Mark R. Warner headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Virginia
Born
December 15, 1954
Age 71
Phone
(202) 224-2023
Office
703 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Virginia

Mark R. Warner

Voting Record — 885
Yes36%
No60%
Present0%
Not Voting4%
Party align91%
Cross-party9%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Mark R. Warner headshot
Mark R. Warner
U.S. SenatorDemocratVirginia
SoupScore
Mark R.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 54 sponsored · 184 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

“It is increasingly evident that the greatest threat now comes from inside our own government.” This morning in the New York Times, I lay out the stakes for this administration’s election interference.
From a legal perspective, the FBI’s raid of a Fulton County election office doesn’t pass the smell test. From an intelligence standpoint, it becomes even more suspicious. @markwarner.bsky.social and I unpack the red flags raised by this search in the latest episode of Making the Case. 🔗⬇️
Trump has the audacity to say that “we don’t need the Strait of Hormuz” and that the energy crisis “isn’t affecting our country.” Anyone that’s filled up their tank recently would have to disagree.
This week, we showed that raising your voice works. We got Senate Republicans to fund the rest of DHS with NO additional funding for ICE or CBP. We’re still successfully blocking the SAVE Act. There’s a lot more we need to do, but these are two good steps.
After over a month of delay, Senate Republicans finally came forward to do what we’ve been pushing for — fund TSA, Coast Guard, and other key elements of DHS while we keep pushing for reforms to ICE and CBP. The House needs to get it done ASAP.
While gas prices skyrocket and everything you buy becomes more expensive, Republicans’ top priority is trying to force through an unpopular voter suppression bill. They know they can’t win without it.
Noncitizen voting is extraordinarily rare – in many audits, less than one hundreth of one percent of all votes cast. The SAVE Act is a total sham, cracking down on a problem that isn’t real.
At a moment when threats from abroad are growing more complex and more dangerous, we should be reinforcing the principle that no one is above the law, not rewriting history to benefit those who violated the public trust.
It undermines the rule of law, demeans the work of the men and women who safeguard our national security, and suggests that accountability depends on who you are and who you know, not what you’ve done.
For this Justice Department to now turn around and reward that behavior with a million-dollar settlement sends exactly the wrong message to our adversaries, to our intelligence professionals, and to the American people.
This is someone who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russian officials at a time when Russia was actively interfering in our democratic process, after being charged by the Department of Justice during President Trump’s first term.
Planning on booking a summer vacation? Airline costs are already spiking thanks to fuel impacts from Trump’s war of choice with Iran. Absolutely everything is skyrocketing because of this costly, stupid war.
This is a solid first step towards accountability for some of the addictive & harmful measures Big Tech has aimed at users, especially minors, but we’re gonna need a lot more action, including passing bills like my DETOUR Act, to permanently build a safer & more humane internet.
Breaking: In a landmark decision, a jury found YouTube and Meta negligent for operating products that harmed kids and teens on.wsj.com/48aHwWn
This is a solid first step towards accountability for some of the addictive & harmful measures Big Tech has aimed at users, especially minors, but we’re gonna need a lot more action, including passing bills like my DETOUR Act, to permanently build a safer & more humane internet.
Breaking: In a landmark decision, a jury found YouTube and Meta negligent for operating products that harmed kids and teens on.wsj.com/48aHwWn
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
885 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
2025-07-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-07-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-07-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-47)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-47)
2025-07-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (48-47)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-47)
2025-07-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-47)
2025-07-23H.R. 3944 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (90-8)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-41)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (61-35)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-07-22H.R. 3944 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (91-7, 3/5 majority required)
2025-07-22H.R. 3944 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (50-48)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-47)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-47)
2025-07-21End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (44-43)
2025-07-17End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (46-36)
2025-07-17End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-34)
2025-07-17End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (57-31)
2025-07-17End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-40)
2025-07-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-43)
2025-07-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Passed (51-48)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (52-47)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-51)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (51-47)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (47-50)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentNOT_VOTINGYESAmendment Rejected (46-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (47-52)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-52)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-07-15H.R. 4 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)
2025-07-15H.R. 4 (119th)Motion to Discharge H.R. 4NONOMotion to Discharge Agreed to (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)
2025-07-15Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-47)
2025-07-15End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-46)
2025-07-15Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-07-15End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-07-15Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (69-30)

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 10 / 18Next →