Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Michigan
Elissa Slotkin
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 843
Yes36%
No62%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align92%
Cross-party7%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Elissa Slotkin
U.S. SenatorDemocratMichigan
SoupScore
Elissa's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 22 sponsored · 122 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
The Farm Bureau was with us and we talked about the year’s crop, trade policy and the special blend of hard work and grit needed to be a cherry farmer in America.
Visits like this are a great chance for me to hear directly from family farmers on what hurdles they face when dealing with government, so that I can bang pots and pans in D.C. to get them some relief.
It’s hard to overstate just how important cherries are to northern Michiganders. As a member of the Ag Committee, I take any chance I can get to visit our specialty crop farmers, like Royal Farms in Ellsworth.
President Trump is doubling down on his $1.8 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund. Another reminder that we cannot take anyone's word for it. The fund is not dead until it is dead.
We need to pass our bill, the Drain the Slush Fund Act, to do just that.
www.cnn.com/2026/06/03/p...
We all have a role to play in keeping our water safe. Learn how you can report harmful algal blooms:
www.wlns.com/news/michiga...
@nicollewallace.bsky.social // @deadlinewh.bsky.social breaks down the latest with Trump's $1.8 billion slush fund and my bill to stop it.
So this Pride Month, that’s the mission — on behalf of those who fought in a very different time, and for those who are just starting out in life.
I know she would be so proud of the progress that’s been made since her time. But I also know she’d be dismayed by some of the backsliding that’s gone on, and would want us to keep on fighting.
She passed away before gay marriage was legal across the country. I was interviewed about her last year — see below.
www.lgbtqnation.com/2025/05/sen-...
Happy Pride Month! This month is important for many reasons but for me, it’s impossible not to think about my mom. She came out in the 1980’s — though I’m not sure she would have called it coming out, since we hid it from most people in suburban Detroit at that time.
This President is marching us through unprecedented corruption. Senator Adam Schiff, Senator Mark Kelly and I are fighting to stop it, and our Republican colleagues should join us.
To my Republican colleagues: Protecting Donald Trump is not a recipe for your own success.
The President's nominee for the Director of National Intelligence has never handled classified information, never been in a national security role, and we're not even sure if he's had a security clearance. He is not qualified for this job, and shouldn't even be there in an acting position.
As someone who has been the target of the President’s attacks, it’s important to recognize who he intends to help with this $1.8 billion slush fund of taxpayer dollars.
For us Michiganders, Canada isn’t just an ally — they’re our cousins. It’s in our economic and national security interest to treat our neighbors — with whom we share bonds, family, experiences and especially... hockey — with respect.
Not this.
I sat down with leaders in Petoskey to discuss some of the main barriers they’re seeing to building housing quickly and affordably, and why we need bold action now.
Northern Michigan is growing fast, and the housing issues we’re seeing across the country are exacerbated. We can’t attract young talent and families to Michigan if they have hour-long commutes due to lack of housing.
This all makes him an incredibly dangerous choice to be in charge of ODNI. As someone who has had the government weaponized against me, I cannot in good conscience support his elevation to such a sensitive post. The President should choose a serious nominee.
Mr. Pulte has weaponized his current agency against the President's critics, he's fired federal watchdogs looking into his allies and he is under active investigation by the Government Accountability Office.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History843 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
843 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-06-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 302(F) of the CBA Re: Murray Amdt. No. 2771) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 313(b)(1)(D) of the Congressional Budget Act Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 2446) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 313(b)(1)(D) of the CBA Re: Cornyn Amdt. No. 2705) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (56-44, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 302(F) of the CBA Re: Amdt. No. 2414) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Blunt Rochester Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-06-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 302(F) of the CBA Re: Amdt. No. 2696) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Reed Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Lujan Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Wyden Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Motion (Schumer Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Decision of the Chair H.R. 1 | NO | NO | ✓ | Decision of Chair Sustained (53-47) |
| 2025-06-30 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Decision of the Chair S.Amdt. 2360 to H.R. 1 (No short title on file) | NO | NO | ✓ | Decision of Chair Sustained (53-47) |
| 2025-06-28 | H.R. 1 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-06-27 | S.J. Res. 59 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 59 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-06-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-06-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-06-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-40) |
| 2025-06-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-42) |
| 2025-06-24 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (61-35) |
| 2025-06-23 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (58-33) |
| 2025-06-18 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-06-18 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-06-18 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-46) |
| 2025-06-17 | S. 1582 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Bill Passed (68-30) |
| 2025-06-17 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-06-17 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (57-40) |
| 2025-06-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-06-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (46-39) |
| 2025-06-16 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (44-33) |
| 2025-06-12 | S. 1582 (119th) | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-27, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-12 | S. 1582 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Amendment Agreed to (67-30) |
| 2025-06-12 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Amdt. No. 2307) | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Motion Agreed to (64-33, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-12 | S. 1582 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Failed (45-52) |
| 2025-06-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-44) |
| 2025-06-11 | S.J. Res. 54 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 54 | NO | YES | ✕↔ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (39-56) |
| 2025-06-11 | S.J. Res. 53 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 53 | NO | YES | ✕↔ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (39-56) |
| 2025-06-11 | S. 1582 (119th) | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (68-30, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-06-11 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-06-10 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-43) |
| 2025-06-10 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-44) |
| 2025-06-10 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-44) |
| 2025-06-10 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (48-45) |
| 2025-06-10 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-41) |
| 2025-06-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-06-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-41) |
| 2025-06-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-40) |
| 2025-06-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-43) |
| 2025-06-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-43) |
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.