Skip to content

Democrat · Illinois House, district 12

Serving since Jan 13, 2021IL 2025–26 session

Portrait of Margaret Croke, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
$2.5M
in itemized contributions in the 2026 cycle, in the top 5% of State House Democrats

The median for State House Democrats is $40.4K. Ranks 14th of 2,082, where 1st raised the most. 447 itemized donors.

Itemized contributions reported to the state in the 2026 cycle, ranked among State House Democrats. State filings leave small gifts out, and totals depend on whether the seat is up this cycle.

At a glance

6 measures against State House Democrats. 72% of the 39 bills Croke sponsored got out of committee, in the top 5% of the Illinois House. Croke sits at −0.70 on the CSIP scale, more liberal than 62% of State House Democrats.

The measures on which Croke sits furthest from the middle of State House Democrats, each against the same group, with the CSIP score when there is one. Every number is explained in its own section below.

Itemized, 2026

$2.5M

State House Democrats’ median $40.4K · ranks 14th of 2,082

Out of committee

72%

Illinois House average 44% · ranks 4th of 116

CSIP ideology

−0.70

More liberal than 62% of State House Democrats · ± 0.07

Party unity

99.6%

Illinois House average 96.7% · ranks 55th of 116 · 2 votes against the majority of Illinois House Democrats

From Illinois, 2026

93%

Of itemized individual dollars · ranks 980th of 1,983 State House Democrats

Attendance

96.3%

Illinois House average 92.6% · ranks 57th of 116 · 1,468 roll calls

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

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Croke says

No statements for the IL 2025–26 session.No classified statements (posts, press releases, newsletters, floor speeches) in this time window.

Back to topNext: Policy

Policy

No policy statements for the IL 2025–26 session.No classified statements (posts, press releases, newsletters, floor speeches) in this time window.

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Croke sits at −0.70 on the CSIP scale, left of 0, more liberal than 62% of State House Democrats. Approximate range −0.78 to −0.63, which understates the uncertainty; from 739 donors and 856 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”.

−0.70

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range −0.78 to −0.63. From 739 donors and 856 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

← More liberalMore conservative →0Croke −0.7State House Democrats −0.6Illinois House −0.5All State House +0.1

The outlined dot is Croke, 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 Croke’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 Croke sits

Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale

−2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →State House Democratsmedian −0.6Croke −0.7Illinois Housemedian −0.5All State Housemedian +0.1
Show the data
Croke's CSIP score of −0.70 placed against State House Democrats, Illinois House, All State House.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Croke
State House Democrats2392−0.638%
Illinois House118−0.522%
All State House5324+0.117%
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 Croke 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 Croke.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Croke reported $2.5M in the 2026 cycle, 61.4 times the State House Democrats’ median of $40.4K. State filings report no small-donation total. 93% of itemized individual money came from Illinois.

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.

Election cycle
$2.5M

itemized in the 2026 cycle

From 447 itemized donors. State House Democrats’ median $40.4K.

Where the money came from

Each square is one percent of itemized contributions in the 2026 cycle.

Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)Individuals (itemized): $1.0M (40.5%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)PACs and other committees: $1.5M (59.3%)
  • Individuals (itemized)41 squares$1.0M
  • PACs and other committees59 squares$1.5M
  • Party committees$5,000
Show the data
Sources of Croke's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Individuals (itemized)$1.0M40.5%
PACs and other committees$1.5M59.3%
Party committees$5,0000.2%
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 Democrats’ median for 2026.

2020 cycle: $352.6K$352.6K20202022 cycle: $371.0K$371.0K20222024 cycle: $452.5K$452.5K20242026 cycle: $2.5M$2.5M2026State House Democrats median $40.4K
Show the data
Croke's receipts by cycle against the 2026 State House Democrats median.
ItemValue
2020 cycle$352.6K
2022 cycle$371.0K
2024 cycle$452.5K
2026 cycle$2.5M

Top donor states, 2026

Itemized contributions by donor state. 93% came from Illinois.

  1. Illinois$935.8K
  2. Texas$20.6K
  3. Florida$15.1K
  4. Massachusetts$7,500
  5. ZZ$7,300

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

Alaska: no dataAKMaine: no dataMEVermont: no dataVTNew Hampshire: no dataNHWashington: no dataWAIdaho: no dataIDMontana: no dataMTNorth Dakota: no dataNDMinnesota: no dataMNIllinois: $935.8KILWisconsin: no dataWIMichigan: $250MINew York: $7,000NYRhode Island: no dataRIMassachusetts: $7,500MAOregon: no dataORNevada: no dataNVWyoming: no dataWYSouth Dakota: no dataSDIowa: no dataIAIndiana: $500INOhio: no dataOHPennsylvania: no dataPANew Jersey: $250NJConnecticut: no dataCTCalifornia: $1,000CAUtah: no dataUTColorado: no dataCONebraska: no dataNEMissouri: $2,000MOKentucky: $1,000KYWest Virginia: no dataWVVirginia: no dataVAMaryland: $250MDDelaware: no dataDEArizona: $3,500AZNew Mexico: no dataNMKansas: no dataKSArkansas: no dataARTennessee: no dataTNNorth Carolina: no dataNCSouth Carolina: no dataSCDistrict of Columbia: $1,500DCOklahoma: no dataOKLouisiana: no dataLAMississippi: no dataMSAlabama: no dataALGeorgia: no dataGAHawaii: no dataHITexas: $20.6KTXFlorida: $15.1KFL
Show the data
Croke's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
Illinois$935.8K
Texas$20.6K
Florida$15.1K
Massachusetts$7,500
New York$7,000
Arizona$3,500
Missouri$2,000
District of Columbia$1,500
California$1,000
Kentucky$1,000
Indiana$500
Michigan$250
New Jersey$250
Maryland$250
AlaskaNo data
MaineNo data
VermontNo data
New HampshireNo data
WashingtonNo data
IdahoNo data
MontanaNo data
North DakotaNo data
MinnesotaNo data
WisconsinNo data
Rhode IslandNo data
OregonNo data
NevadaNo data
WyomingNo data
South DakotaNo data
IowaNo data
OhioNo data
PennsylvaniaNo data
ConnecticutNo data
UtahNo data
ColoradoNo data
NebraskaNo data
West VirginiaNo data
VirginiaNo data
DelawareNo data
New MexicoNo data
KansasNo data
ArkansasNo data
TennesseeNo data
North CarolinaNo data
South CarolinaNo data
OklahomaNo data
LouisianaNo data
MississippiNo data
AlabamaNo data
GeorgiaNo data
HawaiiNo data
447

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

93%

from Illinois

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

Top donor occupations

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. EXECUTIVE$319.3K 5 donors
  2. NOT EMPLOYED$91.5K 33 donors
  3. ATTORNEY$78.1K 36 donors
  4. CEO$64.0K 11 donors
  5. PRESIDENT$22.1K 7 donors

Top committees

PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.

  1. ILLINOIS LABORERS' LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE$145.6K
  2. LIUNA CHICAGO LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL PAC$140.6K
  3. CARPENTRY ADVANCEMENT FUND$128.8K
  4. ILLINOIS PIPE TRADES PAC$72.8K
  5. ILLINOIS PIPE TRADES PEF$72.8K

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

  1. GCM GROSVENOR$324.4K 3 donors
  2. CROKE FAIRCHILD DUARTE & BERES$23.8K 5 donors
  3. CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD$15.0K 3 donors

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Croke voted with the majority of Illinois House Democrats on 99.6% of party-line votes and missed 3.6% of 1,468 roll calls. Illinois House on average: 96.7% party unity, 92.6% attendance. Across all roll calls, Croke voted against the majority of Illinois House Democrats 2 times.

1,468 roll calls Croke could vote on in the IL 2025–26 session, compared with Illinois 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 Croke voted with the majority of Illinois House Democrats. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.

2

votes against the majority of Illinois House Democrats

Party unity 99.6%, Illinois House average 96.7%, ranks 55th of 116. 1,468 roll calls in the IL 2025–26 session.

Attendance and party unity

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

80%100%
Croke
Peers
Rank
Attendance
96.3%
92.6%
57th of 116
Party unity
99.6%
96.7%
55th of 116
Show the data
Croke's attendance and party unity against Illinois House.
RowCrokePeers
Attendance96.3%92.6%
Party unity99.6%96.7%
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

Roll calls the lab flags as key

No votes in this window met the key-vote rules.

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 Croke most often

  1. Eva-Dina DelgadoD1,204 shared votes100%
  2. Hoan HuynhD973 shared votes100%
  3. Mary Beth CantyD1,413 shared votes100%
  4. Dan DidechD1,413 shared votes100%
  5. Tracy Katz MuhlD1,412 shared votes100%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Croke least often

  1. Chris MillerR1,304 shared votes58%
  2. Brad HalbrookR1,329 shared votes59%
  3. Blaine WilhourR1,281 shared votes60%
  4. Adam NiemergR1,348 shared votes60%
  5. John CabelloR1,354 shared votes61%
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

IL 2025–26 session, loads in batches

Back to topNext: Legislation

Legislation

Croke sponsored 39 bills in the IL 2025–26 session; 11 became law. Cosponsored 133 others. 72% of sponsored bills got out of committee (Illinois House average 44%; 4th of 116).

The bills Croke sponsored and cosponsored in the IL 2025–26 session, 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 IL 2025–26 session

Sponsored39 billsSponsored, Introduced: 3939Sponsored, In committee: 3939Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 2121Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 1212Sponsored, Became law: 1111Cosponsored133 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 133133Cosponsored, In committee: 132132Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 8989Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 5353Cosponsored, Became law: 4848IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Croke sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored3939211211
Cosponsored133132895348
How to read the blocks

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

72%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

Illinois House average 44%. Ranks 4th of 116.

Cosponsorship partners

Colleagues who most often cosponsor with Croke, by number of shared bills in the IL 2025–26 session; the square shows their party.

  1. Joyce Mason20
  2. Eva-Dina Delgado15
  3. Matt Hanson14
  4. Kam Buckner14
  5. Kelly Cassidy14
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 Croke’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
HR 916RECOGNIZES-POPE LEO XIVSponsorMay 19, 2026Passed one chamberUnassignedResolution Adopted May 20, 2026
HJR 66OAC-REP. FLYNN CURRIE PORTRAITCosponsorMay 7, 2026Passed one chamberUnassignedPursuant to Senate Rule 3-9(b) / Referred to Assignments Jul 2, 2026
SJR 65CHICAGO CUBS DAYCosponsorMay 5, 2026Passed both chambersUnassignedAdded Alternate Co-Sponsor Rep. Kimberly Du Buclet May 31, 2026
HR 760DIETITIAN NUTRITIONIST DAYSponsorMar 26, 2026In committeeUnassignedRule 19(b) / Re-referred to Rules Committee Jul 1, 2026
HR 753NUTRITION/DIETETICS TECH DAYSponsorMar 25, 2026In committeeUnassignedRule 19(b) / Re-referred to Rules Committee Jul 1, 2026

Back to topNext: Online

Online

A site that has not changed in 90 days. Croke’s official site had 0 pages when last crawled.

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

Websites

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 Croke posted

No images from Croke’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

483 turns, Jan 13, 2021 to Apr 22, 2026

Floor speeches

Transcribed from chamber video or captions by the lab. They are not classified for kinds of statement.

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 Croke is most unusual among State House 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
adf823d2-7e3e-4a4d-898c-2dd404679012
Open States
ocd-person/adf823d2-7e3e-4a4d-898c-2dd404679012

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

Back to top