Chris Van Hollen headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Maryland
Born
January 10, 1959
Age 67
Phone
(202) 224-4654
Office
730 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Maryland

Chris Van Hollen

Christopher Van Hollen Jr. is an American attorney and politician serving as the senior United States senator from Maryland, a seat he has held since 2017. A member of the Democratic Party, he served as the U.S. representative for Maryland's 8th congressional district from 2003 to 2017 and as a Maryland state senator from 1995 to 2003.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 851
Yes28%
No71%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align97%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Chris Van Hollen headshot
Chris Van Hollen
U.S. SenatorDemocratMaryland
SoupScore
Chris's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 64 sponsored · 452 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

In the past 6 months alone, over half of the publicly known donors to Trump's gold-plated ballroom, are reported to have received $50 BILLION in taxpayer-funded contracts from the federal gov.   Wild coincidence or taxpayer-funded corruption? You be the judge. www.washingtonpost.com/politics/202...
Senate Republicans just voted to give billions more of taxpayer money to Trump's lawless ICE operations.

The American people deserve a govt that puts them first.

Today, Trump & his rubber stamp Republicans once again failed them.

My full statement ⬇️
Today, we gave Republicans a choice: Do they want to support people who assaulted police on Jan 6th or the police officers who defended the Capitol on that day. They made their choice. Another shameful vote from Republicans to send your tax dollars to these criminals.
I just offered an amendment to prevent anyone convicted of heinous crimes — from attacking law enforcement to molesting children — from getting money from Trump's taxpayer financed slush fund. Republicans blocked it. All to please the Dear Leader. It's sick.
Senator Bill Cassidy & I are teaming up to undo Trump's $1.8 billion slush fund. As it stands the fund could reward rioters who assaulted police on Jan 6. Our amendment makes it a compensation fund ONLY for officers who defended the Capitol that day & their families.
Yesterday, the IDF seized 4 students from their homes in the West Bank, including 20-year-old American, Sama Safi. The Israeli govt didn’t tell her family or the U.S. Embassy where or why she was being taken & is holding her without charges. America must secure her release NOW.
SCOTUS just cleared an Alabama redistricting map that just 3 years ago a federal court ruled was illegal racial gerrymandering. Even after SCOTUS gutted the VRA, judges still said this map was unconstitutional.   But SCOTUS is allowing it for this election. Corrupt.
Today, Sec. Mullin conceded that DHS has made numerous false statements. That’s why independent investigations into the killings of Alex Pretti, Renee Good, & all victims of DHS's violence are necessary. But he won't give states access to critical evidence. What is DHS hiding?
Let's be clear: Bill Pulte has zero background for this job.   He won Trump's favor by weaponizing our govt against Trump's political foes.   As America’s most powerful intelligence official, he can do incalculable harm.   This should be a non-starter.
Two weeks ago, I told Todd Blanche, his & Trump's $1.8 BILLION slush fund was a pure theft of taxpayer dollars. That reality seems to be catching up with them. While they may be signaling an end to their corrupt scheme, we can't stop pushing until it's outlawed all together.
Turns out, acting-AG Todd Blanche — the architect of Trump's $1.8 BILLION taxpayer funded 'anti-weaponization' slush fund — may be directly involved in the Trump admin's vindictive prosecution of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Again, the acting AG is ACTING like Trump's personal lawyer.
Over 17,000 kids in Maryland have lost SNAP assistance due to cuts in what Trump & Republicans call their "Big, Beautiful Bill."

While it may be beautiful for the billionaires enjoying record tax cuts, kids are going hungry to save those billionaires money. Shameful. www.cbpp.org/blog/sharp-d...
This was a rotten deal from the start, taking taxpayer dollars to pay Trump allies. What's more, the Trump admin has refused to say this money won't go to convicted criminals & those who assaulted police on Jan 6.   Glad to see a federal judge pause this gross abuse of power.
35 federal judges appointed by presidents of both parties agree: Trump's $1.8 BILLION slush fund can't stand. There's a reason Blanche dodged my question when I asked if he'd get a judge to sign off on the fund. He knew no independent judge would allow this robbery of taxpayers.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
851 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
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30Confirm nomineeNONONomination 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)
2025-07-28Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-39)
2025-07-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-07-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-48)
2025-07-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-07-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-07-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-47)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-47)
2025-07-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (48-47)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-47)
2025-07-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-47)
2025-07-23H.R. 3944 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (90-8)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-41)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (61-35)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-07-22H.R. 3944 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (91-7, 3/5 majority required)
2025-07-22H.R. 3944 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (50-48)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-47)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-47)
2025-07-21End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (44-43)
2025-07-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (46-36)
2025-07-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-34)
2025-07-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (57-31)
2025-07-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-40)
2025-07-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-43)
2025-07-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Passed (51-48)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (52-47)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-51)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (51-47)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)

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 / 18Next →