Democrats should stand together and use our power to fix the GENIUS Act before the vote tomorrow. There is no excuse to facilitate Trump's crypto corruption.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Massachusetts
Elizabeth Warren
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 915
Yes26%
No72%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align95%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Elizabeth Warren
U.S. SenatorDemocratMassachusetts
SoupScore
Elizabeth's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 88 sponsored · 386 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Reposted byElizabeth Warren
The rot of corruption is eroding our democracy before our eyes.
With RFK Jr. in charge, measles cases have hit a record high.
But the man nominated to be his second-in-command thinks Kennedy's doing a “great job."
For our kids, I’ll be voting NO on his confirmation.
Donald Trump's tariffs mean you could suffer higher prices and lose your job AT THE SAME TIME.
Forget dolls, families will be forced to make impossible choices between necessities like food, housing, and health care.
Republicans in Congress want to cut health care for millions of people... to pay for more tax cuts for millionaires.
I'm inviting Secretary McMahon to the Senate for a public forum next week.
If McMahon thinks destroying public education is a good idea, she should have no problem showing up and giving us some answers.
Americans who serve in the military are the best of us. It takes courage, bravery, and sacrifice.
Banning transgender servicemembers has nothing to do with national defense. They love this country and contribute just like every soldier — and they are not alone in this fight.
Donald Trump’s Pentagon nominees can mumble and backtrack all they want, but their own tweets don’t lie.
Our military’s loyalty is to the Constitution, not to any politician.
Trump is already using his stablecoin to get a cut of a $2 BILLION deal with a shady UAE fund.
The Senate will vote on the GENIUS Act, a crypto bill which would make the President's grift even easier.
If we don't fix that problem, no Senator should vote for it.
One year ago, Steward Health Care went bankrupt.
I'm not letting CEO Ralph de la Torre and his corporate enablers off the hook for looting Massachusetts hospitals and leaving patients, workers, and communities hanging out to dry.
Reposted byElizabeth Warren
A vote for Frank Bisignano is a vote to cut Social Security.
I won’t do it.
I voted against his nomination.
Reposted byElizabeth Warren
Since we’re voting on the Social Security Administrator, I wanted to re-up my thoughts. I’m a hard NO on Bisignano.
Frank Bisignano has made clear he will not stop Trump and Musk’s Social Security chaos.
Today, we’re voting on his nomination. For every American who counts on Social Security, I’m a NO.
This week, Republicans in Congress are meeting behind closed doors to decide how many people they want to kick off Medicaid.
How many kids will have to lose their health care coverage to fund tax handouts for billionaires?
Tomorrow, the Senate is voting on Trump’s pick to head up Social Security.
I will be voting for every American who counts on Social Security. I'm a hard NO on Frank Bisignano.
Reposted byElizabeth Warren
Elizabeth Warren: I've got a message for Donald Trump, for Elon Musk, and for Frank Bisignano, who is the guy who's going to carry out their plans. And that message is get your Hands Off our Social Security!
#HandsOff @warren.senate.gov
We teamed up with the Hyde Square Task Force to expose Stop & Shop for charging higher prices in working class neighborhoods in MA—and we made change. They lowered SOME prices.
But this fight isn't over. We're keeping up the pressure to make sure their grocery prices are fair for families.
"The thing you carry the baby around in" is called a stroller, Donald.
And everyone knows your tariff chaos is making it much more expensive to care for a family.
Nothing says teacher appreciation like gutting the Department of Education and firing half of the people that make the agency run.
Apple defied a court order just so it could steal from app developers and jack up prices for users.
A federal judge called it an “obvious cover-up” and put a stop to it.
This is a huge win for app users, developers, and competition.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History915 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
915 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-03-11 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (78-19) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-20) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-03-10 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (67-32) |
| 2025-03-06 | S. 331 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (82-12, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-06 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (66-30) |
| 2025-03-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-43) |
| 2025-03-06 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-03-05 | S.J. Res. 28 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-47) |
| 2025-03-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-03-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-03-04 | S.J. Res. 28 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2025-03-04 | S.J. Res. 3 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (70-27) |
| 2025-03-04 | S.J. Res. 3 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (70-28) |
| 2025-03-03 | S. 9 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (51-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-02-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-02-27 | H.J. Res. 35 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-47) |
| 2025-02-26 | S.J. Res. 12 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-26 | S.J. Res. 10 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Defeated (47-52) |
| 2025-02-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-43) |
| 2025-02-25 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-02-25 | S.J. Res. 11 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (54-44) |
| 2025-02-25 | S.J. Res. 11 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (54-42) |
| 2025-02-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (66-28) |
| 2025-02-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-43) |
| 2025-02-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (66-28) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Accept House changes | NO | NO | ✓ | Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (52-48) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Van Hollen Amdt. No. 233) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (24-76) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Reed Amdt. No. 172) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Baldwin Amdt. No. 276) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Wyden Amdt. No. 1156) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 776) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 925) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment 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.