37% of 30 sponsored bills got out of committee; the average for the Delaware House is 80%. Ranks 40th of 40, where 1st is the highest share.
The share of bills Shupe sponsored that a committee reported out or a chamber passed, ranked within the Delaware House. Members of the majority party and committee chairs move more bills, so the rank reflects position as well as effort.
6 measures against State House Republicans. Shupe voted against the majority of Delaware House Republicans 37 times; party unity 91.4%, in the bottom quarter of the Delaware House (average 94.5%). Shupe sits at +0.27 on the CSIP scale, more liberal than 65% of State House Republicans.
The measures on which Shupe sits furthest from the middle of State House Republicans, each against the same group, with the CSIP score when there is one. Every number is explained in its own section below.
Out of committee
Delaware House average 80% · ranks 40th of 40
Party unity
Delaware House average 94.5% · ranks 34th of 41 · 37 votes against the majority of Delaware House Republicans
CSIP ideology
More liberal than 65% of State House Republicans · ± 0.04
Talk-to-bills agreement
State House Republicans average 0.53 · ranks 220th of 504
Itemized, 2026
State House Republicans’ median $33.7K · ranks 1382nd of 2,521
From Delaware, 2026
Of itemized individual dollars · ranks 1121st of 2,335 State House Republicans
Peer group: State House Republicans. Rank 1 is the highest value in the group; the thick bar is Shupe, the thin grey bar the peer average. The headline is the measure on which Shupe is most unusual among peers (Methods, §08).
Shupe attacks opponents personally about as often as the median State House Republican. Personal attacks in 0.6% of 159 statements, against 2.9% for the average State House Republican; 436th of 791.
An AI model reads each of Shupe’s 159 statements in the DE 2025–26 session (159 posts on X) and marks the kinds of statement it contains: a personal attack, criticism of a policy, discussion of policy, bipartisanship, credit claiming, and extreme labels. A statement can carry several. Every rate is compared with the average for State House Republicans and ranked among them.
Share of statements carrying each label, the DE 2025–26 session
| Row | Shupe | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Policy discussion | 49% | 32% |
| Policy criticism | 25% | 9% |
| Credit claiming | 12% | 13% |
| Bipartisanship | 1% | 2% |
| Personal attacks | 1% | 3% |
statements classified
159 posts on X.
| Part | Value |
|---|---|
| posts on X | 159 |
The thick bar is Shupe; the thin grey bar is the average State House Republicans. A longer thick bar means Shupe does this more than peers. Rank 1 is the highest rate in the group.
Shupe used extreme labels in 0.6% of statements, below the peer average. 1 statement, most often aimed at Pentagon; peers 1.4%.
Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements
Calls a politician, a party or a policy “far left”, “far right”, “MAGA”, “extreme”, “radical”, “woke”, “fascist” or “communist”. The target is who or what the label was aimed at. The lists show the five most used labels and targets; the toggle shows the rest.
Share of statements per month, the DE 2025–26 session
| Column | Statements | Personal attacks | Policy criticism | Policy discussion | Bipartisanship | Credit claiming | Extreme labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan ’25 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Feb ’25 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Mar ’25 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Apr ’25 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| May ’25 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Jun ’25 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Jul ’25 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Aug ’25 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Sep ’25 | 61 | 0.0% | 42.6% | 54.1% | 0.0% | 9.8% | 1.6% |
| Oct ’25 | 63 | 1.6% | 15.9% | 49.2% | 1.6% | 17.5% | 0.0% |
| Nov ’25 | 11 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 18.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Dec ’25 | 1 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Jan ’26 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Feb ’26 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Mar ’26 | 5 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Apr ’26 | 1 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| May ’26 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Jun ’26 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Jul ’26 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Aug ’26 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Sep ’26 | 0 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Oct ’26 | 17 | 0.0% | 11.8% | 52.9% | 5.9% | 5.9% | 0.0% |
Each row is one kind of statement; each cell is a month, shaded against that row’s own peak (darker = closer to the peak), with the peak and the latest value written at the right. The top row counts statements. The strip covers every month of the DE 2025–26 session, the same span as the rates above, including months with no statements. A month with fewer than 10 statements is hatched, not shaded: one or two posts would swing its rate to 0% or 100%. 18 months are hatched here; 15 of them have no statements.
Real statements from the classifier’s example set, with the labels it assigned
Policy criticism
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Oct 18, 2026 · Posts on X (state legislators) · policy criticism; policy discussion; bipartisanship; Emergency Management; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; Commerce; Labor and Employment · Source
Personal attacks
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Oct 3, 2025 · Posts on X (state legislators) · personal attacks; target: Governor Meyer · Source
Extreme label
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Sep 19, 2025 · Posts on X (state legislators) · extreme label “extreme” aimed at Pentagon · Source
Up to five recent statements in each category
Overtly questions a named person’s character, integrity or loyalty, or calls them names. Criticising a record or a policy does not count.
Posts on X (state legislators)
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · target: Governor MeyerSource
Newest first, the DE 2025–26 session
Five statements at a time, newest first; filters apply to the statements loaded so far. Export saves the statements that match. Sources: 159 posts on X.
Economics and Public Finance is what Shupe talks about most: 24% of policy statements, 2.0 times the peer share. Talk and legislation agree at 0.55 on a 0–1 scale (State House Republicans average 0.53; 220th of 504).
Each policy statement is tagged by the AI model with one or more of 25 policy areas from the Congressional Research Service list, so the shares say what Shupe talks about. The bills Shupe sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.
Share of policy statements by area, the DE 2025–26 session
| Row | Shupe | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Economics and Public Finance | 24% | 12% |
| Education | 18% | 15% |
| Taxation | 14% | 8% |
| Government Operations and Politics | 13% | 18% |
| Crime and Law Enforcement | 10% | 11% |
The thick bar is the share of Shupe’s policy statements in an area; the thin grey bar is the average share for State House Republicans. A statement counts once in each of its areas, so shares can add to more than 100%. The five largest areas are shown; the toggle shows the rest.
Left: share of statements by policy area. Right: share of bills. Areas in order of their share of statements; both sides run from 0 to 35%. Grey ticks are the State House Republicans averages.
| Area | Talks about | State House Republicans, talks about | Legislates on | State House Republicans, legislates on |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Economics and Public Finance | 24% | 12% | 5% | 2% |
| Education | 18% | 15% | 13% | 9% |
| Taxation | 14% | 8% | 18% | 11% |
| Government Operations and Politics | 13% | 18% | 21% | 12% |
| Crime and Law Enforcement | 10% | 11% | 4% | 11% |
talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1
State House Republicans average 0.53. Ranks 220th of 504.
Agreement is 1 minus the distance between the two distributions (Jensen–Shannon): 1 means Shupe legislates on exactly the areas Shupe talks about, in the same proportions; 0 means no overlap. It does not say whether the bills match the positions in the statements, only the subjects. Bills Shupe sponsored count fully, cosponsored bills a quarter. Shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.
Shupe sits at +0.27 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more liberal than 65% of State House Republicans. Approximate range +0.23 to +0.31, which understates the uncertainty; from 249 donors and 492 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”.
CSIP ideal point
Approximate range +0.23 to +0.31. From 249 donors and 492 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.
The outlined dot is Shupe, 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 Shupe’s groups. 0 is the centre of the scale, not “moderate” by definition.
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.
Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale
| Group | Officials | Median | Share left of Shupe |
|---|---|---|---|
| State House Republicans | 2917 | +0.4 | 35% |
| Delaware House | 41 | −0.6 | 80% |
| All State House | 5324 | +0.1 | 64% |
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 Shupe 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 Shupe.
Shupe reported $27.8K in the 2026 cycle, below the State House Republicans’ median of $33.7K. State filings report no small-donation total. 97% of itemized individual money came from Delaware.
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.
itemized in the 2026 cycle
From 123 itemized donors. State House Republicans’ median $33.7K.
Each square is one percent of itemized contributions in the 2026 cycle.
| Source | Amount | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Individuals (itemized) | $18.1K | 65.1% |
| PACs and other committees | $9,100 | 32.7% |
| Party committees | $600 | 2.2% |
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.
Itemized contributions, 2020 to 2026. The grey line is the State House Republicans’ median for 2026.
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| 2020 cycle | $18.4K |
| 2022 cycle | $12.6K |
| 2024 cycle | $34.5K |
| 2026 cycle | $27.8K |
Itemized contributions by donor state. 97% came from Delaware.
State filings report no total for small gifts.
Not reported in state filings.
Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state
| State | Value |
|---|---|
| Delaware | $17.6K |
| Pennsylvania | $400 |
| Maryland | $100 |
| Alaska | No data |
| Maine | No data |
| Vermont | No data |
| New Hampshire | No data |
| Washington | No data |
| Idaho | No data |
| Montana | No data |
| North Dakota | No data |
| Minnesota | No data |
| Illinois | No data |
| Wisconsin | No data |
| Michigan | No data |
| New York | No data |
| Rhode Island | No data |
| Massachusetts | No data |
| Oregon | No data |
| Nevada | No data |
| Wyoming | No data |
| South Dakota | No data |
| Iowa | No data |
| Indiana | No data |
| Ohio | No data |
| New Jersey | No data |
| Connecticut | No data |
| California | No data |
| Utah | No data |
| Colorado | No data |
| Nebraska | No data |
| Missouri | No data |
| Kentucky | No data |
| West Virginia | No data |
| Virginia | No data |
| Arizona | No data |
| New Mexico | No data |
| Kansas | No data |
| Arkansas | No data |
| Tennessee | No data |
| North Carolina | No data |
| South Carolina | No data |
| District of Columbia | No data |
| Oklahoma | No data |
| Louisiana | No data |
| Mississippi | No data |
| Alabama | No data |
| Georgia | No data |
| Hawaii | No data |
| Texas | No data |
| Florida | No data |
itemized donors
People who gave more than $200
from Delaware
Of itemized individual dollars
Every state the same size. Darker states gave more itemized money; hatched states had no itemized donors; the outlined state is Delaware. Gifts of $200 or less carry no address and are left out.
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
No occupations reported.
PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
No employers reported.
Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.
Shupe voted with the majority of Delaware House Republicans on 91.4% of party-line votes and missed 3.3% of 658 roll calls. Delaware House on average: 94.5% party unity, 94.5% attendance. Across all roll calls, Shupe voted against the majority of Delaware House Republicans 37 times.
658 roll calls Shupe could vote on in the DE 2025–26 session, compared with Delaware 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 Shupe voted with the majority of Delaware House Republicans. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.
votes against the majority of Delaware House Republicans
Party unity 91.4%, Delaware House average 94.5%, ranks 34th of 41. 658 roll calls in the DE 2025–26 session.
The thick bar is Shupe, the thin grey bar the Delaware House average. The scale runs from 80% to 100% to show the gap.
| Row | Shupe | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Attendance | 96.6% | 94.5% |
| Party unity | 91.4% | 94.5% |
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.
25 roll calls the lab flagged as key in the DE 2025–26 session
| Party split (yea–nay) | Why it’s key | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 1, 2026 | Yea | With majority | pass | D 27–0 · R 14–0Democrats 27 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 14 yea, 0 nay | became law | |
| Jul 1, 2026 | HB 445 AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 26 AND TITLE 29 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO LARGE ENERGY USE FACILITIES. Passage | Did not vote | — | pass | D 26–0 · R 0–8Democrats 26 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 0 yea, 8 nay | became law |
| Jul 1, 2026 | SB 347 AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 6 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO THE MEDICAL DEBT PROTECTION ACT Passage | Yea | With majority | pass | D 27–0 · R 13–0Democrats 27 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 13 yea, 0 nay | became law |
| Jul 1, 2026 | SB 1 AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 16, TITLE 18, TITLE 29, AND TITLE 31 OF THE DELAWARE CODE, AND CHAPTER 237, VOLUME 83 OF THE LAWS OF DELAWARE, RELATING TO PRIMARY CARE SERVICES. Passage | Yea | With majority | pass | D 27–0 · R 14–0Democrats 27 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 14 yea, 0 nay | became law |
| Jul 1, 2026 | Yea | With majority | pass | D 27–0 · R 14–0Democrats 27 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 14 yea, 0 nay | became law |
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.
The colleagues who voted the same way as Shupe most often
The colleagues who voted the same way as Shupe least often
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.
DE 2025–26 session, loads in batches
Shupe sponsored 30 bills in the DE 2025–26 session; 5 became law. Cosponsored 55 others. 37% of sponsored bills got out of committee (Delaware House average 80%; 40th of 40).
The bills Shupe sponsored and cosponsored in the DE 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.
Counts for the DE 2025–26 session
| Role | Introduced | In committee | Passed one chamber | Passed both chambers | Became law |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sponsored | 30 | 29 | 11 | 10 | 5 |
| Cosponsored | 55 | 55 | 37 | 36 | 10 |
Ink blocks are bills Shupe sponsored, ochre blocks bills Shupe cosponsored; the figure above each block is the count. Most bills in any legislature never leave committee, so a short staircase is the norm.
of sponsored bills got out of committee
Delaware House average 80%. Ranks 40th of 40.
Colleagues who most often cosponsor with Shupe, by number of shared bills in the DE 2025–26 session; the square shows their party.
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 Shupe’s bills; the toggle shows more.
Sponsored and cosponsored, with status and policy area; five are shown, the toggle shows the rest
| SB 351 | AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 30 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO PERSONAL INCOME TAX SUBTRACTIONS | Sponsor | Jun 23, 2026 | In committee | Taxation(model) | Introduced and Assigned to Executive Committee in Senate Jun 23, 2026 |
| SB 284 | AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 11 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO PROTECTING FIRST RESPONDERS. | Cosponsor | Jun 18, 2026 | Passed one chamber | Crime and Law Enforcement(model) | Reported Out of Committee (Administration) in House with 1 Favorable, 4 On Its Merits Jun 24, 2026 |
| SCR 220 | DESIGNATING OCTOBER 12, 2026, AS "NATIONAL FARMER'S DAY" IN THE STATE OF DELAWARE. | Cosponsor | Jun 18, 2026 | Passed both chambers | Unassigned | Passed In House by Voice Vote Jun 23, 2026 |
| HB 386 | AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 30 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO PERSONAL INCOME TAX DEDUCTION OR CREDITS APPLICABLE TO QUALIFIED TIP INCOME. | Cosponsor | Jun 17, 2026 | In committee | Taxation(model) | Amendment HA 1 to HS 1 - Introduced and Placed With Bill Jun 18, 2026 |
| SCR 215 | RECOGNIZING THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER 2026 AS "NATIONAL ADOPTION MONTH" IN THE STATE OF DELAWARE. | Cosponsor | Jun 17, 2026 | Passed both chambers | Unassigned | Passed In House by Voice Vote Jun 18, 2026 |
A site that has not changed in 90 days. Shupe’s official site had 0 pages when last crawled.
The lab crawls Shupe’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 Shupe posts with a vision model.
Official site
housegop.delaware.gov/members/house-district-36/https://legis.delaware.gov/AssemblyMember/150/ShupeLast crawled never
pages crawled
changes in 90 days
pages crawled
changes in 90 days
“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.
No images from Shupe’s posts have been described.
Written by a vision model and may be wrong. Open the post to see the original. Five are shown; the toggle shows the rest.
133 turns, Mar 25, 2021 to Jun 25, 2026
Transcribed from chamber video or captions by the lab. They are not classified for kinds of statement.
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 is the measure on which Shupe is most unusual among State House Republicans, 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 …”).
Bulk files with the same data for every official:
America’s Political Pulse · Polarization Research Lab
