Bipartisanship
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Oct 19, 2026 · Posts on X · personal attacks; policy discussion; bipartisanship; International Affairs; Armed Forces and National Security; target: Trump · Source
50%
of statements discuss policy, the lowest of 45 Senate Democrats
50% of 5,358 statements discuss policy (2,677 statements); the average for Senate Democrats is 78%. Ranks 45th of 45, where 1st is the highest rate.
An AI model reads each of Whitehouse’s posts on X, press releases, Congressional Record speeches and newsletters and marks whether it discusses a specific policy. The rate is the share of statements marked; it is compared with the average among Senate Democrats and ranked against the same group.
At a glance
6 measures against Senate Democrats. 4.7% of Whitehouse’s statements use bipartisan language, the lowest of 45 Senate Democrats (average 18%). 6.2% of Whitehouse’s statements claim credit, the lowest of 45 Senate Democrats (average 26%).
The measures on which Whitehouse sits furthest from the middle of Senate Democrats, each against the same group, with the CSIP score when there is one. Every number is explained in its own section below.
Policy discussion
50%
Senate Democrats average 78% · ranks 45th of 45
Bipartisanship
4.7%
Senate Democrats average 18% · ranks 45th of 45
Credit claiming
6.2%
Senate Democrats average 26% · ranks 45th of 45
Small donations, 2026
0%
Senate Democrats’ median 35% · ranks 45th of 45
Policy criticism
21%
Senate Democrats average 37% · ranks 43rd of 45
CSIP ideology
−1.11
Left of 0, the centre of the scale · ± 0.01
Peer group: Senate Democrats. Rank 1 is the highest value in the group; the thick bar is Whitehouse, the thin grey bar the peer average. The headline is the measure on which Whitehouse is most unusual among peers (Methods, §08).
What Whitehouse says
Whitehouse claims credit less than any other Senate Democrat. Credit claiming in 6.2% of 5,358 statements, against 26% for the average Senate Democrat; 45th of 45.
An AI model reads each of Whitehouse’s 5,358 statements in the 119th Congress (4,916 posts on X, 224 press releases, 216 Congressional Record speeches, 2 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 Democrats and ranked among them.
Kinds of statement
Share of statements carrying each label, the 119th Congress
0%80%
Whitehouse
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion2,677 statements
50%
78%
45th of 45
Policy criticism1,099 statements
21%
37%
43rd of 45
Personal attacks959 statements
18%
11%
6th of 45
Credit claiming332 statements
6%
26%
45th of 45
Bipartisanship251 statements
5%
18%
45th of 45
Show the data
| Row | Whitehouse | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Policy discussion | 50% | 78% |
| Policy criticism | 21% | 37% |
| Personal attacks | 18% | 11% |
| Credit claiming | 6% | 26% |
| Bipartisanship | 5% | 18% |
5,358
statements classified
4,916 posts on X, 224 press releases, 216 Congressional Record speeches, 2 newsletters.
Show the data
| Part | Value |
|---|---|
| posts on X | 4,916 |
| press releases | 224 |
| Congressional Record speeches | 216 |
| newsletters | 2 |
How to read the bars
The thick bar is Whitehouse; the thin grey bar is the average Senate Democrats. A longer thick bar means Whitehouse does this more than peers. Rank 1 is the highest rate in the group.
Extreme labels
Whitehouse used extreme labels in 6.5% of statements, 2.8 times the peer average. 347 statements, most often aimed at DOJ; peers 2.4%.
- “MAGA”222
- “extreme”29
- “far right”15
- “radical”8
- “woke”3
Who gets the labels
Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements
- DOJ62
- MAGA38
- Trump20
- MAGA DOJ18
- Trumpsters15
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
Show the data
| Column | Statements | Personal attacks | Policy criticism | Policy discussion | Bipartisanship | Credit claiming | Extreme labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan ’25 | 231 | 19.1% | 42.9% | 56.3% | 5.2% | 12.6% | 5.6% |
| Feb ’25 | 329 | 25.2% | 27.4% | 47.1% | 6.4% | 6.7% | 5.8% |
| Mar ’25 | 302 | 19.2% | 21.9% | 39.7% | 5.0% | 7.0% | 7.3% |
| Apr ’25 | 244 | 22.1% | 17.2% | 38.1% | 4.9% | 9.0% | 1.6% |
| May ’25 | 220 | 20.9% | 18.6% | 46.8% | 6.4% | 9.6% | 7.3% |
| Jun ’25 | 217 | 18.9% | 21.2% | 37.8% | 2.8% | 5.1% | 7.4% |
| Jul ’25 | 267 | 17.6% | 21.0% | 43.5% | 4.5% | 4.5% | 4.1% |
| Aug ’25 | 178 | 9.6% | 37.6% | 46.6% | 2.8% | 2.8% | 11.8% |
| Sep ’25 | 254 | 14.6% | 26.4% | 39.8% | 4.3% | 5.9% | 6.3% |
| Oct ’25 | 262 | 16.4% | 30.9% | 45.4% | 5.0% | 3.4% | 8.8% |
| Nov ’25 | 233 | 12.4% | 28.3% | 42.5% | 6.4% | 1.3% | 13.7% |
| Dec ’25 | 170 | 13.5% | 13.5% | 67.7% | 4.7% | 5.3% | 4.1% |
| Jan ’26 | 242 | 15.7% | 8.7% | 71.1% | 5.0% | 7.0% | 5.8% |
| Feb ’26 | 238 | 19.3% | 21.0% | 41.6% | 3.8% | 2.1% | 8.8% |
| Mar ’26 | 267 | 17.6% | 25.5% | 35.6% | 6.0% | 7.5% | 9.7% |
| Apr ’26 | 275 | 19.3% | 10.5% | 51.6% | 4.0% | 5.5% | 5.8% |
| May ’26 | 259 | 16.6% | 16.6% | 55.6% | 3.9% | 5.0% | 3.9% |
| Jun ’26 | 291 | 21.3% | 22.0% | 39.9% | 6.5% | 7.6% | 12.7% |
| Jul ’26 | 270 | 20.0% | 12.6% | 65.2% | 4.1% | 5.6% | 4.8% |
| Aug ’26 | 209 | 19.6% | 9.6% | 70.3% | 2.9% | 7.7% | 1.4% |
| Sep ’26 | 191 | 16.8% | 6.3% | 68.1% | 3.1% | 8.4% | 2.6% |
| Oct ’26 | 209 | 10.1% | 6.7% | 67.0% | 3.4% | 6.7% | 1.0% |
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 Whitehouse’s words
Real statements from the classifier’s example set, with the labels it assigned
Credit claiming
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Oct 26, 2026 · Posts on X · policy discussion; credit claiming; Health; Education; Housing and Community Development · Source
Extreme label
Whitehouse Warns of Global Climate Risk and Calls for Action at OSCE Parliamentary Assembly Whitehouse calls out climate damage, insurance collapse, and corrupt fossil fuel influence Industry, front groups, Russia and far-right comprise Axis of Climate Evil Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Sheldon W…
Oct 9, 2026 · Press releases · policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Environmental Protection; Energy; Finance and Financial Sector; International Affairs; extreme label “far right” aimed at far-right groups, political right · Source
Examples by category
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
Whitehouse Sends Tip to DOJ After Announcement of New Whistleblower Incentive Program to Combat Fraud Whitehouse asks DOJ to investigate possible fraud by Trump White House Border Czar Tom Homan for accepting a $50,000 cash bribe from undercover FBI agents Washington, D.C. – After the Trump administration launched an ostensible Fraud Whistleblower Incentive Program, U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), a senior m…
personal attacks · policy discussion · Crime and Law Enforcement · Government Operations and Politics · target: Tom HomanSource
Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · target: BozoSource
Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · target: TrumpSource
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: TrumpSource
Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · target: TrumpSource
All 5,358 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: 4,916 posts on X, 224 press releases, 216 Congressional Record speeches, 2 newsletters.
Policy
Environmental Protection is what Whitehouse talks about most: 26% of policy statements, 4.1 times the peer share. Talk and legislation agree at 0.60 on a 0–1 scale (Senate Democrats average 0.66; 43rd of 45).
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 Whitehouse talks about. The bills Whitehouse sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.
What Whitehouse talks about
Share of policy statements by area, the 119th Congress
0%35%
Whitehouse
Peers
Environmental Protection699 statements
26%
6%
Energy628 statements
23%
8%
Government Operations and Politics621 statements
23%
22%
Economics and Public Finance470 statements
18%
24%
Law419 statements
16%
7%
Show the data
| Row | Whitehouse | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Protection | 26% | 6% |
| Energy | 23% | 8% |
| Government Operations and Politics | 23% | 22% |
| Economics and Public Finance | 18% | 24% |
| Law | 16% | 7% |
How to read the bars
The thick bar is the share of Whitehouse’s policy statements in an area; the thin grey bar is the average share for Senate Democrats. A statement counts once in each of its areas, so shares can add to more than 100%. The five largest areas are shown; the toggle shows the rest.
Talks about · legislates on
Left: share of statements by policy area. Right: share of bills. Areas in order of their share of statements; both sides run from 0 to 35%. Grey ticks are the Senate Democrats averages.
Show the data
| Area | Talks about | Senate Democrats, talks about | Legislates on | Senate Democrats, legislates on |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Environmental Protection | 26% | 6% | 17% | 3% |
| Energy | 23% | 8% | 3% | 2% |
| Government Operations and Politics | 23% | 22% | 7% | 9% |
| Economics and Public Finance | 18% | 24% | 0% | 0% |
| Law | 16% | 7% | 3% | 1% |
0.60
talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1
Senate Democrats average 0.66. Ranks 43rd of 45.
What agreement means, and what it doesn’t
Agreement is 1 minus the distance between the two distributions (Jensen–Shannon): 1 means Whitehouse legislates on exactly the areas Whitehouse 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 Whitehouse sponsored count fully, cosponsored bills a quarter. Shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.
Ideology
Whitehouse sits at −1.11 on the CSIP scale, left of 0, more conservative than 54% of Senate Democrats. Approximate range −1.13 to −1.10, which understates the uncertainty; from 7,127 donors and 4,896 roll calls.
CSIP, the lab’s Common-Space Ideal Point, places every official, federal and state, on one left–right scale, estimated from roll-call votes, who gives money to whom, and the text of statements. Negative is left of 0, positive right of it; 0 is the centre of the scale, not a definition of “moderate”.
−1.11
CSIP ideal point
Approximate range −1.13 to −1.10. From 7,127 donors and 4,896 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.
The outlined dot is Whitehouse, 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 Whitehouse’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 Whitehouse sits
Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale
Senate Democrats45 · median −1.1
All Senate98 · median +0.4
Show the data
| Group | Officials | Median | Share left of Whitehouse |
|---|---|---|---|
| Senate Democrats | 45 | −1.1 | 53% |
| All Senate | 98 | +0.4 | 26% |
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 Whitehouse 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 Whitehouse.
Money
Whitehouse raised $652.9K in the 2026 cycle, 25% of the Senate Democrats’ median of $2.6M. 0% of individual money came in gifts of $200 or less. 46% of itemized individual money came from Rhode Island.
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.
$652.9K
raised in the 2026 cycle
From 457 itemized donors. Senate Democrats’ median $2.6M.
Where the money came from
Each square is one percent of 2026-cycle receipts, from FEC summary totals.
- Itemized individual (over $200)77 squares$504.8K
- PACs and other committees9 squares$60.4K
- Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)14 squares$87.6K
Show the data
| Source | Amount | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Itemized individual (over $200) | $504.8K | 77.3% |
| PACs and other committees | $60.4K | 9.3% |
| Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds) | $87.6K | 13.4% |
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 Senate Democrats’ median for 2026.
Show the data
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| 2020 cycle | $353.7K |
| 2022 cycle | $1.6M |
| 2024 cycle | $4.9M |
| 2026 cycle | $652.9K |
Top donor states, 2026
Itemized contributions by donor state. 46% came from Rhode Island.
- Rhode Island$128.7K
- California$34.5K
- Massachusetts$31.4K
- District of Columbia$18.7K
- New York$11.8K
Small donations
Gifts of $200 or less as a share of individual money, by cycle. The thin grey bar is the 2026 Senate Democrats’ median.
0%60%
Whitehouse
Median
2026
0%
35%
2024
0%
35%
2022
0%
35%
2020
0%
35%
Show the data
| Row | Whitehouse | Median |
|---|---|---|
| 2026 cycle | 0% | 35% |
| 2024 cycle | 0% | 35% |
| 2022 cycle | 0% | 35% |
| 2020 cycle | 0% | 35% |
Where itemized donors live
Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state
Show the data
| State | Value |
|---|---|
| Rhode Island | $128.7K |
| California | $34.5K |
| Massachusetts | $31.4K |
| District of Columbia | $18.7K |
| New York | $11.8K |
| Florida | $5,692 |
| Texas | $5,517 |
| Virginia | $5,218 |
| Connecticut | $4,161 |
| Maryland | $4,130 |
| Vermont | $4,060 |
| New Mexico | $3,725 |
| Colorado | $2,892 |
| Minnesota | $2,750 |
| Louisiana | $2,250 |
| New Hampshire | $1,750 |
| North Carolina | $1,730 |
| Pennsylvania | $1,697 |
| Tennessee | $1,675 |
| Nevada | $1,547 |
| Missouri | $1,135 |
| Washington | $1,048 |
| Illinois | $1,032 |
| Wisconsin | $1,025 |
| Maine | $940 |
| Alabama | $722 |
| Oregon | $540 |
| Arizona | $510 |
| Delaware | $500 |
| Iowa | $450 |
| Georgia | $445 |
| Hawaii | $350 |
| Michigan | $120 |
| Arkansas | $90 |
| Montana | $75 |
| Utah | $21 |
| Alaska | No data |
| Idaho | No data |
| North Dakota | No data |
| Wyoming | No data |
| South Dakota | No data |
| Indiana | No data |
| Ohio | No data |
| New Jersey | No data |
| Nebraska | No data |
| Kentucky | No data |
| West Virginia | No data |
| Kansas | No data |
| South Carolina | No data |
| Oklahoma | No data |
| Mississippi | No data |
457
itemized donors
People who gave more than $200
46%
from Rhode Island
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 Rhode Island. Gifts of $200 or less carry no address and are left out.
Donors’ ideology
Distribution of itemized donors’ own CSIP scores
Show the data
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| CSIP −1.50 to −1.25 | 2.0% |
| CSIP −1.25 to −1.00 | 71% |
| CSIP −1.00 to −0.75 | 20% |
| CSIP −0.75 to −0.50 | 3.2% |
| CSIP −0.50 to −0.25 | 0.4% |
| CSIP −0.25 to 0.00 | 1.9% |
| CSIP 0.00 to +0.25 | 1.2% |
How to read the columns
Donors who give to many candidates get their own CSIP score. Each column is the share of Whitehouse’s itemized money from donors in that part of the scale, blue left of 0 and red right of 0, deeper further out; Whitehouse’s own score is −1.11.
Top donor occupations
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
- NOT EMPLOYED$122.6K 245 donors
- ATTORNEY$20.8K 20 donors
- RETIRED$19.4K 35 donors
- CONSULTANT$9,400 13 donors
- EXECUTIVE$7,600 5 donors
Top committees
PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.
- NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (NABPAC)$5,000
- THE ASCAP LEGISLATIVE FUND FOR THE ARTS$5,000
- INTERNATIONAL TRADEMARK ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (INTA PAC)$3,500
- NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WATER COMPANIES POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (NAWC - PAC)$3,500
- INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS INTERESTED IN REGISTRATION AND EDUCATION PAC$2,500
Top employers
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
- BROWN UNIVERSITY$2,860 5 donors
Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.
Votes
Whitehouse voted with the majority of Senate Democrats on 95.0% of party-line votes and missed 3.9% of 915 roll calls. Senate Democrats on average: 95.3% party unity, 97.0% attendance. Across all roll calls, Whitehouse voted against the majority of Senate Democrats 46 times.
915 roll calls Whitehouse could vote on in the 119th Congress, compared with Senate Democrats. Attendance is the share with a vote recorded. Party unity counts only party-line roll calls, where most Democrats and most Republicans voted on opposite sides, and is the share of those where Whitehouse voted with the majority of Senate Democrats. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.
46
votes against the majority of Senate Democrats
Party unity 95.0%, Senate Democrats average 95.3%, ranks 27th of 45. 915 roll calls in the 119th Congress.
Attendance and party unity
The thick bar is Whitehouse, the thin grey bar the Senate Democrats average. The scale runs from 80% to 100% to show the gap.
80%100%
Whitehouse
Peers
Rank
Attendance
96.0%
97.0%
32nd of 45
Party unity
95.0%
95.3%
27th of 45
Show the data
| Row | Whitehouse | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Attendance | 96.0% | 97.0% |
| Party unity | 95.0% | 95.3% |
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
| 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 | Nay | Against 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 | Yea | 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 | Nay | 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 |
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 Whitehouse most often
- Richard BlumenthalD870 shared votes95%
- Tammy DuckworthD819 shared votes94%
- Patty MurrayD830 shared votes94%
- Angela AlsobrooksD864 shared votes94%
- Gary PetersD861 shared votes94%
Votes least often with
The colleagues who voted the same way as Whitehouse least often
- Mike LeeR851 shared votes9.2%
- Ron JohnsonR867 shared votes9.7%
- Ted CruzR834 shared votes9.8%
- Rick ScottR877 shared votes10%
- Cynthia LummisR849 shared votes10%
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
Legislation
Whitehouse sponsored 103 bills in the 119th Congress; none became law. Cosponsored 452 others. 13% of sponsored bills got out of committee (Senate Democrats average 14%; 23rd of 45).
The bills Whitehouse 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
Show the data
| Role | Introduced | In committee | Passed one chamber | Passed both chambers | Became law |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sponsored | 103 | 103 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| Cosponsored | 452 | 448 | 78 | 2 | 2 |
How to read the blocks
Ink blocks are bills Whitehouse sponsored, ochre blocks bills Whitehouse cosponsored; the figure above each block is the count. Most bills in any legislature never leave committee, so a short staircase is the norm.
13%
of sponsored bills got out of committee
Senate Democrats average 14%. Ranks 23rd of 45.
Cosponsorship partners
Colleagues who most often cosponsor with Whitehouse, by number of shared bills in the 119th Congress; the square shows their party.
- Richard Blumenthal158
- Jeff Merkley153
- Peter Welch139
- Chris Van Hollen137
- Cory Booker127
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 Whitehouse’s bills; the toggle shows more.
Bill list
Sponsored and cosponsored, with status and policy area; five are shown, the toggle shows the rest
| S.Res. 950 | A resolution designating the week of September 14 through September 18, 2026, as "National Clean Energy Week". | Cosponsor | Oct 15, 2026 | Introduced | Energy | Under authority of the order of the Senate of September 30, 2026, ordered referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. Oct 15, 2026 |
| S. 5618 | Judicial Ethics Enforcement Act of 2026 | Cosponsor | Sep 30, 2026 | In committee | Law | Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. Sep 30, 2026 |
| S. 5625 | Affordable Housing Construction Act | Sponsor | Sep 30, 2026 | In committee | Taxation | Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. Sep 30, 2026 |
| S. 5653 | Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026 | Cosponsor | Sep 30, 2026 | In committee | Environmental Protection | Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Sep 30, 2026 |
| S. 5656 | Domestic Violence SAFE Notice Act | Sponsor | Sep 30, 2026 | In committee | Crime and Law Enforcement | Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. Sep 30, 2026 |
Online
A site that changed 77 times in 90 days. Whitehouse’s official site had 26 pages when last crawled on Oct 18, 2026. The lab last catalogued the images Whitehouse posted on Oct 26, 2026.
The lab crawls Whitehouse’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 Whitehouse posts with a vision model.
Websites
- 26
pages crawled
77changes 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.
Social accounts
- XSenWhitehouse
- FacebookSenatorWhitehouse
- InstagramSenWhitehouse
- YouTubeSenatorWhitehouse
Images Whitehouse posted
The latest 24, with model-written descriptions
An outdoor ceremony is taking place in front of a modern community center. A man in a suit speaks at a lectern while seated attendees watch. Flags stand near the entrance, and the building has vertical signage and other visible text.View post 
A group of people gathers outside a modern community center for a ribbon-cutting or opening ceremony. Several people near the entrance applaud, while others watch and take photographs. Text is visible on the building and on a small sign.View post 
A two-part infographic about climate and energy policies. The left side compares national opposition and support for several policies with horizontal bars; the right side compares responses under climate-focused and clean-energy-focused framing. There is a large headline and other text.View post 
A political cartoon depicts a campaign office with a prominent sign and a devil dressed as a politician speaking with a man inside. A speech bubble comments on campaign donations and polling. There is also text in the image.View post 
A block of large black serif text on a plain white background, formatted as a quotation.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.
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 Whitehouse is most unusual among Senate Democrats, chosen by one rule for every official of every party. The candidates are the rate of each kind of statement and of extreme labels, party unity, attendance, the small-donor share, the in-state share and total receipts of the latest cycle, the share of sponsored bills that got out of committee, talk-to-bills agreement, and the CSIP score’s place within the party group.
The builder ranks every measure within the same peer group the page compares it with, and writes each official’s percentile: the share of the group below the value, ties counting half, so 0.5 is the median and a value shared by many never ranks first. A measure’s score is how far that percentile sits from the median (0 in the middle, 0.5 at either end), and the highest score leads if it is above 0.25, outside the middle half of the group. Scores within 0.03 of each other are a tie, broken in this order: votes against the party majority, kinds of statement, ideology, roll calls missed, small donations, in-state money, legislation, agreement, extreme labels, receipts.
A measure counts only with at least 200 statements, 100 roll calls or 5 sponsored bills behind it and a peer group of at least 10. Two things never lead: high party unity or attendance, where most members sit, and a high rate of a kind of statement backed by fewer than 10 statements. When nothing qualifies, the headline is a neutral fact instead: statements classified, or years in office. The wording always names the direction (“in the bottom 5% of …”, “votes against the majority of …”).
Identifiers
- Profile id
- W000802
- Bioguide
- W000802
- FEC candidate ids
- S6RI00221
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