One year after the devastating Eaton & Palisades fires, we’re still waiting for the White House to release funding that families desperately need to recover.
The fight is far from over, but @padilla.senate.gov and I are working everyday to make sure Californians get the assistance they deserve.
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.
Under Trump, we’re witnessing increased, violent confrontations by federal immigration agents that are putting communities at risk, not keeping us safe. We must refuse to accept this as normal.
There must be an immediate investigation and accountability.
One year ago, the lives of thousands of Californians were changed forever. We will never forget all that we lost, in life and treasure, even as we strive every day to rebuild and grow stronger with the memory.
As our January 6th Committee report showed, many heroic Americans stood up to Donald Trump's attempt to overturn the 2020 election.
But the Big Lie did not stop after January 6, and we need to be ready as Trump and his loyalists work again to undermine our free and fair elections.
Instead of addressing the lack of affordable child care, Trump is again choosing to attack blue states and make the crisis worse.
www.axios.com/2026/01/05/t...
Five years ago today, our nation and our democracy experienced one of its darkest days.
No one should bemoan the end of Maduro's reign.
But Trump's illegal operation is about more than just Venezuela.
It's about a President believing he has no limit to his power as Commander in Chief.
Congress must say no to this abuse of force.
— How will the Trump Administration respond if China or Russia seize on this precedent to justify their own military action against foreign leaders?
And the most important one of all: how does this end and what is our exit strategy?
— What happens next if Venezuela’s remaining government leadership refuses to defer to and cooperate with Trump?
— How does the Trump Administration plan to control Venezuela’s oil? Will Trump deploy military assets to do so?
A few questions among many that Donald Trump avoided today, and the American people deserve an answer to:
— What is the Trump Administration’s actual plan to “run” Venezuela?
— Will President Trump deploy American troops to Venezuela? If so, how many and at what cost?
Donald Trump is clear: he launched this war to remove a foreign leader and now he claims the U.S. will “run the country.”
In other words, Donald Trump wants the U.S. to be an occupying power and control the oil.
We have to continue to fight this.
Donald Trump may want to make oil spills great again, but Californians don’t.
During my first year in office, I have visited nearly half of California’s 58 counties.
Wherever I go, I ask the same question: how can I help?
It is the honor of a lifetime to serve the Golden State in the Senate.
Onto 2026.
This is a long overdue win for the rule of law as the Trump administration is forced to end its illegal deployment of our service members.
My thoughts are with the members of the National Guard who are finally headed home to their families.
Over this past year, it has been an honor to serve as Senator for California — fighting for our families, bringing new investments back to communities, and meeting incredible people in every corner of the Golden State.
More below.
Congress will reconvene in one week.
When we return, we need four Republicans in Congress to stand with us and reassert that Congress, and only Congress, has the power to authorize military action against Venezuela.
The new year cannot bring a new endless war over regime change.
The solution to our housing crisis? More housing. A lot more.
My Housing BOOM Act would spur construction and jobs just like when we built millions of new affordable homes after World War II for returning GIs.
www.sfexaminer.com/news/urban-d...
Thanks to my request with @padilla.senate.gov, and @lofgren.house.gov, the Energy Department will be auditing Donald Trump’s cancellation of dozens of clean energy projects in California and across the country — cancellations that cost thousands of jobs and will drive up energy bills even further.
Californians have paid more than $1,000 in Trump Taxes this year thanks to the President’s tariffs — making housing, groceries, and everyday goods more expensive.
And with inflation still driving up prices, the cost of living under Donald Trump could climb even higher in 2026.
Dozens of energy projects cancelled in California.
Now five more on the East Coast.
All because Donald Trump wants to kill cheap, renewable energy.
Want to know who will pay the price for Trump's job killing cancellations?
Check your utility bill next year and you will see.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-09-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-16 | S. Con. Res. 22 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (36-62) |
| 2025-09-16 | S.J. Res. 60 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-51) |
| 2025-09-15 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (48-47) |
| 2025-09-15 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
| 2025-09-15 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Resolution S.Res. 377 | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (51-44) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Decision of the Chair S.Res. 377 | YES | YES | ✓ | Decision of Chair Not Sustained (45-53) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Motion to Reconsider S.Res. 377 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Reconsider Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-10 | S. 2296 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-09-09 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-09-09 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-09-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-43) |
| 2025-09-04 | S. 2296 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (83-13) |
| 2025-09-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-09-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-09-02 | S. 2296 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-14, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (71-23) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | — | — | Nomination Confirmed (72-22) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-35) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-42) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (78-17) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-19) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-41) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-43) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-44) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | YES | ✕ | Amendment Agreed to (81-15) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Final passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Bill Passed (87-9, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | YES | ✕ | Amendment Agreed to (87-9, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (21-75) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (15-81) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (14-81) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (45-50) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (42-53) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (44-51) |
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.