Trump could do it.
Congressional Republicans would follow his lead.
Deficit Hawks will love this.
Moderate Republicans worried about taking healthcare away from their constituents will love this.
Americans will love this.
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 — 550
Yes48%
No50%
Present1%
Not Voting1%
Party align92%
Cross-party7%
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 · 26 sponsored · 137 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Bottom line: tax relief for everyone who needs it, no one loses their healthcare or food assistance, no cuts to pensions, and no deficit spending.
This would be a very smart, very popular bill.
Fifth, give a small group of Republicans and Democrats a few days to identify actual waste, fraud, and abuse, from the many Government Accountability Office reports.
That way, the bill actually tackles this issue.
Fourth, under this plan, there is no need to mess with pensions for public employees. That provision can be removed.
Most Americans don’t think cutting pensions to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy makes sense.
Third, with the revenue from the simple tax changes they can actually reduce the deficit.
These are basic and very popular changes to the tax code that will only impact the wealthiest Americans and big corporations.
If they pay all their taxes, there will be tax relief for everyone else that needs it. It will be fully paid for.
….Change 3 tax provisions:
1️⃣ Do a simple billionaire minimum tax,
2️⃣ adjust the corporate tax rate a few points,
3️⃣ let the tax cuts for the top wage earners expire.
Second, don’t add trillions to the deficit or take healthcare away from 14 million Americans.
Instead…
First, give tax cuts to everyone who needs it:
➡️ Working folks
➡️ Middle Class families
➡️ Small businesses
➡️ Farmers
Trump is coming to Capitol Hill tomorrow.
What if he told Congressional Republicans the following 🧵👇🏼
This is outrageous, and sets a dangerous precedent. Talk about weaponizing the DOJ. This is beyond and truly scary.
They are criminalizing the constitutional obligation of Members of Congress to provide basic oversight.
Federal funding cuts are devastating for Southwest Ohio. They’re impacting people, programs, and jobs.
We’re fighting to restore their funding so groups like ArtWorks, Breakthrough, and AmeriCorps can keep serving our kids and communities.
www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2...
This is a good one — check out “The Fly-In”:
➡️ Feat. @repgabevasquez.bsky.social
➡️ Budget talks
➡️ 26 hours fighting healthcare cuts
➡️Trump’s bribe plane
What inspired Madison's work ⬇️
Southwest Ohio artists are so talented.
Madison, a 10th grader from I Am CPS, won our 2025 Congressional Art Competition with a powerful piece that truly captures this year’s theme – the intersection of technology and humanity.
Getting members of Congress out of the stock-trading business – and free from the influence of outside corporate interests – is a big part of the solution.
I don’t want a single constituent to think that I’m doing anything in DC but thinking about them.
I’m a cosponsor and compliant with the TRUST in Congress Act because I’m determined to be part of the generation that fixes this broken system.
My wife and I have sold all our individual stocks and reinvested in mutual funds and exchange-traded funds.
And our investment strategy is determined by a portfolio manager — we are not involved in buying or trading individual stocks.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History550 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
550 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-11-20 | 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 |
| 2025-11-13 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | Accept Senate changes | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-12 | H. Res. 873 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-19 | H. Res. 719 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-19 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-19 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-18 | H.R. 1047 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-18 | H.R. 3015 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-18 | H.R. 3062 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-17 | H. Res. 713 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-17 | H.R. 5143 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-17 | H.R. 5125 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-17 | H. Res. 722 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-17 | H. Res. 722 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-16 | H.R. 5140 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-16 | H.R. 4922 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-16 | H.R. 2721 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-16 | H. Res. 707 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-16 | H. Res. 707 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-15 | H.R. 3400 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-15 | H.J. Res. 117 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-11 | H.R. 3486 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-11 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Instruct negotiators | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
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.