Skip to content

Republican · U.S. House, New Jersey’s 7th district

Serving since Jan 3, 2023119th Congress (2025–27)next election Nov 3, 2026

Bioguide K000398FEC H0NJ07261

Portrait of Thomas Kean Jr., rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
22%
of roll calls missed, attendance in the bottom 5% of House Republicans

Attendance 78%; the average among House Republicans is 96.3%. Ranks 218th of 221, where 1st has the highest attendance. 674 roll calls in the 119th Congress.

Attendance is the share of the roll calls Kean could vote on where a yea, nay or present was recorded, ranked among House Republicans. A missed vote has many causes, from illness to campaigning; the number says how often, not why.

At a glance

6 measures against House Republicans. Kean sits at +0.46 on the CSIP scale, more liberal than 98% of House Republicans. Kean voted against the majority of House Republicans 28 times; party unity 93.0%, in the bottom tenth of House Republicans (average 97.1%).

The measures on which Kean 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.

Attendance

78%

House Republicans average 96.3% · ranks 218th of 221 · 674 roll calls

CSIP ideology

+0.46

More liberal than 98% of House Republicans · ± 0.02

Party unity

93.0%

House Republicans average 97.1% · ranks 210th of 221 · 28 votes against the majority of House Republicans

Personal attacks

0.1%

House Republicans average 2.1% · ranks 205th of 221

Policy criticism

6.8%

House Republicans average 15% · ranks 204th of 221

Extreme labels

0.2%

House Republicans average 3.0% · ranks 207th of 221

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

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Kean says

Kean attacks opponents personally less than 92% of House Republicans. Personal attacks in 0.1% of 1,686 statements, against 2.1% for the average House Republican; 205th of 221.

An AI model reads each of Kean’s 1,686 statements in the 119th Congress (1,373 posts on X, 174 press releases, 78 newsletters, 61 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%
Kean
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion1,105 statements
66%
68%
141st of 221
Credit claiming723 statements
43%
37%
78th of 221
Bipartisanship223 statements
13%
9%
50th of 221
Policy criticism114 statements
7%
15%
204th of 221
Personal attacks2 statements
0%
2%
205th of 221
Show the data
Kean's share of statements in each category against the House Republicans average.
RowKeanPeers
Policy discussion66%68%
Credit claiming43%37%
Bipartisanship13%9%
Policy criticism7%15%
Personal attacks0%2%
1,686

statements classified

1,373 posts on X, 174 press releases, 78 newsletters, 61 Congressional Record speeches.

posts on X: 1,373 (81.4%)posts on X 1,373press releases: 174 (10.3%)newsletters: 78 (4.6%)Congressional Record speeches: 61 (3.6%)
Show the data
Kean's statements by source
PartValue
posts on X1,373
press releases174
newsletters78
Congressional Record speeches61
How to read the bars

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

Extreme labels

Kean used extreme labels in 0.2% of statements, 5.9% of the peer average. 3 statements, most often aimed at emissions standards; peers 3.0%.

  1. “extreme”2

Who gets the labels

Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements

  1. emissions standards1
  2. socialist policies1
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: 502025-02: 782025-03: 602025-04: 632025-05: 942025-06: 1092025-07: 852025-08: 792025-09: 1112025-10: 1002025-11: 712025-12: 812026-01: 782026-02: 892026-03: 932026-04: 632026-05: 412026-06: 472026-07: 1042026-08: 702026-09: 652026-10: 55peak 111 · Sep ’25Personal attackspeak 1.8% · Jun ’25 · latest 0.0%Personal attacks, 2025-01: 0.0% of 50Personal attacks, 2025-02: 0.0% of 78Personal attacks, 2025-03: 0.0% of 60Personal attacks, 2025-04: 0.0% of 63Personal attacks, 2025-05: 0.0% of 94Personal attacks, 2025-06: 1.8% of 109Personal attacks, 2025-07: 0.0% of 85Personal attacks, 2025-08: 0.0% of 79Personal attacks, 2025-09: 0.0% of 111Personal attacks, 2025-10: 0.0% of 100Personal attacks, 2025-11: 0.0% of 71Personal attacks, 2025-12: 0.0% of 81Personal attacks, 2026-01: 0.0% of 78Personal attacks, 2026-02: 0.0% of 89Personal attacks, 2026-03: 0.0% of 93Personal attacks, 2026-04: 0.0% of 63Personal attacks, 2026-05: 0.0% of 41Personal attacks, 2026-06: 0.0% of 47Personal attacks, 2026-07: 0.0% of 104Personal attacks, 2026-08: 0.0% of 70Personal attacks, 2026-09: 0.0% of 65Personal attacks, 2026-10: 0.0% of 55Policy criticismpeak 22.0% · Oct ’25 · latest 3.6%Policy criticism, 2025-01: 14.0% of 50Policy criticism, 2025-02: 11.5% of 78Policy criticism, 2025-03: 8.3% of 60Policy criticism, 2025-04: 9.5% of 63Policy criticism, 2025-05: 3.2% of 94Policy criticism, 2025-06: 7.3% of 109Policy criticism, 2025-07: 7.1% of 85Policy criticism, 2025-08: 1.3% of 79Policy criticism, 2025-09: 2.7% of 111Policy criticism, 2025-10: 22.0% of 100Policy criticism, 2025-11: 9.9% of 71Policy criticism, 2025-12: 7.4% of 81Policy criticism, 2026-01: 3.9% of 78Policy criticism, 2026-02: 3.4% of 89Policy criticism, 2026-03: 9.7% of 93Policy criticism, 2026-04: 3.2% of 63Policy criticism, 2026-05: 0.0% of 41Policy criticism, 2026-06: 2.1% of 47Policy criticism, 2026-07: 4.8% of 104Policy criticism, 2026-08: 2.9% of 70Policy criticism, 2026-09: 6.2% of 65Policy criticism, 2026-10: 3.6% of 55Policy discussionpeak 82.9% · Aug ’26 · latest 81.8%Policy discussion, 2025-01: 52.0% of 50Policy discussion, 2025-02: 59.0% of 78Policy discussion, 2025-03: 56.7% of 60Policy discussion, 2025-04: 65.1% of 63Policy discussion, 2025-05: 60.6% of 94Policy discussion, 2025-06: 65.1% of 109Policy discussion, 2025-07: 61.2% of 85Policy discussion, 2025-08: 64.6% of 79Policy discussion, 2025-09: 57.7% of 111Policy discussion, 2025-10: 69.0% of 100Policy discussion, 2025-11: 62.0% of 71Policy discussion, 2025-12: 74.1% of 81Policy discussion, 2026-01: 74.4% of 78Policy discussion, 2026-02: 66.3% of 89Policy discussion, 2026-03: 68.8% of 93Policy discussion, 2026-04: 71.4% of 63Policy discussion, 2026-05: 65.8% of 41Policy discussion, 2026-06: 27.7% of 47Policy discussion, 2026-07: 70.2% of 104Policy discussion, 2026-08: 82.9% of 70Policy discussion, 2026-09: 73.9% of 65Policy discussion, 2026-10: 81.8% of 55Bipartisanshippeak 21.0% · Oct ’25 · latest 3.6%Bipartisanship, 2025-01: 20.0% of 50Bipartisanship, 2025-02: 11.5% of 78Bipartisanship, 2025-03: 16.7% of 60Bipartisanship, 2025-04: 12.7% of 63Bipartisanship, 2025-05: 11.7% of 94Bipartisanship, 2025-06: 13.8% of 109Bipartisanship, 2025-07: 14.1% of 85Bipartisanship, 2025-08: 8.9% of 79Bipartisanship, 2025-09: 18.0% of 111Bipartisanship, 2025-10: 21.0% of 100Bipartisanship, 2025-11: 14.1% of 71Bipartisanship, 2025-12: 21.0% of 81Bipartisanship, 2026-01: 11.5% of 78Bipartisanship, 2026-02: 9.0% of 89Bipartisanship, 2026-03: 17.2% of 93Bipartisanship, 2026-04: 9.5% of 63Bipartisanship, 2026-05: 9.8% of 41Bipartisanship, 2026-06: 2.1% of 47Bipartisanship, 2026-07: 8.6% of 104Bipartisanship, 2026-08: 11.4% of 70Bipartisanship, 2026-09: 15.4% of 65Bipartisanship, 2026-10: 3.6% of 55Credit claimingpeak 55.7% · Aug ’26 · latest 52.7%Credit claiming, 2025-01: 36.0% of 50Credit claiming, 2025-02: 43.6% of 78Credit claiming, 2025-03: 33.3% of 60Credit claiming, 2025-04: 41.3% of 63Credit claiming, 2025-05: 33.0% of 94Credit claiming, 2025-06: 33.9% of 109Credit claiming, 2025-07: 38.8% of 85Credit claiming, 2025-08: 50.6% of 79Credit claiming, 2025-09: 44.1% of 111Credit claiming, 2025-10: 44.0% of 100Credit claiming, 2025-11: 52.1% of 71Credit claiming, 2025-12: 46.9% of 81Credit claiming, 2026-01: 39.7% of 78Credit claiming, 2026-02: 49.4% of 89Credit claiming, 2026-03: 47.3% of 93Credit claiming, 2026-04: 50.8% of 63Credit claiming, 2026-05: 29.3% of 41Credit claiming, 2026-06: 25.5% of 47Credit claiming, 2026-07: 42.3% of 104Credit claiming, 2026-08: 55.7% of 70Credit claiming, 2026-09: 44.6% of 65Credit claiming, 2026-10: 52.7% of 55Extreme labelspeak 1.4% · Nov ’25 · latest 0.0%Extreme labels, 2025-01: 0.0% of 50Extreme labels, 2025-02: 0.0% of 78Extreme labels, 2025-03: 0.0% of 60Extreme labels, 2025-04: 0.0% of 63Extreme labels, 2025-05: 1.1% of 94Extreme labels, 2025-06: 0.9% of 109Extreme labels, 2025-07: 0.0% of 85Extreme labels, 2025-08: 0.0% of 79Extreme labels, 2025-09: 0.0% of 111Extreme labels, 2025-10: 0.0% of 100Extreme labels, 2025-11: 1.4% of 71Extreme labels, 2025-12: 0.0% of 81Extreme labels, 2026-01: 0.0% of 78Extreme labels, 2026-02: 0.0% of 89Extreme labels, 2026-03: 0.0% of 93Extreme labels, 2026-04: 0.0% of 63Extreme labels, 2026-05: 0.0% of 41Extreme labels, 2026-06: 0.0% of 47Extreme labels, 2026-07: 0.0% of 104Extreme labels, 2026-08: 0.0% of 70Extreme labels, 2026-09: 0.0% of 65Extreme labels, 2026-10: 0.0% of 55Jan ’25Jul ’25Jan ’26Jul ’26Oct ’26
Show the data
Monthly rates for Kean, 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 ’25500.0%14.0%52.0%20.0%36.0%0.0%
Feb ’25780.0%11.5%59.0%11.5%43.6%0.0%
Mar ’25600.0%8.3%56.7%16.7%33.3%0.0%
Apr ’25630.0%9.5%65.1%12.7%41.3%0.0%
May ’25940.0%3.2%60.6%11.7%33.0%1.1%
Jun ’251091.8%7.3%65.1%13.8%33.9%0.9%
Jul ’25850.0%7.1%61.2%14.1%38.8%0.0%
Aug ’25790.0%1.3%64.6%8.9%50.6%0.0%
Sep ’251110.0%2.7%57.7%18.0%44.1%0.0%
Oct ’251000.0%22.0%69.0%21.0%44.0%0.0%
Nov ’25710.0%9.9%62.0%14.1%52.1%1.4%
Dec ’25810.0%7.4%74.1%21.0%46.9%0.0%
Jan ’26780.0%3.9%74.4%11.5%39.7%0.0%
Feb ’26890.0%3.4%66.3%9.0%49.4%0.0%
Mar ’26930.0%9.7%68.8%17.2%47.3%0.0%
Apr ’26630.0%3.2%71.4%9.5%50.8%0.0%
May ’26410.0%0.0%65.8%9.8%29.3%0.0%
Jun ’26470.0%2.1%27.7%2.1%25.5%0.0%
Jul ’261040.0%4.8%70.2%8.6%42.3%0.0%
Aug ’26700.0%2.9%82.9%11.4%55.7%0.0%
Sep ’26650.0%6.2%73.9%15.4%44.6%0.0%
Oct ’26550.0%3.6%81.8%3.6%52.7%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 Kean’s words

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

Policy criticism

Kean Urges Action to Make Air Travel Wheelchair Accessible (October 22, 2026) WASHINGTON, D.C. – On Wednesday, Congressman Tom Kean, Jr. (NJ-07) wrote to the Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy, Administrator of theFederal Aviation Administration Bryan Bedford, and five major airline CEOs urging…

Oct 23, 2026 · Press releases · policy criticism; policy discussion; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; Transportation and Public Works · Source

Personal attacks

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

Jun 12, 2025 · Posts on X · personal attacks; target: Rep McIver · Source

Extreme label

News for NJ-07 | Dear , Welcome to my weekly e-newsletter, where you receive updates on my work for you in Congress. This week, I participated in hearings across both of the Committees I serve on in Congress: the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Energy & Commerce (E&C) Committee. I also join…

Nov 22, 2025 · Newsletters · policy criticism; policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Health; Labor and Employment; Transportation and Public Works; Taxation; Armed Forces and National Security; Commerce; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; Foreign Trade and International Finance; Crime and Law Enforcement; Economics and Public Finance; International Affairs; Science, Technology, Communications; Education; Energy; Government Operations and Politics; extreme label “extreme” aimed at socialist policies

Examples by category

Up to five recent statements in each category

Category

Overtly questions a named person’s character, integrity or loyalty, or calls them names. Criticising a record or a policy does not count.

  1. Posts on X

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

    personal attacks · target: Rep McIverSource

  2. Press releases

    Kean Presses Senators Booker, Kim to Support SALT Relief Contact: Riley Pingree (June 5, 2025) WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, Representative Tom Kean, Jr. (NJ-07) sent a letter to New Jersey Senators Cory Booker and Andy Kim urging them to support the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction relief for New Jersey families in the Senate’s forthcoming reconciliation package. For more than a year, Congressman Kean has worked acr…

    personal attacks · policy discussion · bipartisanship · credit claiming · Taxation · target: Cory Booker, Andy KimSource

All 1,686 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: 1,373 posts on X, 174 press releases, 78 newsletters, 61 Congressional Record speeches.

Back to topNext: Policy

Policy

Health is what Kean talks about most: 26% of policy statements, above the peer share. Talk and legislation agree at 0.71 on a 0–1 scale (House Republicans average 0.64; 21st 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 Kean talks about. The bills Kean sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.

What Kean talks about

Share of policy statements by area, the 119th Congress

0%35%
Kean
Peers
Health282 statements
26%
15%
Armed Forces and National Security217 statements
20%
24%
Science, Technology, Communications158 statements
14%
7%
Taxation156 statements
14%
10%
Economics and Public Finance153 statements
14%
19%
Show the data
Policy areas Kean talks about, as a share of policy statements, against the House Republicans average.
RowKeanPeers
Health26%15%
Armed Forces and National Security20%24%
Science, Technology, Communications14%7%
Taxation14%10%
Economics and Public Finance14%19%
How to read the bars

The thick bar is the share of Kean’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 35%. Grey ticks are the House Republicans averages.

Talks aboutLegislates onHealthHealth, talks about: 26% (House Republicans 15%)26%Health, legislates on: 18% (House Republicans 11%)18%Armed Forces and NationalSecurityArmed Forces and National Security, talks about: 20% (House Republicans 24%)20%Armed Forces and National Security, legislates on: 11% (House Republicans 8%)11%Science, Technology,CommunicationsScience, Technology, Communications, talks about: 14% (House Republicans 7%)14%Science, Technology, Communications, legislates on: 4% (House Republicans 3%)4%TaxationTaxation, talks about: 14% (House Republicans 10%)14%Taxation, legislates on: 6% (House Republicans 9%)6%Economics and Public FinanceEconomics and Public Finance, talks about: 14% (House Republicans 19%)14%Economics and Public Finance, legislates on: 0% (House Republicans 2%)0%
Show the data
Kean's share of statements against share of bills in each policy area.
AreaTalks aboutHouse Republicans, talks aboutLegislates onHouse Republicans, legislates on
Health26%15%18%11%
Armed Forces and National Security20%24%11%8%
Science, Technology, Communications14%7%4%3%
Taxation14%10%6%9%
Economics and Public Finance14%19%0%2%
0.71

talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1

House Republicans average 0.64. Ranks 21st of 221.

What agreement means, and what it doesn’t

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

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Kean sits at +0.46 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more liberal than 98% of House Republicans. Approximate range +0.44 to +0.48, which understates the uncertainty; from 4,207 donors and 1,755 roll calls.

CSIP, the lab’s Common-Space Ideal Point, places every official, federal and state, on one left–right scale, estimated from roll-call votes, who gives money to whom, and the text of statements. Negative is left of 0, positive right of it; 0 is the centre of the scale, not a definition of “moderate”.

+0.46

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range +0.44 to +0.48. From 4,207 donors and 1,755 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

← More liberalMore conservative →0Kean +0.5House Republicans +1.0All House +0.3

The outlined dot is Kean, 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 Kean’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 Kean sits

Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale

−2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →House Republicansmedian +1.0Kean +0.5All Housemedian +0.3
Show the data
Kean's CSIP score of +0.46 placed against House Republicans, All House.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Kean
House Republicans221+1.02%
All House439+0.350%
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 Kean 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 Kean.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Kean raised $6.1M in the 2026 cycle, 2.8 times the House Republicans’ median of $2.2M. 10% of individual money came in gifts of $200 or less. 54% of itemized individual money came from New Jersey.

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
$6.1M

raised in the 2026 cycle

From 973 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): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Itemized individual (over $200): $2.5M (40.9%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $284.6K (4.6%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $284.6K (4.6%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $284.6K (4.6%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $284.6K (4.6%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $284.6K (4.6%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (23.9%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $1.9M (30.4%)
  • Itemized individual (over $200)41 squares$2.5M
  • Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)5 squares$284.6K
  • PACs and other committees24 squares$1.5M
  • Party committees$10.0K
  • Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)30 squares$1.9M
Show the data
Sources of Kean's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Itemized individual (over $200)$2.5M40.9%
Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)$284.6K4.6%
PACs and other committees$1.5M23.9%
Party committees$10.0K0.2%
Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)$1.9M30.4%
What this means, and what it doesn’t

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

Receipts by cycle

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

2020 cycle: $3.9M$3.9M20202022 cycle: $4.4M$4.4M20222024 cycle: $6.0M$6.0M20242026 cycle: $6.1M$6.1M2026House Republicans median $2.2M
Show the data
Kean's receipts by cycle against the 2026 House Republicans median.
ItemValue
2020 cycle$3.9M
2022 cycle$4.4M
2024 cycle$6.0M
2026 cycle$6.1M

Top donor states, 2026

Itemized contributions by donor state. 54% came from New Jersey.

  1. New Jersey$924.2K
  2. Florida$189.8K
  3. New York$119.6K
  4. California$87.5K
  5. Virginia$59.5K

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%
Kean
Median
2026
10%
9%
2024
7%
9%
2022
9%
9%
2020
7%
9%
Show the data
Small-donor share by cycle against the House Republicans median
RowKeanMedian
2026 cycle10%9%
2024 cycle7%9%
2022 cycle9%9%
2020 cycle7%9%

Where itemized donors live

Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state

Alaska: no dataAKMaine: $100MEVermont: $450VTNew Hampshire: $1,500NHWashington: no dataWAIdaho: no dataIDMontana: no dataMTNorth Dakota: no dataNDMinnesota: no dataMNIllinois: $10.1KILWisconsin: no dataWIMichigan: $10.2KMINew York: $119.6KNYRhode Island: no dataRIMassachusetts: $25.2KMAOregon: $7,000ORNevada: no dataNVWyoming: $2,412WYSouth Dakota: no dataSDIowa: $285IAIndiana: $5,500INOhio: $5,915OHPennsylvania: $42.0KPANew Jersey: $924.2KNJConnecticut: $29.1KCTCalifornia: $87.5KCAUtah: $12.2KUTColorado: $39.5KCONebraska: no dataNEMissouri: no dataMOKentucky: no dataKYWest Virginia: no dataWVVirginia: $59.5KVAMaryland: $25.1KMDDelaware: $5,500DEArizona: $1,328AZNew Mexico: $51NMKansas: no dataKSArkansas: $10.5KARTennessee: $2,710TNNorth Carolina: $4,250NCSouth Carolina: $5,292SCDistrict of Columbia: $21.3KDCOklahoma: no dataOKLouisiana: no dataLAMississippi: no dataMSAlabama: no dataALGeorgia: $2,339GAHawaii: no dataHITexas: $35.7KTXFlorida: $189.8KFL
Show the data
Kean's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
New Jersey$924.2K
Florida$189.8K
New York$119.6K
California$87.5K
Virginia$59.5K
Pennsylvania$42.0K
Colorado$39.5K
Texas$35.7K
Connecticut$29.1K
Massachusetts$25.2K
Maryland$25.1K
District of Columbia$21.3K
Utah$12.2K
Arkansas$10.5K
Michigan$10.2K
Illinois$10.1K
Oregon$7,000
Ohio$5,915
Indiana$5,500
Delaware$5,500
South Carolina$5,292
North Carolina$4,250
Tennessee$2,710
Wyoming$2,412
Georgia$2,339
New Hampshire$1,500
Arizona$1,328
Vermont$450
Iowa$285
Maine$100
New Mexico$51
AlaskaNo data
WashingtonNo data
IdahoNo data
MontanaNo data
North DakotaNo data
MinnesotaNo data
WisconsinNo data
Rhode IslandNo data
NevadaNo data
South DakotaNo data
NebraskaNo data
MissouriNo data
KentuckyNo data
West VirginiaNo data
KansasNo data
OklahomaNo data
LouisianaNo data
MississippiNo data
AlabamaNo data
HawaiiNo data
973

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

54%

from New Jersey

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

Donors’ ideology

Distribution of itemized donors’ own CSIP scores

CSIP −1.00 to −0.75: 0.3%CSIP −0.75 to −0.50: 2.1%CSIP −0.50 to −0.25: 2.6%CSIP −0.25 to 0.00: 6.4%CSIP 0.00 to +0.25: 12%CSIP +0.25 to +0.50: 43%43%CSIP +0.50 to +0.75: 19%CSIP +0.75 to +1.00: 14%CSIP +1.00 to +1.25: 0.5%CSIP +1.25 to +1.50: 0.0%CSIP +1.50 to +1.75: 0%← More liberalMore conservative →0
Show the data
Ideology of Kean's itemized donors in 2026, from −1.00 to +1.75: 6.4% between −0.25 and 0.00, 12% between 0.00 and +0.25, 43% between +0.25 and +0.50, 19% between +0.50 and +0.75, 14% between +0.75 and +1.00.
ItemValue
CSIP −1.00 to −0.750.3%
CSIP −0.75 to −0.502.1%
CSIP −0.50 to −0.252.6%
CSIP −0.25 to 0.006.4%
CSIP 0.00 to +0.2512%
CSIP +0.25 to +0.5043%
CSIP +0.50 to +0.7519%
CSIP +0.75 to +1.0014%
CSIP +1.00 to +1.250.5%
CSIP +1.25 to +1.500.0%
CSIP +1.50 to +1.750%
How to read the columns

Donors who give to many candidates get their own CSIP score. Each column is the share of Kean’s itemized money from donors in that part of the scale, blue left of 0 and red right of 0, deeper further out; Kean’s own score is +0.46.

Top donor occupations

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. RETIRED$463.2K 295 donors
  2. ATTORNEY$95.6K 66 donors
  3. CEO$86.1K 37 donors
  4. PRESIDENT$60.3K 23 donors
  5. HOMEMAKER$51.3K 19 donors

Top committees

PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.

  1. ALLIED PILOTS ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$10.0K
  2. AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$10.0K
  3. AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$10.0K
  4. AMERICAN REVIVAL PAC$10.0K
  5. BRINGING REPUBLICAN EXCELLENCE TO TOWN PAC$10.0K

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. MORGAN STANLEY$6,100 4 donors

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Kean voted with the majority of House Republicans on 93.0% of party-line votes and missed 22% of 674 roll calls. House Republicans on average: 97.1% party unity, 96.3% attendance. Across all roll calls, Kean voted against the majority of House Republicans 28 times.

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

28

votes against the majority of House Republicans

Party unity 93.0%, House Republicans average 97.1%, ranks 210th of 221. 674 roll calls in the 119th Congress.

Attendance and party unity

The thick bar is Kean, the thin grey bar the House Republicans average. The scale runs from 70% to 100% to show the gap.

70%100%
Kean
Peers
Rank
Attendance
78%
96.3%
218th of 221
Party unity
93.0%
97.1%
210th of 221
Show the data
Kean's attendance and party unity against House Republicans.
RowKeanPeers
Attendance78%96.3%
Party unity93.0%97.1%
What this means, and what it doesn’t

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

Key votes

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

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

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

Votes most often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Kean most often

  1. Nicolas LaLotaR521 shared votes98%
  2. Andrew GarbarinoR511 shared votes98%
  3. Michael LawlerR521 shared votes98%
  4. David ValadaoR518 shared votes98%
  5. Robert BresnahanR524 shared votes98%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Kean least often

  1. Rashida TlaibD513 shared votes28%
  2. Adelita GrijalvaD246 shared votes28%
  3. Delia RamirezD503 shared votes29%
  4. Danny DavisD507 shared votes30%
  5. Robert GarciaD499 shared votes30%
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

Kean sponsored 40 bills in the 119th Congress; none became law. Cosponsored 390 others. 10% of sponsored bills got out of committee (House Republicans average 17%; 139th of 216).

The bills Kean 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

Sponsored40 billsSponsored, Introduced: 4040Sponsored, In committee: 4040Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 33Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 00Sponsored, Became law: 00Cosponsored390 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 390390Cosponsored, In committee: 390390Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 3131Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 44Cosponsored, Became law: 44IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Kean sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored4040300
Cosponsored3903903144
How to read the blocks

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

10%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

House Republicans average 17%. Ranks 139th of 216.

Cosponsorship partners

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

  1. Michael Lawler78
  2. Brian Fitzpatrick73
  3. Josh Gottheimer67
  4. Eugene Vindman41
  5. Don Bacon36
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 Kean’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. 1633Expressing support for the designation of the week of October 19 through October 23, 2026, as "Careers in Energy Week".CosponsorOct 19, 2026In committeeUnassignedReferred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. Oct 19, 2026
H.R. 10792FTC Whistleblower Act of 2026CosponsorOct 9, 2026In committeeCommerceReferred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. Oct 9, 2026
H.R. 10760Healthy Minds for a Better Future ActSponsorOct 6, 2026In committeeEducationReferred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. Oct 6, 2026
H.Res. 1618Recognizing the third anniversary of the October 7, 2023, terrorist attacks on Israel, honoring the victims and the hostages, and calling for the complete disarmament of Hamas for a durable end to the war in Gaza.CosponsorOct 6, 2026In committeeInternational AffairsReferred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. Oct 6, 2026
H.R. 10743Nonprofit Security Grant Program Funding Improvement ActCosponsorOct 5, 2026In committeeEmergency ManagementReferred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, 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

Back to topNext: Online

Online

A site that changed 66 times in 90 days. Kean’s official site had 21 pages when last crawled on Oct 25, 2026. The lab last catalogued the images Kean posted on Oct 26, 2026.

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

Websites

  • Official site

    kean.house.gov

    Last crawled Oct 25, 2026

    21

    pages crawled

    66

    changes in 90 days

  • Campaign site

    tomkean.com

    Last crawled Oct 25, 2026

    7

    pages crawled

    13

    changes in 90 days

How to read the counts

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

Images Kean posted

The latest 24, with model-written descriptions

  • A group of eight adults pose outdoors in front of a wooded area, holding a poster announcing funding for a regional flood mitigation project. Text appears on the poster.
    A group of eight adults pose outdoors in front of a wooded area, holding a poster announcing funding for a regional flood mitigation project. Text appears on the poster.View post
  • A news graphic with a torn-paper-style headline area above a photograph of a suited man wearing glasses seated at a wooden committee desk with a microphone. A nameplate is in front of him, and the graphic includes a news outlet logo and text.
    A news graphic with a torn-paper-style headline area above a photograph of a suited man wearing glasses seated at a wooden committee desk with a microphone. A nameplate is in front of him, and the graphic includes a news outlet logo and text.View post
  • A man in a suit sits at the front of a classroom or children's activity room, holding up a picture book to a group of young children seated on a colorful floor. A blank flip chart, large wall-mounted screen, and educational posters are visible. There is text on the book and posters.
    A man in a suit sits at the front of a classroom or children's activity room, holding up a picture book to a group of young children seated on a colorful floor. A blank flip chart, large wall-mounted screen, and educational posters are visible. There is text on the book and posters.View post
  • A photograph or scan of a formal letter addressed to the U.S. president, with several paragraphs discussing support for Ukraine, Russian energy sanctions, Starlink access, and Patriot missile production. Footnotes and web links appear in the middle of the page. There are no illustrations.
    A photograph or scan of a formal letter addressed to the U.S. president, with several paragraphs discussing support for Ukraine, Russian energy sanctions, Starlink access, and Patriot missile production. Footnotes and web links appear in the middle of the page. There are no illustrations.View post
  • Three adults pose for a photograph on a paved path beside a river, with autumn trees and a clear sky in the background. Small text is visible on one person's shirt.
    Three adults pose for a photograph on a paved path beside a river, with autumn trees and a clear sky in the background. Small text is visible on one person's shirt.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 Kean 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
K000398
Bioguide
K000398
FEC candidate ids
H0NJ07261

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