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.

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.
SNAP food assistance is just $6 a day for families in need. It’s not a lot, but it helps hardworking families trying to make ends meet put food on the table. Republicans’ Big Beautiful Bill will take that help away from millions of families.
Two in three Americans oppose President Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill, because they know it will crush working families. But unfortunately, Republicans aren’t working for them. They’re working for the few billionaires who will get a massive tax cut.
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
2025-12-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (61-36)
2025-12-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-12-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-41)
2025-11-20H.J. Res. 130 (119th)Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 130NONOJoint Resolution Passed (51-43)
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)

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 →