It’s good for farmers. Good for producers. Good for consumers. Good for Minnesota. And the lunch was pretty good, too 😉
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Minnesota
Tina Smith
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 897
Yes27%
No69%
Present0%
Not Voting5%
Party align98%
Cross-party0%
Tina Smith
U.S. SenatorDemocratMinnesota
SoupScore
Tina's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 45 sponsored · 319 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
At a time of massive consolidation in meatpacking, we have to give local producers more places to go to get their animals processed. This facility gives farmers that local option, strengthening our food system and making our rural communities more resilient, secure and competitive.
Farmers and ranchers need options. They need choices. They need more than just whatever the four big corporations that control meat processing in this country offer. That’s why the new Farmers Union Processing and Meats facility in Staples matters.
Medicaid is often the most common health insurance in rural areas, and when people don’t have health insurance, hospitals like CRMC often foot the bill for uncompensated care at a time when budgets are already tight.
We should be investing in our health care system so we can expand the capabilities of rural hospitals, instead of cutting Medicaid and leaving patients uninsured.
Thank you to CRMC for showing me around today and for all the work you do!
In fact, while most people tend to think world-class clinical trials and innovations are usually directed to bigger cities, CRMC is bringing innovative research to Greater Minnesota, including an international clinical trial that may help us combat Type 2 diabetes.
Cuyuna Regional Medical Center (CRMC) is a 25-bed hospital in Crosby with clinics across north-central Minnesota. Patients can access primary and specialty care without having to trek to a big city, and it’s a perfect example of the kind of facility that Minnesotans rely on to stay healthy.
The latest bipartisan housing law we passed this summer will prevent over 9,000 units in Greater Minnesota from falling into disrepair and cuts red tape to spur new housing construction. But there is more to do at all levels to take one the next challenge: insurance costs.
I was able to tour a home being built by Lakes Area Habitat for Humanity in Brainerd as part of a conversation on the housing crisis. Organizations like Lakes Area Habitat are helping solve the housing crisis by building more homes, but tackling skyrocketing insurance costs is the next step.
It can be hundreds of dollars per month on top of your mortgage payments, and every single year, the cost climbs. Home insurance rates jumped 67% for Minnesotans in the last 7 years, with the average homeowner now paying ~$3,500 a year.
Finding a safe and decent place to call home is too expensive in the first place. And for those who can put the money together to own a home, there’s another growing cost: home insurance.
📍Crosby, Minnesota
I’m glad Minnesota is standing up to protect this precious place.
At the end of the day, this is about a foreign company mining our metals, shipping them to China (almost certainly polluting the BWCA in the process) and then selling them back to us for their profit and our loss.
I strongly support Minnesota using all our regulatory powers to stop this mine. I also support the legislature taking action to stop this mine.
Minnesotans strongly support protecting the Boundary Waters. We are a mining state, but not this mine in this place. The Trump Administration and Republicans in Congress ignored the science and overturned protections for the Boundary Waters, but the fight continues here at home.
All this comes as the President dismisses and demeans these sailors’ sacrifices. It’s long past time for Congress to exert its war powers to rein in this war, but that will require Republicans to steel their spines and finally stand up to the President.
Men and women in uniform bear the brunt of the burden. 18 service members have died during this war, including one Minnesotan. 600 have been injured, many severely.
I’m grateful that the USS George Washington will relieve the Lincoln and its crew, but this serves as a stark warning about what happens when we stretch our military so thin.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History897 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
897 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-17 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-45) |
| 2026-09-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-47) |
| 2026-09-17 | S. 4668 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (77-22) |
| 2026-09-15 | S. 4668 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (74-24, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-09-15 | H.R. 3633 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (49-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-09-15 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2026-09-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (47-46) |
| 2026-08-08 | S. 5271 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (52-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-08-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-49) |
| 2026-08-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-49) |
| 2026-08-08 | H.R. 6500 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (90-6, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-08-08 | H.R. 6500 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (61-32) |
| 2026-08-07 | H.R. 6500 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (91-6, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-08-07 | S. Res. 817 (119th) | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2026-08-07 | H.R. 5334 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (86-11, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-08-07 | H.R. 5334 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (32-64) |
| 2026-08-05 | S.J. Res. 187 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-50) |
| 2026-08-05 | S. Res. 817 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
| 2026-08-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-44) |
| 2026-08-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-43) |
| 2026-08-03 | H.R. 6500 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (89-4, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-07-30 | S. Res. 817 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2026-07-30 | S.J. Res. 181 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 181 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (49-50) |
| 2026-07-30 | S.J. Res. 199 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-07-29 | S. Res. 817 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2026-07-29 | H.R. 5334 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-12) |
| 2026-07-28 | H.R. 5334 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (86-12, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-07-28 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2026-07-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-43) |
| 2026-07-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-44) |
| 2026-07-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (48-47) |
| 2026-07-23 | S.J. Res. 180 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 180 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-49) |
| 2026-07-22 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-07-22 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-44) |
| 2026-07-22 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (62-36) |
| 2026-07-22 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-35) |
| 2026-07-22 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2026-07-21 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-48) |
| 2026-07-20 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (43-40) |
| 2026-07-16 | S.J. Res. 198 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-50) |
| 2026-07-16 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-48) |
| 2026-07-15 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2026-07-15 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-07-14 | S. 4784 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-07-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2026-07-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (46-44) |
| 2026-06-24 | S.J. Res. 185 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-06-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2026-06-24 | S.J. Res. 196 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (45-52) |
| 2026-06-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
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.
Page 1 / 18Next →