Skip to content

Republican · U.S. House, Mississippi’s 1st district

Serving since Jun 9, 2015119th Congress (2025–27)next election Nov 3, 2026

Bioguide K000388FEC H6MS01131

Portrait of Trent Kelly, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
3.8%
of statements criticize a policy, in the bottom 5% of House Republicans

3.8% of 264 statements criticize a policy (10 statements); the average for House Republicans is 15%. Ranks 218th of 221, where 1st is the highest rate.

An AI model reads each of Kelly’s posts on X, newsletters, press releases and Congressional Record speeches and marks whether it criticizes a specific policy, law or ruling. 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. 0% of Kelly’s statements contain a personal attack, in the bottom 5% of House Republicans (average 2.1%). 0% of the 8 bills Kelly sponsored got out of committee, in the bottom 5% of House Republicans.

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.

Policy criticism

3.8%

House Republicans average 15% · ranks 218th of 221

Personal attacks

0%

House Republicans average 2.1% · ranks 216th of 221

Out of committee

0%

House Republicans average 17% · ranks 211th of 216

Talk-to-bills agreement

0.50

House Republicans average 0.64 · ranks 211th of 221

Party unity

99.5%

House Republicans average 97.1% · ranks 12th of 221 · 5 votes against the majority of House Republicans

CSIP ideology

+1.10

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

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 97% of House Republicans. Personal attacks in 0% of 264 statements, against 2.1% for the average House Republican; 216th of 221.

An AI model reads each of Kelly’s 264 statements in the 119th Congress (163 posts on X, 42 newsletters, 38 press releases, 21 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 discussion158 statements
60%
68%
181st of 221
Credit claiming92 statements
35%
37%
133rd of 221
Bipartisanship29 statements
11%
9%
63rd of 221
Policy criticism10 statements
4%
15%
218th of 221
Personal attacks0 statements
0%
2%
216th of 221
Show the data
Kelly's share of statements in each category against the House Republicans average.
RowKellyPeers
Policy discussion60%68%
Credit claiming35%37%
Bipartisanship11%9%
Policy criticism4%15%
Personal attacks0%2%
264

statements classified

163 posts on X, 42 newsletters, 38 press releases, 21 Congressional Record speeches.

posts on X: 163 (61.7%)posts on X 163newsletters: 42 (15.9%)press releases: 38 (14.4%)Congressional Record speeches: 21 (8.0%)
Show the data
Kelly's statements by source
PartValue
posts on X163
newsletters42
press releases38
Congressional Record speeches21
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 0.4% of statements, 13% of the peer average. 1 statement; peers 3.0%.

    Who gets the labels

    Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements

    No targets recorded.

    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: 232025-02: 122025-03: 192025-04: 252025-05: 132025-06: 162025-07: 182025-08: 72025-09: 132025-10: 62025-11: 72025-12: 102026-01: 102026-02: 92026-03: 122026-04: 162026-05: 122026-06: 52026-07: 92026-08: 122026-09: 62026-10: 4peak 25 · Apr ’25Personal attackspeak 0.0% · Jan ’25 · latest 0.0%Personal attacks, 2025-01: 0.0% of 23Personal attacks, 2025-02: 0.0% of 12Personal attacks, 2025-03: 0.0% of 19Personal attacks, 2025-04: 0.0% of 25Personal attacks, 2025-05: 0.0% of 13Personal attacks, 2025-06: 0.0% of 16Personal attacks, 2025-07: 0.0% of 18Personal attacks, 2025-08: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Personal attacks, 2025-09: 0.0% of 13Personal attacks, 2025-10: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Personal attacks, 2025-11: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Personal attacks, 2025-12: 0.0% of 10Personal attacks, 2026-01: 0.0% of 10Personal attacks, 2026-02: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Personal attacks, 2026-03: 0.0% of 12Personal attacks, 2026-04: 0.0% of 16Personal attacks, 2026-05: 0.0% of 12Personal attacks, 2026-06: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Personal attacks, 2026-07: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Personal attacks, 2026-08: 0.0% of 12Personal attacks, 2026-09: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Personal attacks, 2026-10: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy criticismpeak 21.1% · Mar ’25 · latest 8.3%Policy criticism, 2025-01: 0.0% of 23Policy criticism, 2025-02: 8.3% of 12Policy criticism, 2025-03: 21.1% of 19Policy criticism, 2025-04: 0.0% of 25Policy criticism, 2025-05: 7.7% of 13Policy criticism, 2025-06: 0.0% of 16Policy criticism, 2025-07: 0.0% of 18Policy criticism, 2025-08: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy criticism, 2025-09: 0.0% of 13Policy criticism, 2025-10: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy criticism, 2025-11: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy criticism, 2025-12: 10.0% of 10Policy criticism, 2026-01: 0.0% of 10Policy criticism, 2026-02: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy criticism, 2026-03: 0.0% of 12Policy criticism, 2026-04: 6.3% of 16Policy criticism, 2026-05: 8.3% of 12Policy criticism, 2026-06: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy criticism, 2026-07: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy criticism, 2026-08: 8.3% of 12Policy criticism, 2026-09: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy criticism, 2026-10: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy discussionpeak 90.0% · Dec ’25 · latest 58.3%Policy discussion, 2025-01: 39.1% of 23Policy discussion, 2025-02: 58.3% of 12Policy discussion, 2025-03: 57.9% of 19Policy discussion, 2025-04: 80.0% of 25Policy discussion, 2025-05: 69.2% of 13Policy discussion, 2025-06: 62.5% of 16Policy discussion, 2025-07: 66.7% of 18Policy discussion, 2025-08: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy discussion, 2025-09: 84.6% of 13Policy discussion, 2025-10: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy discussion, 2025-11: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy discussion, 2025-12: 90.0% of 10Policy discussion, 2026-01: 70.0% of 10Policy discussion, 2026-02: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy discussion, 2026-03: 75.0% of 12Policy discussion, 2026-04: 50.0% of 16Policy discussion, 2026-05: 66.7% of 12Policy discussion, 2026-06: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy discussion, 2026-07: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy discussion, 2026-08: 58.3% of 12Policy discussion, 2026-09: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Policy discussion, 2026-10: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Bipartisanshippeak 36.0% · Apr ’25 · latest 8.3%Bipartisanship, 2025-01: 21.7% of 23Bipartisanship, 2025-02: 8.3% of 12Bipartisanship, 2025-03: 10.5% of 19Bipartisanship, 2025-04: 36.0% of 25Bipartisanship, 2025-05: 7.7% of 13Bipartisanship, 2025-06: 0.0% of 16Bipartisanship, 2025-07: 0.0% of 18Bipartisanship, 2025-08: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Bipartisanship, 2025-09: 7.7% of 13Bipartisanship, 2025-10: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Bipartisanship, 2025-11: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Bipartisanship, 2025-12: 30.0% of 10Bipartisanship, 2026-01: 10.0% of 10Bipartisanship, 2026-02: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Bipartisanship, 2026-03: 0.0% of 12Bipartisanship, 2026-04: 0.0% of 16Bipartisanship, 2026-05: 25.0% of 12Bipartisanship, 2026-06: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Bipartisanship, 2026-07: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Bipartisanship, 2026-08: 8.3% of 12Bipartisanship, 2026-09: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Bipartisanship, 2026-10: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Credit claimingpeak 61.1% · Jul ’25 · latest 16.7%Credit claiming, 2025-01: 47.8% of 23Credit claiming, 2025-02: 58.3% of 12Credit claiming, 2025-03: 31.6% of 19Credit claiming, 2025-04: 40.0% of 25Credit claiming, 2025-05: 46.2% of 13Credit claiming, 2025-06: 18.8% of 16Credit claiming, 2025-07: 61.1% of 18Credit claiming, 2025-08: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Credit claiming, 2025-09: 46.2% of 13Credit claiming, 2025-10: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Credit claiming, 2025-11: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Credit claiming, 2025-12: 50.0% of 10Credit claiming, 2026-01: 20.0% of 10Credit claiming, 2026-02: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Credit claiming, 2026-03: 41.7% of 12Credit claiming, 2026-04: 25.0% of 16Credit claiming, 2026-05: 25.0% of 12Credit claiming, 2026-06: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Credit claiming, 2026-07: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Credit claiming, 2026-08: 16.7% of 12Credit claiming, 2026-09: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Credit claiming, 2026-10: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Extreme labelspeak 5.3% · Mar ’25 · latest 0.0%Extreme labels, 2025-01: 0.0% of 23Extreme labels, 2025-02: 0.0% of 12Extreme labels, 2025-03: 5.3% of 19Extreme labels, 2025-04: 0.0% of 25Extreme labels, 2025-05: 0.0% of 13Extreme labels, 2025-06: 0.0% of 16Extreme labels, 2025-07: 0.0% of 18Extreme labels, 2025-08: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Extreme labels, 2025-09: 0.0% of 13Extreme labels, 2025-10: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Extreme labels, 2025-11: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Extreme labels, 2025-12: 0.0% of 10Extreme labels, 2026-01: 0.0% of 10Extreme labels, 2026-02: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Extreme labels, 2026-03: 0.0% of 12Extreme labels, 2026-04: 0.0% of 16Extreme labels, 2026-05: 0.0% of 12Extreme labels, 2026-06: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Extreme labels, 2026-07: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Extreme labels, 2026-08: 0.0% of 12Extreme labels, 2026-09: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Extreme labels, 2026-10: not plotted (fewer than 10 statements)Jan ’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 ’25230.0%0.0%39.1%21.7%47.8%0.0%
    Feb ’25120.0%8.3%58.3%8.3%58.3%0.0%
    Mar ’25190.0%21.1%57.9%10.5%31.6%5.3%
    Apr ’25250.0%0.0%80.0%36.0%40.0%0.0%
    May ’25130.0%7.7%69.2%7.7%46.2%0.0%
    Jun ’25160.0%0.0%62.5%0.0%18.8%0.0%
    Jul ’25180.0%0.0%66.7%0.0%61.1%0.0%
    Aug ’257— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)
    Sep ’25130.0%0.0%84.6%7.7%46.2%0.0%
    Oct ’256— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)
    Nov ’257— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)
    Dec ’25100.0%10.0%90.0%30.0%50.0%0.0%
    Jan ’26100.0%0.0%70.0%10.0%20.0%0.0%
    Feb ’269— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)
    Mar ’26120.0%0.0%75.0%0.0%41.7%0.0%
    Apr ’26160.0%6.3%50.0%0.0%25.0%0.0%
    May ’26120.0%8.3%66.7%25.0%25.0%0.0%
    Jun ’265— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)
    Jul ’269— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)
    Aug ’26120.0%8.3%58.3%8.3%16.7%0.0%
    Sep ’266— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)
    Oct ’264— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)— (fewer than 10 statements)
    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%. 8 months are hatched here.

    In Kelly’s words

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

    Bipartisanship

    Update from Congressman Trent Kelly September 18, 2026Dear Friend, Our nation recently marked the 25th anniversary of September 11, 2001, coming together once again to remember the 2,977 innocent lives lost that day.We all remember where we were when we first heard the tragic news and watched as th…

    Sep 18, 2026 · Newsletters · policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Agriculture and Food; Public Lands and Natural Resources; Armed Forces and National Security; Commerce; Emergency Management; Transportation and Public Works

    Policy criticism

    Update from Congressman Trent Kelly August 3, 2026Dear Friend,It was an honor to recognize ND Defense as the company celebrated the completion of its first maritime assembly. This new mission supports Ingalls Shipbuilding, the nation's largest builder of ships for the U.S. Navy, and marks an import…

    Aug 3, 2026 · Newsletters · policy criticism; policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Armed Forces and National Security; Agriculture and Food; Education; Transportation and Public Works; Emergency Management; Crime and Law Enforcement

    Extreme label

    Update from Congressman Trent Kelly March 13, 2025Dear Friend,President Donald Trump delivered a powerful address to Congress and the American people, outlining his vision for a new era of prosperity and strength for the United States. President Trump is keeping his promises by securing our border,…

    Mar 13, 2025 · Newsletters · policy criticism; policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Immigration; Education; Economics and Public Finance; Energy; Families; Agriculture and Food; Environmental Protection; Commerce; Labor and Employment; extreme label “extreme”

    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.

    No statements in this category in this window.

    All 264 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: 163 posts on X, 42 newsletters, 38 press releases, 21 Congressional Record speeches.

    Back to topNext: Policy

    Policy

    Armed Forces and National Security is what Kelly talks about most: 68% of policy statements, 2.8 times the peer share. Talk and legislation agree at 0.50 on a 0–1 scale (House Republicans average 0.64; 211th 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%75%
    Kelly
    Peers
    Armed Forces and National Security108 statements
    68%
    24%
    Education49 statements
    31%
    8%
    Agriculture and Food32 statements
    20%
    9%
    Commerce32 statements
    20%
    9%
    Economics and Public Finance24 statements
    15%
    19%
    Show the data
    Policy areas Kelly talks about, as a share of policy statements, against the House Republicans average.
    RowKellyPeers
    Armed Forces and National Security68%24%
    Education31%8%
    Agriculture and Food20%9%
    Commerce20%9%
    Economics and Public Finance15%19%
    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 75%. Grey ticks are the House Republicans averages.

    Talks aboutLegislates onArmed Forces and NationalSecurityArmed Forces and National Security, talks about: 68% (House Republicans 24%)68%Armed Forces and National Security, legislates on: 14% (House Republicans 8%)14%EducationEducation, talks about: 31% (House Republicans 8%)31%Education, legislates on: 2% (House Republicans 3%)2%Agriculture and FoodAgriculture and Food, talks about: 20% (House Republicans 9%)20%Agriculture and Food, legislates on: 8% (House Republicans 3%)8%CommerceCommerce, talks about: 20% (House Republicans 9%)20%Commerce, legislates on: 2% (House Republicans 2%)2%Economics and Public FinanceEconomics and Public Finance, talks about: 15% (House Republicans 19%)15%Economics and Public Finance, 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
    Armed Forces and National Security68%24%14%8%
    Education31%8%2%3%
    Agriculture and Food20%9%8%3%
    Commerce20%9%2%2%
    Economics and Public Finance15%19%0%2%
    0.50

    talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1

    House Republicans average 0.64. Ranks 211th 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 +1.10 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more conservative than 66% of House Republicans. Approximate range +1.09 to +1.12, which understates the uncertainty; from 1,332 donors and 6,004 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”.

    +1.10

    CSIP ideal point

    Approximate range +1.09 to +1.12. From 1,332 donors and 6,004 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

    ← More liberalMore conservative →0Kelly +1.1House 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 +1.1All Housemedian +0.3
    Show the data
    Kelly's CSIP score of +1.10 placed against House Republicans, All House.
    GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Kelly
    House Republicans221+1.066%
    All House439+0.383%
    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 $1.3M in the 2026 cycle, below the House Republicans’ median of $2.2M. 2.8% of individual money came in gifts of $200 or less. 56% of itemized individual money came from Mississippi.

    Campaign money from Federal Election Commission filings, as aggregates only; the lab never shows an individual donor. Campaigns must report by name every person who gives them more than $200 in a cycle (“itemized”); smaller gifts are reported only as one total (“unitemized”), so donor counts, donor states, employers and occupations describe itemized donors only.

    Election cycle
    $1.3M

    raised in the 2026 cycle

    From 299 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): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Itemized individual (over $200): $613.5K (47.0%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $17.7K (1.4%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)PACs and other committees: $674.6K (51.7%)
    • Itemized individual (over $200)47 squares$613.5K
    • Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)1 squares$17.7K
    • PACs and other committees52 squares$674.6K
    Show the data
    Sources of Kelly's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
    SourceAmountShare
    Itemized individual (over $200)$613.5K47.0%
    Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)$17.7K1.4%
    PACs and other committees$674.6K51.7%
    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: $885.0K$885.0K20202022 cycle: $1.1M$1.1M20222024 cycle: $1.2M$1.2M20242026 cycle: $1.3M$1.3M2026House Republicans median $2.2M
    Show the data
    Kelly's receipts by cycle against the 2026 House Republicans median.
    ItemValue
    2020 cycle$885.0K
    2022 cycle$1.1M
    2024 cycle$1.2M
    2026 cycle$1.3M

    Top donor states, 2026

    Itemized contributions by donor state. 56% came from Mississippi.

    1. Mississippi$261.3K
    2. District of Columbia$43.6K
    3. Virginia$38.9K
    4. Nebraska$24.6K
    5. New York$16.4K

    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
    3%
    9%
    2024
    6%
    9%
    2022
    8%
    9%
    2020
    11%
    9%
    Show the data
    Small-donor share by cycle against the House Republicans median
    RowKellyMedian
    2026 cycle3%9%
    2024 cycle6%9%
    2022 cycle8%9%
    2020 cycle11%9%

    Where itemized donors live

    Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state

    Alaska: no dataAKMaine: $2,000MEVermont: no dataVTNew Hampshire: $1,500NHWashington: $2,000WAIdaho: no dataIDMontana: no dataMTNorth Dakota: no dataNDMinnesota: $1,500MNIllinois: no dataILWisconsin: no dataWIMichigan: no dataMINew York: $16.4KNYRhode Island: $5,000RIMassachusetts: no dataMAOregon: no dataORNevada: $1,000NVWyoming: no dataWYSouth Dakota: no dataSDIowa: no dataIAIndiana: $750INOhio: $7,000OHPennsylvania: $1,500PANew Jersey: no dataNJConnecticut: $2,108CTCalifornia: $14.0KCAUtah: no dataUTColorado: no dataCONebraska: $24.6KNEMissouri: $500MOKentucky: no dataKYWest Virginia: no dataWVVirginia: $38.9KVAMaryland: $12.5KMDDelaware: no dataDEArizona: no dataAZNew Mexico: no dataNMKansas: $2,500KSArkansas: no dataARTennessee: $1,000TNNorth Carolina: $1,500NCSouth Carolina: no dataSCDistrict of Columbia: $43.6KDCOklahoma: no dataOKLouisiana: $1,000LAMississippi: $261.3KMSAlabama: $4,500ALGeorgia: no dataGAHawaii: no dataHITexas: $9,650TXFlorida: $10.5KFL
    Show the data
    Kelly's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
    StateValue
    Mississippi$261.3K
    District of Columbia$43.6K
    Virginia$38.9K
    Nebraska$24.6K
    New York$16.4K
    California$14.0K
    Maryland$12.5K
    Florida$10.5K
    Texas$9,650
    Ohio$7,000
    Rhode Island$5,000
    Alabama$4,500
    Kansas$2,500
    Connecticut$2,108
    Maine$2,000
    Washington$2,000
    New Hampshire$1,500
    Minnesota$1,500
    Pennsylvania$1,500
    North Carolina$1,500
    Nevada$1,000
    Tennessee$1,000
    Louisiana$1,000
    Indiana$750
    Missouri$500
    AlaskaNo data
    VermontNo data
    IdahoNo data
    MontanaNo data
    North DakotaNo data
    IllinoisNo data
    WisconsinNo data
    MichiganNo data
    MassachusettsNo data
    OregonNo data
    WyomingNo data
    South DakotaNo data
    IowaNo data
    New JerseyNo data
    UtahNo data
    ColoradoNo data
    KentuckyNo data
    West VirginiaNo data
    DelawareNo data
    ArizonaNo data
    New MexicoNo data
    ArkansasNo data
    South CarolinaNo data
    OklahomaNo data
    GeorgiaNo data
    HawaiiNo data
    299

    itemized donors

    People who gave more than $200

    56%

    from Mississippi

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

    Donors’ ideology

    Distribution of itemized donors’ own CSIP scores

    CSIP −0.75 to −0.50: 0.6%CSIP −0.50 to −0.25: 1.8%CSIP −0.25 to 0.00: 2.2%CSIP 0.00 to +0.25: 1.6%CSIP +0.25 to +0.50: 3.8%CSIP +0.50 to +0.75: 7.7%CSIP +0.75 to +1.00: 29%CSIP +1.00 to +1.25: 53%53%CSIP +1.25 to +1.50: 0.3%← More liberalMore conservative →0
    Show the data
    Ideology of Kelly's itemized donors in 2026, from −0.75 to +1.50: 7.7% between +0.50 and +0.75, 29% between +0.75 and +1.00, 53% between +1.00 and +1.25.
    ItemValue
    CSIP −0.75 to −0.500.6%
    CSIP −0.50 to −0.251.8%
    CSIP −0.25 to 0.002.2%
    CSIP 0.00 to +0.251.6%
    CSIP +0.25 to +0.503.8%
    CSIP +0.50 to +0.757.7%
    CSIP +0.75 to +1.0029%
    CSIP +1.00 to +1.2553%
    CSIP +1.25 to +1.500.3%
    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 +1.10.

    Top donor occupations

    Itemized, 2026 cycle.

    1. CONSULTANT$55.5K 22 donors
    2. PRESIDENT$44.3K 22 donors
    3. OWNER$28.0K 16 donors
    4. ATTORNEY$24.4K 25 donors
    5. HOMEMAKER$22.9K 8 donors

    Top committees

    PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.

    1. ARPAC$13.0K
    2. AMERICA'S CREDIT UNIONS PAC$10.0K
    3. AMERICAN BANKERS ASSOCIATION PAC (BANKPAC)$10.0K
    4. AMERICAN CRYSTAL SUGAR COMPANY POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$10.0K
    5. AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$10.0K

    Top employers

    Itemized, 2026 cycle.

    1. SEEMANN COMPOSITES$18.0K 4 donors
    2. OCEAN AERO$12.5K 4 donors
    3. C2 STRATEGIES$8,600 4 donors
    4. VATN SYSTEMS$7,750 6 donors

    Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

    Back to topNext: Votes

    Votes

    Kelly voted with the majority of House Republicans on 99.5% of party-line votes and missed 0.7% 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 5 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.

    5

    votes against the majority of House Republicans

    Party unity 99.5%, House Republicans average 97.1%, ranks 12th 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
    99.2%
    96.3%
    40th of 221
    Party unity
    99.5%
    97.1%
    12th of 221
    Show the data
    Kelly's attendance and party unity against House Republicans.
    RowKellyPeers
    Attendance99.2%96.3%
    Party unity99.5%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 JohnsonR517 shared votes100%
    2. Jefferson ShreveR657 shared votes99%
    3. Matt Van EppsR363 shared votes99%
    4. Rudy YakymR669 shared votes99%
    5. Tony GonzalesR423 shared votes99%

    Votes least often with

    The colleagues who voted the same way as Kelly least often

    1. Rashida TlaibD653 shared votes23%
    2. Adelita GrijalvaD384 shared votes24%
    3. Delia RamirezD637 shared votes24%
    4. Gregorio CasarD574 shared votes25%
    5. Frederica WilsonD476 shared votes25%
    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 8 bills in the 119th Congress; none became law. Cosponsored 118 others. 0% of sponsored bills got out of committee (House Republicans average 17%; 211th 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

    Sponsored8 billsSponsored, Introduced: 88Sponsored, In committee: 88Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 00Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 00Sponsored, Became law: 00Cosponsored118 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 118118Cosponsored, In committee: 118118Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 1717Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 33Cosponsored, Became law: 33IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
    Show the data
    Bills Kelly sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
    RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
    Sponsored88000
    Cosponsored1181181733
    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.

    0%

    of sponsored bills got out of committee

    House Republicans average 17%. Ranks 211th 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. Mike Ezell11
    2. Michael Guest8
    3. Joe Wilson6
    4. Bennie Thompson5
    5. Donald Davis4
    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.Res. 1552Supporting the designation of the week of September 20 through September 26, 2026, as "Gold Star Families Remembrance Week".CosponsorSep 16, 2026In committeeArmed Forces and National SecurityReferred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on 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. Sep 16, 2026
    H.Res. 1511Recognizing the 25th anniversary of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, honoring the memory of the victims, recognizing the courage and sacrifice of the heroes who answered the call to serve, acknowledging the charitable organizations that continue to support survivors and victims' familiesCosponsorSep 3, 2026In committeeCrime and Law EnforcementReferred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, Armed Services, Transportation and Infrastructure, Veterans' Affairs, Homeland Security, and Intelligence (Permanent Select), 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 3, 2026
    H.J.Res. 209Supporting the designation of November 9 of each year as "Gold Star Father's Day".CosponsorAug 3, 2026In committeeFamiliesReferred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Aug 3, 2026
    H.R. 9911Shipbuilding Investment and Workforce ActCosponsorJul 23, 2026In committeeTaxationReferred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. Jul 23, 2026
    H.R. 9827Wildfire Reduction Market Expansion Act of 2026CosponsorJul 22, 2026In committeeEnergyReferred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Jul 22, 2026

    Back to topNext: Online

    Online

    A site that changed 44 times in 90 days. Kelly’s official site had 44 pages when last crawled on Oct 25, 2026. The lab last catalogued the images Kelly posted on Oct 22, 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 group of men are gathered in a bright meeting room, listening as an older man gestures while speaking. Tables and chairs are arranged throughout the room, with windows along one side. There is some text visible in the background.
      A group of men are gathered in a bright meeting room, listening as an older man gestures while speaking. Tables and chairs are arranged throughout the room, with windows along one side. There is some text visible in the background.View post
    • A group of adults talk and mingle in a warmly lit restaurant or event space, with wooden tables, chandeliers, and a large riverboat mural. Some people are holding cups, and several are wearing name tags. Text is visible in the scene.
      A group of adults talk and mingle in a warmly lit restaurant or event space, with wooden tables, chandeliers, and a large riverboat mural. Some people are holding cups, and several are wearing name tags. Text is visible in the scene.View post
    • People gather at an indoor emergency-services exhibit, looking at ambulances beneath hanging company signs. Text appears on the signs and vehicles.
      People gather at an indoor emergency-services exhibit, looking at ambulances beneath hanging company signs. Text appears on the signs and vehicles.View post
    • Several adults stand close together indoors, talking in a room with a large colorful painting, a window, and wooden chairs. Some people wear name badges. There is text on a badge.
      Several adults stand close together indoors, talking in a room with a large colorful painting, a window, and wooden chairs. Some people wear name badges. There is text on a badge.View post
    • A group of adults pose together indoors near an open wooden door, smiling toward the camera. Some people wear name tags, and framed items are visible on the wall in the background. There is text on the name tags and framed items.
      A group of adults pose together indoors near an open wooden door, smiling toward the camera. Some people wear name tags, and framed items are visible on the wall in the background. There is text on the name tags and framed items.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
    K000388
    Bioguide
    K000388
    FEC candidate ids
    H6MS01131

    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