Skip to content

Democrat · Rhode Island House, district 58

Serving since Jan 3, 2023RI 2025–26 session

Portrait of Cherie Cruz, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
16%
of roll calls missed, attendance in the bottom quarter of the Rhode Island House

Attendance 84%; the average within the Rhode Island House is 90.9%. Ranks 67th of 74, where 1st has the highest attendance. 1,359 roll calls in the RI 2025–26 session.

Attendance is the share of the roll calls Cruz could vote on where a yea, nay or present was recorded, ranked within the Rhode Island House. A missed vote has many causes, from illness to campaigning; the number says how often, not why.

At a glance

6 measures against the Rhode Island House. 23% of the 421 bills Cruz sponsored got out of committee, in the bottom tenth of the Rhode Island House. Cruz reported $12.3K in the 2026 cycle, in the bottom half of State House Democrats (median $40.4K).

The measures on which Cruz 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.

Attendance

84%

Rhode Island House average 90.9% · ranks 67th of 74 · 1,359 roll calls

Out of committee

23%

Rhode Island House average 39% · ranks 68th of 74

Itemized, 2026

$12.3K

State House Democrats’ median $40.4K · ranks 1555th of 2,082

CSIP ideology

−0.72

More liberal than 66% of State House Democrats · ± 0.07

Party unity

96.1%

Rhode Island House average 94.0% · ranks 47th of 74 · 25 votes against the majority of Rhode Island House Democrats

From Rhode Island, 2026

94%

Of itemized individual dollars · ranks 898th of 1,983 State House Democrats

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

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Cruz says

Cruz stresses bipartisanship less than 88% of State House Democrats. Bipartisanship in 0% of 43 statements, against 2.9% for the average State House Democrat; 676th of 764.

An AI model reads each of Cruz’s 43 statements in the RI 2025–26 session (43 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 Democrats and ranked among them.

Kinds of statement

Share of statements carrying each label, the RI 2025–26 session

0%80%
Cruz
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion10 statements
23%
39%
603rd of 764
Policy criticism4 statements
9%
10%
335th of 764
Credit claiming4 statements
9%
14%
447th of 764
Personal attacks0 statements
0%
3%
584th of 764
Bipartisanship0 statements
0%
3%
676th of 764
Show the data
Cruz's share of statements in each category against the State House Democrats average.
RowCruzPeers
Policy discussion23%39%
Policy criticism9%10%
Credit claiming9%14%
Personal attacks0%3%
Bipartisanship0%3%
43

statements classified

43 posts on X.

posts on X: 43 (100.0%)posts on X 43
Show the data
Cruz's statements by source
PartValue
posts on X43
How to read the bars

The thick bar is Cruz; the thin grey bar is the average State House Democrats. A longer thick bar means Cruz does this more than peers. Rank 1 is the highest rate in the group.

Extreme labels

Cruz used no extreme labels in 43 statements. The peer average is 1.0%.

No extreme labels in this window.

Who gets the labels

Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements

No targets recorded.

What an extreme label is

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.

Month by month

Share of statements per month, the RI 2025–26 session

No month in this window has 10 or more statements, too few to chart month by month.

How to read the strips

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 RI 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%. 22 months are hatched here; 9 of them have no statements.

In Cruz’s words

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.

Mar 20, 2025 · Posts on X (state legislators) · policy criticism; policy discussion; Housing and Community Development · Source

Credit claiming

The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.

Jun 21, 2025 · Posts on X (state legislators) · credit claiming · Source

Policy discussion

The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.

Nov 23, 2025 · Posts on X (state legislators) · policy criticism; policy discussion; Housing and Community Development · Source

Examples by category

Up to five recent statements in each category

Category

Overtly questions a named person’s character, integrity or loyalty, or calls them names. Criticising a record or a policy does not count.

No statements in this category in this window.

All 43 statements

Newest first, the RI 2025–26 session

The full feed

Five statements at a time, newest first; filters apply to the statements loaded so far. Export saves the statements that match. Sources: 43 posts on X.

Back to topNext: Policy

Policy

Housing and Community Development is what Cruz talks about most: 70% of policy statements, 11.3 times the peer share. Peers give it 6.2%. Agreement with legislation needs at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.

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 Cruz talks about. The bills Cruz sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.

What Cruz talks about

Share of policy statements by area, the RI 2025–26 session

0%77%
Cruz
Peers
Housing and Community Development7 statements
70%
6%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues1 statements
10%
10%
Education1 statements
10%
15%
Public Lands and Natural Resources1 statements
10%
1%
Agriculture and Food0 statements
0%
5%
Show the data
Policy areas Cruz talks about, as a share of policy statements, against the State House Democrats average.
RowCruzPeers
Housing and Community Development70%6%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues10%10%
Education10%15%
Public Lands and Natural Resources10%1%
Agriculture and Food0%5%
How to read the bars

The thick bar is the share of Cruz’s policy statements in an area; the thin grey bar is the average share for State House Democrats. 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.

Talks about · legislates on

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 77%. Grey ticks are the State House Democrats averages.

Talks aboutLegislates onHousing and CommunityDevelopmentHousing and Community Development, talks about: 70% (State House Democrats 6%)70%Housing and Community Development, legislates on: 11% (State House Democrats 5%)11%Civil Rights and Liberties,Minority IssuesCivil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues, talks about: 10% (State House Democrats 10%)10%Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues, legislates on: 4% (State House Democrats 4%)4%EducationEducation, talks about: 10% (State House Democrats 15%)10%Education, legislates on: 8% (State House Democrats 10%)8%Public Lands and NaturalResourcesPublic Lands and Natural Resources, talks about: 10% (State House Democrats 1%)10%Public Lands and Natural Resources, legislates on: 0% (State House Democrats 2%)0%Agriculture and FoodAgriculture and Food, talks about: 0% (State House Democrats 5%)0%Agriculture and Food, legislates on: 2% (State House Democrats 3%)2%
Show the data
Cruz's share of statements against share of bills in each policy area.
AreaTalks aboutState House Democrats, talks aboutLegislates onState House Democrats, legislates on
Housing and Community Development70%6%11%5%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues10%10%4%4%
Education10%15%8%10%
Public Lands and Natural Resources10%1%0%2%
Agriculture and Food0%5%2%3%

No agreement score.Needs at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills in the window.

What agreement means, and what it doesn’t

Agreement is 1 minus the distance between the two distributions (Jensen–Shannon): 1 means Cruz legislates on exactly the areas Cruz 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 Cruz sponsored count fully, cosponsored bills a quarter. Shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Cruz sits at −0.72 on the CSIP scale, left of 0, more liberal than 66% of State House Democrats. Approximate range −0.79 to −0.66, which understates the uncertainty; from 144 donors and 555 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”.

−0.72

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range −0.79 to −0.66. From 144 donors and 555 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

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

The outlined dot is Cruz, 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 Cruz’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 Cruz 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 −0.6Cruz −0.7Rhode Island Housemedian −0.7All State Housemedian +0.1
Show the data
Cruz's CSIP score of −0.72 placed against State House Democrats, Rhode Island House, All State House.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Cruz
State House Democrats2392−0.634%
Rhode Island House74−0.750%
All State House5324+0.115%
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 Cruz 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 Cruz.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Cruz reported $12.3K in the 2026 cycle, 30% of the State House Democrats’ median of $40.4K. State filings report no small-donation total. 94% 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
$12.3K

itemized in the 2026 cycle

From 32 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): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)Individuals (itemized): $10.6K (86.7%)PACs and other committees: $1,625 (13.3%)PACs and other committees: $1,625 (13.3%)PACs and other committees: $1,625 (13.3%)PACs and other committees: $1,625 (13.3%)PACs and other committees: $1,625 (13.3%)PACs and other committees: $1,625 (13.3%)PACs and other committees: $1,625 (13.3%)PACs and other committees: $1,625 (13.3%)PACs and other committees: $1,625 (13.3%)PACs and other committees: $1,625 (13.3%)PACs and other committees: $1,625 (13.3%)PACs and other committees: $1,625 (13.3%)PACs and other committees: $1,625 (13.3%)
  • Individuals (itemized)87 squares$10.6K
  • PACs and other committees13 squares$1,625
Show the data
Sources of Cruz's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Individuals (itemized)$10.6K86.7%
PACs and other committees$1,62513.3%
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 House Democrats’ median for 2026.

2022 cycle: $16.9K$16.9K20222024 cycle: $34.1K$34.1K20242026 cycle: $12.3K$12.3K2026State House Democrats median $40.4K
Show the data
Cruz's receipts by cycle against the 2026 State House Democrats median.
ItemValue
2022 cycle$16.9K
2024 cycle$34.1K
2026 cycle$12.3K

Top donor states, 2026

Itemized contributions by donor state. 94% came from Rhode Island.

  1. Rhode Island$10.0K
  2. Massachusetts$625

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: $10.0KRIMassachusetts: $625MAOregon: 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: no dataFL
Show the data
Cruz's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
Rhode Island$10.0K
Massachusetts$625
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
FloridaNo data
32

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

94%

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. SHEET METAL WORKERS POLITICAL ACTION LEAGUE$500
  2. RI STATE ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS$350
  3. GRADUATE LABOR ORGANIZATION PAC$250
  4. NEARI PACE (NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION OF RI)$200
  5. PANNONE LOPES DEVEREAUX & O'GARA LLC RI STATE PAC$150

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

No employers reported.

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Cruz voted with the majority of Rhode Island House Democrats on 96.1% of party-line votes and missed 16% of 1,359 roll calls. Rhode Island House on average: 94.0% party unity, 90.9% attendance. Across all roll calls, Cruz voted against the majority of Rhode Island House Democrats 25 times.

1,359 roll calls Cruz 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 Cruz 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.

25

votes against the majority of Rhode Island House Democrats

Party unity 96.1%, Rhode Island House average 94.0%, ranks 47th of 74. 1,359 roll calls in the RI 2025–26 session.

Attendance and party unity

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

80%100%
Cruz
Peers
Rank
Attendance
84%
90.9%
67th of 74
Party unity
96.1%
94.0%
47th of 74
Show the data
Cruz's attendance and party unity against Rhode Island House.
RowCruzPeers
Attendance84%90.9%
Party unity96.1%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 Cruz most often

  1. Brandon PotterD1,074 shared votes98%
  2. Jennifer StewartD1,128 shared votes98%
  3. Leo FelixD984 shared votes98%
  4. Edith AjelloD1,093 shared votes98%
  5. David MoralesD1,030 shared votes98%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Cruz least often

  1. Sherry RobertsR1,032 shared votes73%
  2. Bob QuattrocchiR932 shared votes74%
  3. David PlaceR1,104 shared votes76%
  4. Mike ChippendaleR1,119 shared votes77%
  5. Paul SantucciR1,100 shared votes77%
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

Cruz sponsored 421 bills in the RI 2025–26 session; 45 became law. Cosponsored 0 others. 23% of sponsored bills got out of committee (Rhode Island House average 39%; 68th of 74).

The bills Cruz 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

Sponsored421 billsSponsored, Introduced: 421421Sponsored, In committee: 421421Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 9797Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 4545Sponsored, Became law: 4545Cosponsored0 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 00Cosponsored, In committee: 00Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 00Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 00Cosponsored, Became law: 00IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Cruz sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored421421974545
Cosponsored00000
How to read the blocks

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

23%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

Rhode Island House average 39%. Ranks 68th of 74.

Cosponsorship partners

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

  1. Jennifer Stewart221
  2. Brandon Potter220
  3. David Morales162
  4. Karen Alzate140
  5. Rebecca Kislak138
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 Cruz’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 8638HOUSE RESOLUTION HONORING REPRESENTATIVE DAVID MORALES FOR HIS SERVICE TO THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF RHODE ISLANDSponsorJun 11, 2026Passed one chamberUnassigned06/11/2026 House read and passed Jun 11, 2026
HR 8619HOUSE RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE MONTH OF JUNE 2026 AS "PRIDE MONTH" IN THE STATE OF RHODE ISLANDSponsorJun 4, 2026Passed one chamberUnassigned06/04/2026 House read and passed Jun 4, 2026
HB 8591AN ACT AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF PAWTUCKET TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, RECONSTRUCTION, REPAIR AND EQUIPPING OF BRIDGES AND ALL COSTS INCIDENTAL OR RELATED THERETO AND AUTHORIZING THE FINANCING THEREOF, INCLUDING THE ISSUE OF NOT MORE THAN $2,000,000 BONDS AND NOTES THEREFOR, TO FUND THE CAPITAL ISponsorMay 27, 2026Became lawTransportation and Public Works(model)06/23/2026 Signed by Governor Jun 23, 2026
HB 8594AN ACT AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF PAWTUCKET TO PROVIDE FOR THE REPAVING OF STREETS IN THE CITY AND AUTHORIZING THE FINANCING THEREOF, INCLUDING THE ISSUE OF NOT MORE THAN $3,000,000 BONDS AND NOTES THEREFOR, TO FUND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR THE TWO FISCAL YEARS 2028 AND 2029SponsorMay 27, 2026Became lawTransportation and Public Works(model)06/23/2026 Signed by Governor Jun 23, 2026
HB 8588AN ACT AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF PAWTUCKET TO PROVIDE FOR THE PLANNING, EVALUATION, DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, EQUIPPING AND RECONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SEWERS AND STORM SEWERS IN THE CITY AND AUTHORIZING THE FINANCING THEREOF, INCLUDING THE ISSUE OF NOT MORE THAN $4,000,000 BONDS AND NOTES THEREFOR, TO FUNSponsorMay 27, 2026Became lawWater Resources Development(model)06/23/2026 Signed by Governor Jun 23, 2026

Back to topNext: Online

Online

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

The lab crawls Cruz’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 Cruz 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 Cruz posted

No images from Cruz’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

7 turns, Mar 24, 2026 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 Cruz 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
386a8117-95b5-441f-91d0-665effac1af4
Open States
ocd-person/386a8117-95b5-441f-91d0-665effac1af4

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