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 — 774
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.

I’m not sure I can accurately summarize this as I don’t think anyone has yet catalogued all of the non federal stuff that will continue and accelerate but I anticipate folks are compiling this as we speak.!
I wouldn’t bother they might be nice personally and they might like the ACA or Medicare or a new bridge so we don’t have to win every argument we just have to have a coalition that can win.
This is a real thing and thanks for flagging it. I do believe that some of these AI data centers are going to use small modular nuclear reactors, which could be beneficial for developing scale for what they call SMR, which I believe has pretty big potential
I think there are a lot of people on the center right who do believe that climate change is a problem but have been persuaded that the United States cannot and should not lead within that context I’ve been pretty darn persuasive about what can be done and where America should leave.
I try not to focus on what individuals can do because my job is explicitly climate policy making, and I think one of the things that irritates folks about climate hawks like me is bossing people around about personal choices. This isn’t a criticism of the question, I’m just not the guy to answer.
This is a high impact issue because the cost of disasters keeps going up and up and up and it’s not just the type of infrastructure but also the location. I remember a Republican senator telling me that he went to a Republican mayor and said I will help rebuild your town twice, but not three times
I don’t know if it’s every penny but certainly there was a plan to make sure that the IRA was essentially irreversible and it has been substantially implemented.we wrote this thing with the understanding that the door swings both ways in Washington
A lot of the IRA implementation has been so successful in Red states that I don’t anticipate the underlying subsidy to be repealed. That would be deeply unpopular almost everywhere but I do think they are going to try to do damage - unclear what it would be. Will let you know for sure.
I am very open minded to a wide range of permitting reforms to enable clean energy and housing. The only quibble I would have with your question is, I don’t think we’re done negotiating over the possibilities in this Congress not just next year but in the next six weeks.
storms are getting worse and storms are getting more frequent and you don’t have to be some PhD in meteorology to understand that so I think we should keep our language simple and talk about natural disasters getting worse and they’re being more of them
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
2025-04-30H.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)
2025-04-29H.J. Res. 42 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-04-29Confirm nomineeNOYESNomination Confirmed (83-14)
2025-04-29End debateNOYESCloture Motion Agreed to (84-13)
2025-04-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (60-36)
2025-04-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (62-36)
2025-04-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-39)
2025-04-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (59-39)
2025-04-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (67-29)
2025-04-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (64-27)
2025-04-11Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (60-25)
2025-04-11End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-25)
2025-04-11Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-26)
2025-04-11End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (59-25)
2025-04-10Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-46)
2025-04-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2025-04-10H.J. Res. 20 (119th)Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 20NONOJoint Resolution Passed (53-44)
2025-04-09H.J. Res. 20 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-42)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-46)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (60-37)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-46)
2025-04-09End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-04-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-42)
2025-04-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-44)
2025-04-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-37)
2025-04-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-04-08Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (66-32)
2025-04-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (67-32)
2025-04-08Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-45)
2025-04-07End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-39)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Accept House changesNONOConcurrent Resolution Agreed to (51-48)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-52)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-04-05Motion (Motion to Waive Section 305(b)(2) of the CBA re: Cortez Masto Amdt. No. 1690)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-50, 3/5 majority required)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-52)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (5-94)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-53)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)

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.

← PrevPage 12 / 16Next →