Skip to content

Democrat · U.S. House, Oregon’s 3rd district

Serving since Jan 3, 2025119th Congress (2025–27)next election Nov 3, 2026

Bioguide D000635FEC H4OR03192

Portrait of Maxine Dexter, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
3.0%
of statements use bipartisan language, in the bottom 5% of House Democrats

3.0% of 1,357 statements use bipartisan language (41 statements); the average for House Democrats is 9.8%. Ranks 207th of 216, where 1st is the highest rate.

An AI model reads each of Dexter’s posts on X, newsletters, press releases and Congressional Record speeches and marks whether it stresses working across party lines. 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. 13% of Dexter’s statements criticize a policy, in the bottom tenth of House Democrats (average 28%). 14% of Dexter’s statements claim credit, in the bottom quarter of House Democrats (average 23%).

The measures on which Dexter 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.

Bipartisanship

3.0%

House Democrats average 9.8% · ranks 207th of 216

Party unity

100%

House Democrats average 96.4% · ranks 10th of 217 · 18 votes against the majority of House Democrats

Policy criticism

13%

House Democrats average 28% · ranks 200th of 216

Credit claiming

14%

House Democrats average 23% · ranks 183rd of 216

Talk-to-bills agreement

0.71

House Democrats average 0.67 · ranks 48th of 216

CSIP ideology

−1.08

Left of 0, the centre of the scale · ± 0.03

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

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Dexter says

Dexter stresses bipartisanship less than 95% of House Democrats. Bipartisanship in 3.0% of 1,357 statements, against 9.8% for the average House Democrat; 207th of 216.

An AI model reads each of Dexter’s 1,357 statements in the 119th Congress (1,141 posts on X, 105 Congressional Record speeches, 64 newsletters, 47 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 Democrats and ranked among them.

Kinds of statement

Share of statements carrying each label, the 119th Congress

0%80%
Dexter
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion1,046 statements
77%
73%
72nd of 216
Credit claiming189 statements
14%
23%
183rd of 216
Policy criticism178 statements
13%
28%
200th of 216
Personal attacks115 statements
8%
7%
61st of 216
Bipartisanship41 statements
3%
10%
207th of 216
Show the data
Dexter's share of statements in each category against the House Democrats average.
RowDexterPeers
Policy discussion77%73%
Credit claiming14%23%
Policy criticism13%28%
Personal attacks8%7%
Bipartisanship3%10%
1,357

statements classified

1,141 posts on X, 105 Congressional Record speeches, 64 newsletters, 47 press releases.

posts on X: 1,141 (84.1%)posts on X 1,141Congressional Record speeches: 105 (7.7%)newsletters: 64 (4.7%)press releases: 47 (3.5%)
Show the data
Dexter's statements by source
PartValue
posts on X1,141
Congressional Record speeches105
newsletters64
press releases47
How to read the bars

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

Extreme labels

Dexter used extreme labels in 0.8% of statements, below the peer average. 11 statements, most often aimed at Republicans; peers 1.9%.

  1. “extreme”4
  2. “radical”3
  3. “far right”2

Who gets the labels

Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements

  1. Republicans3
  2. Congress1
  3. Dobbs decision1
  4. politicians, judges1
  5. Republican State Legislature1
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: 382025-02: 582025-03: 402025-04: 432025-05: 792025-06: 752025-07: 822025-08: 592025-09: 882025-10: 612025-11: 512025-12: 382026-01: 572026-02: 792026-03: 852026-04: 952026-05: 752026-06: 592026-07: 502026-08: 482026-09: 512026-10: 46peak 95 · Apr ’26Personal attackspeak 18.0% · Oct ’25 · latest 2.2%Personal attacks, 2025-01: 5.3% of 38Personal attacks, 2025-02: 10.3% of 58Personal attacks, 2025-03: 10.0% of 40Personal attacks, 2025-04: 9.3% of 43Personal attacks, 2025-05: 3.8% of 79Personal attacks, 2025-06: 5.3% of 75Personal attacks, 2025-07: 4.9% of 82Personal attacks, 2025-08: 6.8% of 59Personal attacks, 2025-09: 9.1% of 88Personal attacks, 2025-10: 18.0% of 61Personal attacks, 2025-11: 5.9% of 51Personal attacks, 2025-12: 15.8% of 38Personal attacks, 2026-01: 8.8% of 57Personal attacks, 2026-02: 13.9% of 79Personal attacks, 2026-03: 8.2% of 85Personal attacks, 2026-04: 10.5% of 95Personal attacks, 2026-05: 9.3% of 75Personal attacks, 2026-06: 8.5% of 59Personal attacks, 2026-07: 10.0% of 50Personal attacks, 2026-08: 6.3% of 48Personal attacks, 2026-09: 3.9% of 51Personal attacks, 2026-10: 2.2% of 46Policy criticismpeak 23.7% · Dec ’25 · latest 8.7%Policy criticism, 2025-01: 7.9% of 38Policy criticism, 2025-02: 10.3% of 58Policy criticism, 2025-03: 12.5% of 40Policy criticism, 2025-04: 11.6% of 43Policy criticism, 2025-05: 10.1% of 79Policy criticism, 2025-06: 8.0% of 75Policy criticism, 2025-07: 8.5% of 82Policy criticism, 2025-08: 5.1% of 59Policy criticism, 2025-09: 17.1% of 88Policy criticism, 2025-10: 9.8% of 61Policy criticism, 2025-11: 15.7% of 51Policy criticism, 2025-12: 23.7% of 38Policy criticism, 2026-01: 8.8% of 57Policy criticism, 2026-02: 13.9% of 79Policy criticism, 2026-03: 20.0% of 85Policy criticism, 2026-04: 14.7% of 95Policy criticism, 2026-05: 18.7% of 75Policy criticism, 2026-06: 18.6% of 59Policy criticism, 2026-07: 8.0% of 50Policy criticism, 2026-08: 14.6% of 48Policy criticism, 2026-09: 19.6% of 51Policy criticism, 2026-10: 8.7% of 46Policy discussionpeak 90.2% · Sep ’26 · latest 76.1%Policy discussion, 2025-01: 60.5% of 38Policy discussion, 2025-02: 65.5% of 58Policy discussion, 2025-03: 70.0% of 40Policy discussion, 2025-04: 81.4% of 43Policy discussion, 2025-05: 77.2% of 79Policy discussion, 2025-06: 70.7% of 75Policy discussion, 2025-07: 67.1% of 82Policy discussion, 2025-08: 83.0% of 59Policy discussion, 2025-09: 80.7% of 88Policy discussion, 2025-10: 85.3% of 61Policy discussion, 2025-11: 78.4% of 51Policy discussion, 2025-12: 76.3% of 38Policy discussion, 2026-01: 77.2% of 57Policy discussion, 2026-02: 78.5% of 79Policy discussion, 2026-03: 70.6% of 85Policy discussion, 2026-04: 77.9% of 95Policy discussion, 2026-05: 81.3% of 75Policy discussion, 2026-06: 81.4% of 59Policy discussion, 2026-07: 78.0% of 50Policy discussion, 2026-08: 89.6% of 48Policy discussion, 2026-09: 90.2% of 51Policy discussion, 2026-10: 76.1% of 46Bipartisanshippeak 8.0% · Sep ’25 · latest 4.3%Bipartisanship, 2025-01: 0.0% of 38Bipartisanship, 2025-02: 1.7% of 58Bipartisanship, 2025-03: 0.0% of 40Bipartisanship, 2025-04: 2.3% of 43Bipartisanship, 2025-05: 0.0% of 79Bipartisanship, 2025-06: 2.7% of 75Bipartisanship, 2025-07: 0.0% of 82Bipartisanship, 2025-08: 0.0% of 59Bipartisanship, 2025-09: 8.0% of 88Bipartisanship, 2025-10: 3.3% of 61Bipartisanship, 2025-11: 0.0% of 51Bipartisanship, 2025-12: 7.9% of 38Bipartisanship, 2026-01: 1.8% of 57Bipartisanship, 2026-02: 1.3% of 79Bipartisanship, 2026-03: 3.5% of 85Bipartisanship, 2026-04: 6.3% of 95Bipartisanship, 2026-05: 5.3% of 75Bipartisanship, 2026-06: 6.8% of 59Bipartisanship, 2026-07: 4.0% of 50Bipartisanship, 2026-08: 0.0% of 48Bipartisanship, 2026-09: 3.9% of 51Bipartisanship, 2026-10: 4.3% of 46Credit claimingpeak 31.4% · Sep ’26 · latest 15.2%Credit claiming, 2025-01: 5.3% of 38Credit claiming, 2025-02: 10.3% of 58Credit claiming, 2025-03: 7.5% of 40Credit claiming, 2025-04: 11.6% of 43Credit claiming, 2025-05: 11.4% of 79Credit claiming, 2025-06: 10.7% of 75Credit claiming, 2025-07: 11.0% of 82Credit claiming, 2025-08: 6.8% of 59Credit claiming, 2025-09: 9.1% of 88Credit claiming, 2025-10: 1.6% of 61Credit claiming, 2025-11: 19.6% of 51Credit claiming, 2025-12: 15.8% of 38Credit claiming, 2026-01: 22.8% of 57Credit claiming, 2026-02: 13.9% of 79Credit claiming, 2026-03: 16.5% of 85Credit claiming, 2026-04: 16.8% of 95Credit claiming, 2026-05: 14.7% of 75Credit claiming, 2026-06: 23.7% of 59Credit claiming, 2026-07: 16.0% of 50Credit claiming, 2026-08: 16.7% of 48Credit claiming, 2026-09: 31.4% of 51Credit claiming, 2026-10: 15.2% of 46Extreme labelspeak 3.5% · Feb ’25 · latest 0.0%Extreme labels, 2025-01: 0.0% of 38Extreme labels, 2025-02: 3.5% of 58Extreme labels, 2025-03: 0.0% of 40Extreme labels, 2025-04: 2.3% of 43Extreme labels, 2025-05: 0.0% of 79Extreme labels, 2025-06: 1.3% of 75Extreme labels, 2025-07: 0.0% of 82Extreme labels, 2025-08: 0.0% of 59Extreme labels, 2025-09: 1.1% of 88Extreme labels, 2025-10: 0.0% of 61Extreme labels, 2025-11: 0.0% of 51Extreme labels, 2025-12: 0.0% of 38Extreme labels, 2026-01: 1.8% of 57Extreme labels, 2026-02: 1.3% of 79Extreme labels, 2026-03: 0.0% of 85Extreme labels, 2026-04: 1.1% of 95Extreme labels, 2026-05: 0.0% of 75Extreme labels, 2026-06: 3.4% of 59Extreme labels, 2026-07: 0.0% of 50Extreme labels, 2026-08: 0.0% of 48Extreme labels, 2026-09: 2.0% of 51Extreme labels, 2026-10: 0.0% of 46Jan ’25Jul ’25Jan ’26Jul ’26Oct ’26
Show the data
Monthly rates for Dexter, 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 ’25385.3%7.9%60.5%0.0%5.3%0.0%
Feb ’255810.3%10.3%65.5%1.7%10.3%3.5%
Mar ’254010.0%12.5%70.0%0.0%7.5%0.0%
Apr ’25439.3%11.6%81.4%2.3%11.6%2.3%
May ’25793.8%10.1%77.2%0.0%11.4%0.0%
Jun ’25755.3%8.0%70.7%2.7%10.7%1.3%
Jul ’25824.9%8.5%67.1%0.0%11.0%0.0%
Aug ’25596.8%5.1%83.0%0.0%6.8%0.0%
Sep ’25889.1%17.1%80.7%8.0%9.1%1.1%
Oct ’256118.0%9.8%85.3%3.3%1.6%0.0%
Nov ’25515.9%15.7%78.4%0.0%19.6%0.0%
Dec ’253815.8%23.7%76.3%7.9%15.8%0.0%
Jan ’26578.8%8.8%77.2%1.8%22.8%1.8%
Feb ’267913.9%13.9%78.5%1.3%13.9%1.3%
Mar ’26858.2%20.0%70.6%3.5%16.5%0.0%
Apr ’269510.5%14.7%77.9%6.3%16.8%1.1%
May ’26759.3%18.7%81.3%5.3%14.7%0.0%
Jun ’26598.5%18.6%81.4%6.8%23.7%3.4%
Jul ’265010.0%8.0%78.0%4.0%16.0%0.0%
Aug ’26486.3%14.6%89.6%0.0%16.7%0.0%
Sep ’26513.9%19.6%90.2%3.9%31.4%2.0%
Oct ’26462.2%8.7%76.1%4.3%15.2%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 Dexter’s words

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

Policy criticism

This week in community [https://assets.unlayer.com/projects/85458/1737060295420-DEXTER_OfficialLogo_L5_FINAL.png] political, Yesterday’s tragic shooting at Silver Rail Elementary in Bend is weighing heavily on me. My heart is with our neighbors in Central Oregon and every family whose life has be…

Oct 16, 2026 · Newsletters · policy criticism; policy discussion; Crime and Law Enforcement; Health; Immigration; Education; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; Armed Forces and National Security

Bipartisanship

Dexter, Larsen Introduce Bill to Stop Trump Admin from Rolling Back Veterans’ Benefits WASHINGTON, D.C. – Yesterday, U.S. Representatives Maxine Dexter, M.D. (OR-03) and Rick Larsen (WA-02) introduced the Veteran Breast Cancer Fairness Act to restore male breast cancer as a presumptive illness under…

Oct 23, 2026 · Press releases · policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Armed Forces and National Security; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; Health · Source

Extreme label

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

Sep 10, 2026 · Posts on X · extreme label “far right” aimed at Republicans · Source

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 · Government Operations and Politics · Armed Forces and National SecuritySource

  2. Posts on X

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

    personal attacks · policy discussion · credit claiming · Armed Forces and National Security · International Affairs · Commerce · Energy · Economics and Public Finance · target: TrumpSource

  3. Posts on X

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

    personal attacksSource

  4. 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 · Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues · target: TrumpSource

  5. 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: RepublicansSource

All 1,357 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: 1,141 posts on X, 105 Congressional Record speeches, 64 newsletters, 47 press releases.

Back to topNext: Policy

Policy

Health is what Dexter talks about most: 31% of policy statements, above the peer share. Talk and legislation agree at 0.71 on a 0–1 scale (House Democrats average 0.67; 48th 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 Dexter talks about. The bills Dexter sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.

What Dexter talks about

Share of policy statements by area, the 119th Congress

0%35%
Dexter
Peers
Health319 statements
31%
26%
Government Operations and Politics241 statements
23%
20%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues191 statements
18%
13%
Immigration185 statements
18%
11%
Armed Forces and National Security174 statements
17%
16%
Show the data
Policy areas Dexter talks about, as a share of policy statements, against the House Democrats average.
RowDexterPeers
Health31%26%
Government Operations and Politics23%20%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues18%13%
Immigration18%11%
Armed Forces and National Security17%16%
How to read the bars

The thick bar is the share of Dexter’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: 31% (House Democrats 26%)31%Health, legislates on: 18% (House Democrats 16%)18%Government Operations andPoliticsGovernment Operations and Politics, talks about: 23% (House Democrats 20%)23%Government Operations and Politics, legislates on: 11% (House Democrats 11%)11%Civil Rights and Liberties,Minority IssuesCivil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues, talks about: 18% (House Democrats 13%)18%Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues, legislates on: 5% (House Democrats 5%)5%ImmigrationImmigration, talks about: 18% (House Democrats 11%)18%Immigration, legislates on: 7% (House Democrats 4%)7%Armed Forces and NationalSecurityArmed Forces and National Security, talks about: 17% (House Democrats 16%)17%Armed Forces and National Security, legislates on: 9% (House Democrats 7%)9%
Show the data
Dexter's share of statements against share of bills in each policy area.
AreaTalks aboutHouse Democrats, talks aboutLegislates onHouse Democrats, legislates on
Health31%26%18%16%
Government Operations and Politics23%20%11%11%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues18%13%5%5%
Immigration18%11%7%4%
Armed Forces and National Security17%16%9%7%
0.71

talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1

House Democrats average 0.67. Ranks 48th of 216.

What agreement means, and what it doesn’t

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

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Dexter sits at −1.08 on the CSIP scale, left of 0, more liberal than 64% of House Democrats. Approximate range −1.11 to −1.05, which understates the uncertainty; from 1,541 donors and 1,204 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”.

−1.08

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range −1.11 to −1.05. From 1,541 donors and 1,204 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

← More liberalMore conservative →0Dexter −1.1House Democrats −1.0All House +0.3

The outlined dot is Dexter, 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 Dexter’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 Dexter sits

Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale

−2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →House Democratsmedian −1.0Dexter −1.1All Housemedian +0.3
Show the data
Dexter's CSIP score of −1.08 placed against House Democrats, All House.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Dexter
House Democrats217−1.036%
All House439+0.318%
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 Dexter 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 Dexter.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Dexter raised $1.3M in the 2026 cycle, below the House Democrats’ median of $2.0M. 14% of individual money came in gifts of $200 or less. 77% of itemized individual money came from Oregon.

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
$1.3M

raised in the 2026 cycle

From 477 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): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $712.6K (54.9%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $117.3K (9.0%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $117.3K (9.0%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $117.3K (9.0%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $117.3K (9.0%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $117.3K (9.0%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $117.3K (9.0%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $117.3K (9.0%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $117.3K (9.0%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $117.3K (9.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)PACs and other committees: $454.0K (35.0%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $14.0K (1.1%)
  • Itemized individual (over $200)55 squares$712.6K
  • Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)9 squares$117.3K
  • PACs and other committees35 squares$454.0K
  • Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)1 squares$14.0K
Show the data
Sources of Dexter's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Itemized individual (over $200)$712.6K54.9%
Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)$117.3K9.0%
PACs and other committees$454.0K35.0%
Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)$14.0K1.1%
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, 2024 to 2026. The grey line is the House Democrats’ median for 2026.

2024 cycle: $1.8M$1.8M20242026 cycle: $1.3M$1.3M2026House Democrats median $2.0M
Show the data
Dexter's receipts by cycle against the 2026 House Democrats median.
ItemValue
2024 cycle$1.8M
2026 cycle$1.3M

Top donor states, 2026

Itemized contributions by donor state. 77% came from Oregon.

  1. Oregon$424.7K
  2. California$48.1K
  3. Washington$26.0K
  4. District of Columbia$19.8K
  5. Massachusetts$13.8K

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%
Dexter
Median
2026
14%
13%
2024
6%
13%
Show the data
Small-donor share by cycle against the House Democrats median
RowDexterMedian
2026 cycle14%13%
2024 cycle6%13%

Where itemized donors live

Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state

Alaska: no dataAKMaine: no dataMEVermont: no dataVTNew Hampshire: $3,300NHWashington: $26.0KWAIdaho: $500IDMontana: no dataMTNorth Dakota: no dataNDMinnesota: no dataMNIllinois: $3,500ILWisconsin: no dataWIMichigan: no dataMINew York: no dataNYRhode Island: no dataRIMassachusetts: $13.8KMAOregon: $424.7KORNevada: no dataNVWyoming: no dataWYSouth Dakota: no dataSDIowa: no dataIAIndiana: no dataINOhio: no dataOHPennsylvania: $250PANew Jersey: $250NJConnecticut: no dataCTCalifornia: $48.1KCAUtah: no dataUTColorado: $2,000CONebraska: no dataNEMissouri: $275MOKentucky: no dataKYWest Virginia: no dataWVVirginia: $4,300VAMaryland: $2,250MDDelaware: no dataDEArizona: no dataAZNew Mexico: no dataNMKansas: no dataKSArkansas: no dataARTennessee: $500TNNorth Carolina: no dataNCSouth Carolina: no dataSCDistrict of Columbia: $19.8KDCOklahoma: no dataOKLouisiana: no dataLAMississippi: no dataMSAlabama: no dataALGeorgia: no dataGAHawaii: $500HITexas: no dataTXFlorida: $1,500FL
Show the data
Dexter's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
Oregon$424.7K
California$48.1K
Washington$26.0K
District of Columbia$19.8K
Massachusetts$13.8K
Virginia$4,300
Illinois$3,500
New Hampshire$3,300
Maryland$2,250
Colorado$2,000
Florida$1,500
Idaho$500
Tennessee$500
Hawaii$500
Missouri$275
Pennsylvania$250
New Jersey$250
AlaskaNo data
MaineNo data
VermontNo data
MontanaNo data
North DakotaNo data
MinnesotaNo data
WisconsinNo data
MichiganNo data
New YorkNo data
Rhode IslandNo data
NevadaNo data
WyomingNo data
South DakotaNo data
IowaNo data
IndianaNo data
OhioNo data
ConnecticutNo data
UtahNo data
NebraskaNo data
KentuckyNo data
West VirginiaNo data
DelawareNo data
ArizonaNo data
New MexicoNo data
KansasNo data
ArkansasNo data
North CarolinaNo data
South CarolinaNo data
OklahomaNo data
LouisianaNo data
MississippiNo data
AlabamaNo data
GeorgiaNo data
TexasNo data
477

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

77%

from Oregon

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 Oregon. 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: 1.3%CSIP −1.50 to −1.25: 8.0%CSIP −1.25 to −1.00: 67%67%CSIP −1.00 to −0.75: 20%CSIP −0.75 to −0.50: 1.4%CSIP −0.50 to −0.25: 2.3%CSIP −0.25 to 0.00: 0.4%CSIP +0.25 to +0.50: 0.1%← More liberalMore conservative →
Show the data
Ideology of Dexter's itemized donors in 2026, from −1.75 to +0.50: 8.0% between −1.50 and −1.25, 67% between −1.25 and −1.00, 20% between −1.00 and −0.75.
ItemValue
CSIP −1.75 to −1.501.3%
CSIP −1.50 to −1.258.0%
CSIP −1.25 to −1.0067%
CSIP −1.00 to −0.7520%
CSIP −0.75 to −0.501.4%
CSIP −0.50 to −0.252.3%
CSIP −0.25 to 0.000.4%
CSIP +0.25 to +0.500.1%
How to read the columns

Donors who give to many candidates get their own CSIP score. Each column is the share of Dexter’s itemized money from donors in that part of the scale, blue left of 0 and red right of 0, deeper further out; Dexter’s own score is −1.08.

Top donor occupations

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. NOT EMPLOYED$183.0K 174 donors
  2. PHYSICIAN$35.5K 40 donors
  3. RETIRED$24.8K 17 donors
  4. EXECUTIVE$20.0K 5 donors
  5. ATTORNEY$18.3K 17 donors

Top committees

PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.

  1. AMERICAN ACADEMY OF FAMILY PHYSICIANS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (FAMMEDPAC)$10.0K
  2. AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PHYSICIAN SERVICES INC PAC; AKA ACP SERVICES PAC$10.0K
  3. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY & MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES P E O P L E$10.0K
  4. AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$10.0K
  5. D.R.I.V.E. - DEM, REP, IND VOTER ED (THE PAC OF THE INT'L BRHD OF TEAMSTERS)$10.0K

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. OHSU$8,421 11 donors
  2. KAISER PERMANENTE$6,600 3 donors
  3. NWP$2,825 3 donors
  4. NORTHWEST PERMANENTE$2,750 5 donors
  5. NW PERMANENTE$1,525 3 donors

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Dexter 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, Dexter voted against the majority of House Democrats 18 times.

674 roll calls Dexter 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 Dexter voted with the majority of House Democrats. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.

18

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

80%100%
Dexter
Peers
Rank
Attendance
98.8%
96.9%
73rd of 217
Party unity
100%
96.4%
10th of 217
Show the data
Dexter's attendance and party unity against House Democrats.
RowDexterPeers
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
NayAgainst 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 Dexter most often

  1. Maxwell FrostD662 shared votes99%
  2. Gregorio CasarD568 shared votes99%
  3. Alexandria Ocasio-CortezD647 shared votes99%
  4. Ayanna PressleyD647 shared votes99%
  5. Joaquin CastroD644 shared votes99%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Dexter least often

  1. Chip RoyR627 shared votes16%
  2. Ralph NormanR590 shared votes16%
  3. Eric BurlisonR635 shared votes17%
  4. Andy BiggsR600 shared votes17%
  5. Josh BrecheenR633 shared votes17%
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

Dexter sponsored 20 bills in the 119th Congress; 1 became law. Cosponsored 395 others. 5.0% of sponsored bills got out of committee (House Democrats average 4.9%; 79th of 207).

The bills Dexter 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

Sponsored20 billsSponsored, Introduced: 2020Sponsored, In committee: 2020Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 11Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 11Sponsored, Became law: 11Cosponsored395 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 395395Cosponsored, In committee: 395395Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 66Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 11Cosponsored, Became law: 11IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Dexter sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored2020111
Cosponsored395395611
How to read the blocks

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

5.0%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

House Democrats average 4.9%. Ranks 79th of 207.

Cosponsorship partners

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

  1. Eleanor Norton39
  2. Rashida Tlaib31
  3. Suzanne Bonamici27
  4. Andrea Salinas24
  5. Yassamin Ansari21
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 Dexter’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.R. 10875To amend titles II and XVIII of the Social Security Act to lower the Medicare eligibility age to 50, and for other purposes.CosponsorOct 22, 2026In committeeUnassignedReferred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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. Oct 22, 2026
H.R. 10882Veteran Breast Cancer Fairness ActCosponsorOct 22, 2026In committeeUnassignedReferred to the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs. Oct 22, 2026
H.Res. 1627Reaffirming the commitment of the House of Representatives to preserve and expand pathways to citizenship.CosponsorOct 15, 2026In committeeImmigrationReferred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Oct 15, 2026
H.R. 10798Silicosis Prevention and Treatment ActCosponsorOct 13, 2026In committeeHealthReferred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Oct 13, 2026
H.R. 10774SWIMS Act of 2026CosponsorOct 9, 2026In committeeEnvironmental ProtectionReferred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, 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 9, 2026

Back to topNext: Online

Online

A site that changed 64 times in 90 days. Dexter’s official site had 26 pages when last crawled on Oct 25, 2026. The lab last catalogued the images Dexter posted on Oct 23, 2026.

The lab crawls Dexter’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 Dexter posts with a vision model.

Websites

  • Official site

    dexter.house.gov

    Last crawled Oct 25, 2026

    26

    pages crawled

    64

    changes in 90 days

  • Campaign site

    maxinefororegon.com

    Last crawled Oct 25, 2026

    22

    pages crawled

    31

    changes in 90 days

How to read the counts

“Pages crawled” is the size of the site at the last crawl; “changes in 90 days” counts pages whose text differed from the previous crawl. Sites change for many routine reasons, such as new press releases, so a high count is not by itself notable.

Images Dexter posted

The latest 24, with model-written descriptions

  • Two people are talking indoors. One person faces away from the camera, while the other wears a black graphic T-shirt. A colorful quilt hangs on the wall behind them, and there is text on the shirt.
    Two people are talking indoors. One person faces away from the camera, while the other wears a black graphic T-shirt. A colorful quilt hangs on the wall behind them, and there is text on the shirt.View post
  • A person seated at the front of a room speaks and gestures to an audience. A large dark display hangs above them. Text is visible on the speaker's shirt.
    A person seated at the front of a room speaks and gestures to an audience. A large dark display hangs above them. Text is visible on the speaker's shirt.View post
  • Two adults stand facing each other and talking in a room with rows of chairs. A colorful quilt hangs on the wall behind them, and daylight comes through a window. Text is visible on one person's shirt.
    Two adults stand facing each other and talking in a room with rows of chairs. A colorful quilt hangs on the wall behind them, and daylight comes through a window. Text is visible on one person's shirt.View post
  • Four adults pose together indoors in front of a large dark display screen. Several wear shirts or hold signs with a colorful voting-themed design, and one person has a name badge. There is text on the clothing, signs, and badge.
    Four adults pose together indoors in front of a large dark display screen. Several wear shirts or hold signs with a colorful voting-themed design, and one person has a name badge. There is text on the clothing, signs, and badge.View post
  • A news graphic from The 19th about a pregnant woman in immigration detention who fears losing another pregnancy. It includes a photo of silhouetted people behind a chain-link fence topped with razor wire, with article text overlaid.
    A news graphic from The 19th about a pregnant woman in immigration detention who fears losing another pregnancy. It includes a photo of silhouetted people behind a chain-link fence topped with razor wire, with article text overlaid.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 Dexter 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
D000635
Bioguide
D000635
FEC candidate ids
H4OR03192

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 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

Back to top