Surprise, surprise: Donald Trump's pick for Education Secretary wants to abolish the entire Education Department. Students will pay the price.
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.
Whether your kids love Moana or you don't want to miss the game, this deal matters to you.
Disney wants to buy Fubo to combine it with Hulu+ Live TV.
Fewer streamers could mean higher prices…
I'm pushing for an investigation.
5. Put your grandma’s Social Security check in danger by forcing out the acting Social Security Commissioner.
This isn’t just inefficient — it will hurt the people Donald Trump promised to help.
3. Fired the experts working to end bird flu (as egg prices go WAY up). Now frantically trying to find and rehire them.
4. Stopped the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from helping people who get scammed by Wall Street and giant corporations.
1. Purged the military of experienced and qualified senior officers, putting our national security at risk.
2. Promised to protect Medicaid only to backtrack <24 hours later by endorsing the House Republican plan to cut health care to pay for tax cuts for the ultra-rich.
Is Donald Trump going to respond to Musk’s email and report on what he did last week?
To help, I’ve gone ahead and done it for him. A thread:
Over 1,000 people showed up in Framingham to make clear that we’re fired up and ready to fight back against every terrible policy Donald Trump and Elon Musk throw at us.
📸 John Walker
If you have a:
- Credit card
- Checking account
- Savings account
- Mortgage
- Car loan
- Student loan
- Venmo account
The fight to protect the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is your fight.
Donald Trump’s firing of military leaders — four-star General Brown and four-star Admiral Franchetti — along with top legal officers is a betrayal of legions of first rate service members who dedicate their lives to our nation’s defense.
This is a growing national security risk.
We asked Senate Republicans: is there any millionaire or billionaire rich enough who doesn't need another tax giveaway?
$10M a year? No.
$100M a year? No.
$500M a year? No.
$1 BILLION a year? No.
With Republicans in control: Billionaires win, families lose.
Donald Trump and Elon Musk are waging an attack on American consumers — we won't stand quietly by.
The FDIC protects your hard earn money in the bank and helps prevent another financial crash.
Trump and Musk’s move to fire these workers is dangerous.
I led Senate Democrats in pushing back, and now independent investigators are on the case.
Reposted byElizabeth Warren
Senate Republicans just *BLOCKED* Sen. Ossoff’s amendment to protect children’s and maternal health care through Medicaid.
The Senate just voted on a simple idea: If you make $1 BILLION in a year, you don't deserve a tax handout.
Democrats voted yes.
Republicans voted no.
Republicans are planning huge tax cuts for the rich, but they’re not the ones who need a break — working people do.
Tonight, Senate Republicans are charging ahead with their budget proposal.
They’re making clear who matters to them: billionaires and giant corporations.
And who does not: working families.
The Mar-a-Lago crew might not care about hurricanes in Florida.
But gutting disaster recovery will hurt the same people Donald Trump promised to help.
On Tuesday, Senate Democrats will investigate the Trump-Musk attack on American consumers.
I'm inviting Elon Musk. He owes the American people answers on why he’s trying to shut down the financial cop on the beat that prevents big corporations from cheating Americans.
Here's a riddle:
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau makes sure you don't get scammed by digital payment companies and car lenders.
Elon Musk’s role as CEO of X Money and Tesla makes DOGE’s takeover of the CFPB a clear conflict of interest.
@schiff.senate.gov and I are pressing for answers.
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.