In this week's Intel Briefing, we go deep on 3 topics:
1️⃣ What was decided at the China summit
2️⃣ Weakened drinking water standards around forever chemicals
3️⃣ Potential taxpayer funding for the ballroom and a DOJ anti-weaponization fund
youtu.be/u82i-301Hds
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.
Some of the residents in Oscoda, MI, can't drink their water or swim in their lake due to PFAS. And they've been told to wait another five-years, after twenty years of waiting on the Air Force for proper cleanup. We owe it to them to step up.
youtube.com/shorts/phCRC...
Despite this setback in the fight against forever chemicals like PFAS, this isn’t over. Michigan will keep fighting for safe, clean water.
President Trump's apparent capitulation to the Chinese government on this issue makes it even more urgent that the Senate passes our bill immediately. We need to protect America's land and our national security.
Congresswoman Kristen McDonald Rivet and I have a bipartisan bill to prevent CCP purchases of Michigan's farmland, which has passed the House in the Farm Bill.
While we are still learning the full results of President Trump's summit with President Xi, this is a clear step backward and a full 180 from his first term. American farmland should be for American farmers -- not for the Chinese Communist Party.
Michigan communities like Flint, Oscoda, and Grayling know what it means to lose access to safe drinking water. For all those Michiganders who’ve worked on this issue, know that I am with you in this fight. This isn’t over.
www.mlive.com/environment/...
PFAS, or forever chemicals, poison our water, our soil, and our bodies and they don't go away. The EPA set limits to keep us safe, and now this Administration wants to throw that out the window.
The country pays more for his choices, while he milks the cow that is the U.S. government to enrich himself and his allies.
www.nytimes.com/2026/05/18/u...
and now a $1.8 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund specifically designed to enrich his allies. All while new disclosures reveal he *personally traded* between $220-$750 million in stocks so far this year, often right before his Administration strikes a deal that spikes the stock price.
We’ve got so much churn in our country right now. So what is President Trump focusing on this week? Asking taxpayers for $1 billion to build his ballroom (which he previously claimed would be privately funded),
Every American deserves to feel safe in their house of worship. This attack at the Islamic Center of San Diego was an act of hate and Islamophobia, and our hearts go out to the families of those impacted. Every faith has the right to worship in peace and feel free from fear.
It’s summer and the cost of a grill has doubled in just a few years. I break down why.
Let this sink in.
Every single day, there’s a story about people like Kash Patel in the Trump administration using taxpayer resources for their own benefit. All of these people should be held accountable.
Michigan is a specialty crop state, and the skyrocketing fertilizer costs due to the war with Iran is only making life harder for our farmers.
This Islamophobic attack on a candidate for office in Michigan is meant to intimidate, and it should be condemned by all. I am glad nobody was hurt, and I hope the perpetrator faces full accountability.
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
Michigan lawmakers are urging President Trump against bringing Chinese EVs into the U.S., saying that domestic automakers can't compete. Sen. Elissa Slotkin tells WDET's Alex McLenon that she has another concern: that the data EVs capture will prove a security risk. wdet.org/2026/05/13/m...
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-06-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-43) |
| 2025-06-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (57-38) |
| 2025-06-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (48-46) |
| 2025-06-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-06-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-37) |
| 2025-06-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (72-26) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (66-28) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (59-36) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (59-37) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-06-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 89 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (49-46) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 89 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 87 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-45) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 87 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 88 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-44) |
| 2025-05-21 | H.J. Res. 88 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 55 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Sustained (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 55 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Sustained (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Motion to Adjourn S.J.Res. 55 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Adjourn Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Ten Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (45-52) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Fifteen Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Thirty Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for 60 Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (45-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Ninety Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Failed (46-52) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S. 1582 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (69-31) |
| 2025-05-19 | S. 1582 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (66-32, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-05-19 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-05-19 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-05-15 | S. Res. 195 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.Res. 195 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (45-50) |
| 2025-05-15 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-43) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-40) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (57-41) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (74-25) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (72-26) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
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.