8.1% of 1,303 statements use an extreme label (105 statements); the average for House Republicans is 3.0%. Ranks 13th of 221, where 1st is the highest rate. Most often aimed at Democrats.
An AI model reads each of Babin’s posts on X, press releases, Congressional Record speeches and newsletters and marks whether it calls a politician, party or policy far left, far right, MAGA, extreme, radical, woke, fascist or communist. The rate is the share of statements marked; it is compared with the average among House Republicans and ranked against the same group.
0
At a glance
6 measures against House Republicans. 4.5% of Babin’s statements contain a personal attack, 2.1 times the House Republican average of 2.1%. 5.9% of the 17 bills Babin sponsored got out of committee, in the bottom quarter of House Republicans.
The measures on which Babin sits furthest from the middle of House Republicans, each against the same group, with the CSIP score when there is one. Every number is explained in its own section below.
Extreme labels
8.1%
House Republicans average 3.0% · ranks 13th of 221
Personal attacks
4.5%
House Republicans average 2.1% · ranks 35th of 221
Out of committee
5.9%
House Republicans average 17% · ranks 186th of 216
CSIP ideology
+1.25
More conservative than 80% of House Republicans · ± 0.01
Small donations, 2026
1.5%
House Republicans’ median 9.4% · ranks 178th of 220
Bipartisanship
4.2%
House Republicans average 8.9% · ranks 175th of 221
Peer group: House Republicans. Rank 1 is the highest value in the group; the thick bar is Babin, the thin grey bar the peer average. The headline is the measure on which Babin is most unusual among peers (Methods, §08).
Babin stresses bipartisanship less than 78% of House Republicans. Bipartisanship in 4.2% of 1,303 statements, against 8.9% for the average House Republican; 175th of 221.
An AI model reads each of Babin’s 1,303 statements in the 119th Congress (1,051 posts on X, 118 Congressional Record speeches, 93 newsletters, 41 press releases) 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 House Republicans and ranked among them.
Kinds of statement
Share of statements carrying each label, the 119th Congress
Babin
House Republicans, average of 221
0%20%40%60%80%
Babin
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion812 statements
62%
68%
172nd of 221
Credit claiming440 statements
34%
37%
136th of 221
Policy criticism202 statements
16%
15%
90th of 221
Personal attacks58 statements
4%
2%
35th of 221
Bipartisanship55 statements
4%
9%
175th of 221
+ Show the data
Babin's share of statements in each category against the House Republicans average.
Row
Babin
Peers
Policy discussion
62%
68%
Credit claiming
34%
37%
Policy criticism
16%
15%
Personal attacks
4%
2%
Bipartisanship
4%
9%
1,303
statements classified
1,051 posts on X, 118 Congressional Record speeches, 93 newsletters, 41 press releases.
posts on X
Congressional Record speeches
newsletters
press releases
+ Show the data
Babin's statements by source
Part
Value
posts on X
1,051
Congressional Record speeches
118
newsletters
93
press releases
41
+ − How to read the bars
The thick bar is Babin; the thin grey bar is the average House Republicans. A longer thick bar means Babin does this more than peers. Rank 1 is the highest rate in the group.
Extreme labels
Babin used extreme labels in 8.1% of statements, 2.7 times the peer average. 105 statements, most often aimed at Democrats; peers 3.0%.
“radical”45
“woke”15
“communist”13
“far left”6
“extreme”4
Who gets the labels
Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements
Democrats10
Left5
Radical Left3
Democrat Party2
EV mandate2
+ − 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 119th Congress
+ Show the data
Monthly rates for Babin, each row shaded against its own peak, with statement volume. Months with fewer than 10 statements are left blank.
Column
Statements
Personal attacks
Policy criticism
Policy discussion
Bipartisanship
Credit claiming
Extreme labels
Jan ’25
95
9.5%
27.4%
71.6%
0.0%
44.2%
9.5%
Feb ’25
98
7.1%
26.5%
62.2%
3.1%
53.1%
10.2%
Mar ’25
150
4.7%
13.3%
62.0%
10.7%
35.3%
9.3%
Apr ’25
93
4.3%
10.8%
58.1%
3.2%
30.1%
10.8%
May ’25
86
3.5%
14.0%
57.0%
3.5%
33.7%
8.1%
Jun ’25
71
4.2%
19.7%
60.6%
1.4%
19.7%
11.3%
Jul ’25
65
10.8%
4.6%
52.3%
3.1%
36.9%
4.6%
Aug ’25
51
7.8%
7.8%
52.9%
2.0%
35.3%
5.9%
Sep ’25
63
3.2%
19.1%
47.6%
1.6%
27.0%
11.1%
Oct ’25
62
8.1%
32.3%
58.1%
1.6%
19.4%
11.3%
Nov ’25
54
0.0%
20.4%
57.4%
9.3%
27.8%
14.8%
Dec ’25
43
4.7%
23.3%
58.1%
4.7%
23.3%
9.3%
Jan ’26
51
0.0%
3.9%
76.5%
0.0%
41.2%
0.0%
Feb ’26
65
0.0%
16.9%
60.0%
10.8%
29.2%
3.1%
Mar ’26
41
0.0%
19.5%
56.1%
4.9%
29.3%
4.9%
Apr ’26
34
2.9%
0.0%
70.6%
0.0%
17.6%
0.0%
May ’26
34
0.0%
5.9%
64.7%
2.9%
44.1%
5.9%
Jun ’26
37
2.7%
10.8%
73.0%
5.4%
40.5%
13.5%
Jul ’26
33
3.0%
12.1%
69.7%
12.1%
42.4%
3.0%
Aug ’26
27
0.0%
7.4%
85.2%
0.0%
29.6%
3.7%
Sep ’26
32
3.1%
3.1%
84.4%
3.1%
28.1%
3.1%
Oct ’26
18
5.6%
0.0%
77.8%
0.0%
38.9%
5.6%
+ − 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 119th Congress, 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%.
In Babin’s words
Real statements from the classifier’s example set, with the labels it assigned
Personal attacks
Promises Made, Promises Kept
For years, Texans were forced to pay the price for Sleepy Joe Biden's failure to secure o
Babin Bulletin | October 4, 2026
Click here if you have trouble viewing this email<https://babin.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=MF2UVYGGSHYYC6R7YFVEGHZ6L4>
[Representative Brian…
Oct 4, 2026 · Newsletters · personal attacks; policy discussion; credit claiming; Immigration; Armed Forces and National Security; Crime and Law Enforcement; Taxation; Economics and Public Finance; Energy; target: Joe Biden
Bipartisanship
Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S 283, the Illegal Red Snapper and Tuna Enforcement Act, as amended. This bill directs the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to develo…
Sep 14, 2026 · Congressional Record · policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Agriculture and Food; Crime and Law Enforcement; Science, Technology, Communications · Source
Extreme label
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Oct 2, 2026 · Posts on X · policy discussion; credit claiming; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; extreme label “radical” aimed at leftist ideology · Source
Examples by category
Up to five recent statements in each category
Overtly questions a named person’s character, integrity or loyalty, or calls them names. Criticising a record or a policy does not count.
·Newsletters
Promises Made, Promises Kept
For years, Texans were forced to pay the price for Sleepy Joe Biden's failure to secure o
Babin Bulletin | October 4, 2026
Click here if you have trouble viewing this email<https://babin.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=MF2UVYGGSHYYC6R7YFVEGHZ6L4>
[Representative Brian Babin] <https://babin.house.gov/components/redirect/r.aspx?ID=17828-1134640>
Promises Made, Promises Kept
Dear politi…
personal attacks · policy discussion · credit claiming · Immigration · Armed Forces and National Security · Crime and Law Enforcement · Taxation · Economics and Public Finance · Energy · target: Joe Biden
·Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · Armed Forces and National Security · target: Kathy HochulSource ↗
·Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · Government Operations and Politics · Finance and Financial Sector · target: DemocratsSource ↗
·Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy criticism · policy discussion · Government Operations and Politics · target: Senate ParliamentarianSource ↗
·Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Five statements at a time, newest first; filters apply to the statements loaded so far. Export saves the statements that match. Sources: 1,051 posts on X, 118 Congressional Record speeches, 93 newsletters, 41 press releases.
Immigration is what Babin talks about most: 23% of policy statements, above the peer share. Talk and legislation agree at 0.66 on a 0–1 scale (House Republicans average 0.64; 95th of 221).
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 Babin talks about. The bills Babin sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.
What Babin talks about
Share of policy statements by area, the 119th Congress
Babin
House Republicans average
0%9%18%26%35%
Babin
Peers
Immigration184 statements
23%
13%
Armed Forces and National Security163 statements
20%
24%
Science, Technology, Communications146 statements
18%
7%
Economics and Public Finance125 statements
15%
19%
Government Operations and Politics115 statements
14%
19%
+ Show the data
Policy areas Babin talks about, as a share of policy statements, against the House Republicans average.
Row
Babin
Peers
Immigration
23%
13%
Armed Forces and National Security
20%
24%
Science, Technology, Communications
18%
7%
Economics and Public Finance
15%
19%
Government Operations and Politics
14%
19%
+ − How to read the bars
The thick bar is the share of Babin’s policy statements in an area; the thin grey bar is the average share for 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 35%. Grey ticks are the House Republicans averages.
Statements
Bills
House Republicans
+ Show the data
Babin's share of statements against share of bills in each policy area.
Area
Talks about
House Republicans, talks about
Legislates on
House Republicans, legislates on
Immigration
23%
13%
13%
5%
Armed Forces and National Security
20%
24%
5%
8%
Science, Technology, Communications
18%
7%
4%
3%
Economics and Public Finance
15%
19%
0%
2%
Government Operations and Politics
14%
19%
15%
12%
0.66
talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1
House Republicans average 0.64. Ranks 95th of 221.
+ − What agreement means, and what it doesn’t
Agreement is 1 minus the distance between the two distributions (Jensen–Shannon): 1 means Babin legislates on exactly the areas Babin 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 Babin sponsored count fully, cosponsored bills a quarter. Shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.
Babin sits at +1.25 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more conservative than 80% of House Republicans. Approximate range +1.24 to +1.26, which understates the uncertainty; from 1,773 donors and 6,227 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”.
+1.25
CSIP ideal point
Approximate range +1.24 to +1.26. From 1,773 donors and 6,227 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.
The outlined dot is Babin, 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 Babin’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 Babin sits
Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale
House Republicans221 · median +1.0
All House439 · median +0.3
+ Show the data
Babin's CSIP score of +1.25 placed against House Republicans, All House.
Group
Officials
Median
Share left of Babin
House Republicans
221
+1.0
80%
All House
439
+0.3
90%
+ − 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 Babin 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 Babin.
Babin raised $1.2M in the 2026 cycle, below the House Republicans’ median of $2.2M. 1.5% of individual money came in gifts of $200 or less. 39% of itemized individual money came from Texas.
Campaign money from Federal Election Commission 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.
$1.2M
raised in the 2026 cycle
From 219 itemized donors. House Republicans’ median $2.2M.
Where the money came from
Each square is one percent of 2026-cycle receipts, from FEC summary totals.
Itemized individual (over $200)22 squares$262.6K
Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)$4,078
PACs and other committees44 squares$531.6K
Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)34 squares$402.8K
+ Show the data
Sources of Babin's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
Source
Amount
Share
Itemized individual (over $200)
$262.6K
21.9%
Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)
$4,078
0.3%
PACs and other committees
$531.6K
44.3%
Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)
$402.8K
33.5%
+ − 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. The small-donor share understates small giving when a campaign itemizes gifts made through ActBlue or WinRed.
Receipts by cycle
Total receipts, 2020 to 2026. The grey line is the House Republicans’ median for 2026.
+ Show the data
Babin's receipts by cycle against the 2026 House Republicans median.
Item
Value
2020 cycle
$1.4M
2022 cycle
$1.1M
2024 cycle
$1.2M
2026 cycle
$1.2M
Top donor states, 2026
Itemized contributions by donor state. 39% came from Texas.
Texas$89.4K
Virginia$29.0K
California$24.4K
Florida$17.3K
Nevada$14.3K
Small donations
Gifts of $200 or less as a share of individual money, by cycle. The thin grey bar is the 2026 House Republicans’ median.
Babin
Median
0%20%40%60%
Babin
Median
2026
2%
9%
2024
4%
9%
2022
7%
9%
2020
10%
9%
+ Show the data
Small-donor share by cycle against the House Republicans median
Row
Babin
Median
2026 cycle
2%
9%
2024 cycle
4%
9%
2022 cycle
7%
9%
2020 cycle
10%
9%
Where itemized donors live
Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state
Itemized dollars$250$89.4Kno data
+ Show the data
Babin's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
State
Value
Texas
$89.4K
Virginia
$29.0K
California
$24.4K
Florida
$17.3K
Nevada
$14.3K
District of Columbia
$9,750
North Carolina
$8,301
Colorado
$5,000
New York
$4,258
Illinois
$4,091
Pennsylvania
$3,030
Maryland
$1,800
Alabama
$1,260
Rhode Island
$1,250
Wisconsin
$1,020
Arizona
$1,020
Delaware
$1,000
South Carolina
$1,000
Louisiana
$1,000
Ohio
$780
Connecticut
$770
Georgia
$770
Minnesota
$520
Michigan
$510
Massachusetts
$510
Kansas
$510
Tennessee
$510
New Hampshire
$500
Missouri
$500
West Virginia
$500
Alaska
$260
Idaho
$260
Oregon
$260
Indiana
$260
New Jersey
$260
Kentucky
$250
New Mexico
$250
Maine
No data
Vermont
No data
Washington
No data
Montana
No data
North Dakota
No data
Wyoming
No data
South Dakota
No data
Iowa
No data
Utah
No data
Nebraska
No data
Arkansas
No data
Oklahoma
No data
Mississippi
No data
Hawaii
No data
219
itemized donors
People who gave more than $200
39%
from Texas
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 Texas. Gifts of $200 or less carry no address and are left out.
Donors’ ideology
Distribution of itemized donors’ own CSIP scores
+ Show the data
Ideology of Babin's itemized donors in 2026, from −1.00 to +1.50: 8.0% between −0.25 and 0.00, 7.2% between 0.00 and +0.25, 5.3% between +0.25 and +0.50, 6.7% between +0.50 and +0.75, 29% between +0.75 and +1.00, 19% between +1.00 and +1.25, 22% between +1.25 and +1.50.
Item
Value
CSIP −1.00 to −0.75
0.4%
CSIP −0.75 to −0.50
1.1%
CSIP −0.50 to −0.25
0.5%
CSIP −0.25 to 0.00
8.0%
CSIP 0.00 to +0.25
7.2%
CSIP +0.25 to +0.50
5.3%
CSIP +0.50 to +0.75
6.7%
CSIP +0.75 to +1.00
29%
CSIP +1.00 to +1.25
19%
CSIP +1.25 to +1.50
22%
+ − How to read the columns
Donors who give to many candidates get their own CSIP score. Each column is the share of Babin’s itemized money from donors in that part of the scale, blue left of 0 and red right of 0, deeper further out; Babin’s own score is +1.25.
Top donor occupations
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
RETIRED$27.0K 26 donors
DENTIST$19.1K 45 donors
CEO$18.0K 10 donors
PRESIDENT$8,019 7 donors
GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS$8,000 3 donors
Top committees
PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGEONS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$10.0K
AMERICAN CHEMISTRY COUNCIL PAC$10.0K
ANTI-WOKE FUND$10.0K
CHENIERE ENERGY, INC. PAC$10.0K
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC. TECHNOLOGIES PUBLIC AFFAIRS COUNCIL (HONPAC)$10.0K
Top employers
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
ANDREESSEN HOROWITZ$21.0K 3 donors
AXIOM SPACE$5,143 7 donors
VAN SCOYOC ASSOCIATES$2,500 3 donors
ARTEMIS GROUP$1,500 3 donors
Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.
Babin voted with the majority of House Republicans on 99.1% of party-line votes and missed 2.1% of 674 roll calls. House Republicans on average: 97.1% party unity, 96.3% attendance. Across all roll calls, Babin voted against the majority of House Republicans 14 times.
674 roll calls Babin could vote on in the 119th Congress, compared with House Republicans. 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 Babin voted with the majority of House Republicans. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.
14
votes against the majority of House Republicans
Party unity 99.1%, House Republicans average 97.1%, ranks 50th of 221. 674 roll calls in the 119th Congress.
Attendance and party unity
The thick bar is Babin, the thin grey bar the House Republicans average. The scale runs from 80% to 100% to show the gap.
Babin
House Republicans, average of 221
80%90%100%
Babin
Peers
Rank
Attendance
97.9%
96.3%
118th of 221
Party unity
99.1%
97.1%
50th of 221
+ Show the data
Babin's attendance and party unity against House Republicans.
Row
Babin
Peers
Attendance
97.9%
96.3%
Party unity
99.1%
97.1%
+ − 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 119th Congress
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to the “California State Nonroad Engine Pollution Control Standards; Commercial Harbor Craft Regulations; Notice of Decision”
On Passage
Yea
With majority
Passed
D 3–207 · R 210–1 · I 1–0Democrats 3 yea, 207 nay; Republicans 210 yea, 1 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nay
An Act to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow early childhood educators to take the educator expense deduction, and for other purposes
On Motion to Concur in the Senate Amendments
Yea
With majority
Passed
D 58–152 · R 203–7 · I 1–0Democrats 58 yea, 152 nay; Republicans 203 yea, 7 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nay
became 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 Babin most often
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.
Babin sponsored 17 bills in the 119th Congress; none became law. Cosponsored 268 others. 5.9% of sponsored bills got out of committee (House Republicans average 17%; 186th of 216).
The bills Babin sponsored and cosponsored in the 119th Congress, 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 119th Congress
Sponsored
Cosponsored
+ Show the data
Bills Babin sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
Role
Introduced
In committee
Passed one chamber
Passed both chambers
Became law
Sponsored
17
17
0
0
0
Cosponsored
268
268
31
2
2
+ − How to read the blocks
Ink blocks are bills Babin sponsored, ochre blocks bills Babin cosponsored; the figure above each block is the count. Most bills in any legislature never leave committee, so a short staircase is the norm.
5.9%
of sponsored bills got out of committee
House Republicans average 17%. Ranks 186th of 216.
Cosponsorship partners
Colleagues who most often cosponsor with Babin, by number of shared bills in the 119th Congress; the square shows their party.
Republican
Randy Weber Sr.54
Brandon Gill34
Mary Miller34
Barry Moore34
Troy Nehls31
+ − 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 Babin’s bills; the toggle shows more.
Bill list
Sponsored and cosponsored, with status and policy area; five are shown, the toggle shows the rest
Recognizing the 50th anniversary of the Hyde Amendment and its enduring legacy of saving the lives of more than 2,600,000 unborn children and respecting the conscience rights of the American people.
Cosponsor
Sep 24, 2026
In committee
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Sep 24, 2026
A site that changed 38 times in 90 days. Babin’s official site had 40 pages when last crawled on Oct 25, 2026. The lab last catalogued the images Babin posted on Oct 26, 2026.
The lab crawls Babin’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 Babin posts with a vision model.
“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.
Football players from two teams and officials gather at midfield on a large red, black, and white field logo. Several people stand nearby on the field. There is text on players’ uniforms.View post ↗
02
A large building is engulfed in flames at night, with fire and thick smoke rising from its roof and central tower. Power lines cross the foreground. No visible text.View post ↗
03
A dark blue formal pledge document with a large title, several paragraphs and six numbered commitments about preventing fraud in government benefit programs. A presidential seal appears in the upper right, with decorative eagle imagery and two handwritten signatures near the bottom. The image contains extensive text.View post ↗
04
A commemorative political graphic with a faded illustration of a sailing ship in the background, a large quotation attributed to a former U.S. president, and a congressional campaign logo at the bottom. Text is prominent.View post ↗
05
A group of seven adults pose for a photograph in front of a museum entrance. A display case and framed items are visible nearby. There is text above the entrance.View post ↗
+ − 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.
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 Babin is most unusual among House 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 …”).
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 (Congress)Sep 30, 202628 days agoVoteview roll calls, 113th Congress (2013) on.
Campaign money (FEC)Oct 22, 20266 days agoFEC committee financial summaries (totals, small donations) and itemized contributions (donor counts, states, employers), cycles 2020-2026; 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.
ImagesOct 28, 2026todayImages in members' tweets with vision-model descriptions.
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
