Jeanne Shaheen headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from New Hampshire
Born
January 28, 1947
Age 79
Phone
(202) 224-2841
Office
506 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|New Hampshire

Jeanne Shaheen

Cynthia Jeanne Shaheen is an American politician and former educator serving since 2009 as the senior United States senator from New Hampshire. A member of the Democratic Party, she served from 1997 to 2003 as the 78th governor of New Hampshire. Shaheen is the first woman elected both governor and a U.S. senator, and was the first female governor of New Hampshire.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 774
Yes41%
No55%
Present0%
Not Voting4%
Party align86%
Cross-party14%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Jeanne Shaheen headshot
Jeanne Shaheen
U.S. SenatorDemocratNew Hampshire
SoupScore
Jeanne's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 80 sponsored · 281 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

As Ukraine is pummeled by Russian drones, this is the worst time to be cutting back on the weapons they need to defend themselves—which were already on the way when they were halted. Secretary Hegseth and Under Secretary Colby clearly don't understand the impact of this war on US national security.
After a positive meeting between President Trump and President Zelensky at the NATO Summit, it's distressing to see that Secretary Hegseth and Under Secretary Colby decided to halt weapons shipments to Ukraine. This sends the wrong message not only to our allies but to our adversaries.
46,000 That's how many Granite Staters lose health care coverage under the bill Senate Republicans voted for. They're making the largest cut to health care in American history to give more money to billionaires.
I'm deeply disappointed that my Republican colleagues passed a bill that will rip health care and food assistance away from millions of Americans while also increasing energy costs for millions more so that Trump can cut taxes for the ultra wealthy.
At a moment when Americans are feeling squeezed by high prices, we should be making every effort to lower costs. The Republican "Big Beautiful Bill" will line the pockets of the ultra rich by increasing energy bills and taking health care and food assistance away from families.
Overnight, nearly all Republicans blocked my amendment to preserve tax credits that lower energy costs for families, make housing more affordable and help give businesses needed certainty. Energy and home prices are already too high. Trump's bill will make them even higher.
While Republicans jam through a disastrous budget bill that punishes working families to give handouts to the ultra-wealthy, I'm offering an amendment to save tax breaks that make energy and housing more affordable for Granite Staters. I'm calling on my colleagues to vote YES.
The so-called Republican “Big Beautiful Bill” would be the largest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in a single bill in history. It takes away health care and food from working families and raises household energy costs, all to give more money to billionaires.
I've met with health care leaders in NH's rural communities who are worried about their ability to deliver lifesaving services—and that was before Trump's proposed cuts. This megabill would devastate rural hospitals and make accessing care even harder for rural Granite Staters.
I’ve heard from countless Granite Staters who are deeply anxious about what the Republican megabill would mean for them and their families.     They are real people, and this bill is not just words on a page – it is a direct attack on their health and economic security.
From milk to cheese to ice cream, New Hampshire's dairy farmers play a vital role in our food system and state economy. As National Dairy Month comes to a close, I'll keep working to find ways to support the small dairy producers that make the Granite State unique.
President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” is a big betrayal of the American people.       There's nothing beautiful about taking away health care and food from working families to give more money to billionaires.
The important message from this week's NATO Summit in the Hague was not just the historic 5% defense spending target, it was the unified message we sent to our adversaries that our Alliance is strong and united. Our collective support for Ukraine is and will remain unbreakable.
Granite State communities are facing sky-high electricity prices and investing in energy efficiency can help bring these costs down. Energy Circuit Riders help small towns and rural communities make improvements to become more energy efficient and lower their energy bills.
The Big Beautiful Betrayal would rip away health care from 16 million people, including people with disabilities and folks on long term care. And it would raise health care costs for millions more. All so President Trump can give a big tax cut to the wealthiest Americans.
Birthright citizenship is enshrined in the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. President Trump's executive order to erode this fundamental right runs counter to our nation’s values. I'm alarmed by SCOTUS' ruling allowing this extreme order to take effect in 30 days across much of the U.S.
BREAKING: The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 vote, just handed Trump a major win by limiting judges’ ability to block his birthright citizenship order nationwide. Read more: ow.ly/c2hu50Whvgn
On this day 56 years ago, a powerful movement for justice and equality began at Stonewall. Today, we honor this momentous event in our nation's history and stand with the brave trailblazers who continue to fight for LGBTQ+ rights.
President Trump says he wants peace but at every turn he gives Russia a free pass. We need to put more pressure on Putin to get him to the negotiating table. That starts by passing the bipartisan Graham-Blumenthal legislation.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
774 total votes
ExpandCollapse

Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.

DateBillQuestionPositionParty MajAlign?Result
2025-01-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (56-42)
2025-01-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (56-42)
2025-01-28H.R. 23 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-01-28Confirm nomineeYESYESNomination Confirmed (77-22)
2025-01-27End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (97-0)
2025-01-27Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (68-29)
2025-01-25End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (67-23)
2025-01-25Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (59-34)
2025-01-24End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (61-39)
2025-01-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)
2025-01-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-49)
2025-01-23Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (74-25)
2025-01-23End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (72-26)
2025-01-22S. 6 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required)
2025-01-21Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45)
2025-01-21Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (54-46)
2025-01-20Confirm nomineeYESYESNomination Confirmed (99-0)
2025-01-20S. 5 (119th)Final passageYESNOBill Passed (64-35)
2025-01-20S. 5 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESNOAmendment Agreed to (75-24)
2025-01-17S. 5 (119th)End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (61-35, 3/5 majority required)
2025-01-15S. 5 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-49)
2025-01-15S. 5 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESNOAmendment Agreed to (70-25)
2025-01-13S. 5 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (82-10)
2025-01-09S. 5 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-9, 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.

← PrevPage 16 / 16