Bipartisanship
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Nov 12, 2025 · Posts on X (state legislators) · policy criticism; policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Agriculture and Food · Source
3.8×
the State House Republican rate of personal attacks
11% of 1,135 statements contain a personal attack (123 statements); the average for State House Republicans is 2.9%. Ranks 49th of 791, where 1st is the highest rate.
An AI model reads each of Maddox’s posts on X and marks whether it attacks a person’s character, integrity or loyalty. The rate is the share of statements marked; it is compared with the average among State House Republicans and ranked against the same group.
At a glance
6 measures against State House Republicans. Maddox voted against the majority of Kentucky House Republicans 73 times; party unity 88%, in the bottom quarter of the Kentucky House (average 95.2%). Maddox reported $4,877 in the 2026 cycle, in the bottom quarter of State House Republicans (median $33.7K).
The measures on which Maddox sits furthest from the middle of State House Republicans, each against the same group, with the CSIP score when there is one. Every number is explained in its own section below.
Personal attacks
11%
State House Republicans average 2.9% · ranks 49th of 791
Party unity
88%
Kentucky House average 95.2% · ranks 90th of 100 · 73 votes against the majority of Kentucky House Republicans
Itemized, 2026
$4,877
State House Republicans’ median $33.7K · ranks 2187th of 2,521
CSIP ideology
+0.14
More liberal than 83% of State House Republicans · ± 0.03
Attendance
85%
Kentucky House average 91.1% · ranks 86th of 100 · 785 roll calls
Policy criticism
14%
State House Republicans average 9.3% · ranks 190th of 791
Peer group: State House Republicans. Rank 1 is the highest value in the group; the thick bar is Maddox, the thin grey bar the peer average. The headline is the measure on which Maddox is most unusual among peers (Methods, §08).
What Maddox says
Maddox attacks opponents personally more than 93% of State House Republicans. Personal attacks in 11% of 1,135 statements, against 2.9% for the average State House Republican; 49th of 791.
An AI model reads each of Maddox’s 1,135 statements in the KY 2025–26 session (1,135 posts on X) 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 State House Republicans and ranked among them.
Kinds of statement
Share of statements carrying each label, the KY 2025–26 session
0%80%
Maddox
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion262 statements
23%
32%
508th of 791
Policy criticism158 statements
14%
9%
190th of 791
Personal attacks123 statements
11%
3%
49th of 791
Credit claiming77 statements
7%
13%
491st of 791
Bipartisanship10 statements
1%
2%
425th of 791
Show the data
| Row | Maddox | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Policy discussion | 23% | 32% |
| Policy criticism | 14% | 9% |
| Personal attacks | 11% | 3% |
| Credit claiming | 7% | 13% |
| Bipartisanship | 1% | 2% |
1,135
statements classified
1,135 posts on X.
Show the data
| Part | Value |
|---|---|
| posts on X | 1,135 |
How to read the bars
The thick bar is Maddox; the thin grey bar is the average State House Republicans. A longer thick bar means Maddox does this more than peers. Rank 1 is the highest rate in the group.
Extreme labels
Maddox used extreme labels in 1.1% of statements, below the peer average. 12 statements, most often aimed at Commander in Chief; peers 1.4%.
- “MAGA”2
- “woke”2
- “far left”1
Who gets the labels
Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements
- Commander in Chief1
- Ed Gallrein1
- Epstein petition1
- liberal billionaires1
- Lissa4Maga1
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 KY 2025–26 session
Show the data
| Column | Statements | Personal attacks | Policy criticism | Policy discussion | Bipartisanship | Credit claiming | Extreme labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan ’25 | 61 | 4.9% | 31.1% | 36.1% | 3.3% | 11.5% | 0.0% |
| Feb ’25 | 46 | 2.2% | 32.6% | 32.6% | 0.0% | 10.9% | 0.0% |
| Mar ’25 | 34 | 2.9% | 26.5% | 29.4% | 2.9% | 8.8% | 0.0% |
| Apr ’25 | 61 | 4.9% | 27.9% | 36.1% | 3.3% | 11.5% | 1.6% |
| May ’25 | 24 | 4.2% | 12.5% | 20.8% | 4.2% | 12.5% | 0.0% |
| Jun ’25 | 99 | 7.1% | 21.2% | 27.3% | 1.0% | 6.1% | 2.0% |
| Jul ’25 | 88 | 9.1% | 18.2% | 21.6% | 1.1% | 3.4% | 0.0% |
| Aug ’25 | 44 | 25.0% | 40.9% | 43.2% | 0.0% | 31.8% | 0.0% |
| Sep ’25 | 24 | 4.2% | 25.0% | 33.3% | 4.2% | 8.3% | 4.2% |
| Oct ’25 | 27 | 7.4% | 18.5% | 22.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 3.7% |
| Nov ’25 | 60 | 13.3% | 5.0% | 6.7% | 1.7% | 5.0% | 1.7% |
| Dec ’25 | 5 | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) | — (fewer than 10 statements) |
| Jan ’26 | 32 | 3.1% | 9.4% | 46.9% | 0.0% | 18.8% | 0.0% |
| Feb ’26 | 39 | 15.4% | 2.6% | 12.8% | 0.0% | 5.1% | 2.6% |
| Mar ’26 | 49 | 8.2% | 4.1% | 12.2% | 0.0% | 8.2% | 2.0% |
| Apr ’26 | 134 | 22.4% | 0.8% | 6.7% | 0.0% | 2.2% | 0.0% |
| May ’26 | 122 | 13.1% | 7.4% | 14.8% | 0.0% | 2.5% | 0.8% |
| Jun ’26 | 34 | 8.8% | 2.9% | 5.9% | 0.0% | 2.9% | 5.9% |
| Jul ’26 | 27 | 14.8% | 11.1% | 29.6% | 0.0% | 11.1% | 0.0% |
| Aug ’26 | 75 | 8.0% | 6.7% | 40.0% | 0.0% | 1.3% | 0.0% |
| Sep ’26 | 30 | 20.0% | 3.3% | 23.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Oct ’26 | 20 | 5.0% | 0.0% | 20.0% | 0.0% | 5.0% | 5.0% |
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 KY 2025–26 session, 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%. One month is hatched here.
In Maddox’s words
Real statements from the classifier’s example set, with the labels it assigned
Personal attacks
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Oct 1, 2026 · Posts on X (state legislators) · personal attacks; target: Proverbs3 · Source
Extreme label
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Oct 9, 2026 · Posts on X (state legislators) · policy discussion; Energy; Economics and Public Finance; International Affairs; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; extreme label “woke” aimed at Commander in Chief · 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.
Posts on X (state legislators)
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · target: Proverbs3Source
Posts on X (state legislators)
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · target: LunaSource
Posts on X (state legislators)
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · target: Marsha250, EthanRealBeliefSource
Posts on X (state legislators)
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · target: ValRuk69Source
Posts on X (state legislators)
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · Economics and Public Finance · Health · target: ValRuk69Source
All 1,135 statements
Newest first, the KY 2025–26 session
The full feed
Five statements at a time, newest first; filters apply to the statements loaded so far. Export saves the statements that match. Sources: 1,135 posts on X.
Policy
Government Operations and Politics is what Maddox talks about most: 31% of policy statements, above the peer share. Peers give it 18%.
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 Maddox talks about. The bills Maddox sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.
What Maddox talks about
Share of policy statements by area, the KY 2025–26 session
0%35%
Maddox
Peers
Government Operations and Politics80 statements
31%
18%
Economics and Public Finance52 statements
20%
12%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues34 statements
13%
6%
Transportation and Public Works32 statements
12%
4%
Health25 statements
10%
10%
Show the data
| Row | Maddox | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Government Operations and Politics | 31% | 18% |
| Economics and Public Finance | 20% | 12% |
| Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues | 13% | 6% |
| Transportation and Public Works | 12% | 4% |
| Health | 10% | 10% |
How to read the bars
The thick bar is the share of Maddox’s policy statements in an area; the thin grey bar is the average share for State 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 State House Republicans averages.
No sponsored or cosponsored bills with a policy area in this window.
What agreement means, and what it doesn’t
Agreement is 1 minus the distance between the two distributions (Jensen–Shannon): 1 means Maddox legislates on exactly the areas Maddox 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 Maddox sponsored count fully, cosponsored bills a quarter. Shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.
Ideology
Maddox sits at +0.14 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more liberal than 83% of State House Republicans. Approximate range +0.11 to +0.17, which understates the uncertainty; from 238 donors and 913 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”.
+0.14
CSIP ideal point
Approximate range +0.11 to +0.17. From 238 donors and 913 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.
The outlined dot is Maddox, 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 Maddox’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 Maddox sits
Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale
State House Republicans2,917 · median +0.4
Kentucky House100 · median +0.4
All State House5,324 · median +0.1
Show the data
| Group | Officials | Median | Share left of Maddox |
|---|---|---|---|
| State House Republicans | 2917 | +0.4 | 17% |
| Kentucky House | 100 | +0.4 | 25% |
| All State House | 5324 | +0.1 | 54% |
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 Maddox 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 Maddox.
Money
Maddox reported $4,877 in the 2026 cycle, 14% of the State House Republicans’ median of $33.7K. State filings report no small-donation total. 88% of itemized individual money came from Kentucky.
Campaign money from state campaign-finance 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. State filings report no small-gift total, so these figures add up itemized contributions only.
$4,877
itemized in the 2026 cycle
From 5 itemized donors. State House Republicans’ median $33.7K.
Where the money came from
Each square is one percent of itemized contributions in the 2026 cycle.
- Individuals (itemized)18 squares$877
- PACs and other committees82 squares$4,000
Show the data
| Source | Amount | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Individuals (itemized) | $877 | 18.0% |
| PACs and other committees | $4,000 | 82.0% |
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.
Receipts by cycle
Itemized contributions, 2020 to 2026. The grey line is the State House Republicans’ median for 2026.
Show the data
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| 2020 cycle | $15.9K |
| 2022 cycle | $67.9K |
| 2024 cycle | $17.7K |
| 2026 cycle | $4,877 |
Top donor states, 2026
Itemized contributions by donor state. 88% came from Kentucky.
- Kentucky$770
- Colorado$100
- Tennessee$7
Small donations
State filings report no total for small gifts.
Not reported in state filings.
Where itemized donors live
Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state
Show the data
| State | Value |
|---|---|
| Kentucky | $770 |
| Colorado | $100 |
| Tennessee | $7 |
| Alaska | No data |
| Maine | No data |
| Vermont | No data |
| New Hampshire | No data |
| Washington | No data |
| Idaho | No data |
| Montana | No data |
| North Dakota | No data |
| Minnesota | No data |
| Illinois | No data |
| Wisconsin | No data |
| Michigan | No data |
| New York | No data |
| Rhode Island | No data |
| Massachusetts | No data |
| Oregon | No data |
| Nevada | No data |
| Wyoming | No data |
| South Dakota | No data |
| Iowa | No data |
| Indiana | No data |
| Ohio | No data |
| Pennsylvania | No data |
| New Jersey | No data |
| Connecticut | No data |
| California | No data |
| Utah | No data |
| Nebraska | No data |
| Missouri | No data |
| West Virginia | No data |
| Virginia | No data |
| Maryland | No data |
| Delaware | No data |
| Arizona | No data |
| New Mexico | No data |
| Kansas | No data |
| Arkansas | No data |
| North Carolina | No data |
| South Carolina | No data |
| District of Columbia | No data |
| Oklahoma | No data |
| Louisiana | No data |
| Mississippi | No data |
| Alabama | No data |
| Georgia | No data |
| Hawaii | No data |
| Texas | No data |
| Florida | No data |
5
itemized donors
People who gave more than $200
88%
from Kentucky
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 Kentucky. Gifts of $200 or less carry no address and are left out.
Top donor occupations
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
No occupations reported.
Top committees
PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.
- MAKING A SENSIBLE SHIFT IN ELECTIONS$2,000
- KENTUCKY BANKERS COMMITTEE$1,000
- KENTUCKY BANKERS COMMITTEE FOR STATE GOVERNMENT$1,000
Top employers
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
No employers reported.
Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.
Votes
Maddox voted with the majority of Kentucky House Republicans on 88% of party-line votes and missed 15% of 785 roll calls. Kentucky House on average: 95.2% party unity, 91.1% attendance. Across all roll calls, Maddox voted against the majority of Kentucky House Republicans 73 times.
785 roll calls Maddox could vote on in the KY 2025–26 session, compared with Kentucky House. 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 Maddox voted with the majority of Kentucky House Republicans. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.
73
votes against the majority of Kentucky House Republicans
Party unity 88%, Kentucky House average 95.2%, ranks 90th of 100. 785 roll calls in the KY 2025–26 session.
Attendance and party unity
The thick bar is Maddox, the thin grey bar the Kentucky House average. The scale runs from 80% to 100% to show the gap.
80%100%
Maddox
Peers
Rank
Attendance
85%
91.1%
86th of 100
Party unity
88%
95.2%
90th of 100
Show the data
| Row | Maddox | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Attendance | 85% | 91.1% |
| Party unity | 88% | 95.2% |
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 KY 2025–26 session
| Party split (yea–nay) | Why it’s key | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 15, 2026 | Yea | With majority | pass | D 17–1 · R 80–0Democrats 17 yea, 1 nay; Republicans 80 yea, 0 nay | became law | |
| Apr 15, 2026 | Nay | Against majority | pass | D 18–1 · R 62–14Democrats 18 yea, 1 nay; Republicans 62 yea, 14 nay | became law · party crossover | |
| Apr 15, 2026 | SJR 116 A JOINT RESOLUTION directing the University of Kentucky, the University of Louisville, and Eastern Kentucky University to coordinate a search for actionable solutions to physician shortages and to explore and expand health care opportunities in medically underserved areas in collaboration with commu Adopt | Yea | With majority | pass | D 18–0 · R 78–0Democrats 18 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 78 yea, 0 nay | became law |
| Apr 15, 2026 | Yea | With majority | pass | D 19–0 · R 74–3Democrats 19 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 74 yea, 3 nay | became law | |
| Apr 15, 2026 | Yea | With majority | pass | D 14–4 · R 75–0Democrats 14 yea, 4 nay; Republicans 75 yea, 0 nay | became 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 Maddox most often
- Steven DoanR274 shared votes99%
- Felicia RabournR270 shared votes99%
- T.J. RobertsR264 shared votes98%
- Marianne ProctorR251 shared votes96%
- Josh CallowayR249 shared votes96%
Votes least often with
The colleagues who voted the same way as Maddox least often
- Pamela StevensonD214 shared votes58%
- Lindsey BurkeD208 shared votes59%
- Lisa WillnerD216 shared votes60%
- Mary Lou MarzianD194 shared votes60%
- George BrownD260 shared votes62%
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
KY 2025–26 session, loads in batches
Legislation
No bills for the KY 2025–26 session.No sponsored or cosponsored bills are recorded for this official in this time window.
Online
A site that changed 1 time in 90 days. Maddox’s official site had 1 page when last crawled on Oct 1, 2026.
The lab crawls Maddox’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 Maddox posts with a vision model.
Websites
Official site
legislature.ky.gov/Legislators/Pages/Legislator-Profile.aspx?DistrictNumber=61Last crawled Oct 1, 2026
1pages crawled
1changes in 90 days
- 6
pages crawled
2changes 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
Images Maddox posted
No images from Maddox’s posts have been described.
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.
State floor speeches
3 turns, Mar 11, 2021 to Mar 28, 2024
Floor speeches
Transcribed from chamber video or captions by the lab. They are not classified for kinds of statement.
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 Maddox is most unusual among State 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
- a8988de2-d65f-461c-96d1-4f1cddc6a969
- Open States
- ocd-person/a8988de2-d65f-461c-96d1-4f1cddc6a969
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 (state)Oct 21, 20267 days agoOpen States floor roll calls, 2019 on (none for AK and MO).
- Bills (state)Oct 28, 2026todayOpen States bills and sponsors, 2019 on; stages from roll calls.
- Campaign money (state)no dateState campaign-finance agencies, 2019 on; 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.
- State floor speechesOct 21, 20267 days agoState floor speech turns (published transcripts and captions), 2020 on; not LLM-classified.
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