Skip to content

Republican · North Carolina House, district 85

Serving since Jan 1, 2021NC 2025–26 session

Portrait of Dudley Greene, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
100%
of itemized money from North Carolina donors, in the top quarter of State House Republicans

100% of the itemized money from individuals in the 2026 cycle came from donors with an address in North Carolina. Ranks 392nd of 2,335, where 1st is the highest share. 17 itemized donors.

Only donors who give more than $200 are reported with an address, so this is the share of that itemized money from donors living in North Carolina, ranked among State House Republicans. Small gifts are not counted either way. Candidates running statewide or for federal office often draw more money from out of state.

At a glance

6 measures against the North Carolina House. 55% of the 11 bills Greene sponsored got out of committee, in the top quarter of the North Carolina House. Greene reported $9,142 in the 2026 cycle, in the bottom quarter of State House Republicans (median $33.7K).

The measures on which Greene sits furthest from the middle of the North Carolina House, each against the same group, with the CSIP score when there is one. Every number is explained in its own section below.

Party unity

100%

North Carolina House average 92.6% · ranks 11th of 120 · 0 votes against the majority of North Carolina House Republicans

From North Carolina, 2026

100%

Of itemized individual dollars · ranks 392nd of 2,335 State House Republicans

Out of committee

55%

North Carolina House average 27% · ranks 19th of 110

Itemized, 2026

$9,142

State House Republicans’ median $33.7K · ranks 1952nd of 2,521

CSIP ideology

+0.45

More conservative than 67% of State House Republicans · ± 0.09

Attendance

95.0%

North Carolina House average 92.6% · ranks 64th of 120 · 482 roll calls

Peer group: North Carolina House. Rank 1 is the highest value in the group; the thick bar is Greene, the thin grey bar the peer average. The headline is the measure on which Greene is most unusual among peers (Methods, §08).

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Greene says

No statements for the NC 2025–26 session.No classified statements (posts, press releases, newsletters, floor speeches) in this time window.

Back to topNext: Policy

Policy

No policy statements for the NC 2025–26 session.No classified statements (posts, press releases, newsletters, floor speeches) in this time window.

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Greene sits at +0.45 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more conservative than 67% of State House Republicans. Approximate range +0.36 to +0.53, which understates the uncertainty; from 57 donors and 392 roll calls.

CSIP, the lab’s Common-Space Ideal Point, places every official, federal and state, on one left–right scale, estimated from roll-call votes, who gives money to whom, and the text of statements. Negative is left of 0, positive right of it; 0 is the centre of the scale, not a definition of “moderate”.

+0.45

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range +0.36 to +0.53. From 57 donors and 392 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

← More liberalMore conservative →0Greene +0.4State House Republicans +0.4North Carolina House +0.4All State House +0.1

The outlined dot is Greene, coloured by its side of 0 (blue left, red right, deeper further out); the bar through it is the approximate range (±1.96 standard errors), which understates the uncertainty; the grey ticks below are the medians of Greene’s groups. 0 is the centre of the scale, not “moderate” by definition.

What this means, and what it doesn’t

The score summarises how an official votes, who funds them and how they talk, relative to everyone else. It does not grade positions as good or bad, and two officials with the same score can differ on any single issue. The ± range is 1.96 standard errors, which understates the uncertainty: scores whose ranges overlap may not differ at all, and even scores whose ranges do not overlap may not differ.

Where Greene sits

Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale

−2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →State House Republicansmedian +0.4Greene +0.4North Carolina Housemedian +0.4All State Housemedian +0.1
Show the data
Greene's CSIP score of +0.45 placed against State House Republicans, North Carolina House, All State House.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Greene
State House Republicans2917+0.467%
North Carolina House120+0.464%
All State House5324+0.182%
How to read the strips

Every small dot is one official on the same scale, coloured by its own score (blue left of 0, red right of 0, grey at 0, deeper further out) and spread up and down only to keep dots apart; where a group is crowded the dots overlap, and darker patches mean more officials. The large outlined dot is Greene in every row; the rule is each group’s median. The table under the figure gives the share of each group to the left of Greene.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Greene reported $9,142 in the 2026 cycle, 27% of the State House Republicans’ median of $33.7K. State filings report no small-donation total. 100% of itemized individual money came from North Carolina.

Campaign money from state campaign-finance filings, as aggregates only; the lab never shows an individual donor. Campaigns must report by name every person who gives them more than $200 in a cycle (“itemized”); smaller gifts are reported only as one total (“unitemized”), so donor counts, donor states, employers and occupations describe itemized donors only. State filings report no small-gift total, so these figures add up itemized contributions only.

Election cycle
$9,142

itemized in the 2026 cycle

From 17 itemized donors. State House Republicans’ median $33.7K.

Where the money came from

Each square is one percent of itemized contributions in the 2026 cycle.

Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)Individuals (itemized): $7,642 (83.6%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)PACs and other committees: $1,500 (16.4%)
  • Individuals (itemized)84 squares$7,642
  • PACs and other committees16 squares$1,500
Show the data
Sources of Greene's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Individuals (itemized)$7,64283.6%
PACs and other committees$1,50016.4%
What this means, and what it doesn’t

Totals say how much a campaign took in, not how it was spent, and they rise sharply when a seat is up for election; compare cycles with that in mind.

Receipts by cycle

Itemized contributions, 2020 to 2026. The grey line is the State House Republicans’ median for 2026.

2020 cycle: $8,660$8,66020202022 cycle: $8,500$8,50020222024 cycle: $16.9K$16.9K20242026 cycle: $9,142$9,1422026State House Republicans median $33.7K
Show the data
Greene's receipts by cycle against the 2026 State House Republicans median.
ItemValue
2020 cycle$8,660
2022 cycle$8,500
2024 cycle$16.9K
2026 cycle$9,142

Top donor states, 2026

Itemized contributions by donor state. 100% came from North Carolina.

  1. North Carolina$7,642

Small donations

State filings report no total for small gifts.

Not reported in state filings.

Where itemized donors live

Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state

Alaska: no dataAKMaine: no dataMEVermont: no dataVTNew Hampshire: no dataNHWashington: no dataWAIdaho: no dataIDMontana: no dataMTNorth Dakota: no dataNDMinnesota: no dataMNIllinois: no dataILWisconsin: no dataWIMichigan: no dataMINew York: no dataNYRhode Island: no dataRIMassachusetts: no dataMAOregon: no dataORNevada: no dataNVWyoming: no dataWYSouth Dakota: no dataSDIowa: no dataIAIndiana: no dataINOhio: no dataOHPennsylvania: no dataPANew Jersey: no dataNJConnecticut: no dataCTCalifornia: no dataCAUtah: no dataUTColorado: no dataCONebraska: no dataNEMissouri: no dataMOKentucky: no dataKYWest Virginia: no dataWVVirginia: no dataVAMaryland: no dataMDDelaware: no dataDEArizona: no dataAZNew Mexico: no dataNMKansas: no dataKSArkansas: no dataARTennessee: no dataTNNorth Carolina: $7,642NCSouth Carolina: no dataSCDistrict of Columbia: no dataDCOklahoma: no dataOKLouisiana: no dataLAMississippi: no dataMSAlabama: no dataALGeorgia: no dataGAHawaii: no dataHITexas: no dataTXFlorida: no dataFL
Show the data
Greene's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
North Carolina$7,642
AlaskaNo data
MaineNo data
VermontNo data
New HampshireNo data
WashingtonNo data
IdahoNo data
MontanaNo data
North DakotaNo data
MinnesotaNo data
IllinoisNo data
WisconsinNo data
MichiganNo data
New YorkNo data
Rhode IslandNo data
MassachusettsNo data
OregonNo data
NevadaNo data
WyomingNo data
South DakotaNo data
IowaNo data
IndianaNo data
OhioNo data
PennsylvaniaNo data
New JerseyNo data
ConnecticutNo data
CaliforniaNo data
UtahNo data
ColoradoNo data
NebraskaNo data
MissouriNo data
KentuckyNo data
West VirginiaNo data
VirginiaNo data
MarylandNo data
DelawareNo data
ArizonaNo data
New MexicoNo data
KansasNo data
ArkansasNo data
TennesseeNo data
South CarolinaNo data
District of ColumbiaNo data
OklahomaNo data
LouisianaNo data
MississippiNo data
AlabamaNo data
GeorgiaNo data
HawaiiNo data
TexasNo data
FloridaNo data
17

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

100%

from North Carolina

Of itemized individual dollars

How to read the map

Every state the same size. Darker states gave more itemized money; hatched states had no itemized donors; the outlined state is North Carolina. Gifts of $200 or less carry no address and are left out.

Top donor occupations

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

No occupations reported.

Top committees

PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.

  1. BAXTER HEALTHCARE POLITICAL ACTOIN COMMITTEE$1,500

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

No employers reported.

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Greene voted with the majority of North Carolina House Republicans on 100% of party-line votes and missed 5.0% of 482 roll calls. North Carolina House on average: 92.6% party unity, 92.6% attendance. Across all roll calls, Greene never voted against the majority of North Carolina House Republicans.

482 roll calls Greene could vote on in the NC 2025–26 session, compared with North Carolina House. Attendance is the share with a vote recorded. Party unity counts only party-line roll calls, where most Democrats and most Republicans voted on opposite sides, and is the share of those where Greene voted with the majority of North Carolina House Republicans. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.

0

votes against the majority of North Carolina House Republicans

Party unity 100%, North Carolina House average 92.6%, ranks 11th of 120. 482 roll calls in the NC 2025–26 session.

Attendance and party unity

The thick bar is Greene, the thin grey bar the North Carolina House average. The scale runs from 80% to 100% to show the gap.

80%100%
Greene
Peers
Rank
Attendance
95.0%
92.6%
64th of 120
Party unity
100%
92.6%
11th of 120
Show the data
Greene's attendance and party unity against North Carolina House.
RowGreenePeers
Attendance95.0%92.6%
Party unity100%92.6%
What this means, and what it doesn’t

A missed roll call has many causes, from illness to campaigning, so attendance says how often, not why. A vote against the majority can be on procedure as well as substance, and many fall on roll calls where both parties split; the key votes below show the ones that decided something.

Key votes

25 roll calls the lab flagged as key in the NC 2025–26 session

Key votes
Party split (yea–nay)Why it’s key
Oct 7, 2026
HJR 2
Adjourn 2026 First Extra Session Sine Die.
Second Reading
YeaWith majoritypassD 2–40 · R 61–0 · I 1–0Democrats 2 yea, 40 nay; Republicans 61 yea, 0 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 naybecame law
Oct 7, 2026
HB 3
Relief at the Pump.
Second Reading
YeaWith majoritypassD 42–1 · R 66–0Democrats 42 yea, 1 nay; Republicans 66 yea, 0 naybecame law
Oct 7, 2026
HR 1
House Rules - 2026 First Extra Session.
R2 For Adoption M4 Previous Question
YeaWith majoritypassD 1–36 · R 64–0 · I 2–0Democrats 1 yea, 36 nay; Republicans 64 yea, 0 nay; Independents 2 yea, 0 naymuch discussed
Oct 7, 2026
HR 1
House Rules - 2026 First Extra Session.
R2 For Adoption
Did not vote—passD 12–43 · R 81–0 · I 2–0Democrats 12 yea, 43 nay; Republicans 81 yea, 0 nay; Independents 2 yea, 0 nayparty crossover · much discussed
Aug 5, 2026
SJR 1091
Adjournment Resolution.
Second Reading
YeaWith majoritypassD 26–28 · R 67–0 · I 2–0Democrats 26 yea, 28 nay; Republicans 67 yea, 0 nay; Independents 2 yea, 0 naybecame law · party crossover
How key votes are chosen

Automatically: a final-passage or override vote where the measure became law, the margin was under 10%, at least 10% of either party voted against its majority, or the bill was among the 25 most mentioned in officials’ own statements. Up to 25 per window, most recent first; five are shown. Bars show yea on the left, nay on the right, per party.

Votes most often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Greene most often

  1. Larry PottsR434 shared votes100%
  2. Larry StricklandR434 shared votes100%
  3. Stephen RossR324 shared votes100%
  4. Reece PyrtleR439 shared votes100%
  5. Steve TysonR374 shared votes100%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Greene least often

  1. Pricey HarrisonD416 shared votes43%
  2. Marcia MoreyD441 shared votes52%
  3. Deb ButlerD382 shared votes52%
  4. John AutryD228 shared votes57%
  5. Mary BelkD437 shared votes58%
How to read the agreement lists

The share of roll calls both members voted on where they voted the same way, among colleagues sharing at least 50 such votes. High agreement with members of the other party is common on routine votes.

Full voting record

NC 2025–26 session, loads in batches

Back to topNext: Legislation

Legislation

Greene sponsored 11 bills in the NC 2025–26 session; 4 became law. Cosponsored 46 others. 55% of sponsored bills got out of committee (North Carolina House average 27%; 19th of 110).

The bills Greene sponsored and cosponsored in the NC 2025–26 session, from the official bill records, and how far each got: introduced, referred to or acted on in committee, passed one chamber, passed both, became law. A bill counts at every stage it has reached, so the blocks only shrink to the right.

Bills by stage

Counts for the NC 2025–26 session

Sponsored11 billsSponsored, Introduced: 1111Sponsored, In committee: 1111Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 66Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 44Sponsored, Became law: 44Cosponsored46 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 4646Cosponsored, In committee: 4646Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 3030Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 88Cosponsored, Became law: 55IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Greene sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored1111644
Cosponsored46463085
How to read the blocks

Ink blocks are bills Greene sponsored, ochre blocks bills Greene cosponsored; the figure above each block is the count. Most bills in any legislature never leave committee, so a short staircase is the norm.

55%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

North Carolina House average 27%. Ranks 19th of 110.

Cosponsorship partners

Colleagues who most often cosponsor with Greene, by number of shared bills in the NC 2025–26 session; the square shows their party.

  1. Bill Ward16
  2. Donna White9
  3. Jeff McNeely9
  4. Donnie Loftis8
  5. Reece Pyrtle8
What this means, and what it doesn’t

The score is the share of sponsored bills that a committee reported out or a chamber passed, with at least 5 sponsored bills, ranked within the peer group. Members of the majority party and committee chairs move more bills, so the rank reflects position in the chamber as well as effort. Cosponsorship partners are the five colleagues who share the most of Greene’s bills; the toggle shows more.

Bill list

Sponsored and cosponsored, with status and policy area; five are shown, the toggle shows the rest

Bills sponsored and cosponsored
HB 3Relief at the Pump.SponsorOct 7, 2026Became lawTaxation(model)Signed by Gov. 10/9/2026 Oct 9, 2026
HR 1239Honor Mike Clampitt.CosponsorJun 24, 2026Passed one chamberUnassignedFiled Jun 24, 2026
HR 1238Honor 2026 Carolina Hurricanes Team.CosponsorJun 23, 2026Passed one chamberUnassignedFiled Jun 23, 2026
HB 1154Expand the FarmSHARE Food Hub Program.CosponsorApr 30, 2026In committeeAgriculture and Food(model)Reptd Fav May 13, 2026
HB 1090Revitalizing, Uplifting Regions and Access Local (RURAL) Care Act.CosponsorApr 29, 2026In committeeHealth(model)Reptd Fav Com Substitute May 12, 2026

Back to topNext: Online

Online

A site that changed 1 time in 90 days. Greene’s official site had 1 page when last crawled on Oct 1, 2026.

The lab crawls Greene’s official and campaign websites (weekly for Congress, monthly for the states) and keeps every page’s text, so changes can be read later; it also records social accounts and describes the images Greene posts with a vision model.

Websites

How to read the counts

“Pages crawled” is the size of the site at the last crawl; “changes in 90 days” counts pages whose text differed from the previous crawl. Sites change for many routine reasons, such as new press releases, so a high count is not by itself notable.

Images Greene posted

No images from Greene’s posts have been described.

About the descriptions

Written by a vision model and may be wrong. Open the post to see the original. Five are shown; the toggle shows the rest.

State floor speeches

No transcribed state floor speeches are matched to this legislator yet.

Floor speeches

Transcribed from chamber video or captions by the lab. They are not classified for kinds of statement.

Back to topNext: Methods and sources

Methods and sources

How this page was made. Profile built Oct 28, 2026; site last built Oct 28, 2026. Every number on the page is computed from the sources listed here, by the same rules for every official; nothing is written by hand.

The headline

The headline is the measure on which Greene is most unusual among North Carolina House, chosen by one rule for every official of every party. The candidates are the rate of each kind of statement and of extreme labels, party unity, attendance, the small-donor share, the in-state share and total receipts of the latest cycle, the share of sponsored bills that got out of committee, talk-to-bills agreement, and the CSIP score’s place within the party group.

The builder ranks every measure within the same peer group the page compares it with, and writes each official’s percentile: the share of the group below the value, ties counting half, so 0.5 is the median and a value shared by many never ranks first. A measure’s score is how far that percentile sits from the median (0 in the middle, 0.5 at either end), and the highest score leads if it is above 0.25, outside the middle half of the group. Scores within 0.03 of each other are a tie, broken in this order: votes against the party majority, kinds of statement, ideology, roll calls missed, small donations, in-state money, legislation, agreement, extreme labels, receipts.

A measure counts only with at least 200 statements, 100 roll calls or 5 sponsored bills behind it and a peer group of at least 10. Two things never lead: high party unity or attendance, where most members sit, and a high rate of a kind of statement backed by fewer than 10 statements. When nothing qualifies, the headline is a neutral fact instead: statements classified, or years in office. The wording always names the direction (“in the bottom 5% of …”, “votes against the majority of …”).

Identifiers

Profile id
0573192d-0557-449a-9c3e-8462844a79ab
Open States
ocd-person/0573192d-0557-449a-9c3e-8462844a79ab

Bulk files with the same data for every official:

Freshness of this profile’s data

  • What politicians sayOct 27, 20261 days agoMembers of Congress: tweets since 2017; press releases, newsletters and floor speeches since 2022. State legislators: tweets since May 2024. Governors: tweets since January 2025. Labels from an LLM classifier.
  • Roll calls (state)Oct 21, 20267 days agoOpen States floor roll calls, 2019 on (none for AK and MO).
  • Bills (state)Oct 28, 2026todayOpen States bills and sponsors, 2019 on; stages from roll calls.
  • Campaign money (state)no dateState campaign-finance agencies, 2019 on; aggregates only.
  • Ideology (CSIP)Oct 25, 20263 days agoCommon-Space Ideal Points (CSIP), current validated run.
  • WebsitesOct 25, 20263 days agoWeekly crawls of federal sites since April 2026; monthly state crawls since June 2026.
  • State floor speechesOct 21, 20267 days agoState floor speech turns (published transcripts and captions), 2020 on; not LLM-classified.

How the measures work

What politicians say
Every post, press release, newsletter and congressional floor speech is read by a language model and marked for personal attacks, policy criticism, policy discussion, bipartisanship and credit claiming. A statement can be in several. Rates are shares of statements in the window. The methods paper.
Extreme labels
A statement has an extreme label when it calls a politician, party or policy “far left”, “far right”, “MAGA”, “extreme”, “radical”, “woke”, “fascist” or “communist”. The target is who the label is aimed at.
Policy areas and agreement
Statements and bills share 25 Congressional Research Service policy areas (state bills are assigned by a language model). Agreement is 1 − Jensen–Shannon distance between the two distributions, shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.
Ideology (CSIP)
Common-Space Ideal Points place federal and state officials on one left–right scale, estimated jointly from roll calls, campaign contributions and the text of statements, with standard errors. Only a validated run is shown. The methods paper.
Campaign money
Campaigns report by name only donors who give more than $200 in a cycle; smaller gifts are reported as one total. Federal totals and the small-donor share come from the FEC’s financial summaries of each campaign committee. Donor counts, donor states, employers and occupations cover itemized donors only. State filings report no small-gift totals, so state figures are itemized only. The lab never publishes donor names.
Votes and key votes
Attendance, party unity and the count of votes against the majority of an official’s own party come from roll calls (Voteview for Congress, chamber records for the states). Key votes are final-passage or override votes that became law, were decided by under 10%, saw at least 10% of a party vote against its majority, or concerned one of the 25 bills most mentioned in officials’ statements.
Peers and ranks
Comparisons are with the same party, chamber and level (for example House Democrats); state legislators are compared within their state and chamber for votes. Every comparison names its group. Rank 1 is the highest value in the group; tied values share the average of their ranks, and the percentile is the share of the group below the value, ties counting half.

America’s Political Pulse · Polarization Research Lab

Back to top