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

Voting Record — 890
Yes30%
No64%
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 · 81 sponsored · 432 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

President Trump cares more about the former President of Brazil than America’s small business owners. All these tariffs will do is hurt consumers and farmers across America already struggling under his other tariffs. Congress must take back our tariff power.
Trump says he’s punishing Brazil with 50% tariffs in retaliation for its prosecution of Jair Bolsonaro over his attempted coup
I’m joining my fellow Vermonters in remembering the brutal floods our state faced in 2023 and 2024. In Vermont, we help our neighbors when they need it. We’ll continue to work together to rebuild stronger than before.
Peter visits Barre to assess the damage left from the flooding of July 2023.
Peter visits Plainfield to assess the damage left from the flooding of July 2024.
“Other universities and academic institutions should take note of Harvard’s actions, and the repercussions...” Subpoenaing a university for information about its students? The Trump Administration is trying to punish anyone—or any institution—that defies its illegal actions.
The Department of Homeland Security says it will subpoena Harvard University for records related to its international students.
I met with folks in Barre and Montpelier impacted by the 2023 and 2024 floods to learn about the challenges they faced while recovering from flooding. I also shared how my new bill would make it easier for communities to access federal aid and rebuild after a disaster.
Infants in Gaza are facing starvation because baby formula is being blocked. It’s unacceptable. The government of Israel must immediately allow baby formula and medicine through its blockade to avoid more senseless deaths of innocent children.
President Trump’s tariffs only cause chaos and uncertainty. He’s announced more tariffs—this time on Japan and South Korea. Small businesses can’t plan. Consumers pay more. Working families get hurt.
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?
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
890 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
2025-10-01S. Res. 412 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-10-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-10-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-10-01H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (55-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-01S. 2882 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-30H.R. 5371 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Defeated (55-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-30S. 2882 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Defeated (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-29S. 2806 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (37-61, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-45)
2025-09-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (54-45)
2025-09-19Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (47-43)
2025-09-19End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (47-45)
2025-09-19H.R. 5371 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Defeated (44-48, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-19S. 2882 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Defeated (47-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-18Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-09-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-09-17Decision of the Chair PN12-19 and PN25-28 and PN12-45 and PN22-1 and PN22-2 and PN22-5 and PN22-27 and PN22-20 and PN22-21 and PN26-8 and PN26-34 and PN26-35 and PN55-41 and PN22-4 and PN22-8 and PN22-19 and PN26-1 and PN22-23 and PN25-40 and PN26-7 and PN26-19 and PN26-31 and PN60-3 and PN26-44 and PN25-2 and PN55-16 and PN60-9 and PN60-10 and PN129-8 and PN26-45 and PN141-37 and PN141-7 and PN141-28 and PN12-22 and PN25-21 and PN22-3 and PN26-22 and PN13-5 and PN22-24 and PN25-33 and PN141-18 and PN150-5 and PN345-16 and PN55-42 and PN54-6 and PN54-7 and PN55-45 and PN55-25YESYESDecision of Chair Not Sustained (47-52)
2025-09-17Motion to Reconsider PN55-25 and PN55-45 and PN54-7 and PN54-6 and PN55-42 and PN345-16 and PN150-5 and PN141-18 and PN25-33 and PN22-24 and PN13-5 and PN26-22 and PN22-3 and PN25-21 and PN12-22 and PN141-28 and PN141-7 and PN141-37 and PN26-45 and PN129-8 and PN60-10 and PN60-9 and PN55-16 and PN25-2 and PN26-44 and PN60-3 and PN26-31 and PN26-19 and PN26-7 and PN25-40 and PN22-23 and PN26-1 and PN22-19 and PN22-8 and PN22-4 and PN55-41 and PN26-35 and PN26-34 and PN26-8 and PN22-21 and PN22-20 and PN22-27 and PN22-5 and PN22-2 and PN22-1 and PN12-45 and PN12-19 and PN25-28NONOMotion to Reconsider Agreed to (51-47)
2025-09-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-16S. Con. Res. 22 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Rejected (36-62)
2025-09-16S.J. Res. 60 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-51)
2025-09-15Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (48-47)
2025-09-15End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-44)
2025-09-15S. Res. 377 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOResolution Agreed to (51-44)
2025-09-11S. Res. 377 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-43)
2025-09-11S. Res. 377 (119th)Decision of the Chair S.Res. 377YESYESDecision of Chair Not Sustained (45-53)
2025-09-11S. Res. 377 (119th)Motion to Reconsider S.Res. 377NONOMotion to Reconsider Agreed to (52-45)
2025-09-11S. Res. 377 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-10S. 2296 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (51-49)
2025-09-09S. Res. 377 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45)
2025-09-09S. Res. 377 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (53-46)
2025-09-09Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-09-09End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-09-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-46)
2025-09-09End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2025-09-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-09-08Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-43)
2025-09-04S. 2296 (119th)Begin considerationNOYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (83-13)
2025-09-04End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-09-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2025-09-02S. 2296 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNOYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-14, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (71-23)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNomination Confirmed (72-22)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (59-35)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (52-42)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (50-45)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGYESNomination Confirmed (78-17)
2025-08-02End debateNOT_VOTINGYESCloture Motion Agreed to (76-19)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (50-45)
2025-08-02End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)

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 8 / 18Next →