Skip to content

Democrat · Rhode Island House, district 50

Serving since Jan 1, 2013RI 2025–26 session

Portrait of Stephen Casey, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
35
votes against the majority of Rhode Island House Democrats

Party unity 88%, in the bottom quarter of the Rhode Island House (average 94.0%). 1,359 roll calls in the RI 2025–26 session.

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 Casey voted with the majority of Rhode Island House Democrats; it is ranked within the Rhode Island House. The count covers every roll call where Casey voted opposite that majority.

At a glance

6 measures against the Rhode Island House. Casey sits at −0.48 on the CSIP scale, more conservative than 71% of State House Democrats. 86% of Casey’s itemized money in the 2026 cycle came from Rhode Island, in the bottom half of State House Democrats.

The measures on which Casey sits furthest from the middle of the Rhode Island 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

88%

Rhode Island House average 94.0% · ranks 62nd of 74 · 35 votes against the majority of Rhode Island House Democrats

CSIP ideology

−0.48

More conservative than 71% of State House Democrats · ± 0.03

From Rhode Island, 2026

86%

Of itemized individual dollars · ranks 1341st of 1,983 State House Democrats

Attendance

95.5%

Rhode Island House average 90.9% · ranks 29th of 74 · 1,359 roll calls

Itemized, 2026

$58.8K

State House Democrats’ median $40.4K · ranks 828th of 2,082

Out of committee

37%

Rhode Island House average 39% · ranks 37th of 74

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

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Casey says

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

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Casey sits at −0.48 on the CSIP scale, left of 0, more conservative than 71% of State House Democrats. Approximate range −0.51 to −0.45, which understates the uncertainty; from 249 donors and 987 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”.

−0.48

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range −0.51 to −0.45. From 249 donors and 987 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

← More liberalMore conservative →0Casey −0.5State House Democrats −0.6Rhode Island House −0.7All State House +0.1

The outlined dot is Casey, 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 Casey’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 Casey sits

Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale

−2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →State House Democratsmedian −0.6Casey −0.5Rhode Island Housemedian −0.7All State Housemedian +0.1
Show the data
Casey's CSIP score of −0.48 placed against State House Democrats, Rhode Island House, All State House.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Casey
State House Democrats2392−0.671%
Rhode Island House74−0.774%
All State House5324+0.132%
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 Casey 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 Casey.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Casey reported $58.8K in the 2026 cycle, above the State House Democrats’ median of $40.4K. State filings report no small-donation total. 86% of itemized individual money came from Rhode Island.

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
$58.8K

itemized in the 2026 cycle

From 102 itemized donors. State House Democrats’ median $40.4K.

Where the money came from

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

Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)Individuals (itemized): $32.7K (55.6%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)PACs and other committees: $26.1K (44.4%)
  • Individuals (itemized)56 squares$32.7K
  • PACs and other committees44 squares$26.1K
Show the data
Sources of Casey's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Individuals (itemized)$32.7K55.6%
PACs and other committees$26.1K44.4%
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 Democrats’ median for 2026.

2020 cycle: $10.1K$10.1K20202022 cycle: $49.5K$49.5K20222024 cycle: $31.1K$31.1K20242026 cycle: $58.8K$58.8K2026State House Democrats median $40.4K
Show the data
Casey's receipts by cycle against the 2026 State House Democrats median.
ItemValue
2020 cycle$10.1K
2022 cycle$49.5K
2024 cycle$31.1K
2026 cycle$58.8K

Top donor states, 2026

Itemized contributions by donor state. 86% came from Rhode Island.

  1. Rhode Island$28.2K
  2. Massachusetts$3,025
  3. Florida$1,500

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: $28.2KRIMassachusetts: $3,025MAOregon: 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: no dataNCSouth Carolina: no dataSCDistrict of Columbia: no dataDCOklahoma: no dataOKLouisiana: no dataLAMississippi: no dataMSAlabama: no dataALGeorgia: no dataGAHawaii: no dataHITexas: no dataTXFlorida: $1,500FL
Show the data
Casey's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
Rhode Island$28.2K
Massachusetts$3,025
Florida$1,500
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
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
North CarolinaNo data
South CarolinaNo data
District of ColumbiaNo data
OklahomaNo data
LouisianaNo data
MississippiNo data
AlabamaNo data
GeorgiaNo data
HawaiiNo data
TexasNo data
102

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

86%

from Rhode Island

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 Rhode Island. 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. RI STATE ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS$2,500
  2. WOONSOCKET FIREFIGHTER COPE$1,750
  3. INTERNATIONAL UNION OF PAINTERS & ALLIED TRADES POLITICAL ACTION TOGETHER POLITICAL COMMITTEE - RI$1,250
  4. JOHNSTON ASSOCIATION FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 1950$1,250
  5. RI HOSPITALITY PAC$1,000

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. CITY OF WOONSOCKET$550 3 donors

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Casey voted with the majority of Rhode Island House Democrats on 88% of party-line votes and missed 4.5% of 1,359 roll calls. Rhode Island House on average: 94.0% party unity, 90.9% attendance. Across all roll calls, Casey voted against the majority of Rhode Island House Democrats 35 times.

1,359 roll calls Casey could vote on in the RI 2025–26 session, compared with Rhode Island 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 Casey voted with the majority of Rhode Island House Democrats. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.

35

votes against the majority of Rhode Island House Democrats

Party unity 88%, Rhode Island House average 94.0%, ranks 62nd of 74. 1,359 roll calls in the RI 2025–26 session.

Attendance and party unity

The thick bar is Casey, the thin grey bar the Rhode Island House average. The scale runs from 80% to 100% to show the gap.

80%100%
Casey
Peers
Rank
Attendance
95.5%
90.9%
29th of 74
Party unity
88%
94.0%
62nd of 74
Show the data
Casey's attendance and party unity against Rhode Island House.
RowCaseyPeers
Attendance95.5%90.9%
Party unity88%94.0%
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 RI 2025–26 session

Key votes
Party split (yea–nay)Why it’s key
Jun 11, 2026
HB 7377
AN ACT RELATING TO ELECTIONS -- LOCAL CANVASSING AUTHORITIES
IN CONCURRENCE
YeaWith majoritypassD 57–0 · R 10–0 · I 1–0Democrats 57 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 10 yea, 0 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 naybecame law
Jun 11, 2026
HR 8351
JOINT RESOLUTION CREATING A SPECIAL JOINT LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION TO STUDY RHODE ISLAND'S EDUCATION FUNDING FORMULA AND EDUCATION FINANCE SYSTEM
PASSAGE OF AMENDMENT
YeaWith majoritypassD 52–0 · R 9–0 · I 1–0Democrats 52 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 9 yea, 0 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 naybecame law
Jun 11, 2026
SB 3358
AN ACT AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF CRANSTON TO FINANCE THE ACQUISITION, IMPROVEMENT, RENOVATION AND REPAIR OF FIRE AND PUBLIC SAFETY EQUIPMENT BY THE ISSUANCE OF NOT MORE THAN $8,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND NOTES THEREFOR
IN CONCURRENCE
YeaWith majoritypassD 57–0 · R 10–0 · I 1–0Democrats 57 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 10 yea, 0 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 naybecame law
Jun 11, 2026
SB 3259
AN ACT RELATING TO FOOD AND DRUGS -- UNIFORM CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT
IN CONCURRENCE
YeaWith majoritypassD 57–0 · R 10–0 · I 1–0Democrats 57 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 10 yea, 0 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 naybecame law
Jun 11, 2026
SR 3353
JOINT RESOLUTION MAKING AN APPROPRIATION TO PAY CERTAIN CLAIMS
IN CONCURRENCE
YeaWith majoritypassD 55–0 · R 10–0 · I 1–0Democrats 55 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 10 yea, 0 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 naybecame law
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 Casey most often

  1. Alex MarszalkowskiD1,175 shared votes99%
  2. Joseph SolomonD1,258 shared votes98%
  3. Brian KennedyD1,224 shared votes98%
  4. Doc CorveseD1,271 shared votes98%
  5. Mia AckermanD1,215 shared votes98%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Casey least often

  1. Sherry RobertsR1,189 shared votes76%
  2. Bob QuattrocchiR1,067 shared votes77%
  3. David PlaceR1,233 shared votes78%
  4. Paul SantucciR1,249 shared votes80%
  5. Mike ChippendaleR1,264 shared votes80%
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

RI 2025–26 session, loads in batches

Back to topNext: Legislation

Legislation

Casey sponsored 316 bills in the RI 2025–26 session; 54 became law. Cosponsored 0 others. 37% of sponsored bills got out of committee (Rhode Island House average 39%; 37th of 74).

The bills Casey sponsored and cosponsored in the RI 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 RI 2025–26 session

Sponsored316 billsSponsored, Introduced: 316316Sponsored, In committee: 316316Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 118118Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 5656Sponsored, Became law: 5454Cosponsored0 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 00Cosponsored, In committee: 00Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 00Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 00Cosponsored, Became law: 00IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Casey sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored3163161185654
Cosponsored00000
How to read the blocks

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

37%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

Rhode Island House average 39%. Ranks 37th of 74.

Cosponsorship partners

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

  1. Joseph Solomon104
  2. Jon Brien94
  3. Mike Chippendale79
  4. Doc Corvese78
  5. Julie Casimiro78
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 Casey’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
HR 8629HOUSE RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING JULY 2026 AS "DISABILITY AWARENESS AND DISABILITY PRIDE MONTH" IN THE STATE OF RHODE ISLANDSponsorJun 11, 2026Passed one chamberUnassigned06/11/2026 House read and passed Jun 11, 2026
HR 8610HOUSE RESOLUTION CREATING A SPECIAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION TO STUDY THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN OFFICE OF THE ELDER ADVOCATESponsorJun 3, 2026In committeeGovernment Operations and Politics(model)06/03/2026 Introduced, referred to House State Government & Elections Jun 3, 2026
HR 8607HOUSE RESOLUTION CELEBRATING THE MONTH OF JUNE 2026 AS "MEN'S MENTAL HEALTH MONTH" IN THE STATE OF RHODE ISLANDSponsorJun 2, 2026Passed one chamberUnassigned06/02/2026 House read and passed Jun 2, 2026
HR 8601HOUSE RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE REPORTING AND EXPIRATION DATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION TO STUDY THE ENTIRE AREA OF LAND USE, PRESERVATION, DEVELOPMENT, HOUSING, ENVIRONMENT, AND REGULATIONSponsorMay 29, 2026Passed one chamberGovernment Operations and Politics(model)06/08/2026 House read and passed Jun 8, 2026
HB 8581AN ACT RELATING TO EDUCATION -- THE EDUCATION EQUITY AND PROPERTY TAX RELIEF ACTSponsorMay 22, 2026In committeeEducation(model)05/26/2026 Committee recommended measure be held for further study May 26, 2026

Back to topNext: Online

Online

A site that has not changed in 90 days. Casey’s official site had 1 page when last crawled on Oct 1, 2026.

The lab crawls Casey’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 Casey 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 Casey posted

No images from Casey’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

88 turns, Mar 7, 2024 to Jun 11, 2026

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 Casey is most unusual among Rhode Island 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
0b20a11e-e90b-4ff2-aa25-5334a8592071
Open States
ocd-person/0b20a11e-e90b-4ff2-aa25-5334a8592071

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