Skip to content

Democrat · Florida Senate, district 15

Serving since Nov 8, 2022FL 2025–26 session

Portrait of LaVon Bracy Davis, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
27%
of sponsored bills got out of committee, in the bottom quarter of the Florida Senate

27% of 22 sponsored bills got out of committee; the average for the Florida Senate is 51%. Ranks 31st of 36, where 1st is the highest share.

The share of bills Davis sponsored that a committee reported out or a chamber passed, ranked within the Florida Senate. Members of the majority party and committee chairs move more bills, so the rank reflects position as well as effort.

At a glance

6 measures against the Florida Senate. Davis reported $112.9K in the 2026 cycle, in the top half of State Senate Democrats (median $55.5K). Davis missed 3.9% of 773 roll calls, attendance in the bottom half of the Florida Senate (average 95.0%).

The measures on which Davis sits furthest from the middle of the Florida Senate, 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

27%

Florida Senate average 51% · ranks 31st of 36

Itemized, 2026

$112.9K

State Senate Democrats’ median $55.5K · ranks 246th of 746

Attendance

96.1%

Florida Senate average 95.0% · ranks 23rd of 39 · 773 roll calls

CSIP ideology

−0.63

More conservative than 53% of State Senate Democrats · ± 0.04

From Florida, 2026

93%

Of itemized individual dollars · ranks 344th of 714 State Senate Democrats

Party unity

95.6%

Florida Senate average 90% · ranks 20th of 39 · 17 votes against the majority of Florida Senate Democrats

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

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Davis says

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

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Davis sits at −0.63 on the CSIP scale, left of 0, more conservative than 53% of State Senate Democrats. Approximate range −0.67 to −0.59, which understates the uncertainty; from 757 donors and 412 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”.

−0.63

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range −0.67 to −0.59. From 757 donors and 412 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

← More liberalMore conservative →0Davis −0.6State Senate Democrats −0.7Florida Senate +0.4All State Senate +0.1

The outlined dot is Davis, 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 Davis’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 Davis sits

Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale

−2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →State Senate Democratsmedian −0.7Davis −0.6Florida Senatemedian +0.4All State Senatemedian +0.1
Show the data
Davis's CSIP score of −0.63 placed against State Senate Democrats, Florida Senate, All State Senate.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Davis
State Senate Democrats825−0.753%
Florida Senate39+0.45%
All State Senate1909+0.123%
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 Davis 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 Davis.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Davis reported $112.9K in the 2026 cycle, 2.0 times the State Senate Democrats’ median of $55.5K. State filings report no small-donation total. 93% of itemized individual money came from Florida.

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
$112.9K

itemized in the 2026 cycle

From 463 itemized donors. State Senate Democrats’ median $55.5K.

Where the money came from

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

Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)Individuals (itemized): $69.4K (61.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)PACs and other committees: $43.5K (38.5%)
  • Individuals (itemized)61 squares$69.4K
  • PACs and other committees39 squares$43.5K
Show the data
Sources of Davis's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Individuals (itemized)$69.4K61.5%
PACs and other committees$43.5K38.5%
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, 2022 to 2026. The grey line is the State Senate Democrats’ median for 2026.

2022 cycle: $83.4K$83.4K20222024 cycle: $62.0K$62.0K20242026 cycle: $112.9K$112.9K2026State Senate Democrats median $55.5K
Show the data
Davis's receipts by cycle against the 2026 State Senate Democrats median.
ItemValue
2022 cycle$83.4K
2024 cycle$62.0K
2026 cycle$112.9K

Top donor states, 2026

Itemized contributions by donor state. 93% came from Florida.

  1. Florida$64.7K
  2. Virginia$1,174
  3. California$1,073
  4. Maryland$399
  5. Georgia$348

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: $250AKMaine: $1MEVermont: no dataVTNew Hampshire: no dataNHWashington: $255WAIdaho: no dataIDMontana: no dataMTNorth Dakota: no dataNDMinnesota: $5MNIllinois: $156ILWisconsin: no dataWIMichigan: $108MINew York: $18NYRhode Island: $1RIMassachusetts: $134MAOregon: $3ORNevada: $1NVWyoming: no dataWYSouth Dakota: no dataSDIowa: no dataIAIndiana: no dataINOhio: $13OHPennsylvania: $106PANew Jersey: $17NJConnecticut: $6CTCalifornia: $1,073CAUtah: no dataUTColorado: $102CONebraska: no dataNEMissouri: no dataMOKentucky: $3KYWest Virginia: no dataWVVirginia: $1,174VAMaryland: $399MDDelaware: $30DEArizona: $7AZNew Mexico: no dataNMKansas: no dataKSArkansas: no dataARTennessee: $7TNNorth Carolina: $18NCSouth Carolina: $51SCDistrict of Columbia: no dataDCOklahoma: $2OKLouisiana: no dataLAMississippi: $50MSAlabama: $100ALGeorgia: $348GAHawaii: no dataHITexas: $46TXFlorida: $64.7KFL
Show the data
Davis's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
Florida$64.7K
Virginia$1,174
California$1,073
Maryland$399
Georgia$348
Washington$255
Alaska$250
Illinois$156
Massachusetts$134
Michigan$108
Pennsylvania$106
Colorado$102
Alabama$100
South Carolina$51
Mississippi$50
Texas$46
Delaware$30
North Carolina$18
New York$18
New Jersey$17
Ohio$13
Arizona$7
Tennessee$7
Connecticut$6
Minnesota$5
Oregon$3
Kentucky$3
Oklahoma$2
Maine$1
Rhode Island$1
Nevada$1
VermontNo data
New HampshireNo data
IdahoNo data
MontanaNo data
North DakotaNo data
WisconsinNo data
WyomingNo data
South DakotaNo data
IowaNo data
IndianaNo data
UtahNo data
NebraskaNo data
MissouriNo data
West VirginiaNo data
New MexicoNo data
KansasNo data
ArkansasNo data
District of ColumbiaNo data
LouisianaNo data
HawaiiNo data
463

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

93%

from Florida

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 Florida. Gifts of $200 or less carry no address and are left out.

Top donor occupations

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. ATTORNEY$11.0K 15 donors
  2. NOT EMPLOYED$6,200 19 donors
  3. GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS$3,550 5 donors
  4. HOSPITALITY$3,000 3 donors
  5. REALTOR$950 3 donors

Top committees

PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.

  1. FLORIDA BEER WHOLESALERS GOOD GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE$2,000
  2. FPF FIRE PC$2,000
  3. FRIENDS OF ARRINGTONS$2,000
  4. REALTORS POLITICAL ADVOCACY COMMITTEE$2,000
  5. FUND FOR CHILDREN AND PUBLIC EDUCATION$1,500

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

No employers reported.

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Davis voted with the majority of Florida Senate Democrats on 95.6% of party-line votes and missed 3.9% of 773 roll calls. Florida Senate on average: 90% party unity, 95.0% attendance. Across all roll calls, Davis voted against the majority of Florida Senate Democrats 17 times.

773 roll calls Davis could vote on in the FL 2025–26 session, compared with Florida Senate. 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 Davis voted with the majority of Florida Senate Democrats. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.

17

votes against the majority of Florida Senate Democrats

Party unity 95.6%, Florida Senate average 90%, ranks 20th of 39. 773 roll calls in the FL 2025–26 session.

Attendance and party unity

The thick bar is Davis, the thin grey bar the Florida Senate average. The scale runs from 80% to 100% to show the gap.

80%100%
Davis
Peers
Rank
Attendance
96.1%
95.0%
23rd of 39
Party unity
95.6%
90%
20th of 39
Show the data
Davis's attendance and party unity against Florida Senate.
RowDavisPeers
Attendance96.1%95.0%
Party unity95.6%90%
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 FL 2025–26 session

Key votes
Party split (yea–nay)Why it’s key
Jun 2, 2026
SB 4F
Property Tax Administration
Third Reading
NayWith majoritypassD 3–8 · R 26–0 · I 1–0Democrats 3 yea, 8 nay; Republicans 26 yea, 0 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 naybecame law · party crossover
Jun 2, 2026
HJR 1F
Save our Homes from Excessive Property Taxes
Third Reading
NayWith majoritypassD 3–9 · R 26–0 · I 1–0Democrats 3 yea, 9 nay; Republicans 26 yea, 0 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nayparty crossover
Apr 29, 2026
HB 1D
Establishing the Congressional Districts of the State
Third Reading
NayWith majoritypassD 0–12 · R 21–4 · I 0–1Democrats 0 yea, 12 nay; Republicans 21 yea, 4 nay; Independents 0 yea, 1 naybecame law · party crossover
Apr 28, 2026
SB 4D
Public Records/Investigations by the Department of Legal Affairs
Third Reading
YeaWith majoritypassD 10–1 · R 22–3 · I 1–0Democrats 10 yea, 1 nay; Republicans 22 yea, 3 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nayparty crossover
Mar 13, 2026
SB 628
Transportation Facility Designations
Returning Messages
NayAgainst majoritypassD 5–3 · R 26–1Democrats 5 yea, 3 nay; Republicans 26 yea, 1 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 Davis most often

  1. Rosalind OsgoodD351 shared votes99%
  2. Tina PolskyD309 shared votes98%
  3. Kristen ArringtonD367 shared votes96%
  4. Barbara ShariefD273 shared votes96%
  5. Shev JonesD349 shared votes96%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Davis least often

  1. Don GaetzR360 shared votes84%
  2. Nick DiCeglieR308 shared votes86%
  3. Erin GrallR351 shared votes88%
  4. Joe GrutersR206 shared votes88%
  5. Bryan ÁvilaR257 shared votes88%
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

FL 2025–26 session, loads in batches

Back to topNext: Legislation

Legislation

Davis sponsored 22 bills in the FL 2025–26 session; none became law. Cosponsored 26 others. 27% of sponsored bills got out of committee (Florida Senate average 51%; 31st of 36).

The bills Davis sponsored and cosponsored in the FL 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 FL 2025–26 session

Sponsored22 billsSponsored, Introduced: 2222Sponsored, In committee: 2222Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 33Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 00Sponsored, Became law: 00Cosponsored26 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 2626Cosponsored, In committee: 2626Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 77Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 44Cosponsored, Became law: 22IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Davis sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored2222300
Cosponsored2626742
How to read the blocks

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

27%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

Florida Senate average 51%. Ranks 31st of 36.

Cosponsorship partners

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

  1. Johanna López13
  2. Anna Eskamani11
  3. Rita Harris10
  4. Dotie Joseph9
  5. Carlos Smith9
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 Davis’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
SB 1574Newborn ScreeningsSponsorJan 9, 2026Passed one chamberHealth(model)Died in Messages Mar 13, 2026
SB 1598ElectionsSponsorJan 9, 2026In committeeGovernment Operations and Politics(model)Died in Ethics and Elections Mar 13, 2026
SB 1626Rent Reporting to Credit Reporting AgenciesSponsorJan 9, 2026In committeeFinance and Financial Sector(model)Died in Judiciary Mar 13, 2026
SB 1550Mobile Home Park Lot TenanciesSponsorJan 9, 2026In committeeHousing and Community Development(model)Died in Regulated Industries Mar 13, 2026
SB 1624Harassment and CyberstalkingSponsorJan 9, 2026In committeeCrime and Law Enforcement(model)Died in Criminal Justice Mar 13, 2026

Back to topNext: Online

Online

A site that changed 2 times in 90 days. Davis’s official site had 1 page when last crawled on Oct 1, 2026.

The lab crawls Davis’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 Davis 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 Davis posted

No images from Davis’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

150 turns, Mar 16, 2023 to Jun 2, 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 Davis is most unusual among Florida Senate, 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
2f86f22f-b277-4441-b322-b1fbfb017b74
Open States
ocd-person/2f86f22f-b277-4441-b322-b1fbfb017b74

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