Peter Welch headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Vermont
Born
May 2, 1947
Age 79
Phone
(202) 224-4242
Office
115 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Vermont

Peter Welch

Peter Francis Welch is an American lawyer and politician serving since 2023 as the junior United States senator from Vermont. A member of the Democratic Party, he was the U.S. representative for Vermont's at-large congressional district from 2007 to 2023. He has been a major figure in Vermont politics for over four decades and is only the second Democrat to represent Vermont in the Senate, after his predecessor, Patrick Leahy.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 776
Yes29%
No65%
Present0%
Not Voting6%
Party align95%
Cross-party3%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Peter Welch headshot
Peter Welch
U.S. SenatorDemocratVermont
SoupScore
Peter's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 69 sponsored · 389 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

The Government Accountability Office reviews government spending to save taxpayer dollars. The agency is sounding the alarm on waste, fraud, and abuse from the Trump Administration. It's no wonder Trump officials want to scrap it; they don't want accountability. www.axios.com/2025/09/03/r...
Secretary Kennedy has wrongly accused my fellow Democrats of being shills for Big Pharma. After his hearing today, I went down to the Senate Floor to offer a bill that would allow Medicare to negotiate lower prices on prescription drugs. Republicans blocked it. Talk is cheap.
Former CDC directors from every White House of both parties since the Carter Administration are warning that Secretary Kennedy is doing more harm to public health than we’ve ever seen. They’re warning us about his dangerous, anti-science agenda.
“We served under multiple Republican and Democratic administrations—every president from Jimmy Carter to Donald Trump—alongside thousands of dedicated staff members who shared our commitment to saving lives and improving health... 
  
...What the health and human services secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has done to the C.D.C. and to our nation’s public health system over the past several months—culminating in his decision to fire Susan Monarez as C.D.C. director days ago—is unlike anything we had ever seen at the agency and unlike anything our country had ever experienced. 
   
...This is unacceptable, and it should alarm every American, regardless of political leanings.”

—Nine bipartisan former CDC Directors, New York Times
This is a policy choice. Every day Republicans choose not to come to the table to work with Democrats on gun safety policies a vast majority of Americans agree on is another day putting more families at risk of being torn apart.
Photo of a mother running towards Annunciation Catholic School in Minnesota. 
Credit: Minnesota Star Tribune
These workers courageously spoke out because they know lives are at risk if the Trump Administration keeps defunding disaster recovery. He’s punishing them for warning the public about future catastrophes.
BREAKING: Some FEMA employees who signed a public letter of dissent are put on administrative leave, according to documents reviewed by AP.
Because he's failing to bring down prices, President Trump is lashing out by trying to fire a Governor of the Federal Reserve. He doesn't have the power to fire these officials. He should stop trying to break the law and start taking actions to actually lower costs.
We can't stop natural disasters, but we can control how ready we are to respond to them. FEMA employees who have spent years helping communities recover are warning us this Administration's actions could risk a Katrina-level disaster. Secretary Noem should resign.
FEMA Employees Warn that Trump is Gutting Disaster Response
After Hurricaine Katrine, Congress passed a law to strengthen the nation's disaster response. FEMA employees say the Trump administration has reversed that progress.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
776 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
2025-03-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-40)
2025-03-14End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (56-39)
2025-03-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-45)
2025-03-13S. 331 (119th)End debateNOYESCloture Motion Agreed to (84-15, 3/5 majority required)
2025-03-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (54-45)
2025-03-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (56-43)
2025-03-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (57-41)
2025-03-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-46)
2025-03-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2025-03-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-46)
2025-03-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-03-11Confirm nomineeYESYESNomination Confirmed (78-19)
2025-03-11End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (76-20)
2025-03-11Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-03-11End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2025-03-10Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (67-32)
2025-03-06S. 331 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNOYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (82-12, 3/5 majority required)
2025-03-06End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (66-30)
2025-03-06Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-43)
2025-03-06End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-43)
2025-03-05S.J. Res. 28 (119th)Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 28NONOJoint Resolution Passed (51-47)
2025-03-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-03-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2025-03-04S.J. Res. 28 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47)
2025-03-04S.J. Res. 3 (119th)Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 3NONOJoint Resolution Passed (70-27)
2025-03-04S.J. Res. 3 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (70-28)
2025-03-03S. 9 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (51-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-03-03Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2025-02-27End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-02-27H.J. Res. 35 (119th)Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 35NONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-47)
2025-02-26S.J. Res. 12 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-26S.J. Res. 10 (119th)Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 10YESYESJoint Resolution Defeated (47-52)
2025-02-26Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (56-43)
2025-02-25Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47)
2025-02-25S.J. Res. 11 (119th)Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 11NONOJoint Resolution Passed (54-44)
2025-02-25S.J. Res. 11 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (54-42)
2025-02-25Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (66-28)
2025-02-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (54-43)
2025-02-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (66-28)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Accept House changesNONOConcurrent Resolution Agreed to (52-48)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-51)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (53-47)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-52)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-51)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-21Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Van Hollen Amdt. No. 233)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (24-76)

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 14 / 16Next →