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.

Folks in both parties should call for accountability regarding classified info disclosed over Signal. It's not partisan, it's about the safety of our troops. If the shoe was on the other foot, and this happened to a Democrat, my colleagues would have plenty to say.
Let's get past the parlor games and remember what happened with these leaked Signal chats. They disclosed classified information that could put lives at stake. Now, Secretary Hegseth needs to man up and admit his mistake -- or resign and stop being a distraction.
Today during the Senate Armed Force Committee I talked about the importance of the Selfridge fighter mission, finding a replacement mission, & I invited Troy Meink, the nominee to lead the Air Force, to visit.
Classified info was disclosed by Sec. Hegseth in the now infamous Signal chat, and it could have put lives at risk. If he continues to refuse responsibility, he’ll lose credibility with the force, and become a bigger distraction. If that’s the case, he should resign or Trump should fire him.
One theme across these events: concern and confusion about the economic chaos coming from Washington -- from tariffs to Elon Musk and DOGE -- and the impact it has on their pocketbooks, their jobs and their kids.
Michiganders know that apples have an emotional connection to the state and culture of Michigan. Whether it's high input costs, including the cost of labor, or tariffs or USDA cuts, it's clear that regardless of party, we must all work to protect this historic industry and our farmers.
The Secretary of Defense seems to feel no qualms about disclosing classified information on those in harm’s way. If that was his child on that mission, would he simply shrug his shoulders? I think not.
The reason classified info is so sensitive is because it gives our adversaries the date, time, and sequence of U.S. movements in some of the most dangerous and violent parts of the world.
In the discussion of senior officials texting classified info, let’s remember that this issue, at its heart, is about the safety of the U.S. forces deployed, and the families waiting at home for news of their loved one.
I understand that the folks at the White House are the senior-most officials. But they should, as leaders, set an example with their accountability. No one should be able to put US forces at risk without it.
They would also likely be reported to the Department of Justice in a “crimes report” for further investigation and potential prosecution, and be reported to Congress if the disclosure caused significant harm or damage to national security.
An individual would immediately lose access to their workspace, all classified info and immediately be put on leave. They would be the subject of an investigation to determine the level of damage caused to national security interests and whether any criminal laws were violated.
On the news that classified info was shared on Signal, I’m watching the White House blame others and shirk responsibility. It’s therefore important to understand what would happen to an ordinary person if they shared classified info on unclassified systems. Let's break it down.
If these were regular soldiers or a civilian CIA officer like I was, they would be reprimanded, likely fired, prosecuted and possibly jailed. But this Administration believes they are above the law — and seemingly don’t care what US forces and US operations they put at risk.
For years, I locked up my phone every day b/c it wasn't safe to bring it into an office where we handled and talked about classified docs. Everyone who does classified work knows this. So do the people on this group chat, many of whom have railed against breaches of security.
We also know that China, Russia, and Iran are constantly trying to hack the phones of everyone in that group chat. This is why we have a whole separate computer network to handle classified information.
Laws like the Espionage Act, the Presidential Records Act, and the Federal Records Act lay out clear rules for how you can handle classified information — and those laws apply to every one of the people on that text chain.
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
2025-07-15End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-46)
2025-07-15Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-07-15End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-07-15Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (69-30)
2025-07-14End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-28)
2025-07-14Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (46-42)
2025-07-10Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-45)
2025-07-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-43)
2025-07-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2025-07-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-45)
2025-07-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-46)
2025-07-09End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-44)
2025-07-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-43)
2025-07-09End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2025-07-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-43)
2025-07-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (47-42)
2025-07-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (47-41)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Passed (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Bennet Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (45-55)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (50-50)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (50-50)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-51)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (99-1)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (21-79)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Warnock Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (50-50)
2025-07-01H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Wyden Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53)
2025-07-01Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 2775)NONOMotion Rejected (54-46, 3/5 majority required)
2025-07-01Motion (Motion to Waive Section 302(f) of the CBA Re: Collins Amdt. No. 2812)NONOMotion Rejected (22-78, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Motion to Waive Section 425(a)(2) of the CBA re: H.R. 1)NONOMotion Agreed to (51-48, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Padilla Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53)
2025-06-30Motion (Motion to Waive Section 313(b)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget Act Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 2772 )NOYESMotion Rejected (42-58, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Schiff Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Duckworth Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Hassan Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Gallego Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Blumenthal Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Armed Services with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Kaine Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53)
2025-06-30Motion (Motion to Waive Section 313 (b)(1)(D) of the CBA Re: Amdt. No. 2401)NONOMotion Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-30Motion (Motion to Waive Section 302(F) of the CBA Re: Murray Amdt. No. 2771)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-30Motion (Motion to Waive Section 313(b)(1)(D) of the Congressional Budget Act Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 2446)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-30Motion (Motion to Waive Section 313(b)(1)(D) of the CBA Re: Cornyn Amdt. No. 2705)NONOMotion Rejected (56-44, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-30Motion (Motion to Waive Section 302(F) of the CBA Re: Amdt. No. 2414)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 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 9 / 16Next →