Elissa Slotkin headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Michigan
Born
July 10, 1976
Age 50
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

Voting Record — 890
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 · 28 sponsored · 131 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

Yesterday, I got to come back for the Tulip Time Festival in Holland, MI. With over 5 million tulips, the festival drew a record 976,000 people from across the world last year, generated over $50 million in revenue, and has repeatedly been recognized as one of the country's best flower festivals.
Muskegon is adding 2000 units of housing by 2027. They are moving fast to address housing needs. I also learned more about Chobani and La Colombe’s recent investment in Muskegon/Norton Shores to expand their facility, creating over 300 jobs in the area — which is great news.
As we continued our stops in West Michigan, I held a roundtable with local leaders from Muskegon and Muskegon Heights to discuss workforce development opportunities, ways we can support the county's ports, and what we can do to reduce the rise in homelessness.
The American people cannot rely on the courts alone to protect their rights. The only real remedy is for Congress to do its job: pass laws that protect the Voting Rights Act, and ban partisan gerrymandering once and for all.
Politicians shouldn't get to draw the lines of the districts they plan to run in. Nobody gets to cook the books for their party. And the only antidote to what we're seeing now is to pass a federal law that calls on all states to do the same.
This comes as President Trump kicked off a partisan redistricting war that has rippled across the nation. Here in Michigan, voters made their voices heard in 2018 when we passed a ballot initiative -- with overwhelming bipartisan support -- that ended partisan gerrymandering altogether.
The Supreme Court again attacked the right to fair representation in Congress. By again slicing away at the protections of the Voting Rights Act, communities of color in Michigan and across the country could see their voices diminished and lose the ability to elect a representative of their choice.
I have a real problem with political gerrymandering. Last week, the Supreme Court ruled to limit parts of the Voting Rights Act. Ultimately, this will make it easier for states to dilute the votes of Black voters and other minority groups. We need to outlaw gerrymandering. Period.
The Pentagon is asking for a $1.4 trillion budget next year. It’s an astronomical amount of money. It is our responsibility to push back and understand exactly what they’re spending it on and whether it will actually prepare us for the future.
In this week’s Intel Brief, we dig into a few big topics: 1️⃣ An update on the war in Iran 2️⃣ The status of U.S.-China relations, and why it matters 3️⃣ My bipartisan bill to ban Chinese vehicles from the U.S. 4️⃣ The Supreme Court decision on the Voting Rights Act youtu.be/wdZ1V8xbkR8
This is a good first step, and I'm pleased to see the Senate take bipartisan action that impacts the Senate. Now we need to pass a wider-reaching law, with teeth, to ensure ALL Members of Congress, their staff, and Executive branch officials are banned from insider trading on prediction markets.
Michigan has watched as thousands of manufacturing jobs moved offshore to China. That's because the Chinese Communist Party is subsidizing its products, flooding the market and creating a monopoly. We can never let that happen to Michigan's auto industry and our workers.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
890 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
2026-02-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2026-02-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-46)
2026-02-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-47)
2026-02-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2026-02-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2026-02-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (58-39)
2026-02-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-39)
2026-02-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2026-02-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-44)
2026-02-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-40)
2026-02-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-40)
2026-01-30H.R. 7148 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Passed (71-29, 3/5 majority required)
2026-01-30Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 4287)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required)
2026-01-30H.R. 7148 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2026-01-30H.R. 7148 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Agreed to (58-42)
2026-01-30H.R. 7148 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Agreed to (58-42)
2026-01-30H.R. 7148 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Agreed to (67-33)
2026-01-30H.R. 7148 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (32-67)
2026-01-29H.R. 7148 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (45-55, 3/5 majority required)
2026-01-27S. 3627 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-45, 3/5 majority required)
2026-01-15H.R. 6938 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Passed (82-15)
2026-01-15H.R. 6938 (119th)End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (85-14, 3/5 majority required)
2026-01-14S.J. Res. 98 (119th)Point of Order S.J.Res. 98NONOPoint of Order Well Taken (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)
2026-01-13S.J. Res. 84 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-52)
2026-01-12H.R. 6938 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (80-13, 3/5 majority required)
2026-01-08Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-40)
2026-01-08S.J. Res. 98 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 98YESYESMotion to Discharge Agreed to (52-47)
2026-01-07S.J. Res. 86 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (43-50)
2026-01-06Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-48)
2026-01-06Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2026-01-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-35)
2025-12-18End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-42)
2025-12-18End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-35)
2025-12-18End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (58-36)
2025-12-18End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-43)
2025-12-18S. Res. 532 (119th)Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-43)
2025-12-18S.J. Res. 82 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESJoint Resolution Defeated (50-50)
2025-12-17S. Res. 412 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-12-17Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (71-29)
2025-12-17End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (69-27)
2025-12-17Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (67-30)
2025-12-17End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (67-30)
2025-12-17S. 1071 (119th)Accept House changesYESYESMotion Agreed to (77-20)
2025-12-15S. 1071 (119th)End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (76-20, 3/5 majority required)
2025-12-11S. 1071 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (75-22)
2025-12-11S. Res. 532 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOResolution Agreed to (52-47)
2025-12-11S. 3385 (119th)End debateYESYESCloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required)
2025-12-11S. 3386 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required)
2025-12-10S. Res. 532 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-12-10S.J. Res. 82 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (50-49)

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 5 / 18Next →