Skip to content

Republican · Mississippi Senate, district 33

Serving since Jan 7, 2020MS 2025–26 session

Portrait of Jeff Tate, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
$750
in itemized contributions in the 2026 cycle, in the bottom 5% of State Senate Republicans

The median for State Senate Republicans is $46.2K. Ranks 914th of 936, where 1st raised the most. 0 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

5 measures against the Mississippi Senate. Tate missed 6.2% of 2,117 roll calls, attendance in the bottom quarter of the Mississippi Senate (average 97.1%). Tate voted against the majority of Mississippi Senate Republicans 65 times; party unity 89%, in the bottom half of the Mississippi Senate (average 88%).

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

Itemized, 2026

$750

State Senate Republicans’ median $46.2K · ranks 914th of 936

Attendance

93.8%

Mississippi Senate average 97.1% · ranks 44th of 51 · 2,117 roll calls

Party unity

89%

Mississippi Senate average 88% · ranks 37th of 51 · 65 votes against the majority of Mississippi Senate Republicans

CSIP ideology

+0.31

More liberal than 59% of State Senate Republicans · ± 0.03

Out of committee

33%

Mississippi Senate average 35% · ranks 21st of 47

Statements

No statements in this window

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

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Tate says

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

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Tate sits at +0.31 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more liberal than 59% of State Senate Republicans. Approximate range +0.28 to +0.34, which understates the uncertainty; from 35 donors and 923 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”.

+0.31

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range +0.28 to +0.34. From 35 donors and 923 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

← More liberalMore conservative →0Tate +0.3State Senate Republicans +0.4Mississippi Senate 0.0All State Senate +0.1

The outlined dot is Tate, 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 Tate’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 Tate 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 +0.4Tate +0.3Mississippi Senatemedian 0.0All State Senatemedian +0.1
Show the data
Tate's CSIP score of +0.31 placed against State Senate Republicans, Mississippi Senate, All State Senate.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Tate
State Senate Republicans1083+0.441%
Mississippi Senate510.090%
All State Senate1909+0.166%
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 Tate 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 Tate.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Tate reported $750 in the 2026 cycle, 1.6% of the State Senate Republicans’ median of $46.2K. 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
$750

itemized in the 2026 cycle

From 0 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.

PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)PACs and other committees: $750 (100.0%)
  • PACs and other committees100 squares$750
Show the data
Sources of Tate's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
PACs and other committees$750100.0%
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 Senate Republicans’ median for 2026.

2020 cycle: $16.2K$16.2K20202024 cycle: $110.3K$110.3K20242026 cycle: $750$7502026State Senate Republicans median $46.2K
Show the data
Tate's receipts by cycle against the 2026 State Senate Republicans median.
ItemValue
2020 cycle$16.2K
2024 cycle$110.3K
2026 cycle$750

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
Tate'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 Mississippi. 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. MAE-PAC$500
  2. FINANCIAL SERVICE CENTERS OF MS PAC$250

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

No employers reported.

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Tate voted with the majority of Mississippi Senate Republicans on 89% of party-line votes and missed 6.2% of 2,117 roll calls. Mississippi Senate on average: 88% party unity, 97.1% attendance. Across all roll calls, Tate voted against the majority of Mississippi Senate Republicans 65 times.

2,117 roll calls Tate could vote on in the MS 2025–26 session, compared with Mississippi 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 Tate voted with the majority of Mississippi Senate Republicans. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.

65

votes against the majority of Mississippi Senate Republicans

Party unity 89%, Mississippi Senate average 88%, ranks 37th of 51. 2,117 roll calls in the MS 2025–26 session.

Attendance and party unity

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

80%100%
Tate
Peers
Rank
Attendance
93.8%
97.1%
44th of 51
Party unity
89%
88%
37th of 51
Show the data
Tate's attendance and party unity against Mississippi Senate.
RowTatePeers
Attendance93.8%97.1%
Party unity89%88%
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 MS 2025–26 session

Key votes
Party split (yea–nay)Why it’s key
Jul 16, 2026
HB 2
Appropriation; Department of Human Services of.
Passage
YeaWith majoritypassD 13–0 · R 25–0Democrats 13 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 25 yea, 0 naybecame law · much discussed
Jul 16, 2026
HB 1
Appropriation; Department of Human Services to establish and implement youth diversion program.
Passage
YeaWith majoritypassD 14–0 · R 25–0Democrats 14 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 25 yea, 0 naybecame law · much discussed
Jul 15, 2026
SB 2001
The Mississippi Youth Court Reform Act of 2026; enact.
Passage as Amended
YeaWith majoritypassD 1–9 · R 24–1Democrats 1 yea, 9 nay; Republicans 24 yea, 1 naybecame law · party crossover
Apr 2, 2026
SB 2474
Rare Disease Task Force; establish within the Mississippi Rare Disease Advisory Council.
Adopt Conference Report
YeaWith majoritypassD 18–0 · R 34–0Democrats 18 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 34 yea, 0 naybecame law
Apr 2, 2026
HB 1761
Alcoholic beverages; extend repealers relating to festival wine permits.
Adopt Conference Report
YeaWith majoritypassD 16–2 · R 32–2Democrats 16 yea, 2 nay; Republicans 32 yea, 2 naybecame law · party 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 Tate most often

  1. Philman LadnerR1,870 shared votes98%
  2. Ben SuberR1,972 shared votes97%
  3. Neil WhaleyR1,924 shared votes97%
  4. Mike SeymourR1,957 shared votes97%
  5. Lane TaylorR1,043 shared votes97%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Tate least often

  1. Bradford BlackmonD1,980 shared votes89%
  2. Derrick SimmonsD1,874 shared votes89%
  3. Reginald JacksonD1,968 shared votes90%
  4. Albert ButlerD1,776 shared votes90%
  5. David JordanD974 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

MS 2025–26 session, loads in batches

Back to topNext: Legislation

Legislation

Tate sponsored 63 bills in the MS 2025–26 session; 5 became law. Cosponsored 84 others. 33% of sponsored bills got out of committee (Mississippi Senate average 35%; 21st of 47).

The bills Tate sponsored and cosponsored in the MS 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 MS 2025–26 session

Sponsored63 billsSponsored, Introduced: 6363Sponsored, In committee: 6363Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 2121Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 55Sponsored, Became law: 55Cosponsored84 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 8484Cosponsored, In committee: 8484Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 7777Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 5959Cosponsored, Became law: 3434IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Tate sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored63632155
Cosponsored8484775934
How to read the blocks

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

33%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

Mississippi Senate average 35%. Ranks 21st of 47.

Cosponsorship partners

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

  1. Briggs Hopson46
  2. Tyler McCaughn37
  3. Mike Seymour27
  4. Rod Hickman26
  5. Angela Hill24
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 Tate’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 81Commend West Lauderdale High School Knights Cheerleading Squad for winning a second-consecutive MHSAA 4A State Championship.CosponsorMar 17, 2026Passed one chamberUnassignedAdopted Mar 26, 2026
SR 79Commend West Lauderdale High School Boys Cross Country Team upon winning MHSAA Class 4A State Championship.CosponsorMar 17, 2026Passed one chamberUnassignedAdopted Mar 26, 2026
SR 90Congratulate former State Senator Bobby Chamberlin upon his investiture as United States District Court Judge.CosponsorMar 17, 2026Passed one chamberUnassignedAdopted Mar 26, 2026
SB 3099Appropriation; Treasurer's Office.CosponsorFeb 24, 2026Became lawGovernment Operations and Politics(model)Approved by Governor Apr 8, 2026
SB 3081Appropriation; Massage Therapy, Board of.CosponsorFeb 23, 2026Became lawHealth(model)Approved by Governor Mar 25, 2026

Back to topNext: Online

Online

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

The lab crawls Tate’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 Tate 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 Tate posted

No images from Tate’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

No transcribed state floor speeches are matched to this legislator yet.

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 Tate is most unusual among Mississippi Senate, chosen by one rule for every official of every party. The candidates are the rate of each kind of statement and of extreme labels, party unity, attendance, the small-donor share, the in-state share and total receipts of the latest cycle, the share of sponsored bills that got out of committee, talk-to-bills agreement, and the CSIP score’s place within the party group.

The builder ranks every measure within the same peer group the page compares it with, and writes each official’s percentile: the share of the group below the value, ties counting half, so 0.5 is the median and a value shared by many never ranks first. A measure’s score is how far that percentile sits from the median (0 in the middle, 0.5 at either end), and the highest score leads if it is above 0.25, outside the middle half of the group. Scores within 0.03 of each other are a tie, broken in this order: votes against the party majority, kinds of statement, ideology, roll calls missed, small donations, in-state money, legislation, agreement, extreme labels, receipts.

A measure counts only with at least 200 statements, 100 roll calls or 5 sponsored bills behind it and a peer group of at least 10. Two things never lead: high party unity or attendance, where most members sit, and a high rate of a kind of statement backed by fewer than 10 statements. When nothing qualifies, the headline is a neutral fact instead: statements classified, or years in office. The wording always names the direction (“in the bottom 5% of …”, “votes against the majority of …”).

Identifiers

Profile id
9839c663-7ae3-4437-82d8-c985975309d8
Open States
ocd-person/9839c663-7ae3-4437-82d8-c985975309d8

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