Too many families are being squeezed by rising housing and child care costs. That's why I'm proud to have helped secure millions in federal investments for Bay Area projects to address these challenges and make life more affordable. www.sfgate.com/news/bayarea...
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|California
Adam B. Schiff
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 772
Yes29%
No69%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align93%
Cross-party5%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Adam B. Schiff
U.S. SenatorDemocratCalifornia
SoupScore
Adam B.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 52 sponsored · 295 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Saddened by the loss of civil rights giant Jesse Jackson. Rev. Jackson never stopped advocating for the most marginalized among us, and pushing America to live up to its ideals.
May his memory be a blessing, and may we carry on his legacy by continuing the fight for a more just world.
California's film industry has endured enormous disruption, with production in L.A. declining and companies leaving the U.S. altogether.
We want to know how Netflix and Paramount's bids for Warner Bros would impact jobs and consumers. www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/bus...
The Trump admin must reverse this disastrous decision to withhold NASA funds.
These cuts would be devastating for NASA’s workforce and our leadership in science and space exploration.
www.eenews.net/articles/whi...
"Whether approved by Congress or not" is certainly not "what our Founders desired."
Nor was a king disguised as a rambling fool.
May your Valentines Day be Golden (state)!
ICE agents need to have body cameras on and masks off.
They need to abide by the same code of conduct as local law enforcement.
This is common sense.
Republicans in Congress need to join us in reining in ICE agents so we can end the chaos in our streets.
I’m starting an investigation into this new scheme.
Stop me if you’ve heard this before:
Trump’s White House is offering million-dollar donors special access to the President and official events — this time America’s 250th birthday.
This latest pay-to-play arrangement undercuts already crumbling public trust.
I've been clear — I will not support more funding for ICE until there are new guardrails to rein in its lawless conduct.
A continuing resolution on their current funding is merely more license for their current malfeasance.
I'm a no on anything but real reform.
Donald Trump is suing the IRS for $10 billion because a contractor illegally shared his tax returns.
Do each of the thousands of taxpayers who saw their confidential tax information illegally given to DHS get $10 billion as well?
Accommodation does not moderate authoritarian regimes, it emboldens them.
An important reminder that college and university leaders must fight to protect our democracy and intellectual freedom on college campuses. www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/202...
We must demand that these facilities comply with the law, and this ruling is a step in the right direction to do so, but the work to make this facility safe is just beginning.
When @padilla.senate.gov and I visited the California City Detention Center, we met with people who were held without basic medical treatment or, in many cases, no medical attention at all. 🧵
www.latimes.com/california/s...
For months, the administration falsely claimed that its military operations in the Caribbean were about stopping drugs. Now, they are hiding the proceeds of Venezuela’s oil in an offshore bank.
Where is the money going? Who benefits? We need answers. www.nytimes.com/2026/02/11/u...
Glenn Medical Center, the only hospital in Glenn County, closed last year due to bureaucratic red tape — forcing families to travel miles to get care.
Now, a new bipartisan law that I wrote with the late-Rep. LaMalfa is fixing Glenn's federal status and creating a pathway to reopening its doors.
When the administration comes after members of the House and Senate, our response should be: screw you, we’re not backing down.
In the face of a weaponized government trying to intimidate public servants for simply stating the law, we must fight back.
And give no quarter.
The administration is trying to indict members of Congress for speaking truth to power.
This is a grave threat to the First Amendment and the right of citizens to choose their own representatives.
The time to speak out is now.
The grand jury upheld the rule of law. Against an administration that won’t.
Trump’s DOJ lackeys just tried to indict Members of Congress for stating the obvious:
You don’t have to follow illegal orders.
That the DOJ would even contemplate such an action demonstrates what a repressive regime is now running this country. 🧵
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Passed (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Bennet Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (45-55) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (50-50) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (50-50) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (99-1) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (21-79) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Warnock Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (50-50) |
| 2025-07-01 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Wyden Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-07-01 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 2775) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (54-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-07-01 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 302(f) of the CBA Re: Collins Amdt. No. 2812) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (22-78, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 425(a)(2) of the CBA re: H.R. 1) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Agreed to (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Padilla Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-06-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 313(b)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget Act Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 2772 ) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (42-58, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Schiff Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Duckworth Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Hassan Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Gallego Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Blumenthal Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Armed Services with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Kaine Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-06-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 313 (b)(1)(D) of the CBA Re: Amdt. No. 2401) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 302(F) of the CBA Re: Murray Amdt. No. 2771) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 313(b)(1)(D) of the Congressional Budget Act Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 2446) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 313(b)(1)(D) of the CBA Re: Cornyn Amdt. No. 2705) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (56-44, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 302(F) of the CBA Re: Amdt. No. 2414) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Blunt Rochester Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-06-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 302(F) of the CBA Re: Amdt. No. 2696) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Reed Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Lujan Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Wyden Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Schumer Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Decision of the Chair H.R. 1 | NO | NO | ✓ | Decision of Chair Sustained (53-47) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Decision of the Chair S.Amdt. 2360 to H.R. 1 (No short title on file) | NO | NO | ✓ | Decision of Chair Sustained (53-47) |
| 2025-06-28 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-06-27 | S.J. Res. 59 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 59 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-06-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-06-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-06-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-40) |
| 2025-06-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-42) |
| 2025-06-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (61-35) |
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.