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 — 783
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 · 284 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

How will that effect you? For starters, 100,000 jobs across the country would be at risk. Not to mention, raising the cost of new housing construction at a time when we’re facing a nationwide housing affordability crisis.
Tariffs on Canada and Mexico will spike costs for families everywhere, making it harder to balance their budgets: ➕That’s ~$1,000 more in expenses per year for families ➕$150-$250 more for heating to stay warm each winter ➕Higher prices at the pump and in grocery stores
🗓️First, Trump has promised tariffs on our allies, Canada and Mexico—10% on energy from Canada and 25% on everything else. Today, he said these will go into effect next Tuesday. Whether they take effect next week or next month, they've already created panic and uncertainty.
We should be working to lower energy costs for folks across the country, but Trump’s actions to cut off funding for clean energy, halt energy efficiency programs and level tariffs on heating oil, propane and gasoline are going to do the exact opposite.
By blocking federal funding for good projects, President Trump is stiffing working Americans, small businesses and our communities. The American people elected Donald Trump to lower energy costs—instead he's actively doing the opposite and causing financial hardship.
Despite what Trump might have said, slashing Medicaid is on the table in the U.S. House.   All so that Republicans in Congress, Trump and Elon Musk can come up with trillions to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy in this country.
I’ve heard from far too many Granite Staters forced to ration their life-saving medications because costs are too high. It’s unacceptable. Our legislation would allow prescription drugs to be imported from pharmacies in Canada increasing competition and lowering costs.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau keeps scammers, fraudsters and predatory companies in check, protecting you and your hard-earned dollars. By dismantling CFPB, Trump and Elon Musk are protecting their billionaire friends and corporate insiders at your expense.
Last week, I offered an amendment to the Senate Republican budget resolution to prevent health care costs from skyrocketing for millions of Americans by extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits. Republicans voted it down.
One in seven Granite Staters get their health insurance through Medicaid, including nearly 100,000 children. This morning, I joined providers, advocates and Medicaid recipients to discuss how potential Republican-led cuts would hurt their lives and communities.
Let's be clear, what Trump promised was not that he was going to come in and indiscriminately fire people and cut services. He said he was going to lower the cost of everything from food to rent to energy costs. He hasn't done any of that.
Elon Musk is sowing more confusion with his latest email over the weekend to federal employees. Trump's administration has done nothing but create uncertainty and chaos at every level of our government. Why aren't they focusing on lowering costs?
Federal workers are getting emails asking them to explain the work they did last week. Elon Musk says not responding "will be taken as a resignation."
Too many Americans are struggling with the cost of living—and what is President Trump doing? Proposing tariffs that would raise prices on everyday items Halting federal funding that families rely on Firing employees who live and work in our communities www.cnn.com/2025/02/21/e...
Firing 1,000s of VA employees, many of whom are veterans themselves, is unacceptable. This will only make it harder for our veterans to access care. We should put veterans first, which is why I joined my colleagues in calling for the VA to reverse these mass terminations.
Elon Musk's indiscriminate effort to fire critical federal employees isn't based on expertise or experience.   At a time when accidents in our skies have been increasing, they fired hundreds of FAA employees—folks that we need to keep Americans safe.
Giving tax cuts to the wealthiest while gutting programs families rely on—that’s the Republican plan. Democrats just tried to pass an amendment that would prevent a tax cut for those earning more than one billion dollars. Senate Republicans blocked it.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
783 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
2026-03-26H.R. 7147 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-26S. 1383 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-25S.J. Res. 103 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (48-50)
2026-03-25H.R. 7147 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-46, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-25S.J. Res. 107 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-53)
2026-03-24S.J. Res. 116 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 116YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-53)
2026-03-24S. 1383 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (53-47)
2026-03-24S. 1383 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (53-47)
2026-03-24Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47)
2026-03-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-47)
2026-03-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2026-03-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-45)
2026-03-22End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (54-37)
2026-03-21S. 1383 (119th)End debateNOT_VOTINGYESCloture Motion Rejected (41-49, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-21S. 1383 (119th)End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Rejected (49-41, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-20H.R. 7147 (119th)End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Rejected (47-37, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-18S.J. Res. 118 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 118YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-53)
2026-03-17S. 1383 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-48)
2026-03-17Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2026-03-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (48-45)
2026-03-12H.R. 7147 (119th)End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Rejected (51-46, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-12H.R. 6644 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Passed (89-10)
2026-03-11H.R. 6644 (119th)End debateNOT_VOTINGYESCloture Motion Agreed to (82-11, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-11H.R. 6644 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (84-10)
2026-03-10H.R. 6644 (119th)End debateNOT_VOTINGYESCloture Motion Agreed to (89-9, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-10Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (71-29)
2026-03-09End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (68-28)
2026-03-05H.R. 7147 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (51-45, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-04S.J. Res. 104 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 104YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-53)
2026-03-04H.R. 6644 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (90-8)
2026-03-02H.R. 6644 (119th)End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (84-6, 3/5 majority required)
2026-02-26Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (57-33)
2026-02-26End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-34)
2026-02-25Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-45)
2026-02-25End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2026-02-24H.R. 7147 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-45, 3/5 majority required)
2026-02-12H.R. 7147 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required)
2026-02-12H.J. Res. 142 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (49-47)
2026-02-11H.J. Res. 142 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2026-02-10S.J. Res. 95 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-51)
2026-02-10Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2026-02-09End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2026-02-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-47)
2026-02-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2026-02-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-46)
2026-02-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-47)
2026-02-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2026-02-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2026-02-04Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (58-39)
2026-02-03End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-39)

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 2 / 16Next →