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 — 789
Yes34%
No63%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align92%
Cross-party8%
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 · 20 sponsored · 117 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

Michigan was one of the first to issue PFAS warnings about the foam and the dangers of swimming or eating the fish. It's why I teamed up with Great Lakes PFAS Action for a town hall in Oscoda. This isn’t partisan, it’s about clean water.
Fentanyl is causing profound tragedy, pain and heartache that cuts across Michigan. It takes resources yes, but also seamless cooperation with Canada to stop the cross-border flow of Fentanyl, and we cannot take our eye off the ball. Lives are at stake. www.detroitnews.com/story/news/p...
In my latest Intel Briefing, I break down what's happening in Washington: 1️⃣ How Trump's plan will raise your energy costs 2️⃣ The use of our military by the President in CA 3️⃣ The misuse and abuse of Presidential pardons
I had the opportunity to meet Rep. Hortman a number of times, and it’s clear Minnesota lost an amazing public servant. Political violence has no place in America. It shouldn’t matter who you vote for or what you believe. America can’t become a place where your views or affiliations get you killed.
There is no justification for the aggressive behavior displayed today toward Senator Padilla. This is a U.S. Senator. In a federal building. In his own state, doing his job. If they can handle a Senator like this, they can do this to anybody. It is an authoritarian response.
The truth about President Trump's tax plan. The parts of President Trump's tax plan that benefit the most wealthy are permanent, and the parts that benefit working and middle class families expire.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
789 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
2025-08-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-45)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-44)
2025-08-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-44)
2025-08-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-41)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-45)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-43)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-44)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (81-15)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Passed (87-9, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (87-9, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (21-75)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (15-81)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (14-81)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (45-50)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (42-53)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (44-51)
2025-08-01Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Points of Order Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 3114)YESYESMotion Rejected (44-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-43)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-08-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-41)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-44)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-44)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-39)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-41)
2025-07-30End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (59-38)
2025-07-30S.J. Res. 34 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 34NOT_VOTINGYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (24-73)
2025-07-30S.J. Res. 41 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 41NOT_VOTINGYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (27-70)
2025-07-30End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-07-30End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-49)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-44)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-47)
2025-07-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)

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 7 / 16Next →