Skip to content

Republican · U.S. House, Pennsylvania’s 16th district

Serving since Jan 5, 2011119th Congress (2025–27)next election Nov 3, 2026

Bioguide K000376FEC H0PA03271

Portrait of Mike Kelly, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
55%
of statements claim credit, in the top tenth of House Republicans

55% of 730 statements claim credit (399 statements); the average for House Republicans is 37%. Ranks 13th of 221, where 1st is the highest rate.

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

At a glance

6 measures against House Republicans. The policy areas Kelly talks about and legislates on agree at 0.52 on a 0–1 scale, in the bottom tenth of House Republicans. 18% of Kelly’s statements use bipartisan language, 2.0 times the House Republican average of 8.9%.

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

Credit claiming

55%

House Republicans average 37% · ranks 13th of 221

Talk-to-bills agreement

0.52

House Republicans average 0.64 · ranks 207th of 221

Bipartisanship

18%

House Republicans average 8.9% · ranks 19th of 221

From Pennsylvania, 2026

26%

Of itemized individual dollars · ranks 189th of 216 House Republicans

Small donations, 2026

1.3%

House Republicans’ median 9.4% · ranks 180th of 220

CSIP ideology

+0.84

Right of 0, the centre of the scale · ± 0.01

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

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Kelly says

Kelly attacks opponents personally less than 72% of House Republicans. Personal attacks in 0.4% of 730 statements, against 2.1% for the average House Republican; 161st of 221.

An AI model reads each of Kelly’s 730 statements in the 119th Congress (506 posts on X, 186 press releases, 29 newsletters, 9 Congressional Record speeches) and marks the kinds of statement it contains: a personal attack, criticism of a policy, discussion of policy, bipartisanship, credit claiming, and extreme labels. A statement can carry several. Every rate is compared with the average for House Republicans and ranked among them.

Kinds of statement

Share of statements carrying each label, the 119th Congress

0%80%
Kelly
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion548 statements
75%
68%
55th of 221
Credit claiming399 statements
55%
37%
13th of 221
Bipartisanship131 statements
18%
9%
19th of 221
Policy criticism85 statements
12%
15%
153rd of 221
Personal attacks3 statements
0%
2%
161st of 221
Show the data
Kelly's share of statements in each category against the House Republicans average.
RowKellyPeers
Policy discussion75%68%
Credit claiming55%37%
Bipartisanship18%9%
Policy criticism12%15%
Personal attacks0%2%
730

statements classified

506 posts on X, 186 press releases, 29 newsletters, 9 Congressional Record speeches.

posts on X: 506 (69.3%)posts on X 506press releases: 186 (25.5%)press releases 186newsletters: 29 (4.0%)Congressional Record speeches: 9 (1.2%)
Show the data
Kelly's statements by source
PartValue
posts on X506
press releases186
newsletters29
Congressional Record speeches9
How to read the bars

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

Extreme labels

Kelly used extreme labels in 1.0% of statements, 32% of the peer average. 7 statements, most often aimed at EV mandates; peers 3.0%.

  1. “radical”3
  2. “far left”2
  3. “woke”2
  4. “communist”1
  5. “fascist”1

Who gets the labels

Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements

  1. EV mandates2
  2. climate programs1
  3. DEI1
  4. Democrats1
  5. Donald Trump1
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: 462025-02: 352025-03: 302025-04: 432025-05: 212025-06: 352025-07: 392025-08: 252025-09: 382025-10: 252025-11: 272025-12: 382026-01: 402026-02: 332026-03: 442026-04: 352026-05: 172026-06: 312026-07: 372026-08: 182026-09: 392026-10: 34peak 46 · Jan ’25Personal attackspeak 4.0% · Oct ’25 · latest 0.0%Personal attacks, 2025-01: 0.0% of 46Personal attacks, 2025-02: 0.0% of 35Personal attacks, 2025-03: 0.0% of 30Personal attacks, 2025-04: 0.0% of 43Personal attacks, 2025-05: 0.0% of 21Personal attacks, 2025-06: 2.9% of 35Personal attacks, 2025-07: 0.0% of 39Personal attacks, 2025-08: 0.0% of 25Personal attacks, 2025-09: 0.0% of 38Personal attacks, 2025-10: 4.0% of 25Personal attacks, 2025-11: 0.0% of 27Personal attacks, 2025-12: 0.0% of 38Personal attacks, 2026-01: 0.0% of 40Personal attacks, 2026-02: 0.0% of 33Personal attacks, 2026-03: 2.3% of 44Personal attacks, 2026-04: 0.0% of 35Personal attacks, 2026-05: 0.0% of 17Personal attacks, 2026-06: 0.0% of 31Personal attacks, 2026-07: 0.0% of 37Personal attacks, 2026-08: 0.0% of 18Personal attacks, 2026-09: 0.0% of 39Personal attacks, 2026-10: 0.0% of 34Policy criticismpeak 56.0% · Oct ’25 · latest 5.9%Policy criticism, 2025-01: 19.6% of 46Policy criticism, 2025-02: 11.4% of 35Policy criticism, 2025-03: 6.7% of 30Policy criticism, 2025-04: 9.3% of 43Policy criticism, 2025-05: 4.8% of 21Policy criticism, 2025-06: 17.1% of 35Policy criticism, 2025-07: 10.3% of 39Policy criticism, 2025-08: 0.0% of 25Policy criticism, 2025-09: 5.3% of 38Policy criticism, 2025-10: 56.0% of 25Policy criticism, 2025-11: 11.1% of 27Policy criticism, 2025-12: 13.2% of 38Policy criticism, 2026-01: 12.5% of 40Policy criticism, 2026-02: 6.1% of 33Policy criticism, 2026-03: 11.4% of 44Policy criticism, 2026-04: 11.4% of 35Policy criticism, 2026-05: 11.8% of 17Policy criticism, 2026-06: 6.5% of 31Policy criticism, 2026-07: 5.4% of 37Policy criticism, 2026-08: 16.7% of 18Policy criticism, 2026-09: 10.3% of 39Policy criticism, 2026-10: 5.9% of 34Policy discussionpeak 96.0% · Oct ’25 · latest 79.4%Policy discussion, 2025-01: 69.6% of 46Policy discussion, 2025-02: 77.1% of 35Policy discussion, 2025-03: 66.7% of 30Policy discussion, 2025-04: 69.8% of 43Policy discussion, 2025-05: 71.4% of 21Policy discussion, 2025-06: 74.3% of 35Policy discussion, 2025-07: 64.1% of 39Policy discussion, 2025-08: 48.0% of 25Policy discussion, 2025-09: 76.3% of 38Policy discussion, 2025-10: 96.0% of 25Policy discussion, 2025-11: 59.3% of 27Policy discussion, 2025-12: 57.9% of 38Policy discussion, 2026-01: 85.0% of 40Policy discussion, 2026-02: 87.9% of 33Policy discussion, 2026-03: 81.8% of 44Policy discussion, 2026-04: 77.1% of 35Policy discussion, 2026-05: 76.5% of 17Policy discussion, 2026-06: 74.2% of 31Policy discussion, 2026-07: 81.1% of 37Policy discussion, 2026-08: 88.9% of 18Policy discussion, 2026-09: 89.7% of 39Policy discussion, 2026-10: 79.4% of 34Bipartisanshippeak 30.0% · Mar ’25 · latest 8.8%Bipartisanship, 2025-01: 15.2% of 46Bipartisanship, 2025-02: 25.7% of 35Bipartisanship, 2025-03: 30.0% of 30Bipartisanship, 2025-04: 25.6% of 43Bipartisanship, 2025-05: 14.3% of 21Bipartisanship, 2025-06: 8.6% of 35Bipartisanship, 2025-07: 15.4% of 39Bipartisanship, 2025-08: 8.0% of 25Bipartisanship, 2025-09: 21.1% of 38Bipartisanship, 2025-10: 12.0% of 25Bipartisanship, 2025-11: 25.9% of 27Bipartisanship, 2025-12: 7.9% of 38Bipartisanship, 2026-01: 10.0% of 40Bipartisanship, 2026-02: 24.2% of 33Bipartisanship, 2026-03: 27.3% of 44Bipartisanship, 2026-04: 17.1% of 35Bipartisanship, 2026-05: 29.4% of 17Bipartisanship, 2026-06: 29.0% of 31Bipartisanship, 2026-07: 18.9% of 37Bipartisanship, 2026-08: 5.6% of 18Bipartisanship, 2026-09: 12.8% of 39Bipartisanship, 2026-10: 8.8% of 34Credit claimingpeak 74.2% · Jun ’26 · latest 52.9%Credit claiming, 2025-01: 52.2% of 46Credit claiming, 2025-02: 62.9% of 35Credit claiming, 2025-03: 53.3% of 30Credit claiming, 2025-04: 53.5% of 43Credit claiming, 2025-05: 47.6% of 21Credit claiming, 2025-06: 42.9% of 35Credit claiming, 2025-07: 59.0% of 39Credit claiming, 2025-08: 48.0% of 25Credit claiming, 2025-09: 52.6% of 38Credit claiming, 2025-10: 72.0% of 25Credit claiming, 2025-11: 51.8% of 27Credit claiming, 2025-12: 50.0% of 38Credit claiming, 2026-01: 52.5% of 40Credit claiming, 2026-02: 54.5% of 33Credit claiming, 2026-03: 59.1% of 44Credit claiming, 2026-04: 48.6% of 35Credit claiming, 2026-05: 47.1% of 17Credit claiming, 2026-06: 74.2% of 31Credit claiming, 2026-07: 62.2% of 37Credit claiming, 2026-08: 38.9% of 18Credit claiming, 2026-09: 56.4% of 39Credit claiming, 2026-10: 52.9% of 34Extreme labelspeak 9.5% · May ’25 · latest 0.0%Extreme labels, 2025-01: 2.2% of 46Extreme labels, 2025-02: 0.0% of 35Extreme labels, 2025-03: 0.0% of 30Extreme labels, 2025-04: 2.3% of 43Extreme labels, 2025-05: 9.5% of 21Extreme labels, 2025-06: 2.9% of 35Extreme labels, 2025-07: 0.0% of 39Extreme labels, 2025-08: 0.0% of 25Extreme labels, 2025-09: 2.6% of 38Extreme labels, 2025-10: 0.0% of 25Extreme labels, 2025-11: 0.0% of 27Extreme labels, 2025-12: 2.6% of 38Extreme labels, 2026-01: 0.0% of 40Extreme labels, 2026-02: 0.0% of 33Extreme labels, 2026-03: 0.0% of 44Extreme labels, 2026-04: 0.0% of 35Extreme labels, 2026-05: 0.0% of 17Extreme labels, 2026-06: 0.0% of 31Extreme labels, 2026-07: 0.0% of 37Extreme labels, 2026-08: 0.0% of 18Extreme labels, 2026-09: 0.0% of 39Extreme labels, 2026-10: 0.0% of 34Jan ’25Jul ’25Jan ’26Jul ’26Oct ’26
Show the data
Monthly rates for Kelly, 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 ’25460.0%19.6%69.6%15.2%52.2%2.2%
Feb ’25350.0%11.4%77.1%25.7%62.9%0.0%
Mar ’25300.0%6.7%66.7%30.0%53.3%0.0%
Apr ’25430.0%9.3%69.8%25.6%53.5%2.3%
May ’25210.0%4.8%71.4%14.3%47.6%9.5%
Jun ’25352.9%17.1%74.3%8.6%42.9%2.9%
Jul ’25390.0%10.3%64.1%15.4%59.0%0.0%
Aug ’25250.0%0.0%48.0%8.0%48.0%0.0%
Sep ’25380.0%5.3%76.3%21.1%52.6%2.6%
Oct ’25254.0%56.0%96.0%12.0%72.0%0.0%
Nov ’25270.0%11.1%59.3%25.9%51.8%0.0%
Dec ’25380.0%13.2%57.9%7.9%50.0%2.6%
Jan ’26400.0%12.5%85.0%10.0%52.5%0.0%
Feb ’26330.0%6.1%87.9%24.2%54.5%0.0%
Mar ’26442.3%11.4%81.8%27.3%59.1%0.0%
Apr ’26350.0%11.4%77.1%17.1%48.6%0.0%
May ’26170.0%11.8%76.5%29.4%47.1%0.0%
Jun ’26310.0%6.5%74.2%29.0%74.2%0.0%
Jul ’26370.0%5.4%81.1%18.9%62.2%0.0%
Aug ’26180.0%16.7%88.9%5.6%38.9%0.0%
Sep ’26390.0%10.3%89.7%12.8%56.4%0.0%
Oct ’26340.0%5.9%79.4%8.8%52.9%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 Kelly’s words

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

Bipartisanship

Kelly, Schneider introduce bipartisan "Brews to Barns Act" to support small breweries & local farmers, strengthen local supply chains WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Today, U.S. Representatives Mike Kelly (R-PA), Chairman of the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Tax, and Brad Schneider (D-IL), a member of the Ways…

Oct 22, 2026 · Press releases · policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Agriculture and Food; Commerce; Environmental Protection; Taxation · Source

Personal attacks

Kelly statement on voting to fund the Department of Homeland Security Image March 5, 2026 WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Today, U.S. Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) released the following statement after voting to fund the Department of Homeland Security. "For the last 19 days, during a period of heightened global tens…

Mar 5, 2026 · Press releases · personal attacks; policy discussion; credit claiming; Armed Forces and National Security; Emergency Management; Crime and Law Enforcement; target: Democrats · Source

Extreme label

Kelly, Mackenzie urge Gov. Shapiro to preserve law enforcement communication access WASHINGTON, D.C. -- This week, U.S. Representatives Mike Kelly (PA-16) and Ryan Mackenzie (PA-07) led members of the Pennsylvania congressional delegation in urging Governor Josh Shapiro to preserve Pennsylvania’s pa…

Dec 23, 2025 · Press releases · policy discussion; Crime and Law Enforcement; Immigration; Government Operations and Politics; extreme label “far left” aimed at Democrats · 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. Press releases

    Kelly statement on voting to fund the Department of Homeland Security Image March 5, 2026 WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Today, U.S. Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) released the following statement after voting to fund the Department of Homeland Security. "For the last 19 days, during a period of heightened global tensions, Democrats have withheld funding for the Department of Homeland Security. The Department was established after the…

    personal attacks · policy discussion · credit claiming · Armed Forces and National Security · Emergency Management · Crime and Law Enforcement · target: DemocratsSource

  2. Press releases

    Ways and Means Committee Republican Leaders Slam French Proposal to Impose Higher Discriminatory Digital Services Tax on U.S. Innovators WASHINGTON, D.C. – As lawmakers in France are considering a proposal to increase its digital services tax (DST) from 3 percent to 15 percent and raise the applicable revenue threshold to levels that specifically target American innovators, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smi…

    personal attacks · policy discussion · credit claiming · Taxation · Foreign Trade and International Finance · target: Joe BidenSource

  3. Posts on X

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

    personal attacks · policy discussion · Armed Forces and National Security · International Affairs · target: Iranian leadersSource

All 730 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: 506 posts on X, 186 press releases, 29 newsletters, 9 Congressional Record speeches.

Back to topNext: Policy

Policy

Taxation is what Kelly talks about most: 26% of policy statements, 2.7 times the peer share. Talk and legislation agree at 0.52 on a 0–1 scale (House Republicans average 0.64; 207th of 221).

Each policy statement is tagged by the AI model with one or more of 25 policy areas from the Congressional Research Service list, so the shares say what Kelly talks about. The bills Kelly sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.

What Kelly talks about

Share of policy statements by area, the 119th Congress

0%37%
Kelly
Peers
Taxation143 statements
26%
10%
Economics and Public Finance109 statements
20%
19%
Health104 statements
19%
15%
Armed Forces and National Security95 statements
17%
24%
Commerce84 statements
15%
9%
Show the data
Policy areas Kelly talks about, as a share of policy statements, against the House Republicans average.
RowKellyPeers
Taxation26%10%
Economics and Public Finance20%19%
Health19%15%
Armed Forces and National Security17%24%
Commerce15%9%
How to read the bars

The thick bar is the share of Kelly’s policy statements in an area; the thin grey bar is the average share for House Republicans. A statement counts once in each of its areas, so shares can add to more than 100%. The five largest areas are shown; the toggle shows the rest.

Talks about · legislates on

Left: share of statements by policy area. Right: share of bills. Areas in order of their share of statements; both sides run from 0 to 37%. Grey ticks are the House Republicans averages.

Talks aboutLegislates onTaxationTaxation, talks about: 26% (House Republicans 10%)26%Taxation, legislates on: 33% (House Republicans 9%)33%Economics and Public FinanceEconomics and Public Finance, talks about: 20% (House Republicans 19%)20%Economics and Public Finance, legislates on: 0% (House Republicans 2%)0%HealthHealth, talks about: 19% (House Republicans 15%)19%Health, legislates on: 26% (House Republicans 11%)26%Armed Forces and NationalSecurityArmed Forces and National Security, talks about: 17% (House Republicans 24%)17%Armed Forces and National Security, legislates on: 5% (House Republicans 8%)5%CommerceCommerce, talks about: 15% (House Republicans 9%)15%Commerce, legislates on: 0% (House Republicans 2%)0%
Show the data
Kelly's share of statements against share of bills in each policy area.
AreaTalks aboutHouse Republicans, talks aboutLegislates onHouse Republicans, legislates on
Taxation26%10%33%9%
Economics and Public Finance20%19%0%2%
Health19%15%26%11%
Armed Forces and National Security17%24%5%8%
Commerce15%9%0%2%
0.52

talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1

House Republicans average 0.64. Ranks 207th of 221.

What agreement means, and what it doesn’t

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

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Kelly sits at +0.84 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more liberal than 74% of House Republicans. Approximate range +0.82 to +0.85, which understates the uncertainty; from 1,874 donors and 7,367 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”.

+0.84

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range +0.82 to +0.85. From 1,874 donors and 7,367 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

← More liberalMore conservative →0Kelly +0.8House Republicans +1.0All House +0.3

The outlined dot is Kelly, 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 Kelly’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 Kelly sits

Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale

−2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →House Republicansmedian +1.0Kelly +0.8All Housemedian +0.3
Show the data
Kelly's CSIP score of +0.84 placed against House Republicans, All House.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Kelly
House Republicans221+1.025%
All House439+0.362%
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 Kelly 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 Kelly.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Kelly raised $1.4M in the 2026 cycle, below the House Republicans’ median of $2.2M. 1.3% of individual money came in gifts of $200 or less. 26% of itemized individual money came from Pennsylvania.

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
$1.4M

raised in the 2026 cycle

From 182 itemized donors. House Republicans’ median $2.2M.

Where the money came from

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

Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)Itemized individual (over $200): $328.7K (23.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.1M (76.4%)
  • Itemized individual (over $200)23 squares$328.7K
  • Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)$4,431
  • PACs and other committees77 squares$1.1M
Show the data
Sources of Kelly's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Itemized individual (over $200)$328.7K23.3%
Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)$4,4310.3%
PACs and other committees$1.1M76.4%
What this means, and what it doesn’t

Totals say how much a campaign took in, not how it was spent, and they rise sharply when a seat is up for election; compare cycles with that in mind. The small-donor share understates small giving when a campaign itemizes gifts made through ActBlue or WinRed.

Receipts by cycle

Total receipts, 2020 to 2026. The grey line is the House Republicans’ median for 2026.

2020 cycle: $2.3M$2.3M20202022 cycle: $1.3M$1.3M20222024 cycle: $1.7M$1.7M20242026 cycle: $1.4M$1.4M2026House Republicans median $2.2M
Show the data
Kelly's receipts by cycle against the 2026 House Republicans median.
ItemValue
2020 cycle$2.3M
2022 cycle$1.3M
2024 cycle$1.7M
2026 cycle$1.4M

Top donor states, 2026

Itemized contributions by donor state. 26% came from Pennsylvania.

  1. Pennsylvania$75.3K
  2. Virginia$41.0K
  3. New York$30.5K
  4. California$27.5K
  5. Texas$20.0K

Small donations

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

0%60%
Kelly
Median
2026
1%
9%
2024
4%
9%
2022
4%
9%
2020
5%
9%
Show the data
Small-donor share by cycle against the House Republicans median
RowKellyMedian
2026 cycle1%9%
2024 cycle4%9%
2022 cycle4%9%
2020 cycle5%9%

Where itemized donors live

Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state

Alaska: no dataAKMaine: no dataMEVermont: no dataVTNew Hampshire: no dataNHWashington: $2,500WAIdaho: no dataIDMontana: no dataMTNorth Dakota: no dataNDMinnesota: $400MNIllinois: $2,021ILWisconsin: $1,000WIMichigan: no dataMINew York: $30.5KNYRhode Island: no dataRIMassachusetts: $771MAOregon: no dataORNevada: no dataNVWyoming: no dataWYSouth Dakota: $500SDIowa: no dataIAIndiana: no dataINOhio: $3,250OHPennsylvania: $75.3KPANew Jersey: $1,042NJConnecticut: $1,771CTCalifornia: $27.5KCAUtah: $7,000UTColorado: $19.2KCONebraska: no dataNEMissouri: $1,500MOKentucky: $7,300KYWest Virginia: no dataWVVirginia: $41.0KVAMaryland: $10.5KMDDelaware: no dataDEArizona: $500AZNew Mexico: no dataNMKansas: $3,050KSArkansas: $250ARTennessee: no dataTNNorth Carolina: $3,500NCSouth Carolina: no dataSCDistrict of Columbia: $16.8KDCOklahoma: $3,500OKLouisiana: $6,000LAMississippi: no dataMSAlabama: no dataALGeorgia: no dataGAHawaii: no dataHITexas: $20.0KTXFlorida: $4,196FL
Show the data
Kelly's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
Pennsylvania$75.3K
Virginia$41.0K
New York$30.5K
California$27.5K
Texas$20.0K
Colorado$19.2K
District of Columbia$16.8K
Maryland$10.5K
Kentucky$7,300
Utah$7,000
Louisiana$6,000
Florida$4,196
North Carolina$3,500
Oklahoma$3,500
Ohio$3,250
Kansas$3,050
Washington$2,500
Illinois$2,021
Connecticut$1,771
Missouri$1,500
New Jersey$1,042
Wisconsin$1,000
Massachusetts$771
South Dakota$500
Arizona$500
Minnesota$400
Arkansas$250
AlaskaNo data
MaineNo data
VermontNo data
New HampshireNo data
IdahoNo data
MontanaNo data
North DakotaNo data
MichiganNo data
Rhode IslandNo data
OregonNo data
NevadaNo data
WyomingNo data
IowaNo data
IndianaNo data
NebraskaNo data
West VirginiaNo data
DelawareNo data
New MexicoNo data
TennesseeNo data
South CarolinaNo data
MississippiNo data
AlabamaNo data
GeorgiaNo data
HawaiiNo data
182

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

26%

from Pennsylvania

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

Donors’ ideology

Distribution of itemized donors’ own CSIP scores

CSIP −1.00 to −0.75: 0.5%CSIP −0.75 to −0.50: 1.6%CSIP −0.50 to −0.25: 2.0%CSIP −0.25 to 0.00: 9.3%CSIP 0.00 to +0.25: 5.3%CSIP +0.25 to +0.50: 9.4%CSIP +0.50 to +0.75: 18%CSIP +0.75 to +1.00: 52%52%CSIP +1.00 to +1.25: 2.4%← More liberalMore conservative →0
Show the data
Ideology of Kelly's itemized donors in 2026, from −1.00 to +1.25: 9.3% between −0.25 and 0.00, 5.3% between 0.00 and +0.25, 9.4% between +0.25 and +0.50, 18% between +0.50 and +0.75, 52% between +0.75 and +1.00.
ItemValue
CSIP −1.00 to −0.750.5%
CSIP −0.75 to −0.501.6%
CSIP −0.50 to −0.252.0%
CSIP −0.25 to 0.009.3%
CSIP 0.00 to +0.255.3%
CSIP +0.25 to +0.509.4%
CSIP +0.50 to +0.7518%
CSIP +0.75 to +1.0052%
CSIP +1.00 to +1.252.4%
How to read the columns

Donors who give to many candidates get their own CSIP score. Each column is the share of Kelly’s itemized money from donors in that part of the scale, blue left of 0 and red right of 0, deeper further out; Kelly’s own score is +0.84.

Top donor occupations

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. CEO$38.8K 12 donors
  2. CONSULTANT$24.8K 17 donors
  3. RETIRED$19.8K 18 donors
  4. PRESIDENT$18.5K 6 donors
  5. OWNER$16.8K 6 donors

Top committees

PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.

  1. AMERICA'S CREDIT UNIONS PAC$10.0K
  2. AMERICAN BANKERS ASSOCIATION PAC (BANKPAC)$10.0K
  3. AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PHYSICIAN SERVICES INC PAC; AKA ACP SERVICES PAC$10.0K
  4. AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ASSOCIATION EXECUTIVES (ASAE) PAC$10.0K
  5. AUTOMOTIVE FREE INTERNATIONAL TRADE PAC$10.0K

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. ALLIANT$11.0K 3 donors
  2. DAVITA$8,250 6 donors
  3. STANTON PARK GROUP$2,500 3 donors

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Kelly voted with the majority of House Republicans on 98.0% of party-line votes and missed 1.6% of 674 roll calls. House Republicans on average: 97.1% party unity, 96.3% attendance. Across all roll calls, Kelly voted against the majority of House Republicans 9 times.

674 roll calls Kelly could vote on in the 119th Congress, compared with House Republicans. Attendance is the share with a vote recorded. Party unity counts only party-line roll calls, where most Democrats and most Republicans voted on opposite sides, and is the share of those where Kelly voted with the majority of House Republicans. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.

9

votes against the majority of House Republicans

Party unity 98.0%, House Republicans average 97.1%, ranks 121st of 221. 674 roll calls in the 119th Congress.

Attendance and party unity

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

80%100%
Kelly
Peers
Rank
Attendance
98.3%
96.3%
92nd of 221
Party unity
98.0%
97.1%
121st of 221
Show the data
Kelly's attendance and party unity against House Republicans.
RowKellyPeers
Attendance98.3%96.3%
Party unity98.0%97.1%
What this means, and what it doesn’t

A missed roll call has many causes, from illness to campaigning, so attendance says how often, not why. A vote against the majority can be on procedure as well as substance, and many fall on roll calls where both parties split; the key votes below show the ones that decided something.

Key votes

25 roll calls the lab flagged as key in the 119th Congress

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
YeaWith 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
YeaWith majorityPassedD 6–206 · R 210–1 · I 1–0Democrats 6 yea, 206 nay; Republicans 210 yea, 1 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nayclose vote
Sep 16, 2026
H.R. 9576
National Fraud Enforcement Division Act
On Passage
YeaWith majorityPassedD 139–72 · R 212–0 · I 1–0Democrats 139 yea, 72 nay; Republicans 212 yea, 0 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nayparty crossover
Sep 16, 2026
H.R. 5334
An Act to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow early childhood educators to take the educator expense deduction, and for other purposes
On Motion to Concur in the Senate Amendments
YeaWith 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 Kelly most often

  1. Mike JohnsonR512 shared votes100%
  2. Ashley HinsonR652 shared votes99%
  3. Neal DunnR540 shared votes99%
  4. Cliff BentzR662 shared votes99%
  5. Frank LucasR652 shared votes99%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Kelly least often

  1. Adelita GrijalvaD385 shared votes25%
  2. Rashida TlaibD647 shared votes25%
  3. Delia RamirezD630 shared votes26%
  4. Gregorio CasarD569 shared votes27%
  5. Frederica WilsonD475 shared votes27%
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

Kelly sponsored 36 bills in the 119th Congress; none became law. Cosponsored 283 others. 8.3% of sponsored bills got out of committee (House Republicans average 17%; 159th of 216).

The bills Kelly 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

Sponsored36 billsSponsored, Introduced: 3636Sponsored, In committee: 3636Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 22Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 00Sponsored, Became law: 00Cosponsored283 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 283283Cosponsored, In committee: 283283Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 2424Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 55Cosponsored, Became law: 44IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Kelly sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored3636200
Cosponsored2832832454
How to read the blocks

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

8.3%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

House Republicans average 17%. Ranks 159th of 216.

Cosponsorship partners

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

  1. Claudia Tenney43
  2. Brian Fitzpatrick35
  3. Carol Miller28
  4. Lloyd Smucker25
  5. Mike Carey19
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 Kelly’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. 10876To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to ensure appropriate access to mental health care under the Medicare program.SponsorOct 22, 2026In committeeUnassignedReferred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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. 10877To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 establish a credit against the excise tax on beer for brewers that donate spent grain for local agricultural use.SponsorOct 22, 2026In committeeUnassignedReferred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. Oct 22, 2026
H.Res. 1601Recognizing September as "Childhood Cancer Awareness Month".CosponsorOct 1, 2026In committeeHealthReferred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Oct 1, 2026
H.R. 10521MA STARS ActSponsorSep 21, 2026In committeeHealthReferred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 21, 2026
H.Res. 1564Recognizing September 17, 2026, as National Teach Ag Day.CosponsorSep 17, 2026In committeeAgriculture and FoodReferred to the House Committee on Agriculture. Sep 17, 2026

Back to topNext: Online

Online

A site that changed 68 times in 90 days. Kelly’s official site had 31 pages when last crawled on Oct 25, 2026. The lab last catalogued the images Kelly posted on Oct 26, 2026.

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

Websites

How to read the counts

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

Social accounts

Images Kelly posted

The latest 24, with model-written descriptions

  • Three adults stand talking in a brightly lit office or service-room hallway. A desk, doors, wall notices, and other room fixtures are visible. There is text on signs and notices.
    Three adults stand talking in a brightly lit office or service-room hallway. A desk, doors, wall notices, and other room fixtures are visible. There is text on signs and notices.View post
  • A white ambulance is parked inside a garage as three people walk nearby. There is visible text on the ambulance and wall.
    A white ambulance is parked inside a garage as three people walk nearby. There is visible text on the ambulance and wall.View post
  • A photo of two men shaking hands while holding an oversized check, with another uniformed police officer behind them. A political infographic below the photo describes federal investments in a Pennsylvania congressional district. Text appears throughout the image.
    A photo of two men shaking hands while holding an oversized check, with another uniformed police officer behind them. A political infographic below the photo describes federal investments in a Pennsylvania congressional district. Text appears throughout the image.View post
  • A promotional infographic for a program connecting small breweries with local farmers. It features a photograph of four people standing inside a brewery, a quotation and yearly impact figure, and illustrated icons showing the program’s benefits. Wheat stalks and a representative’s logo decorate the bottom. Text appears throughout.
    A promotional infographic for a program connecting small breweries with local farmers. It features a photograph of four people standing inside a brewery, a quotation and yearly impact figure, and illustrated icons showing the program’s benefits. Wheat stalks and a representative’s logo decorate the bottom. Text appears throughout.View post
  • A political infographic featuring a photograph of a man speaking at a hearing, with a microphone and a name placard on the desk. Below the photo is a graphic about the doubled standard deduction, with claims and checkmark icons. There is prominent text throughout.
    A political infographic featuring a photograph of a man speaking at a hearing, with a microphone and a name placard on the desk. Below the photo is a graphic about the doubled standard deduction, with claims and checkmark icons. There is prominent text throughout.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 Kelly is most unusual among House Republicans, chosen by one rule for every official of every party. The candidates are the rate of each kind of statement and of extreme labels, party unity, attendance, the small-donor share, the in-state share and total receipts of the latest cycle, the share of sponsored bills that got out of committee, talk-to-bills agreement, and the CSIP score’s place within the party group.

The builder ranks every measure within the same peer group the page compares it with, and writes each official’s percentile: the share of the group below the value, ties counting half, so 0.5 is the median and a value shared by many never ranks first. A measure’s score is how far that percentile sits from the median (0 in the middle, 0.5 at either end), and the highest score leads if it is above 0.25, outside the middle half of the group. Scores within 0.03 of each other are a tie, broken in this order: votes against the party majority, kinds of statement, ideology, roll calls missed, small donations, in-state money, legislation, agreement, extreme labels, receipts.

A measure counts only with at least 200 statements, 100 roll calls or 5 sponsored bills behind it and a peer group of at least 10. Two things never lead: high party unity or attendance, where most members sit, and a high rate of a kind of statement backed by fewer than 10 statements. When nothing qualifies, the headline is a neutral fact instead: statements classified, or years in office. The wording always names the direction (“in the bottom 5% of …”, “votes against the majority of …”).

Identifiers

Profile id
K000376
Bioguide
K000376
FEC candidate ids
H0PA03271

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