23% of 2,062 statements contain a personal attack (466 statements); the average for House Democrats is 6.6%. Ranks 1st of 216, where 1st is the highest rate.
An AI model reads each of Doggett’s posts on X, Congressional Record speeches, press releases and newsletters and marks whether it attacks a person’s character, integrity or loyalty. The rate is the share of statements marked; it is compared with the average among House Democrats and ranked against the same group.
0
At a glance
6 measures against House Democrats. 44% of Doggett’s statements criticize a policy, 1.6 times the House Democrat average of 28%. 9.9% of Doggett’s statements claim credit, in the bottom 5% of House Democrats (average 23%).
The measures on which Doggett 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.
Personal attacks
23%
House Democrats average 6.6% · ranks 1st of 216
Policy criticism
44%
House Democrats average 28% · ranks 8th of 216
Credit claiming
9.9%
House Democrats average 23% · ranks 208th of 216
Extreme labels
6.0%
House Democrats average 1.9% · ranks 8th of 216
Raised, 2026
$471.3K
House Democrats’ median $2.0M · ranks 205th of 214
CSIP ideology
−1.03
Left of 0, the centre of the scale · ± 0.02
Peer group: House Democrats. Rank 1 is the highest value in the group; the thick bar is Doggett, the thin grey bar the peer average. The headline is the measure on which Doggett is most unusual among peers (Methods, §08).
Doggett attacks opponents personally more than any other House Democrat. Personal attacks in 23% of 2,062 statements, against 6.6% for the average House Democrat; 1st of 216.
An AI model reads each of Doggett’s 2,062 statements in the 119th Congress (1,911 posts on X, 79 press releases, 46 Congressional Record speeches, 26 newsletters) 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
Doggett
House Democrats, average of 216
0%20%40%60%80%
Doggett
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion1,647 statements
80%
73%
37th of 216
Policy criticism907 statements
44%
28%
8th of 216
Personal attacks466 statements
23%
7%
1st of 216
Credit claiming205 statements
10%
23%
208th of 216
Bipartisanship78 statements
4%
10%
196th of 216
+ Show the data
Doggett's share of statements in each category against the House Democrats average.
Row
Doggett
Peers
Policy discussion
80%
73%
Policy criticism
44%
28%
Personal attacks
23%
7%
Credit claiming
10%
23%
Bipartisanship
4%
10%
2,062
statements classified
1,911 posts on X, 79 press releases, 46 Congressional Record speeches, 26 newsletters.
posts on X
press releases
Congressional Record speeches
newsletters
+ Show the data
Doggett's statements by source
Part
Value
posts on X
1,911
press releases
79
Congressional Record speeches
46
newsletters
26
+ − How to read the bars
The thick bar is Doggett; the thin grey bar is the average House Democrats. A longer thick bar means Doggett does this more than peers. Rank 1 is the highest rate in the group.
Extreme labels
Doggett used extreme labels in 6.0% of statements, 3.1 times the peer average. 123 statements, most often aimed at Trump; peers 1.9%.
“extreme”31
“MAGA”13
“radical”8
“far right”4
“fascist”3
Who gets the labels
Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements
Trump26
Trump regime15
Republicans11
MAGA4
Donald Trump3
+ − 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 Doggett, 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
73
28.8%
37.0%
69.9%
8.2%
16.4%
9.6%
Feb ’25
106
29.3%
53.8%
80.2%
6.6%
16.0%
8.5%
Mar ’25
112
27.7%
42.9%
75.0%
5.4%
13.4%
6.3%
Apr ’25
120
24.2%
45.0%
83.3%
5.8%
7.5%
6.7%
May ’25
119
10.9%
48.7%
74.8%
2.5%
11.8%
3.4%
Jun ’25
89
21.3%
44.9%
78.6%
10.1%
18.0%
7.9%
Jul ’25
107
23.4%
50.5%
83.2%
1.9%
5.6%
0.0%
Aug ’25
99
13.1%
66.7%
79.8%
0.0%
8.1%
14.1%
Sep ’25
102
12.8%
60.8%
80.4%
4.9%
9.8%
6.9%
Oct ’25
94
18.1%
55.3%
75.5%
7.4%
5.3%
3.2%
Nov ’25
97
20.6%
47.4%
70.1%
1.0%
10.3%
7.2%
Dec ’25
105
21.9%
27.6%
79.0%
1.9%
7.6%
7.6%
Jan ’26
112
35.7%
25.0%
90.2%
3.6%
10.7%
2.7%
Feb ’26
107
21.5%
51.4%
72.0%
4.7%
7.5%
9.3%
Mar ’26
103
29.1%
54.4%
72.8%
1.9%
8.7%
9.7%
Apr ’26
110
25.4%
30.9%
78.2%
1.8%
8.2%
3.6%
May ’26
74
23.0%
41.9%
74.3%
1.4%
5.4%
5.4%
Jun ’26
67
19.4%
61.2%
77.6%
6.0%
7.5%
6.0%
Jul ’26
94
23.4%
35.1%
91.5%
4.3%
16.0%
5.3%
Aug ’26
63
22.2%
22.2%
90.5%
0.0%
6.3%
1.6%
Sep ’26
62
17.7%
25.8%
98.4%
0.0%
8.1%
1.6%
Oct ’26
47
27.7%
12.8%
97.9%
2.1%
8.5%
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 Doggett’s words
Real statements from the classifier’s example set, with the labels it assigned
Bipartisanship
Doggett: Trump's Russian Diesel Deal Violates the Law
Sponsor of 2022 Russian Energy Import Ban Says Trump Rewards Putin While Blaming Zelensky
WASHINGTON, D.C.—U.S. Representative Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), a longtime champion of cutting off Russian energy revenue whose name is on the 2022 Ending Impor…
Oct 12, 2026 · Press releases · personal attacks; policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Energy; Foreign Trade and International Finance; International Affairs; Armed Forces and National Security; target: Donald Trump · Source
Personal attacks
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Oct 23, 2026 · Posts on X · personal attacks; policy discussion; Government Operations and Politics; target: Donald Trump · Source
Extreme label
Doggett and Sewell Introduce PROOF Act to Stop the Weaponization of the IRS Against Nonprofits
Legislation would guarantee that no charity or nonprofit can lose its tax-exempt status without evidence and without due process
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) and Rep. Terri A. Sewell…
Sep 3, 2026 · Press releases · personal attacks; policy discussion; credit claiming; Taxation; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; Government Operations and Politics; Law; extreme label “radical” aimed at Donald Trump; target: Donald Trump · 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.
·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 · target: Donald TrumpSource ↗
·Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · International Affairs · target: WitkoffSource ↗
·Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · International Affairs · Foreign Trade and International Finance · target: TrumpSource ↗
·Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · credit claiming · Energy · International Affairs · Armed Forces and National Security · Foreign Trade and International Finance · target: TrumpSource ↗
·Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · Energy · Foreign Trade and International Finance · target: TrumpSource ↗
All 2,062 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: 1,911 posts on X, 79 press releases, 46 Congressional Record speeches, 26 newsletters.
Health is what Doggett talks about most: 23% of policy statements. Talk and legislation agree at 0.70 on a 0–1 scale (House Democrats average 0.67; 53rd 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 Doggett talks about. The bills Doggett sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.
What Doggett talks about
Share of policy statements by area, the 119th Congress
Doggett
House Democrats average
0%9%18%26%35%
Doggett
Peers
Health378 statements
23%
26%
Government Operations and Politics335 statements
20%
20%
International Affairs298 statements
18%
8%
Economics and Public Finance275 statements
17%
20%
Armed Forces and National Security270 statements
16%
16%
+ Show the data
Policy areas Doggett talks about, as a share of policy statements, against the House Democrats average.
Row
Doggett
Peers
Health
23%
26%
Government Operations and Politics
20%
20%
International Affairs
18%
8%
Economics and Public Finance
17%
20%
Armed Forces and National Security
16%
16%
+ − How to read the bars
The thick bar is the share of Doggett’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.
Statements
Bills
House Democrats
+ Show the data
Doggett's share of statements against share of bills in each policy area.
Area
Talks about
House Democrats, talks about
Legislates on
House Democrats, legislates on
Health
23%
26%
25%
16%
Government Operations and Politics
20%
20%
10%
11%
International Affairs
18%
8%
11%
8%
Economics and Public Finance
17%
20%
0%
1%
Armed Forces and National Security
16%
16%
5%
7%
0.70
talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1
House Democrats average 0.67. Ranks 53rd of 216.
+ − What agreement means, and what it doesn’t
Agreement is 1 minus the distance between the two distributions (Jensen–Shannon): 1 means Doggett legislates on exactly the areas Doggett 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 Doggett sponsored count fully, cosponsored bills a quarter. Shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.
Doggett sits at −1.03 on the CSIP scale, left of 0, more liberal than 53% of House Democrats. Approximate range −1.04 to −1.01, which understates the uncertainty; from 1,491 donors and 7,428 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”.
−1.03
CSIP ideal point
Approximate range −1.04 to −1.01. From 1,491 donors and 7,428 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.
The outlined dot is Doggett, 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 Doggett’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 Doggett sits
Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale
House Democrats217 · median −1.0
All House439 · median +0.3
+ Show the data
Doggett's CSIP score of −1.03 placed against House Democrats, All House.
Group
Officials
Median
Share left of Doggett
House Democrats
217
−1.0
46%
All House
439
+0.3
23%
+ − 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 Doggett 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 Doggett.
Doggett raised $471.3K in the 2026 cycle, 24% of the House Democrats’ median of $2.0M. 17% of individual money came in gifts of $200 or less. 79% 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.
$471.3K
raised in the 2026 cycle
From 25 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)13 squares$63.3K
Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)3 squares$13.1K
PACs and other committees32 squares$150.2K
Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)52 squares$244.6K
+ Show the data
Sources of Doggett's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
Source
Amount
Share
Itemized individual (over $200)
$63.3K
13.4%
Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)
$13.1K
2.8%
PACs and other committees
$150.2K
31.9%
Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)
$244.6K
51.9%
+ − 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 Democrats’ median for 2026.
+ Show the data
Doggett's receipts by cycle against the 2026 House Democrats median.
Item
Value
2020 cycle
$1.3M
2022 cycle
$1.4M
2024 cycle
$1.5M
2026 cycle
$471.3K
Top donor states, 2026
Itemized contributions by donor state. 79% came from Texas.
Texas$19.5K
Virginia$4,250
District of Columbia$995
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.
Doggett
Median
0%20%40%60%
Doggett
Median
2026
17%
13%
2024
4%
13%
2022
9%
13%
2020
7%
13%
+ Show the data
Small-donor share by cycle against the House Democrats median
Row
Doggett
Median
2026 cycle
17%
13%
2024 cycle
4%
13%
2022 cycle
9%
13%
2020 cycle
7%
13%
Where itemized donors live
Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state
Itemized dollars$995$19.5Kno data
+ Show the data
Doggett's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
State
Value
Texas
$19.5K
Virginia
$4,250
District of Columbia
$995
Alaska
No data
Maine
No data
Vermont
No data
New Hampshire
No data
Washington
No data
Idaho
No data
Montana
No data
North Dakota
No data
Minnesota
No data
Illinois
No data
Wisconsin
No data
Michigan
No data
New York
No data
Rhode Island
No data
Massachusetts
No data
Oregon
No data
Nevada
No data
Wyoming
No data
South Dakota
No data
Iowa
No data
Indiana
No data
Ohio
No data
Pennsylvania
No data
New Jersey
No data
Connecticut
No data
California
No data
Utah
No data
Colorado
No data
Nebraska
No data
Missouri
No data
Kentucky
No data
West Virginia
No data
Maryland
No data
Delaware
No data
Arizona
No data
New Mexico
No data
Kansas
No data
Arkansas
No data
Tennessee
No data
North Carolina
No data
South Carolina
No data
Oklahoma
No data
Louisiana
No data
Mississippi
No data
Alabama
No data
Georgia
No data
Hawaii
No data
Florida
No data
25
itemized donors
People who gave more than $200
79%
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 Doggett's itemized donors in 2026, from −1.50 to +0.25: 14% between −1.50 and −1.25, 31% between −1.25 and −1.00, 54% between −1.00 and −0.75.
Item
Value
CSIP −1.50 to −1.25
14%
CSIP −1.25 to −1.00
31%
CSIP −1.00 to −0.75
54%
CSIP 0.00 to +0.25
1.0%
+ − How to read the columns
Donors who give to many candidates get their own CSIP score. Each column is the share of Doggett’s itemized money from donors in that part of the scale, blue left of 0 and red right of 0, deeper further out; Doggett’s own score is −1.03.
Top donor occupations
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
ATTORNEY$10.7K 6 donors
NOT EMPLOYED$4,300 8 donors
Top committees
PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.
AMERICA'S CREDIT UNIONS PAC$5,000
AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PHYSICIAN SERVICES INC PAC; AKA ACP SERVICES PAC$5,000
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY & MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES P E O P L E$5,000
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, AFL-CIO COMMITTEE ON POLITICAL EDUCATION$5,000
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SHEET METAL, AIR, RAIL AND TRANSPORTATION WORKERS POLITICAL ACTION LEAGUE$5,000
Top employers
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
No employers reported.
Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.
Doggett voted with the majority of House Democrats on 99.5% of party-line votes and missed 2.4% of 674 roll calls. House Democrats on average: 96.4% party unity, 96.9% attendance. Across all roll calls, Doggett voted against the majority of House Democrats 15 times.
674 roll calls Doggett 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 Doggett voted with the majority of House Democrats. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.
15
votes against the majority of House Democrats
Party unity 99.5%, House Democrats average 96.4%, ranks 49th of 217. 674 roll calls in the 119th Congress.
Attendance and party unity
The thick bar is Doggett, the thin grey bar the House Democrats average. The scale runs from 80% to 100% to show the gap.
Doggett
House Democrats, average of 217
80%90%100%
Doggett
Peers
Rank
Attendance
97.6%
96.9%
133rd of 217
Party unity
99.5%
96.4%
49th of 217
+ Show the data
Doggett's attendance and party unity against House Democrats.
Row
Doggett
Peers
Attendance
97.6%
96.9%
Party unity
99.5%
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
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
Nay
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
Nay
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 Doggett 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.
Doggett sponsored 27 bills in the 119th Congress; none became law. Cosponsored 444 others. 3.7% of sponsored bills got out of committee (House Democrats average 4.9%; 97th of 207).
The bills Doggett 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 Doggett sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
Role
Introduced
In committee
Passed one chamber
Passed both chambers
Became law
Sponsored
27
27
0
0
0
Cosponsored
444
444
13
0
0
+ − How to read the blocks
Ink blocks are bills Doggett sponsored, ochre blocks bills Doggett cosponsored; the figure above each block is the count. Most bills in any legislature never leave committee, so a short staircase is the norm.
3.7%
of sponsored bills got out of committee
House Democrats average 4.9%. Ranks 97th of 207.
Cosponsorship partners
Colleagues who most often cosponsor with Doggett, by number of shared bills in the 119th Congress; the square shows their party.
Democrat
Eleanor Norton67
Rashida Tlaib44
Judy Chu34
Shri Thanedar33
Steve Cohen32
+ − 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 Doggett’s bills; the toggle shows more.
Bill list
Sponsored and cosponsored, with status and policy area; five are shown, the toggle shows the rest
To designate Ukraine under section 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide certain nationals of Ukraine with continued eligibility for temporary protected status, and for other purposes.
Cosponsor
Oct 5, 2026
In committee
Immigration
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Oct 5, 2026
Referred 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
Expressing concern about the growing problem of book banning and the proliferation of threats to freedom of expression in the United States.
Cosponsor
Oct 1, 2026
In committee
Unassigned
Referred 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
To amend the African Growth and Opportunity Act to exclude from eligibility each sub-Saharan African country that does not effectively enforce its environmental laws and fulfill its international environmental obligations.
Sponsor
Sep 24, 2026
In committee
International Affairs
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. Sep 24, 2026
Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on 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. Sep 24, 2026
A site that changed 32 times in 90 days. Doggett’s official site had 33 pages when last crawled on Oct 25, 2026. The lab last catalogued the images Doggett posted on Sep 30, 2026.
The lab crawls Doggett’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 Doggett 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.
A handwritten signature above printed identifying text on a plain white background.View post ↗
02
A quote graphic with a circular photo of a man speaking at microphones on the left and a large quotation with attribution on the right, separated by a thin green line.View post ↗
03
A black-and-white neighborhood newsletter page with a large decorative masthead, a left sidebar of issue and community-meeting information, and a multi-column article about funding for the Belfast Bridge and Trail project. A photo shows two men standing outdoors, with a caption beneath it. The page contains extensive text.View post ↗
04
A nighttime protest or public demonstration on a sidewalk beneath large trees. A crowd faces forward, with several people holding signs. A traffic light and streetlights are visible nearby. The signs contain text.View post ↗
05
A nighttime street scene shows two people leaning over a blue table and filling out forms on clipboards, while other people sit or gather nearby. The scene is lit by warm artificial light, and text is visible on the forms and clothing.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 Doggett 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 …”).
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 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
