Skip to content

Republican · Florida Senate, district 38

Serving since Nov 8, 2022FL 2025–26 session

Portrait of Alexis Calatayud, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
$689.3K
in itemized contributions in the 2026 cycle, in the top 5% of State Senate Republicans

The median for State Senate Republicans is $46.2K. Ranks 45th of 936, where 1st raised the most. 256 itemized donors.

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

At a glance

6 measures against State Senate Republicans. Calatayud voted against the majority of Florida Senate Republicans 17 times; party unity 76%, in the bottom quarter of the Florida Senate (average 90%). 69% of the 71 bills Calatayud sponsored got out of committee, in the top quarter of the Florida Senate.

The measures on which Calatayud 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.

Itemized, 2026

$689.3K

State Senate Republicans’ median $46.2K · ranks 45th of 936

Party unity

76%

Florida Senate average 90% · ranks 35th of 39 · 17 votes against the majority of Florida Senate Republicans

Out of committee

69%

Florida Senate average 51% · ranks 9th of 36

CSIP ideology

+0.27

More liberal than 64% of State Senate Republicans · ± 0.04

From Florida, 2026

94%

Of itemized individual dollars · ranks 484th of 860 State Senate Republicans

Attendance

98.2%

Florida Senate average 95.0% · ranks 17th of 39 · 755 roll calls

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

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Calatayud says

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

Back to topNext: Policy

Policy

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

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Calatayud sits at +0.27 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more liberal than 64% of State Senate Republicans. Approximate range +0.23 to +0.31, which understates the uncertainty; from 398 donors and 361 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”.

+0.27

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range +0.23 to +0.31. From 398 donors and 361 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

← More liberalMore conservative →0Calatayud +0.3State Senate Republicans +0.4Florida Senate +0.4All State Senate +0.1

The outlined dot is Calatayud, 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 Calatayud’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 Calatayud 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 +0.4Calatayud +0.3Florida Senatemedian +0.4All State Senatemedian +0.1
Show the data
Calatayud's CSIP score of +0.27 placed against State Senate Republicans, Florida Senate, All State Senate.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Calatayud
State Senate Republicans1083+0.436%
Florida Senate39+0.436%
All State Senate1909+0.163%
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 Calatayud 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 Calatayud.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Calatayud reported $689.3K in the 2026 cycle, 14.9 times the State Senate Republicans’ median of $46.2K. State filings report no small-donation total. 94% of itemized individual money came from Florida.

Campaign money from state campaign-finance filings, as aggregates only; the lab never shows an individual donor. Campaigns must report by name every person who gives them more than $200 in a cycle (“itemized”); smaller gifts are reported only as one total (“unitemized”), so donor counts, donor states, employers and occupations describe itemized donors only. State filings report no small-gift total, so these figures add up itemized contributions only.

Election cycle
$689.3K

itemized in the 2026 cycle

From 256 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): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)Individuals (itemized): $157.5K (22.9%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)PACs and other committees: $129.0K (18.7%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)Party committees: $402.8K (58.4%)
  • Individuals (itemized)23 squares$157.5K
  • PACs and other committees19 squares$129.0K
  • Party committees58 squares$402.8K
Show the data
Sources of Calatayud's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Individuals (itemized)$157.5K22.9%
PACs and other committees$129.0K18.7%
Party committees$402.8K58.4%
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: $590.8K$590.8K20222024 cycle: $41.6K$41.6K20242026 cycle: $689.3K$689.3K2026State Senate Republicans median $46.2K
Show the data
Calatayud's receipts by cycle against the 2026 State Senate Republicans median.
ItemValue
2022 cycle$590.8K
2024 cycle$41.6K
2026 cycle$689.3K

Top donor states, 2026

Itemized contributions by donor state. 94% came from Florida.

  1. Florida$148.0K
  2. Texas$2,000
  3. California$2,000
  4. Wisconsin$2,000
  5. Washington$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: $1,000WAIdaho: no dataIDMontana: no dataMTNorth Dakota: no dataNDMinnesota: no dataMNIllinois: no dataILWisconsin: $2,000WIMichigan: no dataMINew York: $72NYRhode 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: $2,000CAUtah: 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: $250SCDistrict of Columbia: no dataDCOklahoma: no dataOKLouisiana: no dataLAMississippi: no dataMSAlabama: no dataALGeorgia: no dataGAHawaii: no dataHITexas: $2,000TXFlorida: $148.0KFL
Show the data
Calatayud's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
Florida$148.0K
Wisconsin$2,000
California$2,000
Texas$2,000
Washington$1,000
South Carolina$250
New York$72
AlaskaNo data
MaineNo data
VermontNo data
New HampshireNo data
IdahoNo data
MontanaNo data
North DakotaNo data
MinnesotaNo data
IllinoisNo data
MichiganNo 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
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
District of ColumbiaNo data
OklahomaNo data
LouisianaNo data
MississippiNo data
AlabamaNo data
GeorgiaNo data
HawaiiNo data
256

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

94%

from Florida

Of itemized individual dollars

How to read the map

Every state the same size. Darker states gave more itemized money; hatched states had no itemized donors; the outlined state is Florida. Gifts of $200 or less carry no address and are left out.

Top donor occupations

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. ATTORNEY$23.4K 42 donors
  2. RETIRED$17.5K 38 donors
  3. REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER$13.5K 14 donors
  4. GOVERNMENT RELATIONS$6,925 10 donors
  5. ENGINEER$6,100 7 donors

Top committees

PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.

  1. FLORIDA REPUBLICAN SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE, INC.$402.8K
  2. FLORIDA SMOKE FREE DEFENSE$2,000
  3. FLORIDIANS FOR HOME RULE PAC$2,000
  4. FPF FIRE PC$2,000
  5. FRIENDS OF COLLEEN BURTON$2,000

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

No employers reported.

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Calatayud voted with the majority of Florida Senate Republicans on 76% of party-line votes and missed 1.7% of 755 roll calls. Florida Senate on average: 90% party unity, 95.0% attendance. Across all roll calls, Calatayud voted against the majority of Florida Senate Republicans 17 times.

755 roll calls Calatayud could vote on in the FL 2025–26 session, compared with Florida Senate. Attendance is the share with a vote recorded. Party unity counts only party-line roll calls, where most Democrats and most Republicans voted on opposite sides, and is the share of those where Calatayud voted with the majority of Florida Senate Republicans. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.

17

votes against the majority of Florida Senate Republicans

Party unity 76%, Florida Senate average 90%, ranks 35th of 39. 755 roll calls in the FL 2025–26 session.

Attendance and party unity

The thick bar is Calatayud, the thin grey bar the Florida Senate average. The scale runs from 70% to 100% to show the gap.

70%100%
Calatayud
Peers
Rank
Attendance
98.2%
95.0%
17th of 39
Party unity
76%
90%
35th of 39
Show the data
Calatayud's attendance and party unity against Florida Senate.
RowCalatayudPeers
Attendance98.2%95.0%
Party unity76%90%
What this means, and what it doesn’t

A missed roll call has many causes, from illness to campaigning, so attendance says how often, not why. A vote against the majority can be on procedure as well as substance, and many fall on roll calls where both parties split; the key votes below show the ones that decided something.

Key votes

25 roll calls the lab flagged as key in the FL 2025–26 session

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

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

Votes most often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Calatayud most often

  1. Ana Maria RodriguezR736 shared votes98%
  2. Corey SimonR739 shared votes98%
  3. Bryan ÁvilaR613 shared votes98%
  4. Nick DiCeglieR683 shared votes98%
  5. Jay CollinsR315 shared votes98%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Calatayud least often

  1. Carlos SmithD400 shared votes83%
  2. Lori BermanD734 shared votes88%
  3. Tracie DavisD615 shared votes89%
  4. Dave SmithR336 shared votes90%
  5. Rosalind OsgoodD726 shared votes90%
How to read the agreement lists

The share of roll calls both members voted on where they voted the same way, among colleagues sharing at least 50 such votes. High agreement with members of the other party is common on routine votes.

Full voting record

FL 2025–26 session, loads in batches

Back to topNext: Legislation

Legislation

Calatayud sponsored 71 bills in the FL 2025–26 session; 5 became law. Cosponsored 15 others. 69% of sponsored bills got out of committee (Florida Senate average 51%; 9th of 36).

The bills Calatayud sponsored and cosponsored in the FL 2025–26 session, from the official bill records, and how far each got: introduced, referred to or acted on in committee, passed one chamber, passed both, became law. A bill counts at every stage it has reached, so the blocks only shrink to the right.

Bills by stage

Counts for the FL 2025–26 session

Sponsored71 billsSponsored, Introduced: 7171Sponsored, In committee: 7070Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 1111Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 55Sponsored, Became law: 55Cosponsored15 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 1515Cosponsored, In committee: 1515Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 99Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 22Cosponsored, Became law: 11IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Calatayud sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored71701155
Cosponsored1515921
How to read the blocks

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

69%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

Florida Senate average 51%. Ranks 9th of 36.

Cosponsorship partners

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

  1. Joe Gruters4
  2. Carlos Smith3
  3. Darryl Rouson3
  4. Gayle Harrell3
  5. Nick DiCeglie2
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 Calatayud’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
SR 1766Promoting Stability and Democratic Values in the Western HemisphereSponsorJan 14, 2026Passed one chamberInternational Affairs(model)Adopted Mar 11, 2026
SB 1760Health Care CoverageCosponsorJan 13, 2026In committeeHealth(model)Laid on Table, companion bill(s) passed, see CS/HB 697 (Ch. 2026-4) Mar 10, 2026
SB 1718Educator Preparation and CertificationSponsorJan 9, 2026In committeeEducation(model)Laid on Table, companion bill(s) passed, see CS/HB 561 (Ch. 2026-106) Mar 5, 2026
SB 1690Child Care and Early Learning ServicesSponsorJan 9, 2026Became lawFamilies(model)Chapter No. 2026-140 Jun 12, 2026
SB 1722Application StoresSponsorJan 9, 2026In committeeScience, Technology, Communications(model)Died in Judiciary Mar 13, 2026

Back to topNext: Online

Online

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

The lab crawls Calatayud’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 Calatayud 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 Calatayud posted

No images from Calatayud’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

109 turns, Feb 8, 2023 to Mar 13, 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 Calatayud 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
7f1e874f-ae8b-42a0-90d9-fe867cf9fb45
Open States
ocd-person/7f1e874f-ae8b-42a0-90d9-fe867cf9fb45

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