Skip to content

Republican · Oklahoma Senate, district 12

Serving since Nov 23, 2022OK 2025–26 session

Portrait of Todd Gollihare, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
92%
of State Senate Republicans score to the left of Gollihare on the CSIP scale

CSIP score +0.72 (approximate range +0.64 to +0.79, which understates the uncertainty); negative is left of the scale’s centre, positive right. From 134 donors and 580 roll calls.

CSIP places every official on one left–right scale estimated from roll-call votes, campaign donations and the text of statements; 0 is the centre of the scale, not a definition of moderate. The share says where Gollihare sits among State Senate Republicans, not how far from the centre.

At a glance

6 measures against State Senate Republicans. Gollihare reported $206.9K in the 2026 cycle, in the top quarter of State Senate Republicans (median $46.2K). 79% of the 178 bills Gollihare sponsored got out of committee, in the top quarter of the Oklahoma Senate.

The measures on which Gollihare sits furthest from the middle of State Senate Republicans, each against the same group, with the CSIP score when there is one. Every number is explained in its own section below.

CSIP ideology

+0.72

More conservative than 92% of State Senate Republicans · ± 0.08

Party unity

98.1%

Oklahoma Senate average 90.2% · ranks 6th of 47 · 19 votes against the majority of Oklahoma Senate Republicans

Itemized, 2026

$206.9K

State Senate Republicans’ median $46.2K · ranks 162nd of 936

Out of committee

79%

Oklahoma Senate average 56% · ranks 10th of 47

From Oklahoma, 2026

93%

Of itemized individual dollars · ranks 513th of 860 State Senate Republicans

Attendance

94.3%

Oklahoma Senate average 93.7% · ranks 26th of 47 · 1,658 roll calls

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

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Gollihare says

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

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Gollihare sits at +0.72 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more conservative than 92% of State Senate Republicans. Approximate range +0.64 to +0.79, which understates the uncertainty; from 134 donors and 580 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 +0.64 to +0.79. From 134 donors and 580 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

← More liberalMore conservative →0Gollihare +0.7State Senate Republicans +0.4Oklahoma Senate +0.4All State Senate +0.1

The outlined dot is Gollihare, 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 Gollihare’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 Gollihare sits

Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale

−2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →State Senate Republicansmedian +0.4Gollihare +0.7Oklahoma Senatemedian +0.4All State Senatemedian +0.1
Show the data
Gollihare's CSIP score of +0.72 placed against State Senate Republicans, Oklahoma Senate, All State Senate.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Gollihare
State Senate Republicans1083+0.492%
Oklahoma Senate47+0.487%
All State Senate1909+0.195%
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 Gollihare 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 Gollihare.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Gollihare reported $206.9K in the 2026 cycle, 4.5 times the State Senate Republicans’ median of $46.2K. State filings report no small-donation total. 93% of itemized individual money came from Oklahoma.

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
$206.9K

itemized in the 2026 cycle

From 88 itemized donors. State Senate Republicans’ median $46.2K.

Where the money came from

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

Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)Individuals (itemized): $76.7K (37.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)PACs and other committees: $130.3K (63.0%)
  • Individuals (itemized)37 squares$76.7K
  • PACs and other committees63 squares$130.3K
Show the data
Sources of Gollihare's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Individuals (itemized)$76.7K37.0%
PACs and other committees$130.3K63.0%
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 Republicans’ median for 2026.

2022 cycle: $97.9K$97.9K20222024 cycle: $15.2K$15.2K20242026 cycle: $206.9K$206.9K2026State Senate Republicans median $46.2K
Show the data
Gollihare's receipts by cycle against the 2026 State Senate Republicans median.
ItemValue
2022 cycle$97.9K
2024 cycle$15.2K
2026 cycle$206.9K

Top donor states, 2026

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

  1. Oklahoma$71.2K
  2. Arkansas$3,500
  3. Florida$1,000
  4. New Jersey$1,000

Small donations

State filings report no total for small gifts.

Not reported in state filings.

Where itemized donors live

Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state

Alaska: no dataAKMaine: no dataMEVermont: no dataVTNew Hampshire: no dataNHWashington: no dataWAIdaho: no dataIDMontana: no dataMTNorth Dakota: no dataNDMinnesota: no dataMNIllinois: no dataILWisconsin: no dataWIMichigan: no dataMINew York: no dataNYRhode Island: no dataRIMassachusetts: no dataMAOregon: no dataORNevada: no dataNVWyoming: no dataWYSouth Dakota: no dataSDIowa: no dataIAIndiana: no dataINOhio: no dataOHPennsylvania: no dataPANew Jersey: $1,000NJConnecticut: 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: $3,500ARTennessee: no dataTNNorth Carolina: no dataNCSouth Carolina: no dataSCDistrict of Columbia: no dataDCOklahoma: $71.2KOKLouisiana: no dataLAMississippi: no dataMSAlabama: no dataALGeorgia: no dataGAHawaii: no dataHITexas: no dataTXFlorida: $1,000FL
Show the data
Gollihare's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
Oklahoma$71.2K
Arkansas$3,500
New Jersey$1,000
Florida$1,000
AlaskaNo data
MaineNo data
VermontNo data
New HampshireNo data
WashingtonNo data
IdahoNo data
MontanaNo data
North DakotaNo data
MinnesotaNo data
IllinoisNo data
WisconsinNo data
MichiganNo data
New YorkNo data
Rhode IslandNo data
MassachusettsNo data
OregonNo data
NevadaNo data
WyomingNo data
South DakotaNo data
IowaNo data
IndianaNo data
OhioNo data
PennsylvaniaNo data
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
TennesseeNo data
North CarolinaNo data
South CarolinaNo data
District of ColumbiaNo data
LouisianaNo data
MississippiNo data
AlabamaNo data
GeorgiaNo data
HawaiiNo data
TexasNo data
88

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

93%

from Oklahoma

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

Top donor occupations

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. LOBBYIST$19.8K 24 donors
  2. CEO$8,300 6 donors
  3. OWNER$4,000 4 donors
  4. ATTORNEY$3,600 6 donors

Top committees

PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.

  1. OKLAHOMA COMMITTEE OF AUTOMOBILE RETAILERS$8,000
  2. CITIZENS FOR JUSTICE$6,500
  3. CONSERVATIVE ACTION FUND$5,000
  4. KOCHPAC - KOCH, INC.$5,000
  5. OGE ENERGY CORP EMPLOYEES PAC$5,000

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. BIOS$4,550 3 donors
  2. CIVITAS STRATEGIES$1,600 3 donors
  3. OU HEALTH$750 3 donors

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Gollihare voted with the majority of Oklahoma Senate Republicans on 98.1% of party-line votes and missed 5.7% of 1,658 roll calls. Oklahoma Senate on average: 90.2% party unity, 93.7% attendance. Across all roll calls, Gollihare voted against the majority of Oklahoma Senate Republicans 19 times.

1,658 roll calls Gollihare could vote on in the OK 2025–26 session, compared with Oklahoma 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 Gollihare voted with the majority of Oklahoma Senate Republicans. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.

19

votes against the majority of Oklahoma Senate Republicans

Party unity 98.1%, Oklahoma Senate average 90.2%, ranks 6th of 47. 1,658 roll calls in the OK 2025–26 session.

Attendance and party unity

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

80%100%
Gollihare
Peers
Rank
Attendance
94.3%
93.7%
26th of 47
Party unity
98.1%
90.2%
6th of 47
Show the data
Gollihare's attendance and party unity against Oklahoma Senate.
RowGolliharePeers
Attendance94.3%93.7%
Party unity98.1%90.2%
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 OK 2025–26 session

Key votes
Party split (yea–nay)Why it’s key
May 14, 2026
SB 1360
Mathematics instruction; Oklahoma Math Achievement and Proficiency Act; teacher training; creating the Office of Mathematics Improvement; Director; screening instrument; funding. Effective date. Emergency.
Fourth Reading
YeaWith majoritypassD 9–0 · R 35–0Democrats 9 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 35 yea, 0 naybecame law
May 14, 2026
SJR 52
Joint resolution; approving certain proposed permanent rules of the Oklahoma Health Care Authority.
Fourth Reading
YeaWith majoritypassD 8–0 · R 28–8Democrats 8 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 28 yea, 8 naybecame law · party crossover
May 14, 2026
HB 3004
Professions and occupations; Board of Examiners in Optometry; sunset; effective date; emergency.
Veto Override With Emergency
YeaWith majoritypassD 9–0 · R 38–0Democrats 9 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 38 yea, 0 naybecame law
May 14, 2026
HJR 1092
Joint Resolution; Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission; approving certain proposed permanent rule changes; directing distribution.
Third Reading
YeaWith majoritypassD 8–1 · R 29–9Democrats 8 yea, 1 nay; Republicans 29 yea, 9 naybecame law · party crossover
May 14, 2026
SB 2071
Agriculture; Oklahoma Milk and Milk Products Act; clarifying jurisdictional authority of dairy inspection and grading programs. Effective date.
House Amendments
NayWith majorityfailD 1–7 · R 16–20Democrats 1 yea, 7 nay; Republicans 16 yea, 20 nayparty crossover
How key votes are chosen

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

Votes most often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Gollihare most often

  1. Chuck HallR770 shared votes99%
  2. Aaron ReinhardtR1,509 shared votes99%
  3. Bill ColemanR1,524 shared votes99%
  4. Lonnie PaxtonR1,368 shared votes99%
  5. Rob HallR1,417 shared votes99%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Gollihare least often

  1. Shane JettR1,497 shared votes66%
  2. Dusty DeeversR1,516 shared votes67%
  3. Regina GoodwinD1,498 shared votes71%
  4. Nikki NiceD1,539 shared votes72%
  5. Mary BorenD1,374 shared votes73%
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

OK 2025–26 session, loads in batches

Back to topNext: Legislation

Legislation

Gollihare sponsored 178 bills in the OK 2025–26 session; 60 became law. Cosponsored 0 others. 79% of sponsored bills got out of committee (Oklahoma Senate average 56%; 10th of 47).

The bills Gollihare sponsored and cosponsored in the OK 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 OK 2025–26 session

Sponsored178 billsSponsored, Introduced: 178178Sponsored, In committee: 178178Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 128128Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 9090Sponsored, Became law: 6060Cosponsored0 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 00Cosponsored, In committee: 00Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 00Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 00Cosponsored, Became law: 00IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Gollihare sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored1781781289060
Cosponsored00000
How to read the blocks

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

79%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

Oklahoma Senate average 56%. Ranks 10th of 47.

Cosponsorship partners

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

  1. Erick Harris17
  2. Anthony Moore16
  3. Preston Stinson12
  4. Mark Lawson12
  5. Kyle Hilbert10
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 Gollihare’s bills; the toggle shows more.

Bill list

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

Bills sponsored and cosponsored
HB 4114Motor vehicles; removing license suspension requirement for nonpayment of court-ordered financial obligations; effective date.SponsorFeb 2, 2026In committeeTransportation and Public Works(model)Referred to Public Safety Feb 3, 2026
SB 1460Crimes and punishments; modifying offenses in certain classes of felonies; creating felony offenses for second or subsequent offenses; adding offenses for which registration pursuant to the Sex Offenders Registration Act applies. Effective date.SponsorFeb 2, 2026Passed one chamberCrime and Law Enforcement(model)Remove Representative Ford as principal House author and substitute with Representative CrosswhiteHader Apr 23, 2026
SB 1646Health insurance; requiring coverage of medically necessary treatment of mental health and substance use disorders; prohibiting certain limitations; establishing certain utilization review requirements. Effective date.SponsorFeb 2, 2026In committeeHealth(model)Placed on General Order Mar 4, 2026
HB 4112Court fines and fees; deleting the assessment of certain fees; repealer; effective date.SponsorFeb 2, 2026In committeeLaw(model)Recommendation to the full committee; Do Pass, amended by committee substitute Appropriations and Budget Judiciary Subcommittee Feb 17, 2026
SB 1589Crimes and punishments; modifying scope of certain offense related to gambling. Effective date.SponsorFeb 2, 2026Became lawCrime and Law Enforcement(model)Filed with Secretary of State May 14, 2026

Back to topNext: Online

Online

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

The lab crawls Gollihare’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 Gollihare 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 Gollihare posted

No images from Gollihare’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

475 turns, Mar 2, 2023 to May 14, 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 Gollihare is most unusual among State Senate 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 …”).

Identifiers

Profile id
54d37a3d-68cb-4e87-9916-c38f2f0f8ed3
Open States
ocd-person/54d37a3d-68cb-4e87-9916-c38f2f0f8ed3

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