The fight for the Boundary Waters isn’t over, it just looks a little different now. We will not give up. That would play right into their hands.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Minnesota
Tina Smith
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 772
Yes24%
No71%
Present0%
Not Voting5%
Party align98%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Tina Smith
U.S. SenatorDemocratMinnesota
SoupScore
Tina's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 35 sponsored · 278 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Losing hope is exactly what they want us to do. While the vote against the Boundary Waters is fresh on our minds, the work continues.
Headed to Greater Minnesota now to keep up the fight. We have so much to do to tackle corporate greed in areas like housing and health care.
Do not lose hope.
I'm about to deliver my closing remarks in opposition to a measure that would allow toxic copper-nickel sulfide mining in the watershed of the Boundary Waters.
Tune in.
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.
I’m holding the Senate floor tonight in protest of legislation that would allow a copper-nickel sulfide mine on the doorstep of the Boundary Waters.
Not this mine. Not this place.
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
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.
Reposted byTina Smith
This is not a drill: The Senate is poised to blow up Boundary Waters mining protections, columnist Jill Burcum writes.
Not this mine.
Not this place.
Save our Public Lands.
Save the Boundary Waters.
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?
Not this mine. Not this place. Tell Congress: NO on HJRes 140!
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?
It’s an incredible day to watch our astronauts make history.
Welcome home!
From the guy who promised to “bring back American manufacturing”
…the irony would be comical if it weren’t so frustrating
From the guy who promised to “bring back American manufacturing”
…the irony would be comical if it weren’t so frustrating
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...
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
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.
Reposted byTina Smith
NEW: Since Donald Trump waged war on Iran, Americans have paid over $8 BILLION MORE for gas.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History772 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
772 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-01-29 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (45-55, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-27 | S. 3627 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-15 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (82-15) |
| 2026-01-15 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (85-14, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-14 | S.J. Res. 98 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 98 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Well Taken (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2026-01-13 | S.J. Res. 84 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-01-12 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (80-13, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-40) |
| 2026-01-08 | S.J. Res. 98 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 98 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2026-01-07 | S.J. Res. 86 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (43-50) |
| 2026-01-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-48) |
| 2026-01-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2026-01-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-35) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-42) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-35) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (58-36) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-12-18 | S. Res. 532 (119th) | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (53-43) |
| 2025-12-18 | S.J. Res. 82 (119th) | Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 82 | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Defeated (50-50) |
| 2025-12-17 | S. Res. 412 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (71-29) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (69-27) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (67-30) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-30) |
| 2025-12-17 | S. 1071 (119th) | Accept House changes | NO | YES | ✕ | Motion Agreed to (77-20) |
| 2025-12-15 | S. 1071 (119th) | End debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-20, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. 1071 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | YES | ✕ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (75-22) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. Res. 532 (119th) | Resolution S.Res. 532 | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. 3385 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. 3386 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-10 | S. Res. 532 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-12-10 | S.J. Res. 82 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-49) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-12-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-44) |
| 2025-12-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (57-32) |
| 2025-12-04 | S. Res. 520 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (43-37, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-04 | H.J. Res. 131 (119th) | Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 131 | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (49-45) |
| 2025-12-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (63-34) |
| 2025-12-03 | S.J. Res. 91 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (49-47) |
| 2025-12-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (57-41) |
| 2025-12-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-40) |
| 2025-12-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-39) |
| 2025-12-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (61-36) |
| 2025-12-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-12-01 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-41) |
| 2025-11-20 | H.J. Res. 130 (119th) | Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 130 | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-43) |
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.