NEWS: House Republicans caved.
They’ve agreed to pass the Senate bill to fund DHS except for ICE and CBP that unanimously passed a week ago.
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 — 772
Yes27%
No73%
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 · 146 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
One second, Trump is the “Peace President.” The next, he’s dragged us into war.
And his address tonight? It doesn’t matter. His words are meaningless—he says what’s convenient, then does the opposite.
This is how you burn trust, risk lives, and lead our country into chaos.
$4 gas brought to you by Donald Trump, JD Vance, and their America Last coalition.
A 60 day CR that locks in the status quo is dead on arrival in the Senate, and Republicans know it.
We’ve been clear from day one: Democrats will fund critical Homeland Security functions, but we will not give a blank check to Trump’s lawless and deadly immigration militia without reforms.
After weeks of negotiations, Republicans caved to our demands to fund DHS without a blank check for ICE and CBP.
My full statement below:
Trump promised lower energy bills. Instead, they skyrocketed.
Democrats’ plan to bring them down:
1. Build more clean energy
2. Cut delays — not protections
3. Fix the grid
4. Make data centers pay their fair share
5. Protect consumers
www.nytimes.com/2026/03/25/c...
If Republicans want to shove the SAVE Act into reconciliation, then have at it.
Democrats will fight it tooth and nail, every step of the way. They're going to find it very difficult to jam these massive changes to the American election system.
Today, for the TENTH TIME, Democrats will go to the floor to demand that we pay TSA immediately.
And for the TENTH TIME, Republicans will have a chance to join us. I’m not holding my breath.
Senate Republicans have now blocked TSA funding 9 times.
They are solely responsible for the chaos travelers are experiencing.
We welcome them to join Democrats at the table any time to fund TSA and restore order to our airports.
ICE needs to leave the airports NOW.
Trump needs to pay TSA workers NOW, and push Republicans to reach a deal.
No intimidation forces at our airports. No more chaos at checkpoints.
Enough is enough.
The MAGA Voter ID provision is a cover up to the SAVE Act’s core voter suppression provisions.
Let’s be clear: this bill and this provision are about purging millions of Americans from the voter rolls to tip the scales for a flailing Donald Trump.
A month ago, the national price of gasoline as $2.93 a gallon.
Today it's $3.94.
One man is to blame: Donald Trump.
ICE must change its violent ways. The last thing Americans want is ICE detaining passengers at airports and making things worse.
Sometimes the simplest solution is the best: Fund TSA, rein in ICE, and move our country in the right direction.
Donald Trump is tying himself in a triple knot.
1. Refusing to fund TSA and causing chaos at our airports
2. Starting a reckless war of choice in Iran
3. Pushing a voter suppression bill to disenfranchise over 20 million American citizens
And each day he ties the knot tighter.
NEWS: Republican Leader John Thune told Trump that Senate Republicans would finally join Senate Democrats to support funding all of DHS except ICE.
Donald Trump said no.
This shutdown is on him alone.
Even some Republican Senators are openly admitting they have no clue what the Administration is trying to accomplish in the Middle East.
Enough is enough. End this war.
Instead of sending ICE agents to harass travelers at airports, why don’t Republicans get their act together and agree to pay TSA workers like we’ve asked them to SEVEN TIMES now?
ZERO Republican Senators voted to fund TSA.
This is the seventh time Republicans have blocked pay for TSA. Seven. Times.
They would rather hold TSA hostage to try to force billions more for an unrestrained, out of control ICE. Despicable.
The cruelty is the point. Trump’s goal is to distract you from rising gas prices, his aimless war, ICE abuses, and the Epstein files. Don’t give him what he wants.
And may Robert Mueller, a US Marine and lifelong public servant, rest in peace.
BREAKING: I’m bringing a motion to the floor to FULLY FUND TSA.
Republicans Senators will be forced on the record: they can either vote to fund TSA for good or be fully responsible for its continued shutdown.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History772 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
772 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-03-13 | — | 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 | NO | YES | ✕ | Nomination Confirmed (78-19) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | End debate | NO | 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 | NO | 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 | NO | 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 | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (54-44) |
| 2025-02-25 | S.J. Res. 11 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (54-42) |
| 2025-02-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (66-28) |
| 2025-02-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-43) |
| 2025-02-24 | — | End debate | NO | 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) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Reed Amdt. No. 172) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Baldwin Amdt. No. 276) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Wyden Amdt. No. 1156) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
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.