Skip to content

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

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

Bioguide M001224FEC H2TX01112

Portrait of Nathaniel Moran, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
41%
of individual money in gifts of $200 or less, in the top quarter of House Republicans

41% of individual money in the 2026 cycle came in gifts of $200 or less; the median for House Republicans is 9.4%. Ranks 26th of 220, where 1st is the highest share. $2.4M raised in all.

Campaigns report every donor who gives more than $200 by name and smaller gifts only as one total; this is that small-gift total as a share of all money from individuals, from the FEC’s committee summaries, ranked among House Republicans. It understates small giving when a campaign itemizes gifts made through ActBlue or WinRed.

At a glance

6 measures against House Republicans. The policy areas Moran talks about and legislates on agree at 0.68 on a 0–1 scale, in the top half of House Republicans. 0.4% of Moran’s statements contain a personal attack, in the bottom half of House Republicans (average 2.1%).

The measures on which Moran 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.

Small donations, 2026

41%

House Republicans’ median 9.4% · ranks 26th of 220

Party unity

99.3%

House Republicans average 97.1% · ranks 31st of 221 · 6 votes against the majority of House Republicans

Talk-to-bills agreement

0.68

House Republicans average 0.64 · ranks 57th of 221

Personal attacks

0.4%

House Republicans average 2.1% · ranks 159th of 221

Credit claiming

43%

House Republicans average 37% · ranks 73rd of 221

CSIP ideology

+0.96

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 Moran, the thin grey bar the peer average. The headline is the measure on which Moran is most unusual among peers (Methods, §08).

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Moran says

Moran attacks opponents personally less than 71% of House Republicans. Personal attacks in 0.4% of 1,182 statements, against 2.1% for the average House Republican; 159th of 221.

An AI model reads each of Moran’s 1,182 statements in the 119th Congress (921 posts on X, 111 press releases, 102 newsletters, 48 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%
Moran
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion809 statements
68%
68%
115th of 221
Credit claiming514 statements
43%
37%
73rd of 221
Policy criticism190 statements
16%
15%
85th of 221
Bipartisanship113 statements
10%
9%
76th of 221
Personal attacks5 statements
0%
2%
159th of 221
Show the data
Moran's share of statements in each category against the House Republicans average.
RowMoranPeers
Policy discussion68%68%
Credit claiming43%37%
Policy criticism16%15%
Bipartisanship10%9%
Personal attacks0%2%
1,182

statements classified

921 posts on X, 111 press releases, 102 newsletters, 48 Congressional Record speeches.

posts on X: 921 (77.9%)posts on X 921press releases: 111 (9.4%)newsletters: 102 (8.6%)Congressional Record speeches: 48 (4.1%)
Show the data
Moran's statements by source
PartValue
posts on X921
press releases111
newsletters102
Congressional Record speeches48
How to read the bars

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

Extreme labels

Moran used extreme labels in 2.4% of statements, below the peer average. 28 statements, most often aimed at Democrats; peers 3.0%.

  1. “communist”11
  2. “radical”11
  3. “woke”2
  4. “MAGA”1
  5. “extreme”1

Who gets the labels

Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements

  1. Democrats3
  2. Biden1
  3. Chinese Communist Party1
  4. DEI policies1
  5. Democrat 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: 852025-02: 762025-03: 612025-04: 392025-05: 532025-06: 782025-07: 762025-08: 392025-09: 712025-10: 592025-11: 432025-12: 512026-01: 622026-02: 452026-03: 552026-04: 602026-05: 362026-06: 372026-07: 392026-08: 472026-09: 522026-10: 18peak 85 · Jan ’25Personal attackspeak 1.9% · Sep ’26 · latest 0.0%Personal attacks, 2025-01: 1.2% of 85Personal attacks, 2025-02: 0.0% of 76Personal attacks, 2025-03: 1.6% of 61Personal attacks, 2025-04: 0.0% of 39Personal attacks, 2025-05: 0.0% of 53Personal attacks, 2025-06: 1.3% of 78Personal attacks, 2025-07: 0.0% of 76Personal attacks, 2025-08: 0.0% of 39Personal attacks, 2025-09: 0.0% of 71Personal attacks, 2025-10: 1.7% of 59Personal attacks, 2025-11: 0.0% of 43Personal attacks, 2025-12: 0.0% of 51Personal attacks, 2026-01: 0.0% of 62Personal attacks, 2026-02: 0.0% of 45Personal attacks, 2026-03: 0.0% of 55Personal attacks, 2026-04: 0.0% of 60Personal attacks, 2026-05: 0.0% of 36Personal attacks, 2026-06: 0.0% of 37Personal attacks, 2026-07: 0.0% of 39Personal attacks, 2026-08: 0.0% of 47Personal attacks, 2026-09: 1.9% of 52Personal attacks, 2026-10: 0.0% of 18Policy criticismpeak 30.6% · Jan ’25 · latest 5.6%Policy criticism, 2025-01: 30.6% of 85Policy criticism, 2025-02: 27.6% of 76Policy criticism, 2025-03: 11.5% of 61Policy criticism, 2025-04: 15.4% of 39Policy criticism, 2025-05: 13.2% of 53Policy criticism, 2025-06: 17.9% of 78Policy criticism, 2025-07: 10.5% of 76Policy criticism, 2025-08: 7.7% of 39Policy criticism, 2025-09: 12.7% of 71Policy criticism, 2025-10: 23.7% of 59Policy criticism, 2025-11: 25.6% of 43Policy criticism, 2025-12: 19.6% of 51Policy criticism, 2026-01: 12.9% of 62Policy criticism, 2026-02: 17.8% of 45Policy criticism, 2026-03: 10.9% of 55Policy criticism, 2026-04: 8.3% of 60Policy criticism, 2026-05: 22.2% of 36Policy criticism, 2026-06: 18.9% of 37Policy criticism, 2026-07: 10.3% of 39Policy criticism, 2026-08: 4.3% of 47Policy criticism, 2026-09: 9.6% of 52Policy criticism, 2026-10: 5.6% of 18Policy discussionpeak 89.4% · Aug ’26 · latest 83.3%Policy discussion, 2025-01: 67.1% of 85Policy discussion, 2025-02: 69.7% of 76Policy discussion, 2025-03: 54.1% of 61Policy discussion, 2025-04: 46.2% of 39Policy discussion, 2025-05: 73.6% of 53Policy discussion, 2025-06: 75.6% of 78Policy discussion, 2025-07: 68.4% of 76Policy discussion, 2025-08: 56.4% of 39Policy discussion, 2025-09: 43.7% of 71Policy discussion, 2025-10: 57.6% of 59Policy discussion, 2025-11: 58.1% of 43Policy discussion, 2025-12: 72.5% of 51Policy discussion, 2026-01: 82.3% of 62Policy discussion, 2026-02: 75.6% of 45Policy discussion, 2026-03: 70.9% of 55Policy discussion, 2026-04: 71.7% of 60Policy discussion, 2026-05: 75.0% of 36Policy discussion, 2026-06: 67.6% of 37Policy discussion, 2026-07: 82.0% of 39Policy discussion, 2026-08: 89.4% of 47Policy discussion, 2026-09: 78.8% of 52Policy discussion, 2026-10: 83.3% of 18Bipartisanshippeak 33.3% · Oct ’26 · latest 33.3%Bipartisanship, 2025-01: 8.2% of 85Bipartisanship, 2025-02: 7.9% of 76Bipartisanship, 2025-03: 19.7% of 61Bipartisanship, 2025-04: 5.1% of 39Bipartisanship, 2025-05: 3.8% of 53Bipartisanship, 2025-06: 5.1% of 78Bipartisanship, 2025-07: 5.3% of 76Bipartisanship, 2025-08: 2.6% of 39Bipartisanship, 2025-09: 5.6% of 71Bipartisanship, 2025-10: 3.4% of 59Bipartisanship, 2025-11: 4.7% of 43Bipartisanship, 2025-12: 11.8% of 51Bipartisanship, 2026-01: 9.7% of 62Bipartisanship, 2026-02: 8.9% of 45Bipartisanship, 2026-03: 14.5% of 55Bipartisanship, 2026-04: 6.7% of 60Bipartisanship, 2026-05: 22.2% of 36Bipartisanship, 2026-06: 18.9% of 37Bipartisanship, 2026-07: 10.3% of 39Bipartisanship, 2026-08: 6.4% of 47Bipartisanship, 2026-09: 21.1% of 52Bipartisanship, 2026-10: 33.3% of 18Credit claimingpeak 61.5% · Jul ’26 · latest 38.9%Credit claiming, 2025-01: 61.2% of 85Credit claiming, 2025-02: 50.0% of 76Credit claiming, 2025-03: 42.6% of 61Credit claiming, 2025-04: 30.8% of 39Credit claiming, 2025-05: 50.9% of 53Credit claiming, 2025-06: 35.9% of 78Credit claiming, 2025-07: 44.7% of 76Credit claiming, 2025-08: 28.2% of 39Credit claiming, 2025-09: 31.0% of 71Credit claiming, 2025-10: 25.4% of 59Credit claiming, 2025-11: 30.2% of 43Credit claiming, 2025-12: 43.1% of 51Credit claiming, 2026-01: 41.9% of 62Credit claiming, 2026-02: 60.0% of 45Credit claiming, 2026-03: 43.6% of 55Credit claiming, 2026-04: 41.7% of 60Credit claiming, 2026-05: 38.9% of 36Credit claiming, 2026-06: 48.6% of 37Credit claiming, 2026-07: 61.5% of 39Credit claiming, 2026-08: 57.5% of 47Credit claiming, 2026-09: 42.3% of 52Credit claiming, 2026-10: 38.9% of 18Extreme labelspeak 7.1% · Jan ’25 · latest 0.0%Extreme labels, 2025-01: 7.1% of 85Extreme labels, 2025-02: 5.3% of 76Extreme labels, 2025-03: 4.9% of 61Extreme labels, 2025-04: 0.0% of 39Extreme labels, 2025-05: 1.9% of 53Extreme labels, 2025-06: 5.1% of 78Extreme labels, 2025-07: 0.0% of 76Extreme labels, 2025-08: 0.0% of 39Extreme labels, 2025-09: 2.8% of 71Extreme labels, 2025-10: 5.1% of 59Extreme labels, 2025-11: 0.0% of 43Extreme labels, 2025-12: 3.9% of 51Extreme labels, 2026-01: 1.6% of 62Extreme labels, 2026-02: 0.0% of 45Extreme labels, 2026-03: 1.8% of 55Extreme labels, 2026-04: 0.0% of 60Extreme labels, 2026-05: 0.0% of 36Extreme labels, 2026-06: 0.0% of 37Extreme labels, 2026-07: 2.6% of 39Extreme labels, 2026-08: 0.0% of 47Extreme labels, 2026-09: 0.0% of 52Extreme labels, 2026-10: 0.0% of 18Jan ’25Jul ’25Jan ’26Jul ’26Oct ’26
Show the data
Monthly rates for Moran, 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 ’25851.2%30.6%67.1%8.2%61.2%7.1%
Feb ’25760.0%27.6%69.7%7.9%50.0%5.3%
Mar ’25611.6%11.5%54.1%19.7%42.6%4.9%
Apr ’25390.0%15.4%46.2%5.1%30.8%0.0%
May ’25530.0%13.2%73.6%3.8%50.9%1.9%
Jun ’25781.3%17.9%75.6%5.1%35.9%5.1%
Jul ’25760.0%10.5%68.4%5.3%44.7%0.0%
Aug ’25390.0%7.7%56.4%2.6%28.2%0.0%
Sep ’25710.0%12.7%43.7%5.6%31.0%2.8%
Oct ’25591.7%23.7%57.6%3.4%25.4%5.1%
Nov ’25430.0%25.6%58.1%4.7%30.2%0.0%
Dec ’25510.0%19.6%72.5%11.8%43.1%3.9%
Jan ’26620.0%12.9%82.3%9.7%41.9%1.6%
Feb ’26450.0%17.8%75.6%8.9%60.0%0.0%
Mar ’26550.0%10.9%70.9%14.5%43.6%1.8%
Apr ’26600.0%8.3%71.7%6.7%41.7%0.0%
May ’26360.0%22.2%75.0%22.2%38.9%0.0%
Jun ’26370.0%18.9%67.6%18.9%48.6%0.0%
Jul ’26390.0%10.3%82.0%10.3%61.5%2.6%
Aug ’26470.0%4.3%89.4%6.4%57.5%0.0%
Sep ’26521.9%9.6%78.8%21.1%42.3%0.0%
Oct ’26180.0%5.6%83.3%33.3%38.9%0.0%
How to read the strips

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

In Moran’s words

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

Credit claiming

Moran Minute A Trip of a Lifetime for East Texas Veterans Enews Sign Up<https://moran.house.gov/components/redirect/r.aspx?ID=4428-1312977> | Visit My Website<https://moran.house.gov/components/redirect/r.aspx?ID=4429-1312977> | View Online<https://moran.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=7X6XOICZZ3…

Oct 24, 2026 · Newsletters · policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Armed Forces and National Security; Commerce; Economics and Public Finance; Science, Technology, Communications; Foreign Trade and International Finance; Health; Labor and Employment; Taxation

Personal attacks

Moran Minute This Week: Countering China, Backing East Texas Jobs Enews Sign Up<https://moran.house.gov/components/redirect/r.aspx?ID=4359-1312977> | Visit My Website<https://moran.house.gov/components/redirect/r.aspx?ID=4360-1312977> | View Online<https://moran.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=2Q…

Sep 27, 2026 · Newsletters · personal attacks; policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Immigration; Taxation; Commerce; Armed Forces and National Security; International Affairs; Energy; Science, Technology, Communications; Agriculture and Food; target: Benedict Arnold

Extreme label

Moran Minute Cutting Red Tape for Small Businesses in East Texas. Enews Sign Up<https://moran.house.gov/components/redirect/r.aspx?ID=4153-1312977> | Visit My Website<https://moran.house.gov/components/redirect/r.aspx?ID=4154-1312977> | View Online<https://moran.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=QQ…

Jul 18, 2026 · Newsletters · policy discussion; credit claiming; Commerce; Armed Forces and National Security; International Affairs; Taxation; Health; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; Economics and Public Finance; extreme label “radical, communist” aimed at gender ideology, foreign programs

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. Newsletters

    Moran Minute This Week: Countering China, Backing East Texas Jobs Enews Sign Up<https://moran.house.gov/components/redirect/r.aspx?ID=4359-1312977> | Visit My Website<https://moran.house.gov/components/redirect/r.aspx?ID=4360-1312977> | View Online<https://moran.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=2Q46EZZT2IK5I> [MM V2 9.26.26] Dear East Texas, Fall officially arrived this week. Up in DC, you can almost feel it, but…

    personal attacks · policy discussion · bipartisanship · credit claiming · Immigration · Taxation · Commerce · Armed Forces and National Security · International Affairs · Energy · Science, Technology, Communications · Agriculture and Food · target: Benedict Arnold

  2. Posts on X

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

    personal attacks · policy criticism · policy discussion · Government Operations and Politics · target: SchumerSource

  3. Posts on X

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

    personal attacks · policy discussion · Armed Forces and National Security · target: DemocratsSource

  4. Newsletters

    Moran Minute: President Trump's Message of Increased Liberty and Abundant Life The American Dream is Still Available ? Enews Sign Up | Visit My Website | View Online The First District Email Me Media Center Serving You Dear East Texas, On Tuesday night, millions of Americans tuned in to watch President Trump deliver the first joint address of his second term-not to be confused with a State of the Union. While both ar…

    personal attacks · policy discussion · bipartisanship · credit claiming · Government Operations and Politics · Armed Forces and National Security · International Affairs · Science, Technology, Communications · Water Resources Development · Health · Energy · Taxation · extreme label “communist”

  5. Press releases

    Washington, DC – Congressman Nathaniel Moran (R-TX-01) released the following statement after voting to support Congresswoman Nancy Mace’s (R-SC-01) Preventing Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act, which passed the House on Thursday: “Over the last four years, Americans have witnessed the severity of an Administration complacent in addressing our southern border. Time and time again, we have dealt with the re…

    personal attacks · policy criticism · policy discussion · credit claiming · Immigration · Crime and Law Enforcement · extreme label “radical”Source

All 1,182 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: 921 posts on X, 111 press releases, 102 newsletters, 48 Congressional Record speeches.

Back to topNext: Policy

Policy

Taxation is what Moran talks about most: 28% of policy statements, 2.9 times the peer share. Talk and legislation agree at 0.68 on a 0–1 scale (House Republicans average 0.64; 57th 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 Moran talks about. The bills Moran sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.

What Moran talks about

Share of policy statements by area, the 119th Congress

0%35%
Moran
Peers
Taxation227 statements
28%
10%
Armed Forces and National Security177 statements
22%
24%
Economics and Public Finance176 statements
22%
19%
Government Operations and Politics120 statements
15%
19%
Science, Technology, Communications108 statements
13%
7%
Show the data
Policy areas Moran talks about, as a share of policy statements, against the House Republicans average.
RowMoranPeers
Taxation28%10%
Armed Forces and National Security22%24%
Economics and Public Finance22%19%
Government Operations and Politics15%19%
Science, Technology, Communications13%7%
How to read the bars

The thick bar is the share of Moran’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 onTaxationTaxation, talks about: 28% (House Republicans 10%)28%Taxation, legislates on: 29% (House Republicans 9%)29%Armed Forces and NationalSecurityArmed Forces and National Security, talks about: 22% (House Republicans 24%)22%Armed Forces and National Security, legislates on: 3% (House Republicans 8%)3%Economics and Public FinanceEconomics and Public Finance, talks about: 22% (House Republicans 19%)22%Economics and Public Finance, legislates on: 2% (House Republicans 2%)2%Government Operations andPoliticsGovernment Operations and Politics, talks about: 15% (House Republicans 19%)15%Government Operations and Politics, legislates on: 5% (House Republicans 12%)5%Science, Technology,CommunicationsScience, Technology, Communications, talks about: 13% (House Republicans 7%)13%Science, Technology, Communications, legislates on: 3% (House Republicans 3%)3%
Show the data
Moran's share of statements against share of bills in each policy area.
AreaTalks aboutHouse Republicans, talks aboutLegislates onHouse Republicans, legislates on
Taxation28%10%29%9%
Armed Forces and National Security22%24%3%8%
Economics and Public Finance22%19%2%2%
Government Operations and Politics15%19%5%12%
Science, Technology, Communications13%7%3%3%
0.68

talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1

House Republicans average 0.64. Ranks 57th of 221.

What agreement means, and what it doesn’t

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

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Moran sits at +0.96 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more liberal than 57% of House Republicans. Approximate range +0.94 to +0.99, which understates the uncertainty; from 1,059 donors and 1,887 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”.

+0.96

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range +0.94 to +0.99. From 1,059 donors and 1,887 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

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

The outlined dot is Moran, 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 Moran’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 Moran sits

Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale

−2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →House Republicansmedian +1.0Moran +1.0All Housemedian +0.3
Show the data
Moran's CSIP score of +0.96 placed against House Republicans, All House.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Moran
House Republicans221+1.043%
All House439+0.371%
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 Moran 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 Moran.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Moran raised $2.4M in the 2026 cycle, close to the House Republicans’ median of $2.2M. 41% of individual money came in gifts of $200 or less. 49% of itemized individual money came from Texas.

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
$2.4M

raised in the 2026 cycle

From 460 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): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Itemized individual (over $200): $630.5K (26.5%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less): $437.2K (18.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)PACs and other committees: $1.0M (42.4%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $302.8K (12.7%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $302.8K (12.7%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $302.8K (12.7%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $302.8K (12.7%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $302.8K (12.7%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $302.8K (12.7%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $302.8K (12.7%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $302.8K (12.7%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $302.8K (12.7%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $302.8K (12.7%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $302.8K (12.7%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $302.8K (12.7%)Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds): $302.8K (12.7%)
  • Itemized individual (over $200)27 squares$630.5K
  • Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)18 squares$437.2K
  • PACs and other committees42 squares$1.0M
  • Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)13 squares$302.8K
Show the data
Sources of Moran's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Itemized individual (over $200)$630.5K26.5%
Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)$437.2K18.4%
PACs and other committees$1.0M42.4%
Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)$302.8K12.7%
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, 2022 to 2026. The grey line is the House Republicans’ median for 2026.

2022 cycle: $1.1M$1.1M20222024 cycle: $1.1M$1.1M20242026 cycle: $2.4M$2.4M2026House Republicans median $2.2M
Show the data
Moran's receipts by cycle against the 2026 House Republicans median.
ItemValue
2022 cycle$1.1M
2024 cycle$1.1M
2026 cycle$2.4M

Top donor states, 2026

Itemized contributions by donor state. 49% came from Texas.

  1. Texas$239.6K
  2. Virginia$50.9K
  3. California$43.9K
  4. District of Columbia$37.3K
  5. Florida$15.5K

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%
Moran
Median
2026
41%
9%
2024
9%
9%
2022
3%
9%
Show the data
Small-donor share by cycle against the House Republicans median
RowMoranMedian
2026 cycle41%9%
2024 cycle9%9%
2022 cycle3%9%

Where itemized donors live

Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state

Alaska: $735AKMaine: $1,375MEVermont: no dataVTNew Hampshire: no dataNHWashington: $4,805WAIdaho: no dataIDMontana: $995MTNorth Dakota: no dataNDMinnesota: $278MNIllinois: $2,183ILWisconsin: $812WIMichigan: $98MINew York: $7,586NYRhode Island: no dataRIMassachusetts: $1,821MAOregon: no dataORNevada: $867NVWyoming: no dataWYSouth Dakota: $602SDIowa: $40IAIndiana: $3,438INOhio: $2,192OHPennsylvania: $2,117PANew Jersey: $7,054NJConnecticut: $458CTCalifornia: $43.9KCAUtah: $2,726UTColorado: $1,614CONebraska: no dataNEMissouri: $1,521MOKentucky: $1,398KYWest Virginia: $33WVVirginia: $50.9KVAMaryland: $12.4KMDDelaware: no dataDEArizona: $5,524AZNew Mexico: $1,367NMKansas: $1,187KSArkansas: $1,692ARTennessee: $3,033TNNorth Carolina: $6,424NCSouth Carolina: $5,067SCDistrict of Columbia: $37.3KDCOklahoma: $2,045OKLouisiana: $901LAMississippi: $679MSAlabama: $2,465ALGeorgia: $5,698GAHawaii: $43HITexas: $239.6KTXFlorida: $15.5KFL
Show the data
Moran's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
Texas$239.6K
Virginia$50.9K
California$43.9K
District of Columbia$37.3K
Florida$15.5K
Maryland$12.4K
New York$7,586
New Jersey$7,054
North Carolina$6,424
Georgia$5,698
Arizona$5,524
South Carolina$5,067
Washington$4,805
Indiana$3,438
Tennessee$3,033
Utah$2,726
Alabama$2,465
Ohio$2,192
Illinois$2,183
Pennsylvania$2,117
Oklahoma$2,045
Massachusetts$1,821
Arkansas$1,692
Colorado$1,614
Missouri$1,521
Kentucky$1,398
Maine$1,375
New Mexico$1,367
Kansas$1,187
Montana$995
Louisiana$901
Nevada$867
Wisconsin$812
Alaska$735
Mississippi$679
South Dakota$602
Connecticut$458
Minnesota$278
Michigan$98
Hawaii$43
Iowa$40
West Virginia$33
VermontNo data
New HampshireNo data
IdahoNo data
North DakotaNo data
Rhode IslandNo data
OregonNo data
WyomingNo data
NebraskaNo data
DelawareNo data
460

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

49%

from Texas

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

Donors’ ideology

Distribution of itemized donors’ own CSIP scores

CSIP −1.00 to −0.75: 0.5%CSIP −0.75 to −0.50: 0.8%CSIP −0.50 to −0.25: 1.0%CSIP −0.25 to 0.00: 5.7%CSIP 0.00 to +0.25: 1.1%CSIP +0.25 to +0.50: 1.8%CSIP +0.50 to +0.75: 2.3%CSIP +0.75 to +1.00: 60%60%CSIP +1.00 to +1.25: 26%CSIP +1.25 to +1.50: 0.9%← More liberalMore conservative →0
Show the data
Ideology of Moran's itemized donors in 2026, from −1.00 to +1.50: 5.7% between −0.25 and 0.00, 60% between +0.75 and +1.00, 26% between +1.00 and +1.25.
ItemValue
CSIP −1.00 to −0.750.5%
CSIP −0.75 to −0.500.8%
CSIP −0.50 to −0.251.0%
CSIP −0.25 to 0.005.7%
CSIP 0.00 to +0.251.1%
CSIP +0.25 to +0.501.8%
CSIP +0.50 to +0.752.3%
CSIP +0.75 to +1.0060%
CSIP +1.00 to +1.2526%
CSIP +1.25 to +1.500.9%
How to read the columns

Donors who give to many candidates get their own CSIP score. Each column is the share of Moran’s itemized money from donors in that part of the scale, blue left of 0 and red right of 0, deeper further out; Moran’s own score is +0.96.

Top donor occupations

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. RETIRED$105.6K 238 donors
  2. CEO$27.1K 13 donors
  3. LOBBYIST$27.0K 10 donors
  4. PRESIDENT$24.6K 12 donors
  5. ATTORNEY$23.7K 17 donors

Top committees

PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.

  1. CVS HEALTH PAC$10.0K
  2. EASTMANPAC-POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE OF EASTMAN CHEMICAL COMPANY$10.0K
  3. ELEVANCE HEALTH, INC. POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (ELEVANCE HEALTH PAC)$10.0K
  4. ERNST & YOUNG POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$10.0K
  5. HEALTH CARE SERVICE CORPORATION EMPLOYEES' POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$10.0K

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. MEHLMAN CONSULTING$14.0K 3 donors
  2. ANTHROPIC$10.5K 3 donors
  3. OGR$8,500 3 donors
  4. ALPINE GROUP$4,714 3 donors
  5. HARBINGER STRATEGIES$2,500 3 donors

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Moran voted with the majority of House Republicans on 99.3% of party-line votes and missed 1.3% of 674 roll calls. House Republicans on average: 97.1% party unity, 96.3% attendance. Across all roll calls, Moran voted against the majority of House Republicans 6 times.

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

6

votes against the majority of House Republicans

Party unity 99.3%, House Republicans average 97.1%, ranks 31st of 221. 674 roll calls in the 119th Congress.

Attendance and party unity

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

80%100%
Moran
Peers
Rank
Attendance
98.6%
96.3%
75th of 221
Party unity
99.3%
97.1%
31st of 221
Show the data
Moran's attendance and party unity against House Republicans.
RowMoranPeers
Attendance98.6%96.3%
Party unity99.3%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 Moran most often

  1. Mike JohnsonR512 shared votes99%
  2. Matt Van EppsR356 shared votes99%
  3. Tony GonzalesR424 shared votes99%
  4. Guy ReschenthalerR643 shared votes99%
  5. Rudy YakymR663 shared votes99%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Moran least often

  1. Rashida TlaibD649 shared votes24%
  2. Adelita GrijalvaD380 shared votes24%
  3. Delia RamirezD630 shared votes24%
  4. Frederica WilsonD474 shared votes25%
  5. Gregorio CasarD565 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

Moran sponsored 25 bills in the 119th Congress; none became law. Cosponsored 256 others. 12% of sponsored bills got out of committee (House Republicans average 17%; 117th of 216).

The bills Moran 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

Sponsored25 billsSponsored, Introduced: 2525Sponsored, In committee: 2525Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 33Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 11Sponsored, Became law: 00Cosponsored256 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 256256Cosponsored, In committee: 256256Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 2222Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 22Cosponsored, Became law: 22IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Moran sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored2525310
Cosponsored2562562222
How to read the blocks

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

12%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

House Republicans average 17%. Ranks 117th of 216.

Cosponsorship partners

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

  1. Claudia Tenney27
  2. Adrian Smith21
  3. Carol Miller20
  4. August Pfluger II18
  5. Rudy Yakym18
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 Moran’s bills; the toggle shows more.

Bill list

Sponsored and cosponsored, with status and policy area; five are shown, the toggle shows the rest

Bills sponsored and cosponsored
H.R. 10628Biosimilars Access and Affordability ActCosponsorSep 28, 2026In committeeHealthReferred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. Sep 28, 2026
H.R. 10542Combating Pasture Mealybug ActCosponsorSep 24, 2026In committeeAgriculture and FoodReferred to the House Committee on Agriculture. Sep 24, 2026
H.R. 10582Motion Picture, Television, and Entertainment Revitalization ActSponsorSep 24, 2026In committeeTaxationReferred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. Sep 24, 2026
H.Res. 1584Recognizing the 50th anniversary of the Hyde Amendment and its enduring legacy of saving the lives of more than 2,600,000 unborn children and respecting the conscience rights of the American people.CosponsorSep 24, 2026In committeeCivil Rights and Liberties, Minority IssuesReferred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Sep 24, 2026
H.R. 10296To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 4650 East Rosedale Street in Fort Worth, Texas, as the "Dionne Phillips Bagsby Post Office Building".CosponsorSep 3, 2026In committeeGovernment Operations and PoliticsReferred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Sep 3, 2026

Back to topNext: Online

Online

A site that changed 42 times in 90 days. Moran’s official site had 23 pages when last crawled on Oct 25, 2026. The lab last catalogued the images Moran posted on Oct 16, 2026.

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

Websites

  • Official site

    moran.house.gov

    Last crawled Oct 25, 2026

    23

    pages crawled

    42

    changes in 90 days

  • Campaign site

    nathanielmoran.com

    Last crawled Oct 25, 2026

    24

    pages crawled

    6

    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 Moran posted

The latest 24, with model-written descriptions

  • A formal dark-blue pledge document about preventing fraud in public benefits programs, with a government seal, numbered commitments, signatures, and a representative's name and district at the bottom. It contains extensive text.
    A formal dark-blue pledge document about preventing fraud in public benefits programs, with a government seal, numbered commitments, signatures, and a representative's name and district at the bottom. It contains extensive text.View post
  • A blue patriotic birthday graphic featuring a military fighter jet and a man in Air Force camouflage with his arms crossed. It includes campaign branding and other text.
    A blue patriotic birthday graphic featuring a military fighter jet and a man in Air Force camouflage with his arms crossed. It includes campaign branding and other text.View post
  • A sepia-toned political commemorative poster over a historical painting of people gathered in a formal assembly room. It includes prominent decorative lettering, a date, a politician's name and district information, and a government-related logo.
    A sepia-toned political commemorative poster over a historical painting of people gathered in a formal assembly room. It includes prominent decorative lettering, a date, a politician's name and district information, and a government-related logo.View post
  • A black-and-white commemorative poster showing three firefighters raising an American flag amid debris. Logos appear at the top, and large text is displayed across the bottom.
    A black-and-white commemorative poster showing three firefighters raising an American flag amid debris. Logos appear at the top, and large text is displayed across the bottom.View post
  • A graphic with a dark blue overlay and white border, featuring a large quotation over a group photo of people standing together. The quotation is attributed to Dr. Robin Hickerson, identified as president and CEO of the Texarkana Chamber of Commerce.
    A graphic with a dark blue overlay and white border, featuring a large quotation over a group photo of people standing together. The quotation is attributed to Dr. Robin Hickerson, identified as president and CEO of the Texarkana Chamber of Commerce.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 Moran 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
M001224
Bioguide
M001224
FEC candidate ids
H2TX01112

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