The median for Senate Republicans is $3.2M. Ranks 3rd of 51, where 1st raised the most. 874 itemized donors.
Total receipts of Ricketts’s campaign committees in the 2026 cycle, from the FEC’s financial summaries, ranked among Senate Republicans. Totals depend on whether the seat is up this cycle and on how costly the race is, so they describe the campaign, not the official’s record.
6 measures against Senate Republicans. The policy areas Ricketts talks about and legislates on agree at 0.69 on a 0–1 scale, in the top quarter of Senate Republicans. 4.7% of Ricketts’s statements use an extreme label, 1.6 times the Senate Republican average of 2.9%.
The measures on which Ricketts sits furthest from the middle of Senate Republicans, each against the same group, with the CSIP score when there is one. Every number is explained in its own section below.
Raised, 2026
Senate Republicans’ median $3.2M · ranks 3rd of 51
Talk-to-bills agreement
Senate Republicans average 0.64 · ranks 8th of 52
Extreme labels
Senate Republicans average 2.9% · ranks 11th of 52
Attendance
Senate Republicans average 97.1% · ranks 13th of 53 · 915 roll calls
Credit claiming
Senate Republicans average 36% · ranks 17th of 52
CSIP ideology
Right of 0, the centre of the scale · ± 0.03
Peer group: Senate Republicans. Rank 1 is the highest value in the group; the thick bar is Ricketts, the thin grey bar the peer average. The headline is the measure on which Ricketts is most unusual among peers (Methods, §08).
Ricketts attacks opponents personally about as often as the median Senate Republican. Personal attacks in 1.0% of 1,812 statements, against 2.1% for the average Senate Republican; 27th of 52.
An AI model reads each of Ricketts’s 1,812 statements in the 119th Congress (1,404 posts on X, 248 press releases, 80 Congressional Record speeches, 80 newsletters) 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 Senate Republicans and ranked among them.
Share of statements carrying each label, the 119th Congress
| Row | Ricketts | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Policy discussion | 74% | 70% |
| Credit claiming | 40% | 36% |
| Policy criticism | 15% | 17% |
| Bipartisanship | 13% | 13% |
| Personal attacks | 1% | 2% |
statements classified
1,404 posts on X, 248 press releases, 80 Congressional Record speeches, 80 newsletters.
| Part | Value |
|---|---|
| posts on X | 1,404 |
| press releases | 248 |
| Congressional Record speeches | 80 |
| newsletters | 80 |
The thick bar is Ricketts; the thin grey bar is the average Senate Republicans. A longer thick bar means Ricketts does this more than peers. Rank 1 is the highest rate in the group.
Ricketts used extreme labels in 4.7% of statements, above the peer average. 85 statements, most often aimed at China; peers 2.9%.
Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements
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.
Share of statements per month, the 119th Congress
| Column | Statements | Personal attacks | Policy criticism | Policy discussion | Bipartisanship | Credit claiming | Extreme labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan ’25 | 109 | 1.8% | 27.5% | 69.7% | 13.8% | 41.3% | 9.2% |
| Feb ’25 | 88 | 0.0% | 20.4% | 73.9% | 12.5% | 42.0% | 3.4% |
| Mar ’25 | 104 | 3.9% | 21.1% | 76.0% | 18.3% | 40.4% | 5.8% |
| Apr ’25 | 110 | 0.9% | 15.4% | 73.6% | 10.9% | 35.4% | 6.4% |
| May ’25 | 84 | 0.0% | 17.9% | 73.8% | 11.9% | 44.0% | 4.8% |
| Jun ’25 | 75 | 1.3% | 2.7% | 82.7% | 4.0% | 30.7% | 16.0% |
| Jul ’25 | 78 | 0.0% | 19.2% | 76.9% | 5.1% | 38.5% | 1.3% |
| Aug ’25 | 55 | 0.0% | 18.2% | 67.3% | 7.3% | 43.6% | 7.3% |
| Sep ’25 | 76 | 2.6% | 21.1% | 64.5% | 18.4% | 34.2% | 1.3% |
| Oct ’25 | 98 | 5.1% | 22.4% | 65.3% | 15.3% | 27.6% | 14.3% |
| Nov ’25 | 73 | 0.0% | 19.2% | 58.9% | 23.3% | 34.3% | 4.1% |
| Dec ’25 | 64 | 1.6% | 9.4% | 76.6% | 9.4% | 45.3% | 1.6% |
| Jan ’26 | 78 | 1.3% | 3.9% | 80.8% | 3.9% | 43.6% | 1.3% |
| Feb ’26 | 64 | 0.0% | 12.5% | 62.5% | 12.5% | 50.0% | 4.7% |
| Mar ’26 | 91 | 0.0% | 13.2% | 62.6% | 15.4% | 31.9% | 6.6% |
| Apr ’26 | 80 | 1.3% | 7.5% | 78.8% | 5.0% | 50.0% | 1.3% |
| May ’26 | 94 | 0.0% | 6.4% | 69.2% | 10.6% | 50.0% | 3.2% |
| Jun ’26 | 100 | 0.0% | 11.0% | 72.0% | 15.0% | 49.0% | 5.0% |
| Jul ’26 | 104 | 0.0% | 9.6% | 76.9% | 18.3% | 36.5% | 0.0% |
| Aug ’26 | 67 | 0.0% | 17.9% | 95.5% | 14.9% | 43.3% | 0.0% |
| Sep ’26 | 76 | 0.0% | 7.9% | 88.2% | 17.1% | 50.0% | 0.0% |
| Oct ’26 | 44 | 0.0% | 9.1% | 88.6% | 11.4% | 29.5% | 0.0% |
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%.
Real statements from the classifier’s example set, with the labels it assigned
Policy criticism
Ricketts Defends Homeschooling Parents’ Rights WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senators Pete Ricketts (R-NE) and Ted Budd (R-NC) filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to reverse a California court decision, sanctioning state discrimination against religion. The brief defends homeschooling parents’…
Oct 7, 2026 · Press releases · policy criticism; policy discussion; Education; Law; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues · Source
Personal attacks
VIDEO: Ricketts on United Nations Reform: Prioritize Accountability and Combat Antisemitism WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Pete Ricketts (R-NE) participated in a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing where he discussed the need to reform the United Nations in the face of rising antisemi…
Apr 15, 2026 · Press releases · personal attacks; policy discussion; International Affairs; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; target: Francesca Albanese · Source
Extreme label
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Jun 26, 2026 · Posts on X · policy discussion; Law; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; extreme label “far left” aimed at far-left activists · Source
Up to five recent statements in each category
Overtly questions a named person’s character, integrity or loyalty, or calls them names. Criticising a record or a policy does not count.
Press releases
VIDEO: Ricketts on United Nations Reform: Prioritize Accountability and Combat Antisemitism WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Pete Ricketts (R-NE) participated in a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing where he discussed the need to reform the United Nations in the face of rising antisemitism. “Later this year, the United Nations will select a new Secretary-General. For the United States, as the largest fi…
personal attacks · policy discussion · International Affairs · Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues · target: Francesca AlbaneseSource
Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · target: CavanaughSource
Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · International Affairs · target: Xi JinpingSource
Press releases
Ricketts Commends Omaha Police, Condemns Biden’s Soft-on-Crime Policies WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Pete Ricketts (R-NE) commended Omaha police following the publication of charging documents related to an October 3 shooting in Omaha. An Omaha man, whose 20-year prison sentence was commuted by President Joe Biden, was charged for the shooting. Ricketts issued the following statement: “In 2018, Khyre Holber…
personal attacks · policy discussion · Crime and Law Enforcement · target: Khyre HolbertSource
Newsletters
Ricketts Roundup Week of 10-10-25 | The Healthcare Hypocrisy of Chuck Schumer and the DemocratsFor the 10th day, the government is shutdown. Government services have diminished or stopped. Senate Democrats want to hold rural Nebraskans' healthcare hostage. Important programs like telehealth have lapsed. This is what a Schumer Shutdown looks like. The Schumer Shutdown doesn't have to continue any longer. Republicans…
personal attacks · policy discussion · bipartisanship · Health · Economics and Public Finance · Agriculture and Food · Armed Forces and National Security · extreme label “far left, radical” aimed at Democratic policies · target: Chuck Schumer
Newest first, the 119th Congress
Five statements at a time, newest first; filters apply to the statements loaded so far. Export saves the statements that match. Sources: 1,404 posts on X, 248 press releases, 80 Congressional Record speeches, 80 newsletters.
Armed Forces and National Security is what Ricketts talks about most: 26% of policy statements. Talk and legislation agree at 0.69 on a 0–1 scale (Senate Republicans average 0.64; 8th of 52).
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 Ricketts talks about. The bills Ricketts sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.
Share of policy statements by area, the 119th Congress
| Row | Ricketts | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Armed Forces and National Security | 26% | 25% |
| Agriculture and Food | 22% | 9% |
| International Affairs | 17% | 11% |
| Government Operations and Politics | 14% | 19% |
| Taxation | 14% | 7% |
The thick bar is the share of Ricketts’s policy statements in an area; the thin grey bar is the average share for Senate 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.
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 Senate Republicans averages.
| Area | Talks about | Senate Republicans, talks about | Legislates on | Senate Republicans, legislates on |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Armed Forces and National Security | 26% | 25% | 4% | 8% |
| Agriculture and Food | 22% | 9% | 12% | 4% |
| International Affairs | 17% | 11% | 17% | 8% |
| Government Operations and Politics | 14% | 19% | 7% | 11% |
| Taxation | 14% | 7% | 9% | 7% |
talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1
Senate Republicans average 0.64. Ranks 8th of 52.
Agreement is 1 minus the distance between the two distributions (Jensen–Shannon): 1 means Ricketts legislates on exactly the areas Ricketts 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 Ricketts sponsored count fully, cosponsored bills a quarter. Shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.
Ricketts sits at +0.92 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more liberal than 56% of Senate Republicans. Approximate range +0.89 to +0.94, which understates the uncertainty; from 1,473 donors and 1,575 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”.
CSIP ideal point
Approximate range +0.89 to +0.94. From 1,473 donors and 1,575 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.
The outlined dot is Ricketts, 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 Ricketts’s groups. 0 is the centre of the scale, not “moderate” by definition.
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.
Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale
| Group | Officials | Median | Share left of Ricketts |
|---|---|---|---|
| Senate Republicans | 51 | +1.0 | 43% |
| All Senate | 98 | +0.4 | 70% |
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 Ricketts 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 Ricketts.
Ricketts raised $14.5M in the 2026 cycle, 4.5 times the Senate Republicans’ median of $3.2M. 11% of individual money came in gifts of $200 or less. 30% of itemized individual money came from Nebraska.
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.
raised in the 2026 cycle
From 874 itemized donors. Senate Republicans’ median $3.2M.
Each square is one percent of 2026-cycle receipts, from FEC summary totals.
| Source | Amount | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Itemized individual (over $200) | $2.5M | 17.5% |
| Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less) | $322.7K | 2.2% |
| PACs and other committees | $1.9M | 13.1% |
| Party committees | $62.0K | 0.4% |
| The candidate’s own money and loans | $7.3M | 50.2% |
| Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds) | $2.4M | 16.6% |
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.
Total receipts, 2024 to 2026. The grey line is the Senate Republicans’ median for 2026.
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| 2024 cycle | $5.9M |
| 2026 cycle | $14.5M |
Itemized contributions by donor state. 30% came from Nebraska.
Gifts of $200 or less as a share of individual money, by cycle. The thin grey bar is the 2026 Senate Republicans’ median.
| Row | Ricketts | Median |
|---|---|---|
| 2026 cycle | 11% | 17% |
| 2024 cycle | 8% | 17% |
Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state
| State | Value |
|---|---|
| Nebraska | $648.3K |
| Texas | $177.1K |
| New York | $159.6K |
| Virginia | $118.4K |
| Arizona | $97.3K |
| Michigan | $88.6K |
| Connecticut | $86.6K |
| Florida | $84.0K |
| California | $83.2K |
| Illinois | $69.6K |
| District of Columbia | $64.3K |
| Tennessee | $52.0K |
| Missouri | $45.0K |
| South Dakota | $43.7K |
| Nevada | $32.5K |
| Wyoming | $30.0K |
| North Carolina | $24.4K |
| Georgia | $23.2K |
| Colorado | $22.9K |
| Maryland | $16.7K |
| Indiana | $15.0K |
| New Jersey | $14.8K |
| Pennsylvania | $14.6K |
| Ohio | $14.4K |
| Oregon | $14.0K |
| Washington | $12.6K |
| Arkansas | $11.5K |
| Minnesota | $10.4K |
| South Carolina | $8,936 |
| Oklahoma | $8,800 |
| Massachusetts | $7,550 |
| Wisconsin | $7,247 |
| New Hampshire | $7,000 |
| Iowa | $7,000 |
| Delaware | $7,000 |
| New Mexico | $7,000 |
| Kansas | $4,831 |
| Alabama | $3,650 |
| Utah | $2,600 |
| Kentucky | $2,000 |
| Mississippi | $2,000 |
| Louisiana | $1,570 |
| Idaho | $1,015 |
| West Virginia | $1,000 |
| Vermont | $500 |
| Montana | $253 |
| Hawaii | $100 |
| Alaska | No data |
| Maine | No data |
| North Dakota | No data |
| Rhode Island | No data |
itemized donors
People who gave more than $200
from Nebraska
Of itemized individual dollars
Every state the same size. Darker states gave more itemized money; hatched states had no itemized donors; the outlined state is Nebraska. Gifts of $200 or less carry no address and are left out.
Distribution of itemized donors’ own CSIP scores
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| CSIP −0.75 to −0.50 | 0.5% |
| CSIP −0.50 to −0.25 | 1.7% |
| CSIP −0.25 to 0.00 | 2.1% |
| CSIP 0.00 to +0.25 | 3.6% |
| CSIP +0.25 to +0.50 | 4.2% |
| CSIP +0.50 to +0.75 | 19% |
| CSIP +0.75 to +1.00 | 62% |
| CSIP +1.00 to +1.25 | 7.1% |
| CSIP +1.50 to +1.75 | 0% |
Donors who give to many candidates get their own CSIP score. Each column is the share of Ricketts’s itemized money from donors in that part of the scale, blue left of 0 and red right of 0, deeper further out; Ricketts’s own score is +0.92.
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.
Ricketts voted with the majority of Senate Republicans on 99.6% of party-line votes and missed 1.0% of 915 roll calls. Senate Republicans on average: 98.4% party unity, 97.1% attendance. Across all roll calls, Ricketts voted against the majority of Senate Republicans 4 times.
915 roll calls Ricketts could vote on in the 119th Congress, compared with Senate 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 Ricketts voted with the majority of Senate Republicans. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.
votes against the majority of Senate Republicans
Party unity 99.6%, Senate Republicans average 98.4%, ranks 27th of 53. 915 roll calls in the 119th Congress.
The thick bar is Ricketts, the thin grey bar the Senate Republicans average. The scale runs from 80% to 100% to show the gap.
| Row | Ricketts | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Attendance | 99.0% | 97.1% |
| Party unity | 99.6% | 98.4% |
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.
25 roll calls the lab flagged as key in the 119th Congress
| Party split (yea–nay) | Why it’s key | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 28, 2026 | S. 4668 A bill to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes. On Passage of the Bill | Yea | With majority | Bill Passed | D 26–19 · R 50–2 · I 1–1Democrats 26 yea, 19 nay; Republicans 50 yea, 2 nay; Independents 1 yea, 1 nay | party crossover |
| Sep 24, 2026 | H.Con.Res. 89 A concurrent resolution directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran. On the Concurrent Resolution | Nay | With majority | Concurrent Resolution Rejected | D 43–1 · R 4–49 · I 2–0Democrats 43 yea, 1 nay; Republicans 4 yea, 49 nay; Independents 2 yea, 0 nay | close vote |
| Aug 8, 2026 | H.R. 6500 An act making continuing appropriations and extensions for fiscal year 2027, and for other purposes. On Passage of the Bill | Yea | With majority | Bill Passed | D 42–3 · R 47–2 · I 1–1Democrats 42 yea, 3 nay; Republicans 47 yea, 2 nay; Independents 1 yea, 1 nay | became law |
| Aug 7, 2026 | H.R. 5334 An act to impose sanctions and other measures with respect to the Russian Federation, as championed by the late Senator Lindsey O. Graham, and for other purposes. On Passage of the Bill | Yea | With majority | Bill Passed | D 36–9 · R 49–1 · I 1–1Democrats 36 yea, 9 nay; Republicans 49 yea, 1 nay; Independents 1 yea, 1 nay | became law · party crossover |
| Jul 30, 2026 | S.Res. 817 An executive resolution authorizing the en bloc consideration in Executive Session of certain nominations on the Executive Calendar. On the Resolution | Yea | With majority | Resolution Agreed to | D 0–45 · R 50–0 · I 0–2Democrats 0 yea, 45 nay; Republicans 50 yea, 0 nay; Independents 0 yea, 2 nay | close vote |
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.
The colleagues who voted the same way as Ricketts most often
The colleagues who voted the same way as Ricketts least often
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.
119th Congress (2025–27), loads in batches
Ricketts sponsored 67 bills in the 119th Congress; 1 became law. Cosponsored 375 others. 18% of sponsored bills got out of committee (Senate Republicans average 22%; 29th of 51).
The bills Ricketts 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.
Counts for the 119th Congress
| Role | Introduced | In committee | Passed one chamber | Passed both chambers | Became law |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sponsored | 67 | 67 | 7 | 1 | 1 |
| Cosponsored | 375 | 368 | 62 | 6 | 6 |
Ink blocks are bills Ricketts sponsored, ochre blocks bills Ricketts cosponsored; the figure above each block is the count. Most bills in any legislature never leave committee, so a short staircase is the norm.
of sponsored bills got out of committee
Senate Republicans average 22%. Ranks 29th of 51.
Colleagues who most often cosponsor with Ricketts, by number of shared bills in the 119th Congress; the square shows their party.
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 Ricketts’s bills; the toggle shows more.
Sponsored and cosponsored, with status and policy area; five are shown, the toggle shows the rest
| S. 5604 | Improving Species Recovery Act | Cosponsor | Sep 30, 2026 | In committee | Environmental Protection | Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. Sep 30, 2026 |
| S.Res. 934 | A resolution designating October 10, 2026, as "American Girls in Sports Day". | Cosponsor | Sep 30, 2026 | In committee | Unassigned | Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text: CR S5267) Sep 30, 2026 |
| S.Res. 945 | A resolution designating November 7, 2026, as "National Bison Day". | Cosponsor | Sep 30, 2026 | Passed one chamber | Environmental Protection | Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5299; text: CR S5272) Sep 30, 2026 |
| S.Res. 912 | A resolution recognizing 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. | Cosponsor | Sep 28, 2026 | In committee | Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues | Referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (consideration: CR S5074) Sep 28, 2026 |
| S.Res. 913 | A resolution relating to the death of the Honorable Nancy Kassebaum, former United States Senator for the State of Kansas. | Cosponsor | Sep 28, 2026 | Passed one chamber | Government Operations and Politics | Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5064-5065; text: CR S5074-5075) Sep 28, 2026 |
A site that changed 16 times in 90 days. Ricketts’s official site had 20 pages when last crawled on Oct 18, 2026. The lab last catalogued the images Ricketts posted on Oct 26, 2026.
The lab crawls Ricketts’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 Ricketts posts with a vision model.
pages crawled
changes in 90 days
pages crawled
changes in 90 days
“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.
The latest 24, with model-written 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.
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 is the measure on which Ricketts is most unusual among Senate 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 …”).
Bulk files with the same data for every official:
America’s Political Pulse · Polarization Research Lab
