Skip to content

Republican · Rhode Island House, district 29

Serving since Jan 6, 2015RI 2025–26 session

Portrait of Sherry Roberts, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
$500
in itemized contributions in the 2026 cycle, in the bottom 5% of State House Republicans

The median for State House Republicans is $33.7K. Ranks 2477th of 2,521, where 1st raised the most. 0 itemized donors.

Itemized contributions reported to the state in the 2026 cycle, ranked among State House Republicans. State filings leave small gifts out, and totals depend on whether the seat is up this cycle.

At a glance

5 measures against the Rhode Island House. 23% of the 113 bills Roberts sponsored got out of committee, in the bottom tenth of the Rhode Island House. Roberts sits at +0.56 on the CSIP scale, more conservative than 82% of State House Republicans.

The measures on which Roberts 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.

Itemized, 2026

$500

State House Republicans’ median $33.7K · ranks 2477th of 2,521

Out of committee

23%

Rhode Island House average 39% · ranks 69th of 74

CSIP ideology

+0.56

More conservative than 82% of State House Republicans · ± 0.05

Party unity

99.6%

Rhode Island House average 94.0% · ranks 15th of 74 · 42 votes against the majority of Rhode Island House Republicans

Attendance

91.1%

Rhode Island House average 90.9% · ranks 47th of 74 · 1,359 roll calls

Statements

16

16 posts on X

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

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Roberts says

Roberts claims credit less than 96% of State House Republicans. Credit claiming in 0% of 16 statements, against 13% for the average State House Republican; 764th of 791.

An AI model reads each of Roberts’s 16 statements in the RI 2025–26 session (16 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.

Kinds of statement

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

0%80%
Roberts
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion3 statements
19%
32%
588th of 791
Policy criticism1 statements
6%
9%
401st of 791
Personal attacks0 statements
0%
3%
642nd of 791
Bipartisanship0 statements
0%
2%
677th of 791
Credit claiming0 statements
0%
13%
764th of 791
Show the data
Roberts's share of statements in each category against the State House Republicans average.
RowRobertsPeers
Policy discussion19%32%
Policy criticism6%9%
Personal attacks0%3%
Bipartisanship0%2%
Credit claiming0%13%
16

statements classified

16 posts on X.

posts on X: 16 (100.0%)posts on X 16
Show the data
Roberts's statements by source
PartValue
posts on X16
How to read the bars

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

Extreme labels

Roberts used extreme labels in 6.3% of statements, 4.3 times the peer average. 1 statement, most often aimed at progressive left; peers 1.4%.

    Who gets the labels

    Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements

    1. progressive left1
    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; 14 of them have no statements.

    In Roberts’s words

    Real statements from the classifier’s example set, with the labels it assigned

    Policy discussion

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

    May 8, 2026 · Posts on X (state legislators) · policy discussion; Crime and Law Enforcement · Source

    Extreme label

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

    Apr 1, 2026 · Posts on X (state legislators) · policy criticism; policy discussion; Crime and Law Enforcement; extreme label “extreme” aimed at progressive left · 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 16 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: 16 posts on X.

    Back to topNext: Policy

    Policy

    Crime and Law Enforcement is what Roberts talks about most: 67% of policy statements, 6.1 times the peer share. Peers give it 11%. 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 Roberts talks about. The bills Roberts sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.

    What Roberts talks about

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

    0%73%
    Roberts
    Peers
    Crime and Law Enforcement2 statements
    67%
    11%
    Health1 statements
    33%
    10%
    Agriculture and Food0 statements
    0%
    4%
    Armed Forces and National Security0 statements
    0%
    5%
    Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues0 statements
    0%
    6%
    Show the data
    Policy areas Roberts talks about, as a share of policy statements, against the State House Republicans average.
    RowRobertsPeers
    Crime and Law Enforcement67%11%
    Health33%10%
    Agriculture and Food0%4%
    Armed Forces and National Security0%5%
    Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues0%6%
    How to read the bars

    The thick bar is the share of Roberts’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.

    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 73%. Grey ticks are the State House Republicans averages.

    Talks aboutLegislates onCrime and Law EnforcementCrime and Law Enforcement, talks about: 67% (State House Republicans 11%)67%Crime and Law Enforcement, legislates on: 16% (State House Republicans 11%)16%HealthHealth, talks about: 33% (State House Republicans 10%)33%Health, legislates on: 7% (State House Republicans 10%)7%Agriculture and FoodAgriculture and Food, talks about: 0% (State House Republicans 4%)0%Agriculture and Food, legislates on: 1% (State House Republicans 3%)1%Civil Rights and Liberties,Minority IssuesCivil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues, talks about: 0% (State House Republicans 6%)0%Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues, legislates on: 4% (State House Republicans 4%)4%CommerceCommerce, talks about: 0% (State House Republicans 4%)0%Commerce, legislates on: 2% (State House Republicans 3%)2%
    Show the data
    Roberts's share of statements against share of bills in each policy area.
    AreaTalks aboutState House Republicans, talks aboutLegislates onState House Republicans, legislates on
    Crime and Law Enforcement67%11%16%11%
    Health33%10%7%10%
    Agriculture and Food0%4%1%3%
    Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues0%6%4%4%
    Commerce0%4%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 Roberts legislates on exactly the areas Roberts 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 Roberts sponsored count fully, cosponsored bills a quarter. Shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.

    Back to topNext: Ideology

    Ideology

    Roberts sits at +0.56 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more conservative than 82% of State House Republicans. Approximate range +0.51 to +0.61, which understates the uncertainty; from 8 donors and 956 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”.

    +0.56

    CSIP ideal point

    Approximate range +0.51 to +0.61. From 8 donors and 956 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

    ← More liberalMore conservative →0Roberts +0.6State House Republicans +0.4Rhode Island House −0.7All State House +0.1

    The outlined dot is Roberts, 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 Roberts’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 Roberts sits

    Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale

    −2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →State House Republicansmedian +0.4Roberts +0.6Rhode Island Housemedian −0.7All State Housemedian +0.1
    Show the data
    Roberts's CSIP score of +0.56 placed against State House Republicans, Rhode Island House, All State House.
    GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Roberts
    State House Republicans2917+0.482%
    Rhode Island House74−0.799%
    All State House5324+0.190%
    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 Roberts 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 Roberts.

    Back to topNext: Money

    Money

    Roberts reported $500 in the 2026 cycle, 1.5% of the State House Republicans’ median of $33.7K. State filings report no small-donation total.

    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
    $500

    itemized in the 2026 cycle

    From 0 itemized donors. State House Republicans’ median $33.7K.

    Where the money came from

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

    PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $500 (100.0%)
    • PACs and other committees100 squares$500
    Show the data
    Sources of Roberts's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
    SourceAmountShare
    PACs and other committees$500100.0%
    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, 2020 to 2026. The grey line is the State House Republicans’ median for 2026.

    2020 cycle: $1,100$1,10020202022 cycle: $4,167$4,16720222024 cycle: $744$74420242026 cycle: $500$5002026State House Republicans median $33.7K
    Show the data
    Roberts's receipts by cycle against the 2026 State House Republicans median.
    ItemValue
    2020 cycle$1,100
    2022 cycle$4,167
    2024 cycle$744
    2026 cycle$500

    Top donor states, 2026

    Itemized contributions by donor state.

    No itemized donors with an address.

    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: 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
    Roberts's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
    StateValue
    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
    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
    0

    itemized donors

    People who gave more than $200

    No itemized individual money.

    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. REALTORS PAC OF RI$500

    Top employers

    Itemized, 2026 cycle.

    No employers reported.

    Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

    Back to topNext: Votes

    Votes

    Roberts voted with the majority of Rhode Island House Republicans on 99.6% of party-line votes and missed 8.8% of 1,359 roll calls. Rhode Island House on average: 94.0% party unity, 90.9% attendance. Across all roll calls, Roberts voted against the majority of Rhode Island House Republicans 42 times.

    1,359 roll calls Roberts 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 Roberts voted with the majority of Rhode Island House Republicans. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.

    42

    votes against the majority of Rhode Island House Republicans

    Party unity 99.6%, Rhode Island House average 94.0%, ranks 15th of 74. 1,359 roll calls in the RI 2025–26 session.

    Attendance and party unity

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

    80%100%
    Roberts
    Peers
    Rank
    Attendance
    91.1%
    90.9%
    47th of 74
    Party unity
    99.6%
    94.0%
    15th of 74
    Show the data
    Roberts's attendance and party unity against Rhode Island House.
    RowRobertsPeers
    Attendance91.1%90.9%
    Party unity99.6%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 Roberts most often

    1. Bob QuattrocchiR1,043 shared votes97%
    2. George NardoneR1,237 shared votes95%
    3. Mike ChippendaleR1,208 shared votes94%
    4. Dick FasciaR1,192 shared votes93%
    5. Paul SantucciR1,199 shared votes93%

    Votes least often with

    The colleagues who voted the same way as Roberts least often

    1. Teresa TanziD1,075 shared votes72%
    2. Marvin AbneyD1,160 shared votes73%
    3. Jason KnightD1,068 shared votes73%
    4. Matthew DawsonD1,083 shared votes73%
    5. Cherie CruzD1,032 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

    RI 2025–26 session, loads in batches

    Back to topNext: Legislation

    Legislation

    Roberts sponsored 113 bills in the RI 2025–26 session; 4 became law. Cosponsored 0 others. 23% of sponsored bills got out of committee (Rhode Island House average 39%; 69th of 74).

    The bills Roberts 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

    Sponsored113 billsSponsored, Introduced: 113113Sponsored, In committee: 113113Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 2626Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 44Sponsored, Became law: 44Cosponsored0 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 00Cosponsored, In committee: 00Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 00Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 00Cosponsored, Became law: 00IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
    Show the data
    Bills Roberts sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
    RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
    Sponsored1131132644
    Cosponsored00000
    How to read the blocks

    Ink blocks are bills Roberts sponsored, ochre blocks bills Roberts 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 69th of 74.

    Cosponsorship partners

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

    1. Mike Chippendale72
    2. George Nardone58
    3. Marie Hopkins53
    4. David Place52
    5. Dick Fascia48
    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 Roberts’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 8637HOUSE RESOLUTION THANKING REPRESENTATIVE ROBERT "BOB" QUATTROCCHI FOR HIS DEDICATED SERVICE TO THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF RHODE ISLANDSponsorJun 11, 2026Passed one chamberUnassigned06/11/2026 House read and passed Jun 11, 2026
    HR 8631HOUSE RESOLUTION COMMEMORATING THE 61ST ANNUAL GASPEE DAYS CELEBRATION AND THE MOMENTOUS 254TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE BURNING OF THE GASPEESponsorJun 11, 2026Passed one chamberUnassigned06/11/2026 House read and passed Jun 11, 2026
    HR 8607HOUSE RESOLUTION CELEBRATING THE MONTH OF JUNE 2026 AS "MEN'S MENTAL HEALTH MONTH" IN THE STATE OF RHODE ISLANDSponsorJun 2, 2026Passed one chamberUnassigned06/02/2026 House read and passed Jun 2, 2026
    HB 8532AN ACT RELATING TO WATERS AND NAVIGATION -- WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENTSponsorMay 8, 2026In committeeWater Resources Development(model)05/26/2026 Committee recommended measure be held for further study May 26, 2026
    HB 8482AN ACT RELATING TO MOTOR AND OTHER VEHICLES -- MOTOR VEHICLE OFFENSESSponsorApr 29, 2026In committeeCrime and Law Enforcement(model)05/05/2026 Committee recommended measure be held for further study May 5, 2026

    Back to topNext: Online

    Online

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

    The lab crawls Roberts’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 Roberts 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 Roberts posted

    No images from Roberts’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

    6 turns, Jun 2, 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 Roberts 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
    6c7285bd-fdd3-4629-be6f-4a01d19e9c25
    Open States
    ocd-person/6c7285bd-fdd3-4629-be6f-4a01d19e9c25

    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