Skip to content

Republican · North Dakota Senate, district 37

Serving since Dec 1, 2022ND 2025–26 session

Portrait of Dean Rummel, rendered as a two-tone print
Official portrait
100%
of itemized money from North Dakota donors, in the top quarter of State Senate Republicans

100% of the itemized money from individuals in the 2026 cycle came from donors with an address in North Dakota. Ranks 136th of 860, where 1st is the highest share. 2 itemized donors.

Only donors who give more than $200 are reported with an address, so this is the share of that itemized money from donors living in North Dakota, ranked among State Senate Republicans. Small gifts are not counted either way. Candidates running statewide or for federal office often draw more money from out of state.

At a glance

6 measures against State Senate Republicans. Rummel voted against the majority of North Dakota Senate Republicans 65 times; party unity 73%, in the bottom quarter of the North Dakota Senate (average 79%). Rummel reported $13.6K in the 2026 cycle, in the bottom half of State Senate Republicans (median $46.2K).

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

From North Dakota, 2026

100%

Of itemized individual dollars · ranks 136th of 860 State Senate Republicans

Party unity

73%

North Dakota Senate average 79% · ranks 37th of 46 · 65 votes against the majority of North Dakota Senate Republicans

Itemized, 2026

$13.6K

State Senate Republicans’ median $46.2K · ranks 701st of 936

Out of committee

86%

North Dakota Senate average 68% · ranks 10th of 29

CSIP ideology

+0.48

More conservative than 68% of State Senate Republicans · ± 0.06

Attendance

98.1%

North Dakota Senate average 98.3% · ranks 32nd of 46 · 998 roll calls

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

Back to topNext: What politicians say

What Rummel says

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

Back to topNext: Ideology

Ideology

Rummel sits at +0.48 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more conservative than 68% of State Senate Republicans. Approximate range +0.42 to +0.54, which understates the uncertainty; from 3 donors and 590 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”.

+0.48

CSIP ideal point

Approximate range +0.42 to +0.54. From 3 donors and 590 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.

← More liberalMore conservative →0Rummel +0.5State Senate Republicans +0.4North Dakota Senate +0.1All State Senate +0.1

The outlined dot is Rummel, 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 Rummel’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 Rummel sits

Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale

−2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →State Senate Republicansmedian +0.4Rummel +0.5North Dakota Senatemedian +0.1All State Senatemedian +0.1
Show the data
Rummel's CSIP score of +0.48 placed against State Senate Republicans, North Dakota Senate, All State Senate.
GroupOfficialsMedianShare left of Rummel
State Senate Republicans1083+0.468%
North Dakota Senate47+0.194%
All State Senate1909+0.182%
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 Rummel 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 Rummel.

Back to topNext: Money

Money

Rummel reported $13.6K in the 2026 cycle, 29% of the State Senate Republicans’ median of $46.2K. State filings report no small-donation total. 100% of itemized individual money came from North Dakota.

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
$13.6K

itemized in the 2026 cycle

From 2 itemized donors. State Senate Republicans’ median $46.2K.

Where the money came from

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

Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)Individuals (itemized): $3,400 (25.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)PACs and other committees: $10.2K (75.0%)
  • Individuals (itemized)25 squares$3,400
  • PACs and other committees75 squares$10.2K
Show the data
Sources of Rummel's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
SourceAmountShare
Individuals (itemized)$3,40025.0%
PACs and other committees$10.2K75.0%
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, 2022 to 2026. The grey line is the State Senate Republicans’ median for 2026.

2022 cycle: $3,300$3,30020222024 cycle: $850$85020242026 cycle: $13.6K$13.6K2026State Senate Republicans median $46.2K
Show the data
Rummel's receipts by cycle against the 2026 State Senate Republicans median.
ItemValue
2022 cycle$3,300
2024 cycle$850
2026 cycle$13.6K

Top donor states, 2026

Itemized contributions by donor state. 100% came from North Dakota.

  1. North Dakota$3,400

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: $3,400NDMinnesota: no dataMNIllinois: no dataILWisconsin: no dataWIMichigan: no dataMINew York: no dataNYRhode Island: no dataRIMassachusetts: no dataMAOregon: no dataORNevada: no dataNVWyoming: no dataWYSouth Dakota: no dataSDIowa: no dataIAIndiana: no dataINOhio: no dataOHPennsylvania: no dataPANew Jersey: no dataNJConnecticut: no dataCTCalifornia: no dataCAUtah: no dataUTColorado: no dataCONebraska: no dataNEMissouri: no dataMOKentucky: no dataKYWest Virginia: no dataWVVirginia: no dataVAMaryland: no dataMDDelaware: no dataDEArizona: no dataAZNew Mexico: no dataNMKansas: no dataKSArkansas: no dataARTennessee: no dataTNNorth Carolina: no dataNCSouth Carolina: no dataSCDistrict of Columbia: no dataDCOklahoma: no dataOKLouisiana: no dataLAMississippi: no dataMSAlabama: no dataALGeorgia: no dataGAHawaii: no dataHITexas: no dataTXFlorida: no dataFL
Show the data
Rummel's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
StateValue
North Dakota$3,400
AlaskaNo data
MaineNo data
VermontNo data
New HampshireNo data
WashingtonNo data
IdahoNo data
MontanaNo data
MinnesotaNo data
IllinoisNo data
WisconsinNo data
MichiganNo data
New YorkNo data
Rhode IslandNo data
MassachusettsNo data
OregonNo data
NevadaNo data
WyomingNo data
South DakotaNo data
IowaNo data
IndianaNo data
OhioNo data
PennsylvaniaNo data
New JerseyNo data
ConnecticutNo data
CaliforniaNo data
UtahNo data
ColoradoNo data
NebraskaNo data
MissouriNo data
KentuckyNo data
West VirginiaNo data
VirginiaNo data
MarylandNo data
DelawareNo data
ArizonaNo data
New MexicoNo data
KansasNo data
ArkansasNo data
TennesseeNo data
North CarolinaNo data
South CarolinaNo data
District of ColumbiaNo data
OklahomaNo data
LouisianaNo data
MississippiNo data
AlabamaNo data
GeorgiaNo data
HawaiiNo data
TexasNo data
FloridaNo data
2

itemized donors

People who gave more than $200

100%

from North Dakota

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 North Dakota. 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.

  1. LIGNITE ENERGY COUNCIL PAC (COALPAC)$1,000
  2. ND OIL PAC$1,000
  3. ND RURAL ELECTRIC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (NDREPAC)$1,000
  4. GA GROUP PAC$750
  5. ND ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS PAC (NDRPAC)$750

Top employers

Itemized, 2026 cycle.

No employers reported.

Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.

Back to topNext: Votes

Votes

Rummel voted with the majority of North Dakota Senate Republicans on 73% of party-line votes and missed 1.9% of 998 roll calls. North Dakota Senate on average: 79% party unity, 98.3% attendance. Across all roll calls, Rummel voted against the majority of North Dakota Senate Republicans 65 times.

998 roll calls Rummel could vote on in the ND 2025–26 session, compared with North Dakota Senate. 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 Rummel voted with the majority of North Dakota Senate Republicans. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.

65

votes against the majority of North Dakota Senate Republicans

Party unity 73%, North Dakota Senate average 79%, ranks 37th of 46. 998 roll calls in the ND 2025–26 session.

Attendance and party unity

The thick bar is Rummel, the thin grey bar the North Dakota Senate average. The scale runs from 70% to 100% to show the gap.

70%100%
Rummel
Peers
Rank
Attendance
98.1%
98.3%
32nd of 46
Party unity
73%
79%
37th of 46
Show the data
Rummel's attendance and party unity against North Dakota Senate.
RowRummelPeers
Attendance98.1%98.3%
Party unity73%79%
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 ND 2025–26 session

Key votes
Party split (yea–nay)Why it’s key
Sep 4, 2026
HB 1628
AN ACT to create and enact a new subdivision to subsection 2 of section 12-60-24, subdivision lll of subsection 3 of section 19-03.1-05, and chapter 51-38 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to criminal history record checks, the scheduling of kratom alkaloid derivatives as a schedule I contr
Motion for Final Passage on HB 1628
YeaWith majoritypassD 5–0 · R 41–0Democrats 5 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 41 yea, 0 naybecame law
Sep 3, 2026
SB 2407
AN ACT to provide an appropriation to the state historical society for the North Dakota military museum project; to amend and reenact section 55-01-02.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to jurisdiction of the heritage center; to repeal subsection 3 of section 6 of chapter 17 of the 2025 Se
Motion for Final Passage on SB 2407
YeaWith majoritypassD 2–3 · R 37–5Democrats 2 yea, 3 nay; Republicans 37 yea, 5 naybecame law · party crossover
Sep 3, 2026
SB 2405
A BILL for an Act to amend and reenact subsection 1 of section 57-02-08.9, section 57-20-09, and subsection 1 of section 57-55-03 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the order of application of the primary residence credit and discount for early payment of tax; and to provide an effective
Motion for Final Passage on SB 2405
YeaWith majoritypassD 4–1 · R 23–19Democrats 4 yea, 1 nay; Republicans 23 yea, 19 nayparty crossover
Sep 3, 2026
SB 2406
A BILL for an Act to create and enact chapter 44-04.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to prohibiting agencies from entering nondisclosure agreements concerning data centers and industrial projects; to provide a penalty; to provide an effective date; and to provide an expiration date.
Motion for Final Passage on SB 2406
NayWith majorityfailD 5–0 · R 10–32Democrats 5 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 10 yea, 32 nayparty crossover
Jan 23, 2026
HB 1621
AN ACT to amend and reenact subsection 1 of section 15.1-21-01 and section 15.1-21-02 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to requiring the presidential physical fitness test in physical education courses in elementary, middle, and high schools and providing exceptions to the test; and to prov
Motion for Final Passage on HB 1621
YeaWith majoritypassD 4–1 · R 39–2Democrats 4 yea, 1 nay; Republicans 39 yea, 2 naybecame law
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 Rummel most often

  1. Brad BekkedahlR900 shared votes95%
  2. Dale PattenR946 shared votes95%
  3. Greg KesselR934 shared votes94%
  4. Michelle AxtmanR920 shared votes93%
  5. Ron SorvaagR977 shared votes93%

Votes least often with

The colleagues who voted the same way as Rummel least often

  1. Jeff MagrumR979 shared votes61%
  2. Michelle PowersR978 shared votes82%
  3. Mark EngetR979 shared votes82%
  4. Keith BoehmR970 shared votes82%
  5. Chuck WalenR979 shared votes84%
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

ND 2025–26 session, loads in batches

Back to topNext: Legislation

Legislation

Rummel sponsored 7 bills in the ND 2025–26 session; 5 became law. Cosponsored 31 others. 86% of sponsored bills got out of committee (North Dakota Senate average 68%; 10th of 29).

The bills Rummel sponsored and cosponsored in the ND 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 ND 2025–26 session

Sponsored7 billsSponsored, Introduced: 77Sponsored, In committee: 77Sponsored, Passed one chamber: 66Sponsored, Passed both chambers: 55Sponsored, Became law: 55Cosponsored31 billsCosponsored, Introduced: 3131Cosponsored, In committee: 3030Cosponsored, Passed one chamber: 2222Cosponsored, Passed both chambers: 1919Cosponsored, Became law: 1818IntroducedIncommitteePassed onechamberPassed bothchambersBecamelaw
Show the data
Bills Rummel sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
RoleIntroducedIn committeePassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law
Sponsored77655
Cosponsored3130221918
How to read the blocks

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

86%

of sponsored bills got out of committee

North Dakota Senate average 68%. Ranks 10th of 29.

Cosponsorship partners

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

  1. Mike Lefor9
  2. Pat Heinert7
  3. Anna Novak7
  4. David Hogue7
  5. Brandy Pyle6
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 Rummel’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
SB 2405A BILL for an Act to amend and reenact subsection 1 of section 57-02-08.9, section 57-20-09, and subsection 1 of section 57-55-03 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the order of application of the primary residence credit and discount for early payment of tax; and to provide an effective SponsorSep 2, 2026Passed one chamberTaxation(model)Second reading, failed to pass, yeas 0 nays 93 Sep 4, 2026
HCR 3028A concurrent resolution directing the Legislative Management to consider studying human trafficking victim service and re-entry programs.CosponsorJan 31, 2025In committeeCrime and Law Enforcement(model)Filed with Secretary Of State 04/17 Apr 15, 2025
HCR 3012A concurrent resolution to repeal section 10 of article X of the Constitution of North Dakota, relating to the statewide property tax levy of one mill for support of the state medical center at the University of North Dakota; and to provide an effective date.CosponsorJan 29, 2025In committeeTaxation(model)Second reading, failed, lacks constitutional majority yeas 43 nays 42 Feb 13, 2025
SB 2372A BILL for an Act to create and enact a new section to chapter 54-27 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to a legacy earnings fund; to amend and reenact section 6-09.4-10.1, subsection 1 of section 21-10-06, and section 54-27-19.3 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to funds invested bCosponsorJan 27, 2025In committeeEconomics and Public Finance(model)Second reading, failed to pass, yeas 0 nays 47 Feb 24, 2025
SCR 4006A concurrent resolution urging Congress to establish federal protections for the wild horse herd at Theodore Roosevelt National Park.CosponsorJan 27, 2025Passed one chamberPublic Lands and Natural Resources(model)Filed with Secretary Of State 04/01 Mar 31, 2025

Back to topNext: Online

Online

A site that has not changed in 90 days. Rummel’s official site had 1 page when last crawled on Oct 1, 2026.

The lab crawls Rummel’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 Rummel 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 Rummel posted

No images from Rummel’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

176 turns, Jan 11, 2023 to Sep 3, 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 Rummel is most unusual among State 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 …”).

Identifiers

Profile id
cc65fd55-6d87-4ef9-95ff-b98592bebc8f
Open States
ocd-person/cc65fd55-6d87-4ef9-95ff-b98592bebc8f

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