Elissa Slotkin headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Michigan
Born
July 10, 1976
Age 49
Phone
(202) 224-4822
Office
291 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Michigan

Elissa Slotkin

Elissa Blair Slotkin is an American politician and former intelligence analyst serving since 2025 as the junior United States senator from Michigan. A member of the Democratic Party, she served in the United States House of Representatives from 2019 to 2025.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 846
Yes36%
No62%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align92%
Cross-party7%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Elissa Slotkin headshot
Elissa Slotkin
U.S. SenatorDemocratMichigan
SoupScore
Elissa's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 22 sponsored · 122 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

We are in the middle of an American cultural conversation about ICE and the role of federal law enforcement in our city streets. In the meantime, ICE has lost the trust of Michiganders and should not move forward with this proposal.
Throughout the visit, one thing remained clear: this is a warehouse and is not a place that is fit to house human beings, especially about 500 feet from neighborhoods full of residents.
Last week, Mayor McCraight took me on a driving tour around the proposed ICE facility in Romulus. We discussed the community’s serious concerns about a detention center coming to this space.
Spent a great afternoon in Southwest Ohio today with @repgreglandsman.bsky.social at a town hall with local farmers. We had an important conversation about how we are working together for a bipartisan Farm Bill, year round E15 and trade policy that actually helps farmers.
Michigan is home to one of the largest Arab American communities in the country, whose rich history, culture, and contributions strengthen our state. April is Arab American Heritage Month. We use this month to celebrate and honor the many ways Arab Americans shape our communities for the better.
For a ceasefire deal to be viable, it must cover the full scope of this regional conflict, including Lebanon. The U.S. negotiators should help prevent further loss of civilian life by sitting down with all parties, be transparent about the deal and how to bring the war to a reasonable end.
There are tens of thousands of Michiganders with deep ties to Lebanon— family, friends, and ancestral homes. Today, many anxiously checked in on loved ones amid significant Israeli airstrikes and civilian casualties.
It’s moments like these that are why we made the video to service members last year. And I hope and believe our troops — especially those in command — will have the moral clarity to push back if they are given clearly illegal orders.
If they have been asked to do things that violate the law and their training, it puts them in very real legal jeopardy. I know that our service members up and down the chain of command know their duty and the law to refuse illegal orders. Even as the Commander-in-Chief tells the world otherwise.
This kind of focus on civilians is exactly what we accuse our adversaries of doing and what our military trains to avoid. It’s built into the rigorous drilling and routines that our military are trained on from their first weeks.
The President of the United States is taking his threats against the Iranian people to new extremes. Targeting civilians en masse would be a clear violation of the law of armed conflict as laid out in the Geneva Conventions, as well as the Pentagon's Law of War Manual.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
846 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
2026-04-21S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2026-04-20Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (47-46)
2026-04-16End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-48)
2026-04-16H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (50-49)
2026-04-15H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49)
2026-04-15H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (51-48)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 138 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 138YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (36-63)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 32 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 32YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (40-59)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 123 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 123YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-52)
2026-04-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2026-04-14End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2026-04-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-46)
2026-04-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-44)
2026-03-26H.R. 7147 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-26S. 1383 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-25S.J. Res. 103 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (48-50)
2026-03-25H.R. 7147 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-46, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-25S.J. Res. 107 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-53)
2026-03-24S.J. Res. 116 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 116YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-53)
2026-03-24S. 1383 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (53-47)
2026-03-24S. 1383 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (53-47)
2026-03-24Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47)
2026-03-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-47)
2026-03-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2026-03-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-45)
2026-03-22End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (54-37)
2026-03-21S. 1383 (119th)End debateYESYESCloture Motion Rejected (41-49, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-21S. 1383 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (49-41, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-20H.R. 7147 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (47-37, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-18S.J. Res. 118 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 118YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-53)
2026-03-17S. 1383 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-48)
2026-03-17Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2026-03-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (48-45)
2026-03-12H.R. 7147 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (51-46, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-12H.R. 6644 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Passed (89-10)
2026-03-11H.R. 6644 (119th)End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (82-11, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-11H.R. 6644 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (84-10)
2026-03-10H.R. 6644 (119th)End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (89-9, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-10Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (71-29)
2026-03-09End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (68-28)
2026-03-05H.R. 7147 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (51-45, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-04S.J. Res. 104 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 104YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-53)
2026-03-04H.R. 6644 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (90-8)
2026-03-02H.R. 6644 (119th)End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (84-6, 3/5 majority required)
2026-02-26Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (57-33)
2026-02-26End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-34)
2026-02-25Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-45)
2026-02-25End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2026-02-24H.R. 7147 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-45, 3/5 majority required)
2026-02-12H.R. 7147 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (52-47, 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 / 17Next →