Congress Member Profile|U.S. Representative|Democrat|Ohio District 1
Greg Landsman
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 534
Yes48%
No51%
Present1%
Not Voting1%
Party align92%
Cross-party8%
SoupScore
District Map
Congressional District 1
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Greg Landsman
U.S. RepresentativeDemocratOhio District 1
SoupScore
Greg's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 25 sponsored · 136 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Join us TODAY at the Anderson Branch Library. My team will be there to help with VA benefits, passports, Social Security, and immigration questions.
More info 👇🏼
www.eventbrite.com/e/anderson-m...
Joined @917wvxu.bsky.social to discuss the strikes on Iranian nuclear enrichment facilities, the path to peace, and how we address political violence.
www.wvxu.org/show/cincinn...
Our children and families deserve a straight answer on Head Start funding.
I asked Secretary Kennedy directly, and he told me the funding is protected. We’re going to hold him to that — 770,000 Americans are depending on it.
Too many veterans don’t have options when it comes to pain management.
Our bipartisan NOPAIN for Veterans Act makes non-addictive treatments more accessible.
Thank you to Voices for Non-Opioid Choices for recognizing the bill and for leading the fight against addiction.
We need leadership that brings countries together, particularly in Europe and the Middle East, and that unites Republicans and Democrats in working toward peace.
There is a path to peace and security in the Middle East, and I hope this is it.
Remove all enriched uranium, accept around-the-clock inspections, pursue only civilian nuclear programs, and dismantle their terror armies.
6. Next steps will determine everything.
I will advocate that the Administration build the broadest bipartisan coalition possible to reach the right agreement with the Iranian regime...
5. The Iranian regime’s attacks on our military bases in the region were intercepted by the Qataris. This is a good sign.
My hope is that this is an attempt to de-escalate. Reports suggest that the Iranian regime coordinated with the Qataris.
4. Declaring war does require Congressional action. This would be troops on the ground.
The goal of this strike was to prevent war.
3. It was a serious military action, and Trump should have briefed key Republican and Democratic members of Congress before taking the action. Reports suggest he only called Republicans. This must be bipartisan.
We know that the Iranian regime is pursuing a nuclear weapon. The question is how close are they to having the bomb.
The strikes set them back. Significantly, we hope.
No one is talking about sending in troops or regime change (in any real way). I oppose both.
2. This is not Iraq.
In 2003, the Administration lied about weapons of mass destruction, sent in troops, and forced a regime change.
1. The Iranian regime cannot acquire a nuclear weapon.
This weekend’s targeted, defensive strikes on nuclear enrichment facilities may be the best way to prevent what could be a catastrophic war - and to get the regime to negotiate terms for a sustainable peace in the Middle East.
Hopefully we are now on the path to peace…
6 thoughts on Saturday’s strike, the regime’s response, and where we go from here. 🧵👇🏼
When you walk out of the Holocaust & Humanity Center in Cincinnati, you see Edith Carter's words: “Every human being has the obligation to contribute somehow to this world.”
This weekend, we celebrated local leaders who are meeting the moment and making a difference at the Upstander Awards. 🙏🏻💙
That will end this conflict, and put the entire region on the path to a real and sustainable peace.
It’s time for the Iranian regime to agree to the removal of all enriched uranium, comprehensive, around-the-clock inspections, and the full dismantling of their terror armies from Hamas to Hezbollah and the Houthis.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History534 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
534 total votes
Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.
| Date | Bill | Question | Position | Party Maj | Align? | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-12-16 | H. Res. 951 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-16 | H.R. 3187 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-15 | S. 284 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-12 | H.R. 3668 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-12 | H.R. 3668 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 2550 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-11 | H. Res. 432 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3898 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3898 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3383 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3383 (119th) | Approve amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3383 (119th) | Approve amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3383 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3638 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-11 | H.R. 3628 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-11 | H. Res. 939 (119th) | Kill the motion | PRESENT | NO | — | Passed |
| 2025-12-10 | H. Res. 432 (119th) | Motion to Discharge | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-10 | S. 1071 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-10 | S. 1071 (119th) | Motion to Commit | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-10 | H. Res. 936 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-10 | H. Res. 936 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-10 | H.R. 1676 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-09 | S. 356 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-04 | H.R. 1049 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-12-04 | H.R. 1069 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-12-03 | H.R. 1005 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-12-03 | H.R. 4305 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-12-03 | H.R. 2965 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-12-02 | H. Res. 916 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-02 | H. Res. 916 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-02 | H.R. 4423 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-01 | H.R. 5348 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-20 | H.R. 3109 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-11-20 | H. Res. 893 (119th) | Motion to Refer | NO | YES | ✕ | Passed |
| 2025-11-20 | H.R. 6019 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-20 | H.R. 4058 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-20 | H.R. 5107 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-20 | H.R. 5214 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-11-19 | H. Res. 888 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-11-19 | S.J. Res. 80 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-19 | H.J. Res. 131 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-19 | H.J. Res. 130 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-18 | H. Res. 888 (119th) | Motion to Refer | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-11-18 | H. Res. 878 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-11-18 | H. Res. 879 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-18 | H. Res. 879 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-18 | H.R. 4405 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-18 | H. Res. 878 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-11-18 | H.R. 2659 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-17 | H.R. 1608 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
Alignment stats consider only votes where a clear yes/no majority existed for the legislator's party. Cross-party marks divergence where the vote matched the opposite party majority. ↔ indicates cross-party divergence.