We forced vote after vote last night on one question: Should we save health care for millions of Americans by stopping giant tax giveaways for the ultra-wealthy?
Republicans voted NO every single time.
That tells you all you need to know about Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill.”
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.
Republicans snuck in a line that'd make it harder for people to become home care workers for seniors and people with disabilities.
Senator Kim forced a vote to try to take it out.
Republicans voted NO.
Big Tech companies snuck a line into the Republican bill that'd stop local and state governments from having ANY rules about AI for TEN YEARS.
But we fought back — and won!
This fight is not over, but we are not powerless.
Big Tech companies snuck a line into the Republican bill that'd stop local and state governments from having ANY rules about AI for TEN YEARS.
But we fought back — and won!
This fight is not over, but we are not powerless.
Here's the proof: Republicans are only looking out for their millionaire and billionaire friends – and they're willing to gamble with your lives to pay them off.
Reposted byElizabeth Warren
If a bill is so bad that you have to exempt entire states from its consequences to win the votes you need—just don't pass the bill!
Why do people in Washington state deserve Medicaid & SNAP cuts, but others don't?
This is plain wrong, and it's just no way to legislate.
Get this: Republicans voted NO to protect Medicaid funding for addiction treatment.
If you’re battling addiction, Republicans are happy to throw you under the bus in order to give a billionaire another tax break.
It’s shameful.
Hard to believe I'm siding with the guy who spent $300 million to get Trump elected, but he's not wrong:
Republicans’ plan to run up the national debt to hand out giant tax breaks to billionaires will be an economic disaster.
Republicans just voted to DEFUND health clinics and deny women basic health care.
@murray.senate.gov forced a vote to try and protect that critical funding.
Republicans voted NO.
In classic Republican fashion—they've found a way to make their "Big Beautiful Bill" even worse.
More cuts to health care.
More money added to the debt.
More Americans suffer.
Senate Republicans have lost their spines—all they do is bow down to Donald Trump and his billionaire donors.
They know this bill will kill people. And they just look the other way.
Republicans just voted NO to save funding for labor and delivery rooms for mommas and babies.
@bluntrochester.senate.gov asked a simple question: do we stand for billionaires or moms and babies?
Republicans voted with the billionaires and threw mommas and babies under the bus. It’s cruel.
Republicans are putting 17 million lives at risk in their “Big Beautiful Bill.”
These are more than just numbers. These are real people who deserve to live a life without worrying they will go broke if they need health care.
USD1—a stablecoin linked to President Trump and his family—is now the second most traded in the world.
Next week, the House is voting on a bill that would let Trump’s crypto cash machine keep growing with no guardrails.
Congress can rein in this corruption—or greenlight it.
Reposted byElizabeth Warren
President Trump loves to say he puts “America First.” But his Beautiful-for-Billionaires Bill actually includes tax breaks for sending jobs overseas.
The truth is that Trump’s policies undermine our economy and put billionaires first, America Last.
Reposted byElizabeth Warren
Republicans are trying to slash funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in their Big, Ugly Bill.
The CFPB has returned $21 billion directly to 205 million Americans scammed by giant banks and corporations.
Democrats are introducing an amendment to stop these cuts.
Reposted byElizabeth Warren
Growing up, my dad lost his job after getting MS. Mom was raising 7 kids & needed skills training before she could find work—both unemployed for months.
Food stamps kept us fed, but my family wouldn't even qualify today under the Big Ugly bill.
It's just wrong. Senators must vote NO.
Republicans just voted to RAISE Americans’ health care costs.
@ossoff.senate.gov led Democrats in fighting to stop premiums from spiking and bring down costs for working families.
But Republicans said NO — they just want to give tax breaks to billionaires.
Under Trump and Republicans’ “Big Beautiful Bill,” 17 MILLION people will lose their health care.
That’s your grandma with a walker, your niece who was born with a life-threatening condition, and your neighbor whose kid just broke his arm.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-10-09 | S. 2296 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-09 | S. 2296 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (51-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-09 | S. 2296 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Amendment Rejected (53-43, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-09 | S. 2296 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | NO | ✕ | Amendment Rejected (14-83, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-47) |
| 2025-10-09 | H.J. Res. 106 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (50-46) |
| 2025-10-09 | H.J. Res. 106 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2025-10-09 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-09 | S. 2882 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-08 | H.J. Res. 105 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (50-45) |
| 2025-10-08 | S.J. Res. 83 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 83 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-10-08 | S.J. Res. 71 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Defeated (47-51) |
| 2025-10-08 | H.J. Res. 105 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-10-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2025-10-08 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-08 | S. 2882 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-08 | H.J. Res. 104 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-47) |
| 2025-10-07 | H.J. Res. 104 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2025-10-07 | S. Res. 412 (119th) | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2025-10-06 | S. Res. 412 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2025-10-06 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (52-42, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-06 | S. 2882 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (45-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-03 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-44, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-03 | S. 2882 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-03 | S. Res. 412 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-10-01 | S. Res. 412 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-10-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-10-01 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-10-01 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (55-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-01 | S. 2882 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-30 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Defeated (55-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-30 | S. 2882 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Defeated (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-29 | S. 2806 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (37-61, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2025-09-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-45) |
| 2025-09-19 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (47-43) |
| 2025-09-19 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (47-45) |
| 2025-09-19 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Defeated (44-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-19 | S. 2882 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Defeated (47-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-18 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | Decision 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 PN55-25 | YES | YES | ✓ | Decision of Chair Not Sustained (47-52) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | Motion 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 PN25-28 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Reconsider Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-16 | S. Con. Res. 22 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (36-62) |
| 2025-09-16 | S.J. Res. 60 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-51) |
| 2025-09-15 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (48-47) |
| 2025-09-15 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
| 2025-09-15 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (51-44) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
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.