Reposted byTina Smith
My son in the Boundary Waters. This is what’s under attack by the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress. Channel your inner Teddy Roosevelt and call your Senators!
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Representative|Republican|Missouri District 8
Jason Smith
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 615
Yes78%
No21%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align98%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map
Congressional District 8
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Jason Smith
U.S. RepresentativeRepublicanMissouri District 8
SoupScore
Jason's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 9 sponsored · 8 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
This Administration’s attacks on Minnesota continue, this time by threatening to allow copper-sulfide mining in the watershed of the Boundary Waters when a majority of Minnesotans have made it clear they don't want this mine.
Not this mine. Not this place. Keep public lands in public hands.
“The first of several students detained by immigration officers...” shouldn’t even be a sentence
“The first of several students detained by immigration officers...” shouldn’t even be a sentence
Rhetoric didn’t kill Renee Good or Alex Pretti. An unaccountable federal police force did.
Reposted byTina Smith
Homan says that 2,000+ DHS immigration enforcement agents will be left in Minnesota even after the drawdown he announced this morning
A first step, sure. But there’s usually only 150 in the entire state. This drawdown means there will still be around 2,300 (15x the normal amount) unaccountable federal agents roaming our streets.
ICE detained multiple kids (all under the age of 10!) in the last week alone. Still kidnapping people based solely on the way they look. Still arresting parents at school pick up.
Nothing has changed in Minnesota. Nice words from the Admin won’t change that. ICE leaving will.
Bovino needs to go.
Noem needs to go.
Miller needs to go.
But firing or impeaching any of these people will not unilaterally change what’s happening in Minnesota. That’s why Congress needs to exert some muscle over DHS/ICE funding.
Reposted byTina Smith
In @nytopinion.nytimes.com
“We need to rip ICE down to the studs and start over,” Senator Tina Smith of Minnesota writes. “In the wake of this catastrophe, there is no reason we can’t come up with a way of enforcing our laws that doesn’t trample on our values and our Constitution.”
People are still being profiled.
People are still being wrongfully detained.
People still can’t go to work or school out of fear.
Do not look away and do not buy any political spin coming out of DHS.
ICE OUT OF MINNESOTA.
Predicting that this week we’ll hear more conciliatory words from the Administration regarding Minnesota (since they’re starting to realize that ICE has become politically toxic) but everyone outside of Minnesota needs to know that nothing on the ground has changed.
Thank you @joaquincastrotx.bsky.social
for bringing Liam back to his friends and families.
He endured more than any 5-year-old ever should. Now more than ever, we need to get ICE out of Minnesota.
ICE needs to be ripped down to the studs. We need to start over and hold this Administration accountable for this mess.
Nothing has changed. Minnesota is still suffering and sending in a new guy to run ICE won’t change that – but Congress can.
The Northland is bitter cold, but our hearts are warm. That’s what makes us great.
Giving a ride to those stranded at the Whipple building after wrongful detainment, bringing coffee to legal observers, delivering groceries to those too scared to leave their homes out of fear of racial profiling, or standing on a street corner holding a sign to let each other know we are not alone.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History615 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
615 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-03-10 | H.R. 993 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-10 | H.R. 901 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-10 | H.R. 495 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-06 | H. Res. 189 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-06 | S.J. Res. 11 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-05 | H. Res. 189 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-03-05 | H.J. Res. 42 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-05 | H.J. Res. 61 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-04 | H. Res. 177 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-04 | H. Res. 177 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-04 | H.R. 758 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-03-03 | H.R. 856 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-27 | H.J. Res. 20 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-26 | H.J. Res. 35 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-26 | H.R. 695 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-26 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-26 | H.R. 804 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-26 | H.R. 788 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-25 | H. Res. 161 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-25 | H. Res. 161 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-25 | H.R. 818 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-25 | H.R. 832 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-24 | H.R. 825 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-13 | H.R. 35 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-12 | H.R. 77 (119th) | Final passage | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Passed |
| 2025-02-12 | H.R. 77 (119th) | Send back to committee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Failed |
| 2025-02-11 | H. Res. 122 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-11 | H. Res. 122 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-10 | H.R. 736 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-10 | H.R. 692 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-07 | H.R. 26 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-07 | H.R. 26 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-02-06 | H.R. 27 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-06 | H.R. 27 (119th) | Approve amendment | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Failed |
| 2025-02-05 | H. Res. 93 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-05 | H. Res. 93 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-05 | H.R. 776 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-04 | H.R. 43 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-23 | H.R. 21 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-23 | H.R. 21 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-01-23 | H.R. 471 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-23 | H.R. 375 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-22 | S. 5 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-22 | H.R. 165 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-22 | H. Res. 53 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-22 | H. Res. 53 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-22 | H.R. 187 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-21 | H.R. 186 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-16 | H.R. 30 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-16 | H.R. 30 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
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.