Who stands to gain from President Trump’s so-called “Big Beautiful Bill?”
Billionaires. Big Oil. China.
Who stands to lose?
Working families. Rural communities. Hungry children.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Vermont
Peter Welch
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 776
Yes29%
No65%
Present0%
Not Voting6%
Party align95%
Cross-party3%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Peter Welch
U.S. SenatorDemocratVermont
SoupScore
Peter's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 69 sponsored · 389 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
President Trump was supposed to lower costs for families. But his Big Beautiful Bill could raise mortgages by $1,000 a year. It could raise small business loans $800 a year. It could raise energy bills $400 a year.
All to give tax cuts to billionaires.
How many times have Democrats tried to pass legislation that would actually help working families, only for Republicans to block it because they say they’re worried about adding to the deficit?
And yet they’re adding $3.3 TRILLION to the deficit to give billionaires tax cuts.
My full remarks on the Senate floor in opposition to President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill.”
www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5N1...
At the end of the day, Trump’s so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” is very simple.
It takes from working families to give to billionaires.
Right now, one in five children across America are hungry. One in five.
It’s almost beyond belief that President Trump and Republicans are working to take away food assistance for kids in order to give tax cuts to billionaires.
Folks are having a hard enough time paying for groceries and everyday needs. And now, Republicans are trying to pass Trump’s tax bill, which picks the pockets of working families to give tax breaks to the rich.
Income inequality will only grow larger in America if it passes.
Vermont’s small businesses, farmers, and families will pay the price for yet another one of President Trump’s temper tantrums.
It will mean job layoffs, small businesses closing, and higher prices.
The so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” would force more than 300 rural hospitals to immediately shut down and put hundreds more at risk.
Even some of my Republican colleagues are sounding the alarm about this because they know it would be a total betrayal of rural communities.
Billionaires in this country are doing just fine. They don’t need a massive tax cut.
The folks who need a break are working families, and President Trump’s so-called "Big Beautiful Bill" will crush them.
Today marks a decade since the Supreme Court legalized marriage for same-sex couples in the landmark case, Obergefell v. Hodges. 🌈
Vermont was a leader in the fight for marriage equality—we’ll continue to stand up for the rights of the LGBTQ+ community.
Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill will kick 16 million people off their health care.
That’s more than the populations of Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Delaware, Rhode Island, Montana, Maine, New Hampshire, Hawaii, West Virginia, Idaho, and Nebraska COMBINED.
I joined the groundbreaking for the Shelburne Museum's Perry Center for Native American Art, which will feature pieces from Tribal Nations and Indigenous groups across Vermont.
We must keep investing in projects that highlight all of our history and culture.
The Trump Administration’s plan to open 59 million acres of public land to logging would gut our National Forests, threaten the tourism economy, and crush local ecosystems.
It’s clear: If there’s a buyer, the Administration will keep selling out the American people.
President Trump is pushing to consolidate some USDA Rural Development programs into the Small Business Administration. This will make it harder for farmers and small businesses to get support from experts who know the needs of Vermonters.
I urge him to drop this proposal.
The Trump Administration is doubling down on its attack on health care, this time by shutting down the suicide prevention hotline dedicated to LGBTQ+ youth.
This cruel decision abandons the 1.3 million people the service has reached and will have deadly consequences.
Since the Supreme Court struck down the right to abortion, nineteen states have passed abortion bans.
On the anniversary of that terrible decision, I'm joining my colleagues to introduce the Women's Health Protection Act, which would restore and protect this right nationwide.
A new whistleblower report alleges that Emil Bove, a senior official at the Justice Department, planned to defy court orders to halt deportations.
If true, someone so willing to violate the core tenants of our Constitution can’t receive a lifetime judicial appointment.
Vermonters: It’s important for everyone to stay alert and safe during this heatwave that’s sweeping across the state.
Vermont’s Health Department lists over 400 sites folks can visit and cool down. Find a location near you.
www.healthvermont.gov/environment/...
The “Big Beautiful Bill” will cause real people—people who work in coal mines, on dairy farms, in factories—to lose their health care.
The sheer number of people who will be kicked off is chilling.
www.youtube.com/shorts/R6pZP...
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History776 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
776 total votes
Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.
| Date | Bill | Question | Position | Party Maj | Align? | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Amendment Rejected (14-81) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Amendment Rejected (45-50) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Amendment Rejected (42-53) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Amendment Rejected (44-51) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Points of Order Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 3114) | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Motion Rejected (44-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (54-43) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (55-41) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-44) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-44) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-39) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-07-31 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-41) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (59-38) |
| 2025-07-30 | S.J. Res. 34 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 34 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (24-73) |
| 2025-07-30 | S.J. Res. 41 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 41 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (27-70) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-07-30 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-49) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-44) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-07-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-47) |
| 2025-07-28 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2025-07-28 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (50-39) |
| 2025-07-28 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-07-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-48) |
| 2025-07-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2025-07-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-07-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-07-23 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-47) |
| 2025-07-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-47) |
| 2025-07-23 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (48-47) |
| 2025-07-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-47) |
| 2025-07-23 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-47) |
| 2025-07-23 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (90-8) |
| 2025-07-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
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.