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 — 783
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 · 392 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

House Republicans are delaying the vote on the “Big Beautiful Bill.” They don’t have the votes yet. I still have hope we can kill this bill and save health care for 17 million people.
Natural disasters don’t discriminate. They happen in red states and blue states. Every community deserves to get the resources they need to recover as quick as possible. My new bill will help ensure your town or city—no matter your zip code—can start recovery process faster.
Communities devastated by disasters shouldn’t have to wait to get the help they need. But too often, that's the frustrating reality. I’m introducing legislation to help communities recover in red states and blue states alike.
That’s why next week—on the anniversaries of the floods—I’m introducing a new bill to reform FEMA. The Disaster AID Act will cut through red tape, get more resources to small towns, encourage long-term resilience, and protect federal recovery funding.
The so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” would force over more than 300 rural hospitals to immediately shut down and put hundreds more at risk of closing. Even some of my Republican colleagues are sounding the alarm about this because they know it would be a total betrayal of rural communities.
One of the best investments our country can make is to build renewable energy projects that lower energy bills. Not only does Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill cut funding for green projects, it literally adds a tax on them. It helps no one but billionaires.
Too many families will go to bed tonight wondering what they will do if the nursing home their elderly loved ones live in is forced to close. Parents are wondering what they’ll do if their child with a disability loses the care they need. That’s the cruel reality of the “Big Beautiful Bill.”
I thought that Republicans were supposed to be the party of states’ rights? Yet the Big Beautiful Bill bans states from passing any laws that regulate AI and social media. Working families can suffer, but let's make sure Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg are above the law, right?
Rural hospitals rely on Medicaid payments from patients. When you cut Medicaid, those payments go away and rural hospitals close. That means if you’re in a rural community, that 30-minute drive to the hospital might turn into an hour or more. If you’re in an emergency, that’s a terrifying reality.
Two out of three beds in nursing homes are paid for by Medicaid. When you slash Medicaid, seniors get kicked out of nursing homes and those facilities can’t stay open to care for the patients who can pay. One in four nursing homes are projected to close.
When people can’t go to the doctor for minor issues, they end up using the emergency room instead. It drives up emergency room wait times even longer than they already are, and if patients can’t afford to pay, it puts more stress on hospitals’ finances.
When people lose their health care, they stop going to the doctor for check ups. When they stop getting check ups, they miss diagnoses of diseases that are treatable if caught early. More people will get sick and die.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
783 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
2025-03-14H.R. 1968 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Passed (54-46)
2025-03-14H.R. 1968 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (27-73)
2025-03-14H.R. 1968 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-03-14H.R. 1968 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-03-14H.R. 1968 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-03-14H.R. 1968 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (62-38, 3/5 majority required)
2025-03-14S. 331 (119th)Final passageNOYESBill Passed (84-16)
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)Approve resolutionNONOJoint 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)Approve resolutionNONOJoint 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)Approve resolutionNONOJoint 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)Approve resolutionYESYESJoint 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)Approve resolutionNONOJoint 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)

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 →