Reposted byTina Smith
This is out of hand. These agents are there to cause trouble and violence, not to keep people safe. These are the scenes that play out in war torn, destitute countries - not America.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Minnesota
Tina Smith
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 776
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 · 36 sponsored · 278 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
If ICE thinks it's okay to assault a pastor in broad daylight, imagine what they're doing in the dark.
I got their letter, and I’m not mad — just disappointed.
Don’t send me a damn letter, come to Washington and let’s get this fixed.
Reposted byTina Smith
Trump keeps saying he needs to send federal agents in to protect Chicago because the Police aren't doing the job.
You know what makes it hard for our city's brave police officers to do their jobs?
Trump's agents throwing tear gas at them.
You’ll never be able to convince me ripping an American citizen out of their Chicago apartment in the dead of night, zip tying their hands and refusing to let them call their lawyer is ‘America First’
Weird how that didn’t make the cut.
“I honestly feel in that group of people where I will probably drop health insurance”
What kind of country do we live in that we can’t agree to help people like CHILDCARE PROVIDERS see their doctor?
Reposted byTina Smith
Whitehouse: What became of the $50,000 in cash that the FBI gave to Mr. Homan?
Bondi: The investigation of Mr. Homan was subjected to a full review They found no evidence of wrongdoing.
Reposted byTina Smith
Every day Republicans are choosing to keep the government closed rather than lower your health care costs.
Did Mike Johnson just call MTG stupid?
Reposted byTina Smith
FACT FOCUS: Democrats did not shut down the government to give health care to illegal immigrants.
Reposted byTina Smith
Next year, a lot of folks are going to see their premiums go up $1,000 or more per month because of a Republican policy.
If you start having to pay $1,000 extra every month, what will you stop being able to afford?
This is what Democrats are fighting to stop.
MAGA folks, Republicans, Independents and Democrats from every corner of Minnesota are reaching out — and an overwhelming majority want to fix this health insurance spike before it’s too late.
How the hell is this shutdown our fault if Republicans can’t be bothered to show up
I cannot be bullied to vote for a bill that I know will price more people out of health insurance — especially at a time when everything else is completely unaffordable.
Reposted byTina Smith
DOKOUPIL: Republicans says what you're really fighting for is taxpayer dollars for illegal aliens. I know that's not strictly true--
ELIZABETH WARREN: Excuse me, not strictly true? It is a flat out lie!
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History776 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
776 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-04-30 | S.J. Res. 49 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (49-49, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2025-04-30 | S.J. Res. 49 (119th) | Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 49 | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Defeated (49-49) |
| 2025-04-30 | H.J. Res. 75 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-04-30 | H.J. Res. 42 (119th) | Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 42 | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-46) |
| 2025-04-29 | H.J. Res. 42 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | YES | ✕ | Nomination Confirmed (83-14) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | End debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (84-13) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-36) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (62-36) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-39) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (59-39) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (67-29) |
| 2025-04-28 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (64-27) |
| 2025-04-11 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-25) |
| 2025-04-11 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-25) |
| 2025-04-11 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-26) |
| 2025-04-11 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (59-25) |
| 2025-04-10 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-46) |
| 2025-04-10 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-04-10 | H.J. Res. 20 (119th) | Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 20 | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (53-44) |
| 2025-04-09 | H.J. Res. 20 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-42) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-37) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-42) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-44) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-37) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (66-32) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-32) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2025-04-07 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-39) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Accept House changes | NO | NO | ✓ | Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 305(b)(2) of the CBA re: Cortez Masto Amdt. No. 1690) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (5-94) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment 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.