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 — 772
Yes29%
No65%
Present0%
Not Voting7%
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.

Situations like this are one of the reasons I've called for Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to resign. The actions happening under her watch are outrageous. I stand with Wilmer.
The actions of this Administration make it clear they're not focused on finding people who are a danger to society, they only care about the highest number of deportations possible. That's led to numerous instances of unacceptable treatment of citizens, particularly people of color.
On Monday, Winooski School District Superintendent Wilmer Chavarria was detained and interrogated for more than five hours by U.S. Customs and Border Protection after returning from Nicaragua. Superintendent Chavarria is a U.S. citizen.
President Trump is denying 460,000 Americans from using income-based repayment plans for their student loans. These are folks trying to pay their loans, they're just trying to to keep their head above water. And he won't even let them do that.
At least 73 Palestinians were killed yesterday seeking humanitarian aid. Hundreds have been killed in recent months trying to get food, water, and medicine. The U.S. shouldn't give offensive weapons to a government that has consistently disregarded civilian lives.
In March, the Trump Administration slashed funding that helped farmers give excess food to local food banks. And now on top of that, the so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” shrinks SNAP benefits for 22.3 million families. It's cruel to let food spoil while hunger rises.
I'm thrilled that Vermont will receive $22.7 million in federal funds to help replace the almost 100-year-old Winooski River Bridge. I was proud to vote for the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and excited that it’s making Vermont stronger and more weather resilient.
The devastating impacts of President Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill are already happening. Curtis Medical Center in rural Nebraska announced it will close because of cuts to Medicaid. Nebraskans will have to find an alternative for their health care.
Late last night, the Senate did something we haven’t done for decades. Republicans voted to revoke funding both parties agreed to spend just a few months ago. To be clear: they only did this because President Trump demanded it. They're ceding the power of Congress to Trump.
I’m introducing two bills to create safer alternatives to burn pits, improve the VA’s response to toxic exposure, and make it easier to update the health information of deceased veterans. They'll help protect and support our servicemembers.
Because of DOGE, the Trump Administration is going to spend $130,000 to burn $800,000 of food that USAID intended for starving children overseas but couldn't deliver due to the massive cuts to staff and services. DOGE isn't eliminating waste; they're literally creating it.
Senator Grassley violated the rules and refused to allow Senators to speak against Emil Bove's lifetime judicial appointment. So I and every Democrat on the Judiciary Committee walked out of the hearing.
Photo of the Senate Judiciary Committee showing all the Democrats have left the room.
As a Fox News host, Jeanine Pirro promoted conspiracies surrounding the 2020 election, even after the network confirmed her statements had been debunked. If she can do that on-air, imagine what she can in our judicial system. I will vote against her nomination for U.S. Attorney.
On one hand, the U.S. could continue to support global health programs that save lives and reduce the spread of disease to America. But on the other hand, President Trump would rather give tax cuts to billionaires, so the Senate is about to vote to gut these lifesaving programs.
So President Trump thinks supporting shows like Sesame Street and Mr. Rogers is a bad use of funding but giving massive tax breaks to billionaires is a good idea? Got it.
• South Dakota – $3,038,524 • Tennessee – $7,365,199 • Texas – $17,719,507 • Utah – $7,103,835 • Vermont – $2,043,510 • Virginia – $99,465,449 • Washington – $10,106,644 • West Virginia – $1,790,242 • Wisconsin – $8,498,812 • Wyoming – $1,870,865 Thats more than $1 BILLION from around the country.
• New Jersey – $2,282,024 • New Mexico – $5,841,697 • New York – $42,556,210 • North Carolina – $8,236,216 • North Dakota – $2,564,579 • Ohio – $13,341,101 • Oklahoma – $3,485,600 • Oregon – $7,468,534 • Pennsylvania – $14,492,945 • Rhode Island – $1,082,244 • South Carolina – $3,488,714
• Maine – $2,895,498 • Maryland – $6,357,641 • Massachusetts – $22,549,333 • Michigan – $11,818,761 • Minnesota – $17,228,752 • Mississippi – $2,824,520 • Missouri – $8,677,805 • Montana – $2,837,807 • Nebraska – $6,297,290 • Nevada – $3,881,471 • New Hampshire – $1,795,240
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
772 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
2025-11-19S.J. Res. 76 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (46-51)
2025-11-19S.J. Res. 89 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47)
2025-11-19Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (66-32)
2025-11-18End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (65-32)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Passed (60-40)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-40, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (60-40)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-40, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Kill the motionNOYESMotion to Table Agreed to (76-24)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Failed (47-53)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Failed (47-53)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (60-40)
2025-11-09H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (60-40, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-07S. 3012 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (53-43, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-06S.J. Res. 90 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 90YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (49-51)
2025-11-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (57-43)
2025-11-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (57-41)
2025-11-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-11-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-11-04H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-44, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2025-10-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-10-30S.J. Res. 88 (119th)Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 88YESYESJoint Resolution Passed (51-47)
2025-10-30S.J. Res. 80 (119th)Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 80NONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-45)
2025-10-29S.J. Res. 77 (119th)Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 77YESYESJoint Resolution Passed (50-46)
2025-10-29S.J. Res. 69 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Rejected (25-72)
2025-10-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-10-29S.J. Res. 80 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (54-46)
2025-10-28S.J. Res. 81 (119th)Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 81YESYESJoint Resolution Passed (52-48)
2025-10-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-10-28Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-47)
2025-10-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-10-28H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-27Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (58-40)
2025-10-27Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-10-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2025-10-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (48-45)
2025-10-23S. 3012 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-10-22End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-10-22End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-39)
2025-10-22H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-46, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-21Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-46)
2025-10-21End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-10-21End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-10-21Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (66-32)
2025-10-20H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-43, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-16H.R. 4016 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-44, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-16End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (62-34)
2025-10-16H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (51-45, 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 4 / 16Next →