14% of 792 statements use bipartisan language (110 statements); the average for House Democrats is 9.8%. Ranks 37th of 216, where 1st is the highest rate.
An AI model reads each of Hoyle’s press releases, posts on X, Congressional Record speeches and newsletters 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.
6 measures against House Democrats. The policy areas Hoyle talks about and legislates on agree at 0.71 on a 0–1 scale, in the top quarter of House Democrats. 3.0% of Hoyle’s statements contain a personal attack, in the bottom half of House Democrats (average 6.6%).
The measures on which Hoyle 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
House Democrats average 9.8% · ranks 37th of 216
Talk-to-bills agreement
House Democrats average 0.67 · ranks 39th of 216
Personal attacks
House Democrats average 6.6% · ranks 162nd of 216
CSIP ideology
More liberal than 73% of House Democrats · ± 0.03
Out of committee
House Democrats average 4.9% · ranks 60th of 207
Extreme labels
House Democrats average 1.9% · ranks 141st of 216
Peer group: House Democrats. Rank 1 is the highest value in the group; the thick bar is Hoyle, the thin grey bar the peer average. The headline is the measure on which Hoyle is most unusual among peers (Methods, §08).
Hoyle attacks opponents personally less than 74% of House Democrats. Personal attacks in 3.0% of 792 statements, against 6.6% for the average House Democrat; 162nd of 216.
An AI model reads each of Hoyle’s 792 statements in the 119th Congress (485 posts on X, 157 press releases, 140 Congressional Record speeches, 10 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.
Share of statements carrying each label, the 119th Congress
| Row | Hoyle | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Policy discussion | 74% | 73% |
| Policy criticism | 28% | 28% |
| Credit claiming | 24% | 23% |
| Bipartisanship | 14% | 10% |
| Personal attacks | 3% | 7% |
statements classified
485 posts on X, 157 press releases, 140 Congressional Record speeches, 10 newsletters.
| Part | Value |
|---|---|
| posts on X | 485 |
| press releases | 157 |
| Congressional Record speeches | 140 |
| newsletters | 10 |
The thick bar is Hoyle; the thin grey bar is the average House Democrats. A longer thick bar means Hoyle does this more than peers. Rank 1 is the highest rate in the group.
Hoyle used extreme labels in 1.0% of statements, below the peer average. 8 statements, most often aimed at abortion coverage; peers 1.9%.
Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements
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.
Share of statements per month, the 119th Congress
| Column | Statements | Personal attacks | Policy criticism | Policy discussion | Bipartisanship | Credit claiming | Extreme labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan ’25 | 48 | 0.0% | 52.1% | 81.3% | 31.3% | 47.9% | 4.2% |
| Feb ’25 | 30 | 10.0% | 33.3% | 66.7% | 6.7% | 23.3% | 0.0% |
| Mar ’25 | 48 | 8.3% | 43.8% | 66.7% | 2.1% | 8.3% | 0.0% |
| Apr ’25 | 9 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| May ’25 | 39 | 0.0% | 25.6% | 61.5% | 25.6% | 28.2% | 2.6% |
| Jun ’25 | 11 | 0.0% | 36.4% | 100.0% | 36.4% | 63.6% | 0.0% |
| Jul ’25 | 37 | 2.7% | 27.0% | 70.3% | 27.0% | 32.4% | 0.0% |
| Aug ’25 | 8 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Sep ’25 | 9 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Oct ’25 | 10 | 10.0% | 20.0% | 70.0% | 20.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Nov ’25 | 7 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Dec ’25 | 20 | 0.0% | 50.0% | 85.0% | 30.0% | 40.0% | 0.0% |
| Jan ’26 | 23 | 4.3% | 21.7% | 82.6% | 13.0% | 8.7% | 4.3% |
| Feb ’26 | 43 | 4.7% | 39.5% | 55.8% | 2.3% | 9.3% | 2.3% |
| Mar ’26 | 60 | 1.7% | 31.7% | 55.0% | 15.0% | 20.0% | 3.3% |
| Apr ’26 | 47 | 8.5% | 25.5% | 74.5% | 8.5% | 23.4% | 0.0% |
| May ’26 | 38 | 0.0% | 31.6% | 73.7% | 15.8% | 34.2% | 0.0% |
| Jun ’26 | 55 | 1.8% | 21.8% | 80.0% | 12.7% | 25.4% | 0.0% |
| Jul ’26 | 44 | 2.3% | 20.4% | 77.3% | 15.9% | 29.5% | 0.0% |
| Aug ’26 | 35 | 0.0% | 14.3% | 88.6% | 2.9% | 25.7% | 0.0% |
| Sep ’26 | 112 | 3.6% | 19.6% | 76.8% | 8.9% | 15.2% | 0.0% |
| Oct ’26 | 59 | 0.0% | 15.3% | 78.0% | 3.4% | 20.3% | 0.0% |
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%. 4 months are hatched here.
Real statements from the classifier’s example set, with the labels it assigned
Bipartisanship
LAWMAKERS CALL FOR UKRAINIAN TEMPORARAY PROTECTED STATUS (TPS) EXTENSION WASHINGTON, D.C. — This week, Rep. Val Hoyle (D-OR) and Rep. Bryan Fitzpatrick (R-PA) led over 50 of their colleagues in sending a letter to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin demanding the agency ensure that Ukrainian nationals le…
Oct 20, 2026 · Press releases · policy criticism; policy discussion; bipartisanship; Immigration; Law · Source
Personal attacks
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Sep 16, 2026 · Posts on X · personal attacks; target: Republican colleagues · Source
Extreme label
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Mar 29, 2026 · Posts on X · extreme label “fascist” · Source
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 · target: Republican colleaguesSource
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 · Commerce · target: PresidentSource
Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill. This administration's corruption playbook is impacting industries across the board and raising costs for working families like the ones I represent. Their next target is the mining industry. Representative Grijalva offered an amendment that would require the Secretary to ensure there is meaningful and robust Tribal consultation for any mining project to be eligible to b…
personal attacks · policy discussion · Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues · Environmental Protection · Commerce · Public Lands and Natural Resources · target: PresidentSource
Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 of the Constitution says: The time, place, and manner of elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof, but Congress may at any time by law--by law--make or alter such regulations. There is a court order saying the administration may not interfere with vote by mail. In Oregon, we only vote by mail and have done so s…
personal attacks · policy discussion · Government Operations and Politics · Law · target: colleaguesSource
Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · bipartisanship · Housing and Community Development · target: PresidentSource
Newest first, the 119th Congress
Five statements at a time, newest first; filters apply to the statements loaded so far. Export saves the statements that match. Sources: 485 posts on X, 157 press releases, 140 Congressional Record speeches, 10 newsletters.
Government Operations and Politics is what Hoyle talks about most: 26% of policy statements, above the peer share. Talk and legislation agree at 0.71 on a 0–1 scale (House Democrats average 0.67; 39th 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 Hoyle talks about. The bills Hoyle sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.
Share of policy statements by area, the 119th Congress
| Row | Hoyle | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Government Operations and Politics | 26% | 20% |
| Economics and Public Finance | 21% | 20% |
| Health | 17% | 26% |
| Armed Forces and National Security | 17% | 16% |
| Labor and Employment | 15% | 7% |
The thick bar is the share of Hoyle’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.
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.
| Area | Talks about | House Democrats, talks about | Legislates on | House Democrats, legislates on |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Government Operations and Politics | 26% | 20% | 13% | 11% |
| Economics and Public Finance | 21% | 20% | 1% | 1% |
| Health | 17% | 26% | 11% | 16% |
| Armed Forces and National Security | 17% | 16% | 7% | 7% |
| Labor and Employment | 15% | 7% | 6% | 5% |
talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1
House Democrats average 0.67. Ranks 39th of 216.
Agreement is 1 minus the distance between the two distributions (Jensen–Shannon): 1 means Hoyle legislates on exactly the areas Hoyle 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 Hoyle sponsored count fully, cosponsored bills a quarter. Shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.
Hoyle sits at −1.15 on the CSIP scale, left of 0, more liberal than 73% of House Democrats. Approximate range −1.18 to −1.13, which understates the uncertainty; from 2,094 donors and 1,864 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”.
CSIP ideal point
Approximate range −1.18 to −1.13. From 2,094 donors and 1,864 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.
The outlined dot is Hoyle, 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 Hoyle’s groups. 0 is the centre of the scale, not “moderate” by definition.
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.
Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale
| Group | Officials | Median | Share left of Hoyle |
|---|---|---|---|
| House Democrats | 217 | −1.0 | 27% |
| All House | 439 | +0.3 | 13% |
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 Hoyle 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 Hoyle.
Hoyle raised $1.7M in the 2026 cycle, below the House Democrats’ median of $2.0M. 12% of individual money came in gifts of $200 or less. 49% 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.
raised in the 2026 cycle
From 393 itemized donors. House Democrats’ median $2.0M.
Each square is one percent of 2026-cycle receipts, from FEC summary totals.
| Source | Amount | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Itemized individual (over $200) | $758.1K | 46.0% |
| Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less) | $102.9K | 6.3% |
| PACs and other committees | $785.7K | 47.7% |
| Party committees | $75 | 0.0% |
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.
Total receipts, 2022 to 2026. The grey line is the House Democrats’ median for 2026.
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| 2022 cycle | $2.6M |
| 2024 cycle | $2.7M |
| 2026 cycle | $1.7M |
Itemized contributions by donor state. 49% came from Oregon.
Gifts of $200 or less as a share of individual money, by cycle. The thin grey bar is the 2026 House Democrats’ median.
| Row | Hoyle | Median |
|---|---|---|
| 2026 cycle | 12% | 13% |
| 2024 cycle | 17% | 13% |
| 2022 cycle | 22% | 13% |
Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state
| State | Value |
|---|---|
| Oregon | $223.0K |
| District of Columbia | $42.3K |
| California | $26.9K |
| New York | $24.2K |
| Massachusetts | $17.0K |
| Texas | $16.0K |
| Virginia | $15.5K |
| Maryland | $14.6K |
| New Jersey | $12.3K |
| Washington | $10.8K |
| Florida | $8,500 |
| New Hampshire | $6,000 |
| Illinois | $5,000 |
| Arizona | $3,800 |
| Idaho | $3,500 |
| Ohio | $2,000 |
| Connecticut | $1,000 |
| Colorado | $1,000 |
| North Carolina | $1,000 |
| Missouri | $500 |
| Alaska | $250 |
| Maine | No data |
| Vermont | No data |
| Montana | No data |
| North Dakota | No data |
| Minnesota | No data |
| Wisconsin | No data |
| Michigan | No data |
| Rhode Island | No data |
| Nevada | No data |
| Wyoming | No data |
| South Dakota | No data |
| Iowa | No data |
| Indiana | No data |
| Pennsylvania | No data |
| Utah | No data |
| Nebraska | No data |
| Kentucky | No data |
| West Virginia | No data |
| Delaware | No data |
| New Mexico | No data |
| Kansas | No data |
| Arkansas | No data |
| Tennessee | No data |
| South Carolina | No data |
| Oklahoma | No data |
| Louisiana | No data |
| Mississippi | No data |
| Alabama | No data |
| Georgia | No data |
| Hawaii | No data |
itemized donors
People who gave more than $200
from Oregon
Of itemized individual dollars
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.
Distribution of itemized donors’ own CSIP scores
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| CSIP −1.75 to −1.50 | 0.0% |
| CSIP −1.50 to −1.25 | 5.3% |
| CSIP −1.25 to −1.00 | 53% |
| CSIP −1.00 to −0.75 | 25% |
| CSIP −0.75 to −0.50 | 3.8% |
| CSIP −0.50 to −0.25 | 5.5% |
| CSIP −0.25 to 0.00 | 4.3% |
| CSIP 0.00 to +0.25 | 2.1% |
| CSIP +0.25 to +0.50 | 0.7% |
| CSIP +0.50 to +0.75 | 0.2% |
Donors who give to many candidates get their own CSIP score. Each column is the share of Hoyle’s itemized money from donors in that part of the scale, blue left of 0 and red right of 0, deeper further out; Hoyle’s own score is −1.15.
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.
Hoyle voted with the majority of House Democrats on 97.4% of party-line votes and missed 1.8% of 674 roll calls. House Democrats on average: 96.4% party unity, 96.9% attendance. Across all roll calls, Hoyle voted against the majority of House Democrats 24 times.
674 roll calls Hoyle 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 Hoyle voted with the majority of House Democrats. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.
votes against the majority of House Democrats
Party unity 97.4%, House Democrats average 96.4%, ranks 134th of 217. 674 roll calls in the 119th Congress.
The thick bar is Hoyle, the thin grey bar the House Democrats average. The scale runs from 80% to 100% to show the gap.
| Row | Hoyle | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Attendance | 98.2% | 96.9% |
| Party unity | 97.4% | 96.4% |
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.
25 roll calls the lab flagged as key in the 119th Congress
| Party split (yea–nay) | Why it’s key | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 16, 2026 | Yea | With majority | Passed | D 209–0 · R 191–14 · I 1–0Democrats 209 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 191 yea, 14 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nay | became 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 | 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 | close vote |
| Sep 16, 2026 | Nay | With majority | Passed | D 6–206 · R 210–1 · I 1–0Democrats 6 yea, 206 nay; Republicans 210 yea, 1 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nay | close vote | |
| Sep 16, 2026 | Nay | Against majority | Passed | D 139–72 · R 212–0 · I 1–0Democrats 139 yea, 72 nay; Republicans 212 yea, 0 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nay | party 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 | 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 |
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.
The colleagues who voted the same way as Hoyle most often
The colleagues who voted the same way as Hoyle least 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.
119th Congress (2025–27), loads in batches
Hoyle sponsored 16 bills in the 119th Congress; none became law. Cosponsored 356 others. 6.3% of sponsored bills got out of committee (House Democrats average 4.9%; 60th of 207).
The bills Hoyle 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.
Counts for the 119th Congress
| Role | Introduced | In committee | Passed one chamber | Passed both chambers | Became law |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sponsored | 16 | 16 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Cosponsored | 356 | 356 | 7 | 0 | 0 |
Ink blocks are bills Hoyle sponsored, ochre blocks bills Hoyle cosponsored; the figure above each block is the count. Most bills in any legislature never leave committee, so a short staircase is the norm.
of sponsored bills got out of committee
House Democrats average 4.9%. Ranks 60th of 207.
Colleagues who most often cosponsor with Hoyle, by number of shared bills in the 119th Congress; the square shows their party.
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 Hoyle’s bills; the toggle shows more.
Sponsored and cosponsored, with status and policy area; five are shown, the toggle shows the rest
| H.R. 10875 | To amend titles II and XVIII of the Social Security Act to lower the Medicare eligibility age to 50, and for other purposes. | Cosponsor | Oct 22, 2026 | In committee | Unassigned | Referred 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. 10907 | To prohibit interference in elections for Federal office, and for other purposes. | Cosponsor | Oct 22, 2026 | In committee | Unassigned | Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, 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. 10823 | Northwest Wetlands Voluntary Incentives Program Act | Sponsor | Oct 15, 2026 | In committee | Environmental Protection | Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. Oct 15, 2026 |
| H.Res. 1628 | Supporting the designation of the week beginning on October 10, 2026, as "National Wildlife Refuge Week". | Cosponsor | Oct 15, 2026 | In committee | Public Lands and Natural Resources | Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. Oct 15, 2026 |
| H.R. 10774 | SWIMS Act of 2026 | Cosponsor | Oct 9, 2026 | In committee | Environmental Protection | Referred 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 |
A site that changed 71 times in 90 days. Hoyle’s official site had 28 pages when last crawled on Oct 25, 2026. The lab last catalogued the images Hoyle posted on Oct 26, 2026.
The lab crawls Hoyle’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 Hoyle posts with a vision model.
pages crawled
changes in 90 days
pages crawled
changes in 90 days
“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.
The latest 24, with model-written 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 is the measure on which Hoyle 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 …”).
Bulk files with the same data for every official:
America’s Political Pulse · Polarization Research Lab
