
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|New York
Charles E. Schumer
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 783
Yes27%
No72%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align98%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources

Charles E. Schumer
U.S. SenatorDemocratNew York
SoupScore
Charles E.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 25 sponsored · 150 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Today, Senate Republicans are threatening Social Security by voting for Frank Bisignano.
The last person we need overseeing seniors’ benefits is a DOGE fanatic who will accelerate office closures, rollbacks, and risky practices that DOGE set in motion.
I joined Sen. Markey to introduce the Small Business Liberation Act that would exempt small businesses from the chaos & uncertainty of Trump’s tariff tax hike
Small businesses are the backbone of America
It's time for the Senate GOP to grow a backbone and save small businesses
youtu.be/hm5rbZeT98o
NEWS:
As we begin National #SmallBusinessWeek, @klobuchar.senate.gov, @markey.senate.gov, @smith.senate.gov and I stood with small business owners from across the country that have been directly impacted by Trump’s tariff catastrophe.
Trump and RFK Jr. have fired more than a quarter of World Trade Center Health Program staff.
These cuts have nothing to do with efficiency and all to do with hurting those who risked their lives on 9/11.
NY Republicans: Find the courage our heroes had and stand up to these cuts.
Instead of advancing someone who'd bring order & stability to Social Security, the GOP is backing Frank Bisignano—a billionaire CEO with zero experience in government or Social Security
But he has plenty of experience in slashing jobs & downsizing!
That's who they want in charge of your benefits
Frank Bisignano’s nomination to lead Social Security is another reminder that Trump’s chaos is made possible thanks to the complicity of Senate Republicans.
Every Senate Republican who votes yes on Bisignano is voting to put Social Security benefits in jeopardy.
Just over 100 days ago, Trump raised his right hand and swore to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.
No president has done more to disregard the Constitution and the rule of law.
It’s hard to imagine something more un-American than the sitting president saying he “doesn’t know” whether he needs to uphold the Constitution.
If Republicans actually cared about small businesses, they’d be against Trump’s tariffs.
Small businesses are the backbone of our country—Republicans should grow a backbone and support them.
Keeping our national airspace safe and efficient is the chief responsibility of Trump’s FAA—and they're FAILING at every turn
How much has DOGE contributed to the chaos?
What's the plan to replace old tech & infrastructure?
What's the plan to fill FAA vacancies?
We need answers
Americans flying in and out of Newark Airport have experienced increasing delays & disruptions.
I'm demanding a full Inspector General investigation into what happened at Newark so these problems don't get worse, or spread to airports across the nation.
President Trump has just admitted that he “doesn’t know” whether he needs to uphold the Constitution.
This is as un-American as it gets.
Democrats are going to fight this heartless budget with everything we’ve got and if Congressional Republicans actually cared about American families, they’d join us.
As he guts healthcare, slashes education, and hollows out programs families rely on—he’s bankrolling tax breaks for billionaires and big corporations.
It’s not just fiscally irresponsible, it’s a betrayal of working people from a morally bankrupt president.
Donald Trump’s days of pretending to be a populist are over.
His policies are nothing short of an all out assault on hardworking Americans.
The Trump admin is cruelly and unjustly weaponizing Harvard’s nonprofit status.
I’m standing with @wyden.senate.gov, @markey.senate.gov, and @warren.senate.gov to fight for the Treasury Inspector General to investigate the IRS’s and the admin’s potential criminal activity against Harvard.
The Trump administration is patently breaking the law, trying to use the Alien Enemies Act to deport people without due process.
Americans reject this. The courts are taking them to task.
We won’t stop fighting for our Constitution.
Frank Bisignano is literally called Mr. Slash-and-Burn for how he's slashed and burned his way through companies.
Republicans are moving forward on his nomination by Trump to lead Social Security.
Republicans will be complicit in axing Social Security if they confirm this guy.
Senate Republicans just voted to advance Frank Bisignano to lead Social Security
This guy is literally known as Mr. Slash-and-Burn
Because every company he’s been part of he’s slashed and burned his way through
Confirming him makes Republicans Trump’s co-conspirators in slashing Social Security
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History783 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
783 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (5-94) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-48) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | S.J. Res. 26 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 26 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (15-83) |
| 2025-04-03 | S.J. Res. 33 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 33 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (15-82) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | H.J. Res. 24 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (53-42) |
| 2025-04-02 | H.J. Res. 24 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-04-02 | S.J. Res. 37 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-48) |
| 2025-04-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-04-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-04-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-03-31 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-42) |
| 2025-03-27 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-03-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-03-27 | S.J. Res. 18 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-48) |
| 2025-03-26 | S.J. Res. 18 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-03-26 | H.J. Res. 25 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Joint Resolution Passed (70-28) |
| 2025-03-26 | H.J. Res. 25 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (70-28) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-43) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-44) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-44) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (74-25) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (73-25) |
| 2025-03-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-31) |
| 2025-03-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (62-30) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (63-32) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (64-33) |
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.