We know energy efficiency is the cheapest, fastest way to deal with our energy needs.
Trump’s decision to cut off funding for clean energy projects and halt energy efficiency programs won't lower costs for Americans—it'll raise energy prices.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|New Hampshire
Jeanne Shaheen
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 783
Yes41%
No55%
Present0%
Not Voting4%
Party align86%
Cross-party14%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Jeanne Shaheen
U.S. SenatorDemocratNew Hampshire
SoupScore
Jeanne's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 80 sponsored · 284 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Republicans blocked my bill to lower costs for Americans.
My bill would have helped ensure that households across the country are not forced to pay higher prices on everyday goods because of Trump's reckless tariffs on Canada and Mexico.
I'm headed to the Senate floor soon to condemn Trump's sweeping new tariffs on Canada and Mexico and to force a vote on my bill that would protect American businesses and consumers from rising prices caused by tariffs on imported goods.
www.senate.gov/legislative/...
On the campaign trail, Trump promised to leave the Social Security Administration alone.
Now, he's firing the employees who help Americans access their hard-earned benefits all so that he can cut taxes for billionaires.
www.cbsnews.com/news/social-...
Trump's new tariffs on Canada and Mexico won't:
❌Lower your grocery bill
❌Help small businesses
❌Make America stronger or safer
Trump's tariffs will:
⬆️ Raise prices on everything from groceries to energy to housing
ICYMI: Last week, I spoke with Granite State providers, advocates and Medicaid recipients about the devastating harms folks would face if Republicans gut Medicaid.
I’ll keep pursuing every avenue available to protect Medicaid and prevent health care costs from rising.
I’m honored to have Rebecca Hamilton, Co-owner and Co-CEO of Badger in Gilsum, New Hampshire, joining me for the Joint Address to Congress to call attention to the harmful and costly impact of President Trump’s proposed tariffs on Mexico and Canada.
During #NationalSchoolBreakfastWeek, students should be focused on learning. But for too many, that task is made harder without breakfast to power their growing minds. I'll keep working to support school breakfast programs across the country.
Year after year, visitors flock to New Hampshire to view and experience the outdoor spaces and wildlife that are integral to our state's identity and economy.
We have a duty to protect and preserve these spaces for current and future generations.🫎
#WorldWildlifeDay
March is Women's History Month!
This month we celebrate the contributions and accomplishments of trailblazing women throughout history and today, and commit to continuing the march toward a prosperous and free future for women and girls in the U.S. and around the globe.
The shipbuilding workforce at Portsmouth Naval Shipyard is critical to maintaining the attack submarines that promote our national security.
The last thing the Trump Administration should be doing is interfering with their recruitment efforts.
Access to affordable child care is essential to a healthy economy.
It's unacceptable that so many of our working families in the Granite State can't find child care they can afford.
We've got to do better.
indepthnh.org/2025/02/17/n...
The Department of Housing and Urban Development is the latest target of Trump and Musk's inflationary cuts while states like New Hampshire already face a housing crisis. Voters elected Donald Trump to lower the costs of housing and rent. These cuts will have the opposite effect.
Gutting Medicaid would be catastrophic for the families, women and children who rely on this program—it’s not just a line item on a budget.
We should be focused on lowering health care costs for Americans not slashing programs that make it more affordable.
www.nhbr.com/fate-of-medi...
Senate Republicans just voted to roll back a commonsense fee on venting or flaring of methane—a vote that will cost taxpayers nearly $7.5 billion.
They're lighting your money on fire to save Big Oil a few bucks.
So let’s review, if tariffs won't lower costs, why is Trump proposing them?
Well, that’s the little secret the Administration won’t say out loud.
The truth? They’re looking for ways to raise taxes on families all so they can make YOU pay for tax giveaways for billionaires.
From small businesses trying to plan their operations to a housing developer deciding if they can build affordable homes for Granite Staters to a family trying to plan a summer vacation, everyone will have to budget for Trump's tariffs if they go into effect.
You may ask: didn’t Trump get elected to LOWER costs? How do these actions accomplish that?
Well, the straightforward answer is: they don’t.
If you guessed prices would rise, you’re right.
Households can expect to spend an unconscionable $900 to $1,100 more a year on these goods, plus car and drug prices could rise by 8.5% to 10.5%.
🗓️In early April, we’re also hearing there will be a 25% tariff on all automotive, pharmaceutical and semiconductor products. And the impact?
a) Prices would rise.
b) Prices would rise.
c) Prices would rise.
Hint: Semiconductors are in almost all the electronics we use.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-14 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 130 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 141 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-50) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 132 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-52) |
| 2026-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2026-05-13 | S. Res. 526 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (99-0, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 163 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 163 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (49-50) |
| 2026-05-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2026-05-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2026-05-11 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-44) |
| 2026-05-11 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (46-45) |
| 2026-04-30 | S.J. Res. 184 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 184 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-04-30 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-04-29 | S.J. Res. 99 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-04-29 | S.J. Res. 139 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-52) |
| 2026-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (59-39) |
| 2026-04-28 | S.J. Res. 124 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 124 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Well Taken (51-47) |
| 2026-04-28 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2026-04-27 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-37) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Accept House changes | NO | NO | ✓ | Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (50-48) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-49) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-50) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Padilla Amdt. No. 4855) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Sanders Amdt. No. 5159) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-52) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (25-73) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Markey Amdt. No. 5001) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hawley Amdt. No. 4794) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (50-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 5414) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Alsobrooks Amdt. No. 5294) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 4956) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hirono Amdt. No. 4884) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (98-0) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Ossoff Amdt. No. 4897) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Lujan Amdt. No. 4798) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 4799) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | S.J. Res. 114 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 114 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (46-51) |
| 2026-04-21 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2026-04-20 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (47-46) |
| 2026-04-16 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-48) |
| 2026-04-16 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (50-49) |
| 2026-04-15 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2026-04-15 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 138 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 138 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (36-63) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 32 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 32 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (40-59) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 123 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 123 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-04-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2026-04-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2026-04-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2026-04-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
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.
Page 1 / 16Next →