PolicySoupstir the potALPHA

Tina Smith headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Minnesota
Born
1958
Age 68
Phone
(202) 224-5641
Office
720 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Minnesota

Tina Smith

SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 903
Yes27%
No68%
Present0%
Not Voting5%
Party align98%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
BlueskyFacebookInstagram
Tina Smith headshot
Tina Smith
U.S. SenatorDemocratMinnesota
SoupScore
Tina's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 45 sponsored · 322 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

Tina Smith@smith.senate.govApr 16(source)
Since they’re abusing the Congressional Review Act to get around the filibuster, I am reserving some of my time so I can make closing remarks in the morning before the final vote. Maybe they’ll listen to reason after a night’s sleep. Stay tuned. Save the Boundary Waters.
Photo of my desk with a boundary waters canoe area forest service sign next to the Minnesota state flag and a framed photo of my parents.
Tina Smith@smith.senate.govApr 15(source)
70% of Minnesotans do NOT want copper nickel mining near the Boundary Waters. The Senate has a chance to do right by them by leaving the mining moratorium in place.
Reposted byTina Smith
Patagonia@patagonia.comApr 15(source)
As soon as today, the US Senate will vote on a House resolution that allows copper mining by a Chilean company near Minnesota’s Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. The Boundary Waters is the most-visited wilderness area in the country, and it cannot be replaced.
Tina Smith@smith.senate.govApr 13(source)
The Boundary Waters don’t just belong to Minnesotans. They’re the birthright of every single American. Why would we let a foreign mining company ruin them just so they can mine OUR resources, ship them off to China and enrich their shareholders?
Map showing the pollution a proposed copper-nickel mine would have on the Boundary Waters, Voyageurs National Park and Quetico Provincial Park.
Tina Smith@smith.senate.govApr 13(source)
The threat to the Boundary Waters isn’t just about Minnesota — the legislative gymnastics being thrust upon us to allow copper-nickel mining in this watershed would mean no public lands are ever truly protected. We would be opening Pandora’s box… for what? The profits of a foreign mining company?
Photo of a canoe in the Boundary Waters. The waters are so still that the sky is reflected on the surface.
Tina Smith@smith.senate.govApr 9(source)
From the guy who promised to “bring back American manufacturing” …the irony would be comical if it weren’t so frustrating
Peter Baker
@peterbakernyt.bsky.social
Open post ↗
Trump, who has promoted "Buy America" policies and vowed to protect American steel, has secured tens of millions of dollars worth of donated foreign steel for his $400 million ballroom project, report @anaswanson.bsky.social and @lukebroadwater.bsky.social. www.nytimes.com/2026/04/08/u...
Tina Smith@smith.senate.govApr 9(source)
Can’t trust a word they say. They’re lying about what they’re doing in Minnesota and across the country. This is exactly why I’m not voting for a single penny for ICE or CBP without massive, agency-wide changes.
Reposted byTina Smith
Tina Smith@mspwhistles.bsky.socialApr 8(source)
Today is day 127 of the ICE occupation of MN. ICE is still here. Neighbors are still being abducted. So we’re here too. Still carrying whistles. Still standing watch in our neighborhoods. Still doing mutual aid. Still fighting for ICE OUT EVERYWHERE.
Tina Smith@smith.senate.govApr 8(source)
Americans are less safe and paying more for gas and everyday goods. He wasted billions of dollars on an unjustified war and we are worse off because of it.
Tina Smith@smith.senate.govApr 8(source)
Grateful there wasn’t further escalation, but this ceasefire is anything but a win. So much chaos and pain for an ill-conceived war. A massive strategic failure.
Tina Smith@smith.senate.govApr 7(source)
Republicans should be calling us back to DC right now. We should be voting to stop him.
Tina Smith
@smith.senate.gov
Open post ↗
Threatening to wipe out an entire civilization is morally bankrupt and a major war crime, risking the lives of innocent civilians - including children. He seems detached from reality. I don’t know who (if anyone) can get through to him. Congress needs to step in and stop him.
Tina Smith@smith.senate.govApr 7(source)
Not to mention the serious danger this poses to American troops and risk of entrapping us in another endless war in the Middle East that nobody asked for.
← Newer postsPosts page 12Older posts →
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
903 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
2026-06-04—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Graham Amdt. No. 5779)NONO✓Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-04—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Warner Amdt. No. 5556)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-04—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hassan Amdt. No. 5535)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-04S. 2 (119th)Motion (Ossoff Motion to Commit S. 2 to the Committee on the Judiciary with Instructions)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (47-50)
2026-06-04—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Reed Amdt. No. 5514)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (46-53, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-04—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 5512)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (53-46, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-04—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Tillis Amdt. No. 5452)NONO✓Motion Rejected (15-84)
2026-06-04S. 2 (119th)Motion (Schumer motion to commit S.2 to the Committee on the Judiciary with instructions)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (49-50)
2026-06-03S. 2 (119th)Begin considerationNONO✓Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46)
2026-06-03S.J. Res. 188 (119th)Begin considerationYESYES✓Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-53)
2026-06-02—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (52-46)
2026-06-02—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2026-06-02—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (52-46)
2026-06-01—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44)
2026-05-20—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (52-47)
2026-05-19S.J. Res. 185 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 185YESYES✓Motion to Discharge Agreed to (50-47)
2026-05-19—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-47)
2026-05-19—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (52-38)
2026-05-19—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (57-38)
2026-05-18S. Res. 690 (119th)Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (46-43)
2026-05-14S. Res. 690 (119th)End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 130 (119th)Begin considerationYESYES✓Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-53)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 141 (119th)Begin considerationYESYES✓Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-50)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 132 (119th)Begin considerationYESYES✓Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-52)
2026-05-13—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (54-45)
2026-05-13S. Res. 526 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYES✓Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (99-0, 3/5 majority required)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 163 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 163YESYES✓Motion to Discharge Rejected (49-50)
2026-05-12—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2026-05-12—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (51-45)
2026-05-11—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-44)
2026-05-11S. Res. 690 (119th)Approve resolutionNONO✓Resolution Agreed to (46-45)
2026-04-30S.J. Res. 184 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 184YESYES✓Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-50)
2026-04-30S. Res. 690 (119th)End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2026-04-29S.J. Res. 99 (119th)Begin considerationYESYES✓Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-50)
2026-04-29S.J. Res. 139 (119th)Begin considerationYESYES✓Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-52)
2026-04-29—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (59-39)
2026-04-28S.J. Res. 124 (119th)Point of Order S.J.Res. 124NONO✓Point of Order Well Taken (51-47)
2026-04-28S. Res. 690 (119th)Begin considerationNONO✓Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2026-04-27—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-37)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Accept House changesNONO✓Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (50-48)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYES✓Amendment Rejected (49-49)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYES✓Amendment Rejected (48-50)
2026-04-23—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Padilla Amdt. No. 4855)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Sanders Amdt. No. 5159)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYES✓Amendment Rejected (46-52)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONO✓Amendment Rejected (25-73)
2026-04-23—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Markey Amdt. No. 5001)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hawley Amdt. No. 4794)NONO✓Motion Rejected (50-48, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 5414)NONO✓Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Alsobrooks Amdt. No. 5294)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required)

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 3 / 19Next →