Ron Wyden headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Oregon
Born
May 3, 1949
Age 77
Phone
(202) 224-5244
Office
221 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Oregon

Ron Wyden

Ronald Lee Wyden is an American politician serving as the senior United States senator from Oregon, a seat he has held since 1996. A member of the Democratic Party, he served in the United States House of Representatives from 1981 until 1996. Upon the death of Representative Don Young in 2022, Wyden became the dean of the West Coast's Congressional delegation. He is the dean of Oregon's congressional delegation and serves as the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee. Known for his libertarian-leaning stances within the Democratic Party, Wyden has been a prominent advocate for privacy rights, internet freedom, and limiting government surveillance, positioning him as a defender of civil liberties.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 851
Yes28%
No70%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align97%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Ron Wyden headshot
Ron Wyden
U.S. SenatorDemocratOregon
SoupScore
Ron's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 84 sponsored · 373 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

🚨🚨Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-OR) and 14 others have introduced the Medicare Cost Cap Act — a potentially big step for Democrats toward lowering health care costs for seniors and Americans with disabilities who rely on Medicare.
I believe in the groundbreaking concept that a full day’s work should entitle you to a living wage. Proud to be leading the effort for a $25 federal minimum wage with @chrismurphyct.bsky.social.
Today, I introduced legislation to require that the minimum wage be a living wage. $25 an hour is what’s required for a full time worker to pay their bills, and we shouldn’t accept that full time work leaves people living in poverty.
Two issues with this: 1. Black's own attorneys told my investigators that Epstein's advice was shoddy at best and often needed double checking. 2. Black paid Epstein astronomically more than his other world-class tax advisors. Why was he paying Epstein like the CEO of a Fortune 100 company?
Leon Black tells Congress that Epstein 'duped and deceived' him reut.rs/4v4Bn6R
A $10 million procurement reviewed by 404 Media indicates ICE is buying records related to immigrants’ tax identifiers. “It looks for all the world like Trump is trying to skirt the law and a court order to fuel his mass-deportation campaign,” Senator Ron Wyden said.
This is a big sleeper issue. Nitazenes are the next wave of the opioid crisis, and the Trump administration has been undermining and defunding the federal programs that study, prepare for and respond to emerging drug threats. I’ve been leading the charge on this to mobilize a federal response.
A drug up to 40 times more potent than fentanyl and 500 times stronger than heroin is increasingly being detected in the US. Bellingcat produced the most detailed account yet of how nitazenes are infiltrating US borders and destroying lives. www.bellingcat.com/news/2026/06...
US troops are dead and gas prices are sky high. The Trump administration wants you to believe that Iran having nukes is a good thing to distract from Trump's colossal failure of a war
JD Vance comes out in support of Iran's right of self-defense and right to have ballistic missiles: "Israel doesn't give up the right of self-defense if Hezbollah fires rockets or drones at Israel. The Iranians don't give up the right of self-defense in their country."
It doesn’t matter who’s in charge. FISA 702 can’t be renewed without real reforms. Case in point: Trump’s latest nominee for director of national intelligence was peddling election conspiracies just a few days ago.
Breaking: Trump says he's nominating Jay Clayton, the current U.S. Attorney for the SDNY, to be Director of National Intelligence. Just this week on CNBC, Clayton said the "American people are right to question" California's elections. To be clear: There is no evidence of fraud in those elections.
I'll be fighting like hell between now and June 12 to ensure Congress doesn't cave and renew Section 702 of FISA without real reforms. Security and liberty aren't mutually exclusive, and it seems like Congress is finally starting to understand that.
Posts page 1Older posts →
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
2025-02-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-02-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-48)
2025-02-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2025-02-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-02-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (55-44)
2025-02-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-45)
2025-02-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-46)
2025-02-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (77-23)
2025-02-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-38)
2025-02-03Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-01-30End debateNOYESCloture Motion Agreed to (83-13)
2025-01-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (62-35)
2025-01-30Confirm nomineeNOYESNomination Confirmed (80-17)
2025-01-29End debateNOYESCloture Motion Agreed to (78-20)
2025-01-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (56-42)
2025-01-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (56-42)
2025-01-28H.R. 23 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-01-28Confirm nomineeNOYESNomination Confirmed (77-22)
2025-01-27End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (97-0)
2025-01-27Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (68-29)
2025-01-25End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (67-23)
2025-01-25Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (59-34)
2025-01-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (61-39)
2025-01-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)
2025-01-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-49)
2025-01-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (74-25)
2025-01-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (72-26)
2025-01-22S. 6 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required)
2025-01-21Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45)
2025-01-21Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (54-46)
2025-01-20Confirm nomineeYESYESNomination Confirmed (99-0)
2025-01-20S. 5 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Passed (64-35)
2025-01-20S. 5 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESNOAmendment Agreed to (75-24)
2025-01-17S. 5 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (61-35, 3/5 majority required)
2025-01-15S. 5 (119th)Vote on amendmentNOT_VOTINGYESAmendment Rejected (46-49)
2025-01-15S. 5 (119th)Vote on amendmentNOT_VOTINGNOAmendment Agreed to (70-25)
2025-01-13S. 5 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (82-10)

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 17 / 18Next →