Brian Schatz headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Hawaii
Born
October 20, 1972
Age 53
Phone
(202) 224-3934
Office
722 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Hawaii

Brian Schatz

Brian Emanuel Schatz is an American politician serving as the senior United States senator from Hawaii, a seat he has held since 2012. A progressive Democrat, Schatz served in the Hawaii House of Representatives from 1998 to 2006, representing the 25th legislative district; as the chairman of the Democratic Party of Hawaii from 2008 to 2010; and as the 12th lieutenant governor of Hawaii from 2010 to 2012.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 772
Yes26%
No73%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align96%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Brian Schatz headshot
Brian Schatz
U.S. SenatorDemocratHawaii
SoupScore
Brian's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 44 sponsored · 168 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

The problem is not people. The problem is the systems in which people are operating. Everybody can have nice things and we can still sustain our planet. We just have to re-organize a bit and get serious about it.
No, but it’s the underlying law that we passed it matters much more than the Paris climate accord when Democrats are in charge we will reengage, but in the meantime, we have a strong foundation to make progress and clean energy. Whatever Trump wants to try.
Not at all, we don’t need to make sacrifices in terms of quality of life or price or anything else. It is bullshit to assume that it is fossilthat is driving improvements in the quality of life. What’s driving improvements in the quality of life is science productivity, freedom, and capitalism
My personal carbon footprint is awful because of the amount of travel that I do between Hawaii and DC so although I try my best, I try to make an impact at the institutional level and I also think that this is going to take systems changes rather than individual behavior changes
Every increment makes a difference for people for prices for communities and for natural areas. This is absolutely not a binary question about whether we fix it or not it’s about whether or not we can manage it.
Reposted byBrian Schatz
Articles ignore the fact that a lot of us just want to mostly talk about sports without dealing with bots and trolls.
Opinion - The problem with Bluesky: It won’t broaden our horizons: In the wake of Donald Trump’s election win, the social-media platform has enjoyed a surge of new users looking for an alternative to Elon Musk’s X. But will it be useful, if it just creates an echo chamber for the left?
Reposted byBrian Schatz
In the three majority-Native districts in Alaska, the 'no' to repealing RCV won 64% to 36%, netting 2,960 votes. Statewide, the 'no' only won by 664 votes. This was not a coincidence, but result of plenty of organizing, & work by Native leaders: boltsmag.org/alaska-measu...
I was part of a group that originally negotiated for a lifting of the oil export band and exchange for an extension of the investment tax credit and the production tax credit for wind and solar. I still stand by that decision because net net. It was a huge benefit for the climate
we should do all of the things and anything that is currently not economical could become economical and one of the lessons that I learned from the Hawaii clean energy initiative is that the politics and the science of saying yes is a lot better than the politics of picking winners and losers
It’s stupid and indefensible. We also are not parties to the universal law of the sea treaty which we are arguably among the most forceful nations in trying to enforce these high principles so part of it is just the Senate being the Senate.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
772 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
2025-05-21S.J. Res. 55 (119th)Motion to Adjourn S.J.Res. 55YESYESMotion to Adjourn Rejected (46-51)
2025-05-21Motion (Motion to Recess for Ten Minutes)YESYESMotion Rejected (45-52)
2025-05-21Motion (Motion to Recess for Fifteen Minutes)YESYESMotion Rejected (46-51)
2025-05-21Motion (Motion to Recess for Thirty Minutes)YESYESMotion Rejected (46-51)
2025-05-21Motion (Motion to Recess for 60 Minutes)YESYESMotion Rejected (45-51)
2025-05-21Motion (Motion to Recess for Ninety Minutes)YESYESMotion Rejected (46-51)
2025-05-21S.J. Res. 55 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (51-46)
2025-05-21S.J. Res. 55 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Failed (46-52)
2025-05-21S.J. Res. 55 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46)
2025-05-21S. 1582 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (69-31)
2025-05-19S. 1582 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (66-32, 3/5 majority required)
2025-05-19Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2025-05-19End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-05-15S. Res. 195 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.Res. 195YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (45-50)
2025-05-15Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-05-14End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-05-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-05-14End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-05-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-43)
2025-05-14End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-43)
2025-05-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-05-14End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-05-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-40)
2025-05-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (57-41)
2025-05-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-05-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2025-05-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (74-25)
2025-05-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (72-26)
2025-05-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-05-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-05-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-05-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-05-08S. 1582 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-49, 3/5 majority required)
2025-05-08H.J. Res. 60 (119th)Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 60NONOJoint Resolution Passed (50-43)
2025-05-08S.J. Res. 7 (119th)Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 7NONOJoint Resolution Passed (50-38)
2025-05-07S.J. Res. 13 (119th)Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 13NONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-47)
2025-05-06H.J. Res. 60 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-47)
2025-05-06S.J. Res. 7 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-47)
2025-05-06Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2025-05-06S.J. Res. 13 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46)
2025-05-06H.J. Res. 61 (119th)Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 61NONOJoint Resolution Passed (55-45)
2025-05-05H.J. Res. 61 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-43)
2025-05-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2025-05-01S.J. Res. 31 (119th)Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 31NONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-46)
2025-05-01H.J. Res. 75 (119th)Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 75NONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-45)
2025-04-30S.J. Res. 31 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-40)
2025-04-30S.J. Res. 49 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (49-49, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)
2025-04-30S.J. Res. 49 (119th)Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 49YESYESJoint Resolution Defeated (49-49)
2025-04-30H.J. Res. 75 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-04-30H.J. Res. 42 (119th)Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 42NONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-46)

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 11 / 16Next →