Nevadans still remember the nuclear testing era, and it left lasting radioactive contamination across millions of acres of land.
Our nuclear stockpile is annually certified to be both safe and effective, and there’s no evidence that resuming explosive testing is necessary.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Nevada
Jacky Rosen
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 776
Yes36%
No62%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align89%
Cross-party11%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Jacky Rosen
U.S. SenatorDemocratNevada
SoupScore
Jacky's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 59 sponsored · 211 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Open enrollment begins on Saturday, and health care costs are up for EVERYONE who buys their insurance through NV Health Link.
Going to the doctor or getting your medication shouldn’t break the bank – but Washington Republicans refuse to do anything to help you afford your health care next year.
House Republicans are on a taxpayer-funded vacation while Nevadans worry about whether they can afford their health insurance.
It’s past time for Republicans to get back to work, negotiate with Democrats to address the health care crisis they created, and reopen the government.
Attention Service Academy applicants: applications close this Friday at 11:59 pm PT. All materials including your resume, letter of interest, official high school transcript, and two letters of recommendation must be submitted by the deadline.
Apply here: www.rosen.senate.gov/services/aca...
Trump’s tariffs amount to a sales tax on Nevadans as they’re already being squeezed by rising prices on everyday essentials.
That's why I'm proud to have helped pass a bill in the Senate to overturn some of these cost-raising tariffs.
Trump is trying to pay himself $230 million with your tax dollars, and Washington Republicans gave him the green light.
Watch what happened on the Senate floor today:
Nevada families can’t go into next year with no plan for how they’ll afford health insurance.
Washington Republicans should put the Americans they serve first and negotiate a deal to stop this huge spike in costs.
Trump wants to pay himself $230 million of YOUR tax dollars.
I’m going to the Senate floor today to ask my colleagues to condemn his attempt to pad his own pockets while he cancels SNAP funding. Time for DC Republicans to put the American people first.
www.nbcnews.com/politics/tru...
Reposted bySenator Jacky Rosen
“Who will stand up?” Sen. @rosen.senate.gov has introduced a resolution to formally condemn Donald Trump for reportedly seeking a $230 million payout from the Justice Department. She joins The Weeknight to challenge her GOP colleagues to finally push back against Trump’s demands.
The Trump Admin committed to using emergency funding for food assistance during this Republican government shutdown – but now they’re walking it back, putting Nevada families at risk.
I’m calling on Trump to keep his promise to Nevadans and release the emergency SNAP funding ASAP.
As if a $40 billion bailout wasn’t enough, now Trump wants to increase beef imports from Argentina, putting pressure on our ranchers producing high-quality beef right here at home.
How dare he sell out Nevada ranchers like this? I won’t stand for it.
Reposted bySenator Jacky Rosen
Parents who are doing their best shouldn't have to spend sleepless nights figuring out how to make it all work between health care costs and the overall uptick in the cost of living. I'm committed to protecting folks from sky-high health care premiums.
Skyrocketing health care costs aren’t a Democrat or Republican problem. They’re affecting millions of Americans. Washington Republicans need to come to the table before it’s too late.
Reposted bySenator Jacky Rosen
Trump promised to lower costs and help working class Americans.
Now, costs are higher than ever, and no one can find a new job.
His economic leadership has been nothing short of a disaster.
The only way we can make sure everyone gets their paychecks is by negotiating a deal to reopen the government and address the health care crisis.
Democrats tried to pass a bill I co-sponsored to pay ALL federal workers – but Washington Republicans blocked it because they want to give Trump the power to decide who gets paid.
This is Americans’ reality after Washington Republicans gave billionaires more tax breaks.
Hardworking Nevadans see their health care costs go up while Kristi Noem uses their tax dollars to buy two jets during a Republican shutdown. It’s a disgrace.
I won’t stop fighting to extend the enhanced premium tax credits. They’re a lifeline for Nevada families.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History776 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
776 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-03-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-40) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-39) |
| 2025-03-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2025-03-13 | S. 331 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (84-15, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-45) |
| 2025-03-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-43) |
| 2025-03-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (57-41) |
| 2025-03-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2025-03-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-03-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2025-03-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (78-19) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-20) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-03-10 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (67-32) |
| 2025-03-06 | S. 331 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (82-12, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-06 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (66-30) |
| 2025-03-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-43) |
| 2025-03-06 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-03-05 | S.J. Res. 28 (119th) | Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 28 | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-47) |
| 2025-03-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-03-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-03-04 | S.J. Res. 28 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2025-03-04 | S.J. Res. 3 (119th) | Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 3 | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Joint Resolution Passed (70-27) |
| 2025-03-04 | S.J. Res. 3 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (70-28) |
| 2025-03-03 | S. 9 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (51-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-02-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-02-27 | H.J. Res. 35 (119th) | Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 35 | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-47) |
| 2025-02-26 | S.J. Res. 12 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-26 | S.J. Res. 10 (119th) | Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 10 | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Defeated (47-52) |
| 2025-02-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-43) |
| 2025-02-25 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-02-25 | S.J. Res. 11 (119th) | Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 11 | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Joint Resolution Passed (54-44) |
| 2025-02-25 | S.J. Res. 11 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (54-42) |
| 2025-02-25 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (66-28) |
| 2025-02-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-43) |
| 2025-02-24 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (66-28) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Accept House changes | NO | NO | ✓ | Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (52-48) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Van Hollen Amdt. No. 233) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (24-76) |
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.