Edward J. Markey headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Massachusetts
Born
July 11, 1946
Age 79
Phone
(202) 224-2742
Office
255 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Massachusetts

Edward J. Markey

Edward John Markey is an American politician serving as the junior United States senator from the state of Massachusetts, a seat he has held since 2013. A member of the Democratic Party, he served 20 terms as the U.S. representative for Massachusetts's 7th congressional district from 1976 to 2013. Before that, he was a member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives from 1973 to 1976. When Senator Patrick Leahy retired in 2023, Markey became the dean of New England's Congressional delegation.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 789
Yes24%
No75%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align95%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Edward J. Markey headshot
Edward J. Markey
U.S. SenatorDemocratMassachusetts
SoupScore
Edward J.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 131 sponsored · 314 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

Bad for Republicans? It’s bad for people like Jeff in Natick who will see the cost of his cancer treatment skyrocket to over $300,000 a year if we do not extend the ACA premium tax credits. That’s who we’re fighting for.

Alayna Treene
@alaynatreene
Trump at his breakfast with Senate Republicans in the White House State Dining Room:

"I thought we'd have a discussion after the press leaves about what last night represented, and what we should do about it. And also about the shutdown, how that relates to last night. I think if you read the pollsters, the shutdown was a big factor, negative for the Republicans"
America doesn’t have a food shortage—we have a justice shortage. Trump is illegally withholding $5.5 billion in food aid. It’s time to get food to families, fund our food banks, and stop this moral failure.
Jeff Sternick, a lung cancer survivor and Lung Association advocate from Natick, knows firsthand how premium hikes threaten access to affordable health care. We need to extend tax credits—not let Trump and MAGA Republicans rip them away.
Today, on the first-ever #USAIDDay, we honor decades of American compassion, courage, and global leadership. Trump may try to gut foreign aid—but he can’t kill compassion. The spirit of USAID lives on in public servants who believe America can still be a force for good.
97% of Bostonians have health insurance—and that means access to care, vaccines, cancer screenings, and peace of mind. MAGA Republicans want to rip that away with their cruel premium hikes. We won’t let them. Thank you, Dr.Ojikutu, for fighting for public health.
True or False? In 1977, Republicans in Congress helped pass a law granting Jimmy Carter king-like powers to impose tariffs on any good, from any country, for any reason? I’ll let you take a guess. This case is small businesses v. Trump—and Main Street must prevail.
Screenshot of headline reading: What's at stake in high-profile Supreme Court case on tariffs: ANALYSIS
At stake is whether the modern presidency continues an expansion of power.
22 million Americans face skyrocketing premiums next year—all because Trump and MAGA Republicans let health care tax credits expire. While families gather at the kitchen table, Republicans have vanished from the negotiating table. We need action—not six-week vacations.
Two federal courts confirm what we already knew: Trump must use contingency funds to fund SNAP this month. But millions will still see their benefits delayed because Trump tried to hold SNAP hostage. No more games. Use all available resources to ensure no one goes hungry.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
789 total votes
ExpandCollapse

Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.

DateBillQuestionPositionParty MajAlign?Result
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Blunt Rochester Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52)
2025-06-30Motion (Motion to Waive Section 302(F) of the CBA Re: Amdt. No. 2696)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Reed Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Lujan Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Wyden Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Schumer Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Decision of the Chair H.R. 1NONODecision of Chair Sustained (53-47)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Decision of the Chair S.Amdt. 2360 to H.R. 1 (No short title on file)NONODecision of Chair Sustained (53-47)
2025-06-28H.R. 1 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49)
2025-06-27S.J. Res. 59 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 59YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-53)
2025-06-26Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-06-25End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-06-25Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (56-40)
2025-06-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (56-42)
2025-06-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (61-35)
2025-06-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (58-33)
2025-06-18Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-06-18Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-06-18End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-46)
2025-06-17S. 1582 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Passed (68-30)
2025-06-17Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-06-17Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (57-40)
2025-06-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-06-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (46-39)
2025-06-16End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (44-33)
2025-06-12S. 1582 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (67-27, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-12S. 1582 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (67-30)
2025-06-12Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Amdt. No. 2307)NONOMotion Agreed to (64-33, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-12S. 1582 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Failed (45-52)
2025-06-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-44)
2025-06-11S.J. Res. 54 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 54YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (39-56)
2025-06-11S.J. Res. 53 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 53YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (39-56)
2025-06-11S. 1582 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (68-30, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-11End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-06-10Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-43)
2025-06-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-44)
2025-06-10Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-44)
2025-06-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (48-45)
2025-06-10Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-41)
2025-06-09End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-43)
2025-06-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-41)
2025-06-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-40)
2025-06-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-43)
2025-06-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-43)
2025-06-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-43)
2025-06-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (57-38)
2025-06-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (48-46)
2025-06-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)

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.

← PrevPage 10 / 16Next →