If they actually cared about “government efficiency,” they wouldn’t have started by firing the inspectors general whose JOB it was to root out waste, fraud, and abuse.
What Elon Musk is doing is only opening the door to MORE waste, fraud, and abuse.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Maryland
Chris Van Hollen
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 788
Yes26%
No73%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align97%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Chris Van Hollen
U.S. SenatorDemocratMaryland
SoupScore
Chris's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 59 sponsored · 422 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
The last time they passed a billionaire tax cut, Republicans said it would pay for itself. That was a lie then, and it's a lie now.
You know who's actually going to foot the bill for their billionaire tax cut? Children, families, and working people across the country.
Trump and his cabinet of billionaires are trying to destroy the Department of Education so they can privatize more schools. The result: making it even harder to ensure that ALL students have access to a quality education.
Another outrageous, illegal scam. We will fight this.
As we discuss here: when Donald Trump talks about big, across-the-board tariffs, he's talking about hiking prices — including up to $10k for new homes.
It is not America First. It is a giant sales tax on AMERICANS.
This says it all. Trump, Netanyahu, and Musk — like right wing autocrats worldwide — detest the rule of law.
They want to make up their own rules.
We must fight back against this wave of lawlessness to protect democracy.
With one hand they're making it harder for working people to get info about their taxes, and with the other they're dismantling the IRS's effort to ensure the ultra-rich pay what they already owe.
Billionaire tax cheats win — law abiding Americans lose. The Great Betrayal in action.
We created the Green Bank to turbocharge innovation, boost our energy independence, create good-paying American jobs and confront the climate crisis.
Trump and Musk want to shutter it to do Big Oil's bidding.
This ruling is an important step towards stopping their illegal scam.
Vincent served 24 years in the Air Force and then joined the USDA.
I never thought our veterans would be betrayed by their own country, but last month he was illegally fired from his job by Elon Musk and Donald Trump.
I thank Vincent for sharing his story with me today.
Trump is clearly trying to intimidate judges for doing their jobs and protecting the rule of law. I'm glad the Chief Justice isn't tolerating this assault on the constitutional separation of powers.
If only Senate Republicans would muster the decency to honor their oaths as well.
Make no mistake — by doing this, Trump is helping Putin cover up terrible war crimes in Ukraine.
This has nothing to do with government efficiency and everything to do with bending the knee to a murderous dictator who Trump views as a role model. What a disgrace.
Ignoring a court order is absolutely unacceptable. He must be held accountable for this contemptible and lawless conduct.
Dictators worldwide are cheering Trump and Musk’s illegal shutdown of Voice of America — a global beacon of hope and democracy.
It’s their latest “America in Retreat” policy — undermining our influence and making us less secure.
Patriots must stand up to these illegal actions.
Yes — Trump and Musk lied when they said they wanted Musk’s DOGE operation to be transparent and accountable.
They are appealing this decision because they want to keep the American people in the dark and cover up the baseless claims and corruption of that illegal operation.
JUST IN: Trump administration asks Judge Cooper to reconsider his order that DOGE has to comply with #FOIA. And, wait for it....there's an Amy Gleason declaration. Doc: www.documentcloud.org/documents/25... Earlier: www.politico.com/news/2025/03...
After the very bad news of the Republican CR passing the Senate, there was a bit of good news: my bill to reverse its outrageous attack on the District of Columbia's ability to control its OWN tax dollars passed unanimously.
I urge my colleagues in the House to pass it ASAP.
The terrible House Republican CR capped DC's ability to use its OWN money — putting local schools, public safety and more on the chopping block. I'm bringing up legislation to fix this:
The terrible Republican CR restricts DC's ability to use its OWN money — putting local schools, public safety and more on the chopping block.
I'm bringing a bill to the floor immediately to reverse that disastrous provision.
I’m still fighting this BAD bill — I’m offering an amendment to STOP Musk and his DOGE cronies:
I’m about to offer an amendment to this terrible bill, with one simple goal: stopping Musk and his DOGE cronies.
I'll say it again: this is a terrible bill. I'm headed to the Senate floor right now to vote HELL NO on this sham slush fund for Elon Musk.
I said it once and I’ll say it again. I am a HELL NO on cloture and HELL NO on the Republican CR that provides Elon Musk a slush fund to support his illegal operations.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History788 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
788 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-41) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-43) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-44) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (81-15) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (87-9, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (87-9, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (21-75) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (15-81) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (14-81) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (45-50) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (42-53) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (44-51) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Points of Order Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 3114) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (44-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-43) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (55-41) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-44) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-44) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-39) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-41) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (59-38) |
| 2025-07-30 | S.J. Res. 34 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 34 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (24-73) |
| 2025-07-30 | S.J. Res. 41 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 41 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (27-70) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-49) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-44) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-47) |
| 2025-07-28 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture 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.