Skip to content

Democrat · U.S. House, Illinois’s 2nd district

Serving since Apr 9, 2013119th Congress (2025–27)next election Nov 3, 2026

Bioguide K000385FEC H2IL02172, S6IL00474

Portrait of Robin Kelly, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
80%
of statements discuss policy, in the top quarter of House Democrats

80% of 1,985 statements discuss policy (1,590 statements); the average for House Democrats is 73%. Ranks 34th of 216, where 1st is the highest rate.

An AI model reads each of Kelly’s press releases, posts on X, Congressional Record speeches and newsletters and marks whether it discusses a specific policy. 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. 36% of Kelly’s statements criticize a policy, in the top quarter of House Democrats (average 28%). 24% of Kelly’s individual money in the 2026 cycle came in gifts of $200 or less, in the top quarter of House Democrats (median 13%).

The measures on which Kelly 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.

Policy discussion

80%

House Democrats average 73% · ranks 34th of 216

Policy criticism

36%

House Democrats average 28% · ranks 35th of 216

Small donations, 2026

24%

House Democrats’ median 13% · ranks 41st of 214

Personal attacks

9.9%

House Democrats average 6.6% · ranks 45th of 216

Party unity

99.5%

House Democrats average 96.4% · ranks 46th of 217 · 10 votes against the majority of House Democrats

CSIP ideology

−1.12

Left of 0, the centre of the scale · ± 0.02

Peer group: House Democrats. Rank 1 is the highest value in the group; the thick bar is 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 stresses bipartisanship less than 74% of House Democrats. Bipartisanship in 6.0% of 1,985 statements, against 9.8% for the average House Democrat; 162nd of 216.

An AI model reads each of Kelly’s 1,985 statements in the 119th Congress (1,757 posts on X, 130 press releases, 67 newsletters, 31 Congressional Record speeches) and marks the kinds of statement it contains: a personal attack, criticism of a policy, discussion of policy, bipartisanship, credit claiming, and extreme labels. A statement can carry several. Every rate is compared with the average for House Democrats and ranked among them.

Kinds of statement

Share of statements carrying each label, the 119th Congress

0%80%
Kelly
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion1,590 statements
80%
73%
34th of 216
Policy criticism717 statements
36%
28%
35th of 216
Credit claiming433 statements
22%
23%
110th of 216
Personal attacks197 statements
10%
7%
45th of 216
Bipartisanship120 statements
6%
10%
162nd of 216
Show the data
Kelly's share of statements in each category against the House Democrats average.
RowKellyPeers
Policy discussion80%73%
Policy criticism36%28%
Credit claiming22%23%
Personal attacks10%7%
Bipartisanship6%10%
1,985

statements classified

1,757 posts on X, 130 press releases, 67 newsletters, 31 Congressional Record speeches.

posts on X: 1,757 (88.5%)posts on X 1,757press releases: 130 (6.5%)newsletters: 67 (3.4%)Congressional Record speeches: 31 (1.6%)
Show the data
Kelly's statements by source
PartValue
posts on X1,757
press releases130
newsletters67
Congressional Record speeches31
How to read the bars

The thick bar is Kelly; the thin grey bar is the average House Democrats. 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 1.8% of statements, close to the peer average. 35 statements, most often aimed at ICE; peers 1.9%.

  1. “extreme”11
  2. “MAGA”1
  3. “woke”1

Who gets the labels

Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements

  1. ICE8
  2. Kristi Noem4
  3. Trump4
  4. Donald Trump3
  5. Republicans3
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: 392025-02: 472025-03: 582025-04: 492025-05: 632025-06: 642025-07: 1012025-08: 1212025-09: 1232025-10: 1312025-11: 1112025-12: 952026-01: 1452026-02: 1362026-03: 1132026-04: 1242026-05: 1172026-06: 1152026-07: 512026-08: 642026-09: 632026-10: 55peak 145 · Jan ’26Personal attackspeak 22.1% · Jan ’26 · latest 5.5%Personal attacks, 2025-01: 7.7% of 39Personal attacks, 2025-02: 8.5% of 47Personal attacks, 2025-03: 19.0% of 58Personal attacks, 2025-04: 10.2% of 49Personal attacks, 2025-05: 12.7% of 63Personal attacks, 2025-06: 10.9% of 64Personal attacks, 2025-07: 9.9% of 101Personal attacks, 2025-08: 8.3% of 121Personal attacks, 2025-09: 8.1% of 123Personal attacks, 2025-10: 9.2% of 131Personal attacks, 2025-11: 4.5% of 111Personal attacks, 2025-12: 12.6% of 95Personal attacks, 2026-01: 22.1% of 145Personal attacks, 2026-02: 15.4% of 136Personal attacks, 2026-03: 5.3% of 113Personal attacks, 2026-04: 7.3% of 124Personal attacks, 2026-05: 7.7% of 117Personal attacks, 2026-06: 7.8% of 115Personal attacks, 2026-07: 5.9% of 51Personal attacks, 2026-08: 3.1% of 64Personal attacks, 2026-09: 9.5% of 63Personal attacks, 2026-10: 5.5% of 55Policy criticismpeak 65.6% · Oct ’25 · latest 9.1%Policy criticism, 2025-01: 25.6% of 39Policy criticism, 2025-02: 53.2% of 47Policy criticism, 2025-03: 39.7% of 58Policy criticism, 2025-04: 32.6% of 49Policy criticism, 2025-05: 38.1% of 63Policy criticism, 2025-06: 39.1% of 64Policy criticism, 2025-07: 44.5% of 101Policy criticism, 2025-08: 39.7% of 121Policy criticism, 2025-09: 44.7% of 123Policy criticism, 2025-10: 65.6% of 131Policy criticism, 2025-11: 51.3% of 111Policy criticism, 2025-12: 22.1% of 95Policy criticism, 2026-01: 14.5% of 145Policy criticism, 2026-02: 46.3% of 136Policy criticism, 2026-03: 36.3% of 113Policy criticism, 2026-04: 21.8% of 124Policy criticism, 2026-05: 38.5% of 117Policy criticism, 2026-06: 37.4% of 115Policy criticism, 2026-07: 33.3% of 51Policy criticism, 2026-08: 17.2% of 64Policy criticism, 2026-09: 14.3% of 63Policy criticism, 2026-10: 9.1% of 55Policy discussionpeak 95.3% · Aug ’26 · latest 67.3%Policy discussion, 2025-01: 79.5% of 39Policy discussion, 2025-02: 74.5% of 47Policy discussion, 2025-03: 75.9% of 58Policy discussion, 2025-04: 75.5% of 49Policy discussion, 2025-05: 79.4% of 63Policy discussion, 2025-06: 76.6% of 64Policy discussion, 2025-07: 87.1% of 101Policy discussion, 2025-08: 75.2% of 121Policy discussion, 2025-09: 80.5% of 123Policy discussion, 2025-10: 83.2% of 131Policy discussion, 2025-11: 81.1% of 111Policy discussion, 2025-12: 75.8% of 95Policy discussion, 2026-01: 91.0% of 145Policy discussion, 2026-02: 68.4% of 136Policy discussion, 2026-03: 80.5% of 113Policy discussion, 2026-04: 86.3% of 124Policy discussion, 2026-05: 80.3% of 117Policy discussion, 2026-06: 79.1% of 115Policy discussion, 2026-07: 72.5% of 51Policy discussion, 2026-08: 95.3% of 64Policy discussion, 2026-09: 82.5% of 63Policy discussion, 2026-10: 67.3% of 55Bipartisanshippeak 19.1% · Feb ’25 · latest 1.8%Bipartisanship, 2025-01: 7.7% of 39Bipartisanship, 2025-02: 19.1% of 47Bipartisanship, 2025-03: 6.9% of 58Bipartisanship, 2025-04: 14.3% of 49Bipartisanship, 2025-05: 7.9% of 63Bipartisanship, 2025-06: 9.4% of 64Bipartisanship, 2025-07: 2.0% of 101Bipartisanship, 2025-08: 1.7% of 121Bipartisanship, 2025-09: 8.9% of 123Bipartisanship, 2025-10: 5.3% of 131Bipartisanship, 2025-11: 3.6% of 111Bipartisanship, 2025-12: 9.5% of 95Bipartisanship, 2026-01: 7.6% of 145Bipartisanship, 2026-02: 0.7% of 136Bipartisanship, 2026-03: 3.5% of 113Bipartisanship, 2026-04: 7.3% of 124Bipartisanship, 2026-05: 6.0% of 117Bipartisanship, 2026-06: 7.0% of 115Bipartisanship, 2026-07: 9.8% of 51Bipartisanship, 2026-08: 3.1% of 64Bipartisanship, 2026-09: 4.8% of 63Bipartisanship, 2026-10: 1.8% of 55Credit claimingpeak 41.0% · Jan ’25 · latest 14.5%Credit claiming, 2025-01: 41.0% of 39Credit claiming, 2025-02: 31.9% of 47Credit claiming, 2025-03: 17.2% of 58Credit claiming, 2025-04: 32.6% of 49Credit claiming, 2025-05: 11.1% of 63Credit claiming, 2025-06: 14.1% of 64Credit claiming, 2025-07: 13.9% of 101Credit claiming, 2025-08: 14.9% of 121Credit claiming, 2025-09: 22.8% of 123Credit claiming, 2025-10: 16.8% of 131Credit claiming, 2025-11: 28.8% of 111Credit claiming, 2025-12: 21.1% of 95Credit claiming, 2026-01: 25.5% of 145Credit claiming, 2026-02: 20.6% of 136Credit claiming, 2026-03: 31.9% of 113Credit claiming, 2026-04: 26.6% of 124Credit claiming, 2026-05: 20.5% of 117Credit claiming, 2026-06: 32.2% of 115Credit claiming, 2026-07: 13.7% of 51Credit claiming, 2026-08: 15.6% of 64Credit claiming, 2026-09: 9.5% of 63Credit claiming, 2026-10: 14.5% of 55Extreme labelspeak 5.3% · Oct ’25 · latest 0.0%Extreme labels, 2025-01: 0.0% of 39Extreme labels, 2025-02: 4.3% of 47Extreme labels, 2025-03: 1.7% of 58Extreme labels, 2025-04: 2.0% of 49Extreme labels, 2025-05: 1.6% of 63Extreme labels, 2025-06: 3.1% of 64Extreme labels, 2025-07: 0.0% of 101Extreme labels, 2025-08: 1.7% of 121Extreme labels, 2025-09: 2.4% of 123Extreme labels, 2025-10: 5.3% of 131Extreme labels, 2025-11: 1.8% of 111Extreme labels, 2025-12: 0.0% of 95Extreme labels, 2026-01: 0.0% of 145Extreme labels, 2026-02: 4.4% of 136Extreme labels, 2026-03: 1.8% of 113Extreme labels, 2026-04: 0.8% of 124Extreme labels, 2026-05: 1.7% of 117Extreme labels, 2026-06: 2.6% of 115Extreme labels, 2026-07: 0.0% of 51Extreme labels, 2026-08: 0.0% of 64Extreme labels, 2026-09: 0.0% of 63Extreme labels, 2026-10: 0.0% of 55Jan ’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 ’25397.7%25.6%79.5%7.7%41.0%0.0%
Feb ’25478.5%53.2%74.5%19.1%31.9%4.3%
Mar ’255819.0%39.7%75.9%6.9%17.2%1.7%
Apr ’254910.2%32.6%75.5%14.3%32.6%2.0%
May ’256312.7%38.1%79.4%7.9%11.1%1.6%
Jun ’256410.9%39.1%76.6%9.4%14.1%3.1%
Jul ’251019.9%44.5%87.1%2.0%13.9%0.0%
Aug ’251218.3%39.7%75.2%1.7%14.9%1.7%
Sep ’251238.1%44.7%80.5%8.9%22.8%2.4%
Oct ’251319.2%65.6%83.2%5.3%16.8%5.3%
Nov ’251114.5%51.3%81.1%3.6%28.8%1.8%
Dec ’259512.6%22.1%75.8%9.5%21.1%0.0%
Jan ’2614522.1%14.5%91.0%7.6%25.5%0.0%
Feb ’2613615.4%46.3%68.4%0.7%20.6%4.4%
Mar ’261135.3%36.3%80.5%3.5%31.9%1.8%
Apr ’261247.3%21.8%86.3%7.3%26.6%0.8%
May ’261177.7%38.5%80.3%6.0%20.5%1.7%
Jun ’261157.8%37.4%79.1%7.0%32.2%2.6%
Jul ’26515.9%33.3%72.5%9.8%13.7%0.0%
Aug ’26643.1%17.2%95.3%3.1%15.6%0.0%
Sep ’26639.5%14.3%82.5%4.8%9.5%0.0%
Oct ’26555.5%9.1%67.3%1.8%14.5%0.0%
How to read the strips

Each row is one kind of statement; each cell is a month, shaded against that row’s own peak (darker = closer to the peak), with the peak and the latest value written at the right. The top row counts statements. The strip covers every month of the 119th Congress, the same span as the rates above, including months with no statements. A month with fewer than 10 statements is hatched, not shaded: one or two posts would swing its rate to 0% or 100%.

In Kelly’s words

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

Personal attacks

CONGRESSWOMAN ROBIN KELLY CONDEMNS UNPRECEDENTED FEDERAL RAID ON CONGRESSWOMAN ILHAN OMAR’S HOME WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Representative Robin Kelly (IL-02), issued the following statement regarding the Trump administration’s federal raid on the home of Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and her family. "I am…

Oct 12, 2026 · Press releases · personal attacks; policy discussion; Crime and Law Enforcement; Government Operations and Politics; Immigration; target: Trump · Source

Bipartisanship

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

Oct 2, 2026 · Posts on X · policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Crime and Law Enforcement; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues · Source

Extreme label

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

Jun 11, 2026 · Posts on X · policy criticism; policy discussion; Immigration; extreme label “extreme” aimed at Republicans, ICE · 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

    CONGRESSWOMAN ROBIN KELLY CONDEMNS UNPRECEDENTED FEDERAL RAID ON CONGRESSWOMAN ILHAN OMAR’S HOME WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Representative Robin Kelly (IL-02), issued the following statement regarding the Trump administration’s federal raid on the home of Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and her family. "I am glad to hear that Congresswoman Omar and her family are safe. This unprecedented raid is an authoritarian use of power a…

    personal attacks · policy discussion · Crime and Law Enforcement · Government Operations and Politics · Immigration · target: TrumpSource

  2. Posts on X

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

    personal attacks · policy discussion · Health · target: TrumpSource

  3. Posts on X

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

    personal attacks · target: TrumpSource

  4. Posts on X

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

    personal attacks · policy discussion · Health · Economics and Public Finance · target: KennedySource

  5. 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 · Families · Agriculture and Food · target: Donald TrumpSource

All 1,985 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: 1,757 posts on X, 130 press releases, 67 newsletters, 31 Congressional Record speeches.

Back to topNext: Policy

Policy

Health is what Kelly talks about most: 40% of policy statements, above the peer share. Talk and legislation agree at 0.69 on a 0–1 scale (House Democrats average 0.67; 92nd 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 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%44%
Kelly
Peers
Health633 statements
40%
26%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues274 statements
17%
13%
Crime and Law Enforcement274 statements
17%
9%
Economics and Public Finance269 statements
17%
20%
Government Operations and Politics228 statements
14%
20%
Show the data
Policy areas Kelly talks about, as a share of policy statements, against the House Democrats average.
RowKellyPeers
Health40%26%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues17%13%
Crime and Law Enforcement17%9%
Economics and Public Finance17%20%
Government Operations and Politics14%20%
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 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 44%. Grey ticks are the House Democrats averages.

Talks aboutLegislates onHealthHealth, talks about: 40% (House Democrats 26%)40%Health, legislates on: 24% (House Democrats 16%)24%Civil Rights and Liberties,Minority IssuesCivil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues, talks about: 17% (House Democrats 13%)17%Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues, legislates on: 7% (House Democrats 5%)7%Crime and Law EnforcementCrime and Law Enforcement, talks about: 17% (House Democrats 9%)17%Crime and Law Enforcement, legislates on: 13% (House Democrats 7%)13%Economics and Public FinanceEconomics and Public Finance, talks about: 17% (House Democrats 20%)17%Economics and Public Finance, legislates on: 0% (House Democrats 1%)0%Government Operations andPoliticsGovernment Operations and Politics, talks about: 14% (House Democrats 20%)14%Government Operations and Politics, legislates on: 10% (House Democrats 11%)10%
Show the data
Kelly's share of statements against share of bills in each policy area.
AreaTalks aboutHouse Democrats, talks aboutLegislates onHouse Democrats, legislates on
Health40%26%24%16%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues17%13%7%5%
Crime and Law Enforcement17%9%13%7%
Economics and Public Finance17%20%0%1%
Government Operations and Politics14%20%10%11%
0.69

talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1

House Democrats average 0.67. Ranks 92nd of 216.

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 −1.12 on the CSIP scale, left of 0, more liberal than 70% of House Democrats. Approximate range −1.14 to −1.11, which understates the uncertainty; from 1,824 donors and 7,248 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”.

−1.12

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range −1.14 to −1.11. From 1,824 donors and 7,248 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

← More liberalMore conservative →0Kelly −1.1House Democrats −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 Democratsmedian −1.0Kelly −1.1All Housemedian +0.3
Show the data
Kelly's CSIP score of −1.12 placed against House Democrats, All House.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Kelly
House Democrats217−1.030%
All House439+0.315%
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 $1.8M in the 2026 cycle, close to the House Democrats’ median of $2.0M. 24% of individual money came in gifts of $200 or less. 69% of itemized individual money came from Illinois.

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
$1.8M

raised in the 2026 cycle

From 877 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): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Itemized individual (over $200): $920.1K (50.8%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $294.8K (16.3%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)PACs and other committees: $541.3K (29.9%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $53.7K (3.0%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $53.7K (3.0%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $53.7K (3.0%)
  • Itemized individual (over $200)51 squares$920.1K
  • Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)16 squares$294.8K
  • PACs and other committees30 squares$541.3K
  • The candidate’s own money and loans$207
  • Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)3 squares$53.7K
Show the data
Sources of Kelly's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Itemized individual (over $200)$920.1K50.8%
Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)$294.8K16.3%
PACs and other committees$541.3K29.9%
The candidate’s own money and loans$2070.0%
Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)$53.7K3.0%
What this means, and what it doesn’t

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

Receipts by cycle

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

2020 cycle: $1.6M$1.6M20202022 cycle: $1.7M$1.7M20222024 cycle: $1.9M$1.9M20242026 cycle: $1.8M$1.8M2026House Democrats median $2.0M
Show the data
Kelly's receipts by cycle against the 2026 House Democrats median.
ItemValue
2020 cycle$1.6M
2022 cycle$1.7M
2024 cycle$1.9M
2026 cycle$1.8M

Top donor states, 2026

Itemized contributions by donor state. 69% came from Illinois.

  1. Illinois$542.1K
  2. District of Columbia$79.6K
  3. California$27.0K
  4. Maryland$26.7K
  5. Virginia$21.0K

Small donations

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

0%60%
Kelly
Median
2026
24%
13%
2024
10%
13%
2022
11%
13%
2020
13%
13%
Show the data
Small-donor share by cycle against the House Democrats median
RowKellyMedian
2026 cycle24%13%
2024 cycle10%13%
2022 cycle11%13%
2020 cycle13%13%

Where itemized donors live

Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state

Alaska: no dataAKMaine: $250MEVermont: no dataVTNew Hampshire: no dataNHWashington: $1,000WAIdaho: no dataIDMontana: $250MTNorth Dakota: no dataNDMinnesota: $750MNIllinois: $542.1KILWisconsin: $2,850WIMichigan: $3,250MINew York: $18.5KNYRhode Island: $2,000RIMassachusetts: $1,350MAOregon: $1,000ORNevada: no dataNVWyoming: no dataWYSouth Dakota: $25SDIowa: $250IAIndiana: $8,215INOhio: $6,250OHPennsylvania: $1,500PANew Jersey: $3,000NJConnecticut: $525CTCalifornia: $27.0KCAUtah: no dataUTColorado: $590CONebraska: no dataNEMissouri: $222MOKentucky: $22KYWest Virginia: no dataWVVirginia: $21.0KVAMaryland: $26.7KMDDelaware: $3,500DEArizona: $350AZNew Mexico: $250NMKansas: $404KSArkansas: no dataARTennessee: $250TNNorth Carolina: $3,860NCSouth Carolina: $1,000SCDistrict of Columbia: $79.6KDCOklahoma: $100OKLouisiana: $2,750LAMississippi: $400MSAlabama: $550ALGeorgia: $6,700GAHawaii: $500HITexas: $7,822TXFlorida: $8,270FL
Show the data
Kelly's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
Illinois$542.1K
District of Columbia$79.6K
California$27.0K
Maryland$26.7K
Virginia$21.0K
New York$18.5K
Florida$8,270
Indiana$8,215
Texas$7,822
Georgia$6,700
Ohio$6,250
North Carolina$3,860
Delaware$3,500
Michigan$3,250
New Jersey$3,000
Wisconsin$2,850
Louisiana$2,750
Rhode Island$2,000
Pennsylvania$1,500
Massachusetts$1,350
Washington$1,000
Oregon$1,000
South Carolina$1,000
Minnesota$750
Colorado$590
Alabama$550
Connecticut$525
Hawaii$500
Kansas$404
Mississippi$400
Arizona$350
Maine$250
Montana$250
Iowa$250
New Mexico$250
Tennessee$250
Missouri$222
Oklahoma$100
South Dakota$25
Kentucky$22
AlaskaNo data
VermontNo data
New HampshireNo data
IdahoNo data
North DakotaNo data
NevadaNo data
WyomingNo data
UtahNo data
NebraskaNo data
West VirginiaNo data
ArkansasNo data
877

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

69%

from Illinois

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

Donors’ ideology

Distribution of itemized donors’ own CSIP scores

CSIP −1.75 to −1.50: 0.1%CSIP −1.50 to −1.25: 2.8%CSIP −1.25 to −1.00: 71%71%CSIP −1.00 to −0.75: 22%CSIP −0.75 to −0.50: 2.4%CSIP −0.50 to −0.25: 0.4%CSIP −0.25 to 0.00: 0.4%CSIP 0.00 to +0.25: 0.1%CSIP +0.25 to +0.50: 0.3%CSIP +0.50 to +0.75: 0.2%← More liberalMore conservative →0
Show the data
Ideology of Kelly's itemized donors in 2026, from −1.75 to +0.75: 71% between −1.25 and −1.00, 22% between −1.00 and −0.75.
ItemValue
CSIP −1.75 to −1.500.1%
CSIP −1.50 to −1.252.8%
CSIP −1.25 to −1.0071%
CSIP −1.00 to −0.7522%
CSIP −0.75 to −0.502.4%
CSIP −0.50 to −0.250.4%
CSIP −0.25 to 0.000.4%
CSIP 0.00 to +0.250.1%
CSIP +0.25 to +0.500.3%
CSIP +0.50 to +0.750.2%
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 −1.12.

Top donor occupations

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. NOT EMPLOYED$192.6K 246 donors
  2. ATTORNEY$92.4K 58 donors
  3. PHYSICIAN$37.4K 25 donors
  4. CONSULTANT$32.8K 39 donors
  5. CEO$24.9K 24 donors

Top committees

PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.

  1. ARRAY DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE, INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$10.0K
  2. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$10.0K
  3. TOGETHER EVERYONE REALIZES REAL IMPACT$10.0K
  4. FORD MOTOR COMPANY CIVIC ACTION FUND$8,500
  5. ELECT DEMOCRATIC WOMEN$8,000

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. ARIEL INVESTMENTS$13.0K 6 donors
  2. STATE OF ILLINOIS$6,977 9 donors
  3. CHICAGO ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS$3,850 3 donors
  4. WALGREENS$3,315 3 donors
  5. MINDSET$2,500 3 donors

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Kelly voted with the majority of House Democrats on 99.5% of party-line votes and missed 1.9% of 674 roll calls. House Democrats on average: 96.4% party unity, 96.9% attendance. Across all roll calls, Kelly voted against the majority of House Democrats 10 times.

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

10

votes against the majority of House Democrats

Party unity 99.5%, House Democrats average 96.4%, ranks 46th of 217. 674 roll calls in the 119th Congress.

Attendance and party unity

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

80%100%
Kelly
Peers
Rank
Attendance
98.0%
96.9%
113th of 217
Party unity
99.5%
96.4%
46th of 217
Show the data
Kelly's attendance and party unity against House Democrats.
RowKellyPeers
Attendance98.0%96.9%
Party unity99.5%96.4%
What this means, and what it doesn’t

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

Key votes

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

Key votes
Party split (yea–nay)Why it’s key
Sep 16, 2026
S. 2403
Retire through Ownership Act
On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass
YeaWith majorityPassedD 209–0 · R 191–14 · I 1–0Democrats 209 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 191 yea, 14 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 naybecame law
Sep 16, 2026
H.J.Res. 213
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to the “California State Nonroad Engine Pollution Control Standards; Commercial Harbor Craft Regulations; Notice of Decision”
On Passage
NayWith majorityPassedD 3–207 · R 210–1 · I 1–0Democrats 3 yea, 207 nay; Republicans 210 yea, 1 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nayclose vote
Sep 16, 2026
H.R. 10326
PROOF Act
On Passage
NayWith majorityPassedD 6–206 · R 210–1 · I 1–0Democrats 6 yea, 206 nay; Republicans 210 yea, 1 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nayclose vote
Sep 16, 2026
H.R. 9576
National Fraud Enforcement Division Act
On Passage
YeaWith majorityPassedD 139–72 · R 212–0 · I 1–0Democrats 139 yea, 72 nay; Republicans 212 yea, 0 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nayparty crossover
Sep 16, 2026
H.R. 5334
An Act to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow early childhood educators to take the educator expense deduction, and for other purposes
On Motion to Concur in the Senate Amendments
NayWith majorityPassedD 58–152 · R 203–7 · I 1–0Democrats 58 yea, 152 nay; Republicans 203 yea, 7 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 naybecame law · party crossover
How key votes are chosen

Automatically: a final-passage or override vote where the measure became law, the margin was under 10%, at least 10% of either party voted against its majority, or the bill was among the 25 most mentioned in officials’ own statements. Up to 25 per window, most recent first; five are shown. Bars show yea on the left, nay on the right, per party.

Votes most often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Kelly most often

  1. Jasmine CrockettD623 shared votes99%
  2. LaMonica McIverD658 shared votes99%
  3. Nanette BarragánD640 shared votes99%
  4. Danny DavisD638 shared votes99%
  5. Robert GarciaD626 shared votes99%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Kelly least often

  1. Chip RoyR626 shared votes15%
  2. Ralph NormanR590 shared votes17%
  3. Andy BiggsR597 shared votes17%
  4. Eric BurlisonR631 shared votes17%
  5. Keith SelfR647 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

Kelly sponsored 22 bills in the 119th Congress; none became law. Cosponsored 463 others. 4.5% of sponsored bills got out of committee (House Democrats average 4.9%; 85th of 207).

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

Sponsored22 billsSponsored, Introduced: 2222Sponsored, In committee: 2222Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 11Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 00Sponsored, Became law: 00Cosponsored463 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 463463Cosponsored, In committee: 463463Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 2121Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 33Cosponsored, Became law: 22IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Kelly sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored2222100
Cosponsored4634632132
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.

4.5%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

House Democrats average 4.9%. Ranks 85th of 207.

Cosponsorship partners

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

  1. Eleanor Norton68
  2. Hank Johnson Jr.46
  3. Rashida Tlaib35
  4. Bonnie Watson Coleman34
  5. André Carson33
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. 10794Improving Access to WIC ActCosponsorOct 9, 2026In committeeAgriculture and FoodReferred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. Oct 9, 2026
H.Res. 1610Expressing support for the recognition of October 2026, as "World Menopause Awareness Month" and for global awareness and access to care during menopausal transition and post-menopause.CosponsorOct 5, 2026In committeeHealthReferred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Armed Services, and Veterans' Affairs, 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 5, 2026
H.R. 10640Urban Health Transformation Act of 2026CosponsorOct 1, 2026In committeeHealthReferred 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 1, 2026
H.R. 10680Food Access in Community Health Centers Act of 2026CosponsorOct 1, 2026In committeeHealthReferred to the House Committee on Agriculture. Oct 1, 2026
H.Res. 1602Recognizing the importance of access to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention and supporting the designation of Saturday, October 10, 2026, as "National PrEP Day".CosponsorOct 1, 2026In committeeHealthReferred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Oct 1, 2026

Back to topNext: Online

Online

A site that changed 37 times in 90 days. Kelly’s official site had 21 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.

Images Kelly posted

The latest 24, with model-written descriptions

  • A dark blue political announcement graphic overlaid with a stylized street map. It announces the permanent closure of a Chicago district office and includes a note directing viewers to the caption for more information.
    A dark blue political announcement graphic overlaid with a stylized street map. It announces the permanent closure of a Chicago district office and includes a note directing viewers to the caption for more information.View post
  • A panel discussion is taking place on a stage in a conference auditorium. Four people sit in chairs beneath a large projected slide featuring headshots, names, and organizational logos. Audience members and red seats are visible in the foreground.
    A panel discussion is taking place on a stage in a conference auditorium. Four people sit in chairs beneath a large projected slide featuring headshots, names, and organizational logos. Audience members and red seats are visible in the foreground.View post
  • A woman speaks from behind a wooden lectern on a stage, gesturing toward the audience. Colorful balloons decorate the side of the stage, and a presentation screen is visible. Text appears on the screen and on a speaker.
    A woman speaks from behind a wooden lectern on a stage, gesturing toward the audience. Colorful balloons decorate the side of the stage, and a presentation screen is visible. Text appears on the screen and on a speaker.View post
  • Four people pose together at an indoor event in front of a projected presentation. The slide has a large heading and smaller event details. A few other people and presentation equipment are visible in the background.
    Four people pose together at an indoor event in front of a projected presentation. The slide has a large heading and smaller event details. A few other people and presentation equipment are visible in the background.View post
  • A group of people pose together at an indoor event in front of a large projected presentation slide showing headshots and names. There is text on the slide.
    A group of people pose together at an indoor event in front of a large projected presentation slide showing headshots and names. There is text on the slide.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 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
K000385
Bioguide
K000385
FEC candidate ids
H2IL02172, S6IL00474

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