Skip to content

Democrat · U.S. House, Vermont at large

Serving since Jan 3, 2023119th Congress (2025–27)next election Nov 3, 2026

Bioguide B001318FEC H2VT01076

Portrait of Becca Balint, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
12%
of statements claim credit, in the bottom tenth of House Democrats

12% of 1,523 statements claim credit (184 statements); the average for House Democrats is 23%. Ranks 201st of 216, where 1st is the highest rate.

An AI model reads each of Balint’s Congressional Record speeches, posts on X, press releases and newsletters and marks whether it claims credit for an accomplishment. The rate is the share of statements marked; it is compared with the average among House Democrats and ranked against the same group.

At a glance

6 measures against House Democrats. Balint sits at −1.37 on the CSIP scale, more liberal than 94% of House Democrats. 14% of Balint’s statements contain a personal attack, 2.1 times the House Democrat average of 6.6%.

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

Party unity

100%

House Democrats average 96.4% · ranks 10th of 217 · 12 votes against the majority of House Democrats

Credit claiming

12%

House Democrats average 23% · ranks 201st of 216

CSIP ideology

−1.37

More liberal than 94% of House Democrats · ± 0.03

Personal attacks

14%

House Democrats average 6.6% · ranks 23rd of 216

Bipartisanship

5.1%

House Democrats average 9.8% · ranks 181st of 216

Small donations, 2026

28%

House Democrats’ median 13% · ranks 35th of 214

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

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Balint says

Balint attacks opponents personally more than 89% of House Democrats. Personal attacks in 14% of 1,523 statements, against 6.6% for the average House Democrat; 23rd of 216.

An AI model reads each of Balint’s 1,523 statements in the 119th Congress (1,231 posts on X, 151 press releases, 79 newsletters, 62 Congressional Record speeches) 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 Democrats and ranked among them.

Kinds of statement

Share of statements carrying each label, the 119th Congress

0%80%
Balint
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion1,058 statements
69%
73%
158th of 216
Policy criticism411 statements
27%
28%
130th of 216
Personal attacks212 statements
14%
7%
23rd of 216
Credit claiming184 statements
12%
23%
201st of 216
Bipartisanship77 statements
5%
10%
181st of 216
Show the data
Balint's share of statements in each category against the House Democrats average.
RowBalintPeers
Policy discussion69%73%
Policy criticism27%28%
Personal attacks14%7%
Credit claiming12%23%
Bipartisanship5%10%
1,523

statements classified

1,231 posts on X, 151 press releases, 79 newsletters, 62 Congressional Record speeches.

posts on X: 1,231 (80.8%)posts on X 1,231press releases: 151 (9.9%)newsletters: 79 (5.2%)Congressional Record speeches: 62 (4.1%)
Show the data
Balint's statements by source
PartValue
posts on X1,231
press releases151
newsletters79
Congressional Record speeches62
How to read the bars

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

Extreme labels

Balint used extreme labels in 2.3% of statements, above the peer average. 35 statements, most often aimed at Trump; peers 1.9%.

  1. “extreme”9
  2. “fascist”4
  3. “MAGA”2
  4. “far right”2
  5. “radical”1

Who gets the labels

Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements

  1. Trump3
  2. Republicans2
  3. Trump administration2
  4. anti-abortion extremists1
  5. anti-choice extremists1
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

Statements2025-01: 772025-02: 882025-03: 622025-04: 652025-05: 622025-06: 522025-07: 692025-08: 282025-09: 452025-10: 532025-11: 452025-12: 532026-01: 792026-02: 652026-03: 462026-04: 762026-05: 1112026-06: 1002026-07: 1062026-08: 592026-09: 1022026-10: 80peak 111 · May ’26Personal attackspeak 30.6% · Mar ’25 · latest 8.8%Personal attacks, 2025-01: 16.9% of 77Personal attacks, 2025-02: 17.1% of 88Personal attacks, 2025-03: 30.6% of 62Personal attacks, 2025-04: 15.4% of 65Personal attacks, 2025-05: 19.4% of 62Personal attacks, 2025-06: 15.4% of 52Personal attacks, 2025-07: 11.6% of 69Personal attacks, 2025-08: 10.7% of 28Personal attacks, 2025-09: 6.7% of 45Personal attacks, 2025-10: 11.3% of 53Personal attacks, 2025-11: 8.9% of 45Personal attacks, 2025-12: 18.9% of 53Personal attacks, 2026-01: 13.9% of 79Personal attacks, 2026-02: 10.8% of 65Personal attacks, 2026-03: 6.5% of 46Personal attacks, 2026-04: 15.8% of 76Personal attacks, 2026-05: 13.5% of 111Personal attacks, 2026-06: 14.0% of 100Personal attacks, 2026-07: 11.3% of 106Personal attacks, 2026-08: 13.6% of 59Personal attacks, 2026-09: 11.8% of 102Personal attacks, 2026-10: 8.8% of 80Policy criticismpeak 43.5% · Jul ’25 · latest 12.5%Policy criticism, 2025-01: 32.5% of 77Policy criticism, 2025-02: 37.5% of 88Policy criticism, 2025-03: 24.2% of 62Policy criticism, 2025-04: 23.1% of 65Policy criticism, 2025-05: 40.3% of 62Policy criticism, 2025-06: 28.8% of 52Policy criticism, 2025-07: 43.5% of 69Policy criticism, 2025-08: 35.7% of 28Policy criticism, 2025-09: 33.3% of 45Policy criticism, 2025-10: 20.8% of 53Policy criticism, 2025-11: 24.4% of 45Policy criticism, 2025-12: 18.9% of 53Policy criticism, 2026-01: 13.9% of 79Policy criticism, 2026-02: 23.1% of 65Policy criticism, 2026-03: 37.0% of 46Policy criticism, 2026-04: 25.0% of 76Policy criticism, 2026-05: 29.7% of 111Policy criticism, 2026-06: 39.0% of 100Policy criticism, 2026-07: 27.4% of 106Policy criticism, 2026-08: 13.6% of 59Policy criticism, 2026-09: 14.7% of 102Policy criticism, 2026-10: 12.5% of 80Policy discussionpeak 87.5% · Oct ’26 · latest 87.5%Policy discussion, 2025-01: 68.8% of 77Policy discussion, 2025-02: 67.0% of 88Policy discussion, 2025-03: 56.5% of 62Policy discussion, 2025-04: 61.5% of 65Policy discussion, 2025-05: 72.6% of 62Policy discussion, 2025-06: 75.0% of 52Policy discussion, 2025-07: 78.3% of 69Policy discussion, 2025-08: 64.3% of 28Policy discussion, 2025-09: 55.6% of 45Policy discussion, 2025-10: 50.9% of 53Policy discussion, 2025-11: 60.0% of 45Policy discussion, 2025-12: 66.0% of 53Policy discussion, 2026-01: 82.3% of 79Policy discussion, 2026-02: 55.4% of 65Policy discussion, 2026-03: 56.5% of 46Policy discussion, 2026-04: 76.3% of 76Policy discussion, 2026-05: 58.6% of 111Policy discussion, 2026-06: 67.0% of 100Policy discussion, 2026-07: 84.0% of 106Policy discussion, 2026-08: 76.3% of 59Policy discussion, 2026-09: 78.4% of 102Policy discussion, 2026-10: 87.5% of 80Bipartisanshippeak 9.1% · Jan ’25 · latest 8.8%Bipartisanship, 2025-01: 9.1% of 77Bipartisanship, 2025-02: 4.5% of 88Bipartisanship, 2025-03: 8.1% of 62Bipartisanship, 2025-04: 0.0% of 65Bipartisanship, 2025-05: 1.6% of 62Bipartisanship, 2025-06: 3.9% of 52Bipartisanship, 2025-07: 2.9% of 69Bipartisanship, 2025-08: 3.6% of 28Bipartisanship, 2025-09: 8.9% of 45Bipartisanship, 2025-10: 0.0% of 53Bipartisanship, 2025-11: 2.2% of 45Bipartisanship, 2025-12: 7.5% of 53Bipartisanship, 2026-01: 5.1% of 79Bipartisanship, 2026-02: 3.1% of 65Bipartisanship, 2026-03: 4.3% of 46Bipartisanship, 2026-04: 4.0% of 76Bipartisanship, 2026-05: 5.4% of 111Bipartisanship, 2026-06: 6.0% of 100Bipartisanship, 2026-07: 8.5% of 106Bipartisanship, 2026-08: 5.1% of 59Bipartisanship, 2026-09: 3.9% of 102Bipartisanship, 2026-10: 8.8% of 80Credit claimingpeak 23.6% · Jul ’26 · latest 18.8%Credit claiming, 2025-01: 13.0% of 77Credit claiming, 2025-02: 14.8% of 88Credit claiming, 2025-03: 12.9% of 62Credit claiming, 2025-04: 7.7% of 65Credit claiming, 2025-05: 4.8% of 62Credit claiming, 2025-06: 11.5% of 52Credit claiming, 2025-07: 4.3% of 69Credit claiming, 2025-08: 3.6% of 28Credit claiming, 2025-09: 6.7% of 45Credit claiming, 2025-10: 5.7% of 53Credit claiming, 2025-11: 20.0% of 45Credit claiming, 2025-12: 9.4% of 53Credit claiming, 2026-01: 8.9% of 79Credit claiming, 2026-02: 4.6% of 65Credit claiming, 2026-03: 6.5% of 46Credit claiming, 2026-04: 6.6% of 76Credit claiming, 2026-05: 13.5% of 111Credit claiming, 2026-06: 20.0% of 100Credit claiming, 2026-07: 23.6% of 106Credit claiming, 2026-08: 11.9% of 59Credit claiming, 2026-09: 14.7% of 102Credit claiming, 2026-10: 18.8% of 80Extreme labelspeak 11.3% · Mar ’25 · latest 0.0%Extreme labels, 2025-01: 6.5% of 77Extreme labels, 2025-02: 1.1% of 88Extreme labels, 2025-03: 11.3% of 62Extreme labels, 2025-04: 4.6% of 65Extreme labels, 2025-05: 6.5% of 62Extreme labels, 2025-06: 5.8% of 52Extreme labels, 2025-07: 1.5% of 69Extreme labels, 2025-08: 3.6% of 28Extreme labels, 2025-09: 2.2% of 45Extreme labels, 2025-10: 0.0% of 53Extreme labels, 2025-11: 0.0% of 45Extreme labels, 2025-12: 1.9% of 53Extreme labels, 2026-01: 1.3% of 79Extreme labels, 2026-02: 4.6% of 65Extreme labels, 2026-03: 4.3% of 46Extreme labels, 2026-04: 0.0% of 76Extreme labels, 2026-05: 1.8% of 111Extreme labels, 2026-06: 0.0% of 100Extreme labels, 2026-07: 0.0% of 106Extreme labels, 2026-08: 0.0% of 59Extreme labels, 2026-09: 0.0% of 102Extreme labels, 2026-10: 0.0% of 80Jan ’25Jul ’25Jan ’26Jul ’26Oct ’26
Show the data
Monthly rates for Balint, each row shaded against its own peak, with statement volume. Months with fewer than 10 statements are left blank.
ColumnStatementsPersonal attacksPolicy criticismPolicy discussionBipartisanshipCredit claimingExtreme labels
Jan ’257716.9%32.5%68.8%9.1%13.0%6.5%
Feb ’258817.1%37.5%67.0%4.5%14.8%1.1%
Mar ’256230.6%24.2%56.5%8.1%12.9%11.3%
Apr ’256515.4%23.1%61.5%0.0%7.7%4.6%
May ’256219.4%40.3%72.6%1.6%4.8%6.5%
Jun ’255215.4%28.8%75.0%3.9%11.5%5.8%
Jul ’256911.6%43.5%78.3%2.9%4.3%1.5%
Aug ’252810.7%35.7%64.3%3.6%3.6%3.6%
Sep ’25456.7%33.3%55.6%8.9%6.7%2.2%
Oct ’255311.3%20.8%50.9%0.0%5.7%0.0%
Nov ’25458.9%24.4%60.0%2.2%20.0%0.0%
Dec ’255318.9%18.9%66.0%7.5%9.4%1.9%
Jan ’267913.9%13.9%82.3%5.1%8.9%1.3%
Feb ’266510.8%23.1%55.4%3.1%4.6%4.6%
Mar ’26466.5%37.0%56.5%4.3%6.5%4.3%
Apr ’267615.8%25.0%76.3%4.0%6.6%0.0%
May ’2611113.5%29.7%58.6%5.4%13.5%1.8%
Jun ’2610014.0%39.0%67.0%6.0%20.0%0.0%
Jul ’2610611.3%27.4%84.0%8.5%23.6%0.0%
Aug ’265913.6%13.6%76.3%5.1%11.9%0.0%
Sep ’2610211.8%14.7%78.4%3.9%14.7%0.0%
Oct ’26808.8%12.5%87.5%8.8%18.8%0.0%
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 Balint’s words

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

Bipartisanship

NEW REPORT: WEAK TRUMP ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT AND BACKROOM DEALS ARE DRIVING UP COSTS FOR AMERICAN FAMILIES TEXT OF REPORT WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Representative Becca Balint (VT-AL) and Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) released a new report, Settling For Less: How Trump’s weak antitrust enforceme…

Oct 22, 2026 · Press releases · policy discussion; bipartisanship; Commerce; Government Operations and Politics; Housing and Community Development; Health; Agriculture and Food · Source

Personal attacks

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

Oct 22, 2026 · Posts on X · personal attacks; policy discussion; Commerce; Government Operations and Politics · Source

Extreme label

The Highs and Lows of this Week in DC I want to take this time before the weekend to share with you the steps I took to fight f Enews Sign Up<https://balint.house.gov/components/redirect/r.aspx?ID=1614-1875274> | Visit My Website<https://balint.house.gov/components/redirect/r.aspx?ID=1615-1875274>…

May 22, 2026 · Newsletters · policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Armed Forces and National Security; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; Economics and Public Finance; Emergency Management; Education; Immigration; Health; Housing and Community Development; extreme label “extreme” aimed at trans bill

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.

  1. Posts on X

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

    personal attacks · policy discussion · Commerce · Government Operations and PoliticsSource

  2. 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 · Crime and Law Enforcement · target: Alina HabbaSource

  3. Posts on X

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

    personal attacks · policy discussion · Economics and Public Finance · target: Donald TrumpSource

  4. 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 · International Affairs · target: Pete HegsethSource

  5. Posts on X

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

    personal attacks · policy discussion · Immigration · target: Stephen MillerSource

All 1,523 statements

Newest first, the 119th Congress

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: 1,231 posts on X, 151 press releases, 79 newsletters, 62 Congressional Record speeches.

Back to topNext: Policy

Policy

Health is what Balint talks about most: 25% of policy statements. Talk and legislation agree at 0.67 on a 0–1 scale (House Democrats average 0.67; 130th of 216).

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 Balint talks about. The bills Balint sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.

What Balint talks about

Share of policy statements by area, the 119th Congress

0%35%
Balint
Peers
Health268 statements
25%
26%
Economics and Public Finance221 statements
21%
20%
Government Operations and Politics221 statements
21%
20%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues213 statements
20%
13%
Immigration148 statements
14%
11%
Show the data
Policy areas Balint talks about, as a share of policy statements, against the House Democrats average.
RowBalintPeers
Health25%26%
Economics and Public Finance21%20%
Government Operations and Politics21%20%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues20%13%
Immigration14%11%
How to read the bars

The thick bar is the share of Balint’s policy statements in an area; the thin grey bar is the average share for House Democrats. 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 Democrats averages.

Talks aboutLegislates onHealthHealth, talks about: 25% (House Democrats 26%)25%Health, legislates on: 25% (House Democrats 16%)25%Economics and Public FinanceEconomics and Public Finance, talks about: 21% (House Democrats 20%)21%Economics and Public Finance, legislates on: 0% (House Democrats 1%)0%Government Operations andPoliticsGovernment Operations and Politics, talks about: 21% (House Democrats 20%)21%Government Operations and Politics, legislates on: 7% (House Democrats 11%)7%Civil Rights and Liberties,Minority IssuesCivil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues, talks about: 20% (House Democrats 13%)20%Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues, legislates on: 7% (House Democrats 5%)7%ImmigrationImmigration, talks about: 14% (House Democrats 11%)14%Immigration, legislates on: 4% (House Democrats 4%)4%
Show the data
Balint's share of statements against share of bills in each policy area.
AreaTalks aboutHouse Democrats, talks aboutLegislates onHouse Democrats, legislates on
Health25%26%25%16%
Economics and Public Finance21%20%0%1%
Government Operations and Politics21%20%7%11%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues20%13%7%5%
Immigration14%11%4%4%
0.67

talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1

House Democrats average 0.67. Ranks 130th of 216.

What agreement means, and what it doesn’t

Agreement is 1 minus the distance between the two distributions (Jensen–Shannon): 1 means Balint legislates on exactly the areas Balint 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 Balint sponsored count fully, cosponsored bills a quarter. Shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Balint sits at −1.37 on the CSIP scale, left of 0, more liberal than 94% of House Democrats. Approximate range −1.40 to −1.35, which understates the uncertainty; from 2,237 donors and 1,977 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”.

−1.37

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range −1.40 to −1.35. From 2,237 donors and 1,977 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

← More liberalMore conservative →0Balint −1.4House Democrats −1.0All House +0.3

The outlined dot is Balint, 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 Balint’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 Balint sits

Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale

−2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →House Democratsmedian −1.0Balint −1.4All Housemedian +0.3
Show the data
Balint's CSIP score of −1.37 placed against House Democrats, All House.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Balint
House Democrats217−1.06%
All House439+0.33%
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 Balint 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 Balint.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Balint raised $1.2M in the 2026 cycle, below the House Democrats’ median of $2.0M. 28% of individual money came in gifts of $200 or less. 61% of itemized individual money came from Vermont.

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.

Election cycle
$1.2M

raised in the 2026 cycle

From 700 itemized donors. House Democrats’ median $2.0M.

Where the money came from

Each square is one percent of 2026-cycle receipts, from FEC summary totals.

Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Itemized individual (over $200): $599.5K (51.1%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $230.9K (19.7%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)PACs and other committees: $342.8K (29.2%)
  • Itemized individual (over $200)51 squares$599.5K
  • Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)20 squares$230.9K
  • PACs and other committees29 squares$342.8K
  • Party committees$779
Show the data
Sources of Balint's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Itemized individual (over $200)$599.5K51.1%
Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)$230.9K19.7%
PACs and other committees$342.8K29.2%
Party committees$7790.1%
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, 2022 to 2026. The grey line is the House Democrats’ median for 2026.

2022 cycle: $1.9M$1.9M20222024 cycle: $1.4M$1.4M20242026 cycle: $1.2M$1.2M2026House Democrats median $2.0M
Show the data
Balint's receipts by cycle against the 2026 House Democrats median.
ItemValue
2022 cycle$1.9M
2024 cycle$1.4M
2026 cycle$1.2M

Top donor states, 2026

Itemized contributions by donor state. 61% came from Vermont.

  1. Vermont$291.3K
  2. Massachusetts$30.2K
  3. District of Columbia$28.8K
  4. New York$27.5K
  5. New Jersey$16.0K

Small donations

Gifts of $200 or less as a share of individual money, by cycle. The thin grey bar is the 2026 House Democrats’ median.

0%60%
Balint
Median
2026
28%
13%
2024
21%
13%
2022
13%
13%
Show the data
Small-donor share by cycle against the House Democrats median
RowBalintMedian
2026 cycle28%13%
2024 cycle21%13%
2022 cycle13%13%

Where itemized donors live

Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state

Alaska: no dataAKMaine: $989MEVermont: $291.3KVTNew Hampshire: $9,170NHWashington: $4,230WAIdaho: no dataIDMontana: no dataMTNorth Dakota: no dataNDMinnesota: $500MNIllinois: $9,105ILWisconsin: $550WIMichigan: $400MINew York: $27.5KNYRhode Island: $300RIMassachusetts: $30.2KMAOregon: $2,181ORNevada: $1,000NVWyoming: $100WYSouth Dakota: $432SDIowa: no dataIAIndiana: no dataINOhio: $629OHPennsylvania: $2,500PANew Jersey: $16.0KNJConnecticut: $60CTCalifornia: $14.0KCAUtah: no dataUTColorado: $750CONebraska: $208NEMissouri: no dataMOKentucky: $7,000KYWest Virginia: no dataWVVirginia: $5,775VAMaryland: $15.3KMDDelaware: no dataDEArizona: $420AZNew Mexico: $1,500NMKansas: $260KSArkansas: no dataARTennessee: no dataTNNorth Carolina: $10NCSouth Carolina: $1,338SCDistrict of Columbia: $28.8KDCOklahoma: no dataOKLouisiana: no dataLAMississippi: no dataMSAlabama: no dataALGeorgia: $4,500GAHawaii: no dataHITexas: $1,655TXFlorida: $1,300FL
Show the data
Balint's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
Vermont$291.3K
Massachusetts$30.2K
District of Columbia$28.8K
New York$27.5K
New Jersey$16.0K
Maryland$15.3K
California$14.0K
New Hampshire$9,170
Illinois$9,105
Kentucky$7,000
Virginia$5,775
Georgia$4,500
Washington$4,230
Pennsylvania$2,500
Oregon$2,181
Texas$1,655
New Mexico$1,500
South Carolina$1,338
Florida$1,300
Nevada$1,000
Maine$989
Colorado$750
Ohio$629
Wisconsin$550
Minnesota$500
South Dakota$432
Arizona$420
Michigan$400
Rhode Island$300
Kansas$260
Nebraska$208
Wyoming$100
Connecticut$60
North Carolina$10
AlaskaNo data
IdahoNo data
MontanaNo data
North DakotaNo data
IowaNo data
IndianaNo data
UtahNo data
MissouriNo data
West VirginiaNo data
DelawareNo data
ArkansasNo data
TennesseeNo data
OklahomaNo data
LouisianaNo data
MississippiNo data
AlabamaNo data
HawaiiNo data
700

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

61%

from Vermont

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

Donors’ ideology

Distribution of itemized donors’ own CSIP scores

CSIP −1.75 to −1.50: 0.1%CSIP −1.50 to −1.25: 34%CSIP −1.25 to −1.00: 46%46%CSIP −1.00 to −0.75: 19%CSIP −0.75 to −0.50: 0.2%CSIP −0.50 to −0.25: 0.2%CSIP −0.25 to 0.00: 0.4%CSIP +0.25 to +0.50: 0.2%← More liberalMore conservative →
Show the data
Ideology of Balint's itemized donors in 2026, from −1.75 to +0.50: 34% between −1.50 and −1.25, 46% between −1.25 and −1.00, 19% between −1.00 and −0.75.
ItemValue
CSIP −1.75 to −1.500.1%
CSIP −1.50 to −1.2534%
CSIP −1.25 to −1.0046%
CSIP −1.00 to −0.7519%
CSIP −0.75 to −0.500.2%
CSIP −0.50 to −0.250.2%
CSIP −0.25 to 0.000.4%
CSIP +0.25 to +0.500.2%
How to read the columns

Donors who give to many candidates get their own CSIP score. Each column is the share of Balint’s itemized money from donors in that part of the scale, blue left of 0 and red right of 0, deeper further out; Balint’s own score is −1.37.

Top donor occupations

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. NOT EMPLOYED$187.9K 343 donors
  2. RETIRED$57.4K 45 donors
  3. ATTORNEY$44.4K 53 donors
  4. GOVERNMENT RELATIONS$16.7K 11 donors
  5. OWNER$7,684 13 donors

Top committees

PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.

  1. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY & MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES P E O P L E$10.0K
  2. INT'L ASSOCIATION OF BRIDGE, STRUCTURAL, ORNAMENTAL AND REINFORCING IRON WORKERS (IPAL)$10.0K
  3. INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SHEET METAL, AIR, RAIL AND TRANSPORTATION WORKERS POLITICAL ACTION LEAGUE$10.0K
  4. MACHINISTS NON PARTISAN POLITICAL LEAGUE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS & AEROSPACE WORKERS$10.0K
  5. EQUALITY PAC$7,500

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. BRATTLEBORO RETREAT$3,679 3 donors
  2. NVG, LLC$3,071 4 donors
  3. DOWNS RACHLIN MARTIN, PLLC$2,630 4 donors
  4. FGS GLOBAL$2,500 5 donors
  5. STATE OF VERMONT$2,340 6 donors

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Balint voted with the majority of House Democrats on 100% of party-line votes and missed 1.2% of 674 roll calls. House Democrats on average: 96.4% party unity, 96.9% attendance. Across all roll calls, Balint voted against the majority of House Democrats 12 times.

674 roll calls Balint could vote on in the 119th Congress, compared with House Democrats. 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 Balint voted with the majority of House Democrats. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.

12

votes against the majority of House Democrats

Party unity 100%, House Democrats average 96.4%, ranks 10th of 217. 674 roll calls in the 119th Congress.

Attendance and party unity

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

80%100%
Balint
Peers
Rank
Attendance
98.8%
96.9%
73rd of 217
Party unity
100%
96.4%
10th of 217
Show the data
Balint's attendance and party unity against House Democrats.
RowBalintPeers
Attendance98.8%96.9%
Party unity100%96.4%
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

Key votes
Party split (yea–nay)Why it’s key
Sep 16, 2026
S. 2403
Retire through Ownership Act
On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass
YeaWith majorityPassedD 209–0 · R 191–14 · I 1–0Democrats 209 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 191 yea, 14 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 naybecame law
Sep 16, 2026
H.J.Res. 213
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
NayWith majorityPassedD 3–207 · R 210–1 · I 1–0Democrats 3 yea, 207 nay; Republicans 210 yea, 1 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nayclose vote
Sep 16, 2026
H.R. 10326
PROOF Act
On Passage
NayWith majorityPassedD 6–206 · R 210–1 · I 1–0Democrats 6 yea, 206 nay; Republicans 210 yea, 1 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nayclose vote
Sep 16, 2026
H.R. 9576
National Fraud Enforcement Division Act
On Passage
YeaWith majorityPassedD 139–72 · R 212–0 · I 1–0Democrats 139 yea, 72 nay; Republicans 212 yea, 0 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nayparty crossover
Sep 16, 2026
H.R. 5334
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
NayWith majorityPassedD 58–152 · R 203–7 · I 1–0Democrats 58 yea, 152 nay; Republicans 203 yea, 7 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 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 Balint most often

  1. Mary ScanlonD655 shared votes99%
  2. Joaquin CastroD644 shared votes99%
  3. Jerrold NadlerD596 shared votes99%
  4. Suzanne BonamiciD660 shared votes99%
  5. Maxine DexterD660 shared votes99%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Balint least often

  1. Chip RoyR628 shared votes16%
  2. Ralph NormanR593 shared votes17%
  3. Eric BurlisonR636 shared votes17%
  4. Andy BiggsR602 shared votes17%
  5. Josh BrecheenR635 shared votes18%
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

119th Congress (2025–27), loads in batches

Back to topNext: Legislation

Legislation

Balint sponsored 26 bills in the 119th Congress; none became law. Cosponsored 429 others. 0% of sponsored bills got out of committee (House Democrats average 4.9%; 171st of 207).

The bills Balint 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

Sponsored26 billsSponsored, Introduced: 2626Sponsored, In committee: 2626Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 00Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 00Sponsored, Became law: 00Cosponsored429 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 429429Cosponsored, In committee: 429429Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 55Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 00Cosponsored, Became law: 00IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Balint sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored2626000
Cosponsored429429500
How to read the blocks

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

0%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

House Democrats average 4.9%. Ranks 171st of 207.

Cosponsorship partners

Colleagues who most often cosponsor with Balint, by number of shared bills in the 119th Congress; the square shows their party.

  1. Eleanor Norton40
  2. Rashida Tlaib23
  3. Bonnie Watson Coleman22
  4. André Carson20
  5. Hank Johnson Jr.18
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 Balint’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
H.Res. 1634Expressing support for the recognition of October 26, 2026, as Intersex Awareness Day, and supporting the goals and ideals of Intersex Awareness Day.SponsorOct 22, 2026In committeeCivil Rights and Liberties, Minority IssuesReferred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. Oct 22, 2026
H.Res. 1606Expressing support for the designation of the week of October 24, 2026, to October 31, 2026, as "Bat Week".SponsorOct 5, 2026In committeeEnvironmental ProtectionReferred to the House Committee on Agriculture. Oct 5, 2026
H.R. 10642STS ActCosponsorOct 1, 2026In committeeInternational AffairsReferred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, Financial Services, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. Oct 1, 2026
H.Res. 1603Expressing concern about the growing problem of book banning and the proliferation of threats to freedom of expression in the United States.CosponsorOct 1, 2026In committeeUnassignedReferred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. Oct 1, 2026
H.Res. 1586Recognizing and honoring the 27th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Olmstead v. L.C.CosponsorSep 28, 2026In committeeCivil Rights and Liberties, Minority IssuesReferred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. Sep 28, 2026

Back to topNext: Online

Online

A site that changed 40 times in 90 days. Balint’s official site had 22 pages when last crawled on Oct 25, 2026. The lab last catalogued the images Balint posted on Oct 24, 2026.

The lab crawls Balint’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 Balint 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.

Social accounts

Images Balint posted

The latest 24, with model-written descriptions

  • Two workers in white coats and hair coverings stand in a cool storage room, talking among long shelves filled with large round wheels of cheese. There is no prominent text.
    Two workers in white coats and hair coverings stand in a cool storage room, talking among long shelves filled with large round wheels of cheese. There is no prominent text.View post
  • A low-angle view of many large, round wheels of cheese arranged in rows on wooden shelves in a storage room. Some faint markings are visible on the cheese.
    A low-angle view of many large, round wheels of cheese arranged in rows on wooden shelves in a storage room. Some faint markings are visible on the cheese.View post
  • Two smiling women in white lab coats, hairnets, and glasses stand in a large food-processing room. They are surrounded by wheeled metal racks filled with trays of small round food items. There is no visible text.
    Two smiling women in white lab coats, hairnets, and glasses stand in a large food-processing room. They are surrounded by wheeled metal racks filled with trays of small round food items. There is no visible text.View post
  • Two people in white coats, glasses, and hair coverings stand facing each other in a cheese-aging room. Shelves behind them are filled with many wheels of cheese, with small labels attached to the shelves.
    Two people in white coats, glasses, and hair coverings stand facing each other in a cheese-aging room. Shelves behind them are filled with many wheels of cheese, with small labels attached to the shelves.View post
  • Four adults pose for a photo outside a health center, standing in front of a wall-mounted directory sign. Text is visible on the sign.
    Four adults pose for a photo outside a health center, standing in front of a wall-mounted directory sign. Text is visible on the sign.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.

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 Balint is most unusual among House Democrats, 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
B001318
Bioguide
B001318
FEC candidate ids
H2VT01076

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 (Congress)Sep 30, 202628 days agoVoteview roll calls, 113th Congress (2013) on.
  • Bills (Congress)Oct 22, 20266 days agoGovInfo BILLSTATUS: sponsors, cosponsors, actions, CRS policy area.
  • 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 27, 20261 days agoImages 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

Back to top