Kyrsten Sinema

Kyrsten Sinema

  • D-AZ, Senator2019 – present
  • D-AZ, 9th District2013 – 2019
Kyrsten Sinema's photo

Lifetime Score 16%

24%
‘13
2013: 24%
29%
2014: 29%
15%
2015: 15%
13%
2016: 13%
3%
2017: 3%
26%
2018: 26%
7%
2019: 7%
17%
‘20
2020: 17%

Contact Information

Key Voting Record

Ineligible / Out of OfficeDid Not Vote
Voted with FreedomWorks principlesAnti-Freedom Vote
Print Scorecard

Key Vote Description

Legislator Score / Vote

2020: 116th Congress 17%

  • 1: On the Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline for United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act, H.R. 5430Yea

    Key Vote 1: On the Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline for United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act, H.R. 5430

    This motion waives the Senate's "pay-as-you-go" (PAYGO) rules for H.R. 5430, allowing for a larger budget deficit.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 2: Guilty or Not Guilty: Article of Impeachment Against Donald John Trump for Abuse of PowerYea

    Key Vote 2: Guilty or Not Guilty: Article of Impeachment Against Donald John Trump for Abuse of Power

    As Professor Turley noted in his written testimony to the House Judiciary Committee, “[T]he problem with the abuse of power allegation is its lack of foundation.” President Trump denied on multiple occasions that there was any quid pro quo tying the aid to Ukraine to investigations. The most notable claim that there was a quid pro quo comes from a former national security adviser who was relieved of his duties in a very public manner and is seeking to cash in on his time in the White House through a book deal.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 3: Guilty or Not Guilty: Article of Impeachment Against Donald John Trump for Obstruction of CongressYea

    Key Vote 3: Guilty or Not Guilty: Article of Impeachment Against Donald John Trump for Obstruction of Congress

    In addition to the charge of “abuse of power,” charge of “obstruction of Congress” rings hollow, too. House Democrats had not exhausted all legal mechanisms to compel testimony. House Democrats complain that federal courts would have taken too long to solve the disputes over subpoenas, yet they took 29 days to appoint impeachment managers and transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate. Even if federal courts took months, or even years, to settle the legal disputes, with a presidential election on the horizon, the electorate would have had the final word.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 4: On the Joint Resolution: Iran War Powers ResolutionYea

    Key Vote 4: On the Joint Resolution: Iran War Powers Resolution

    Many of the issues with out-of-control government power stem from congressional leaders surrendering their constitutionally delegated power over to the executive branch, whether they be handed over to unelected regulators or in the office of the President itself. In order to chip away at the behemoth our federal government has become, we need our members of Congress to be willing to reclaim the powers our framers meant for them to have. This includes the power to initiate hostilities and to declare war on foreign nations. S.J.Res. 68 is one monumental step in that reclamation fight.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 5: On the Joint Resolution: Borrower Defense Institutional Accountability Rule CRA Resolution, H.J.Res. 76Yea

    Key Vote 5: On the Joint Resolution: Borrower Defense Institutional Accountability Rule CRA Resolution, H.J.Res. 76

    This Democrat-only Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution would undo updated borrower defense regulations that will be a marked improvement over the existing set of regulations that were issued under President Obama. The revised borrower defense regulations set to go into effect in July 2020 are the result of more than two years of deliberations and significant input from the public and from higher education stakeholders, following years of broad relief granted to groups under the existing regulations. As such, fortunately, the new regulations address many of the flaws of the existing structure of borrower defense.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 6: On the Motion to Table: Paul Amendment to H.R. 6074 to Pay for Coronavirus Emergency SpendingYea

    Key Vote 6: On the Motion to Table: Paul Amendment to H.R. 6074 to Pay for Coronavirus Emergency Spending

    The amendment would simply rescind unobligated funds for several international outreach and foreign aid programs that have been flagged in the past for being unnecessary and wasting taxpayer dollars, and apply those funds to offset the cost of emergency spending to combat the coronavirus domestically. The continued spread of the COVID-19 virus worldwide, including now in a number of US states, has justly caused significant public concern. As Congress moves to fund efforts to combat the spread of the disease, however, it should not forget its duty to avoid burdening future generations with unnecessary new deficit spending.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • No votes for this year match the provided filters.
  • View scorecard »