Skip to content

Federal level · Current term

Illinois

Illinois’s congressional delegation

statements analyzed
30,890
officials covered
19
last updated
Oct 28, 2026

What each party owns

Democrats name Health, Civil Rights and Intl. Affairs more often than Republicans do; Republicans name Armed Forces, Agriculture and Taxation more often. Health is named in 24.6% of Democrats’ policy statements and 15.2% of Republicans’, a gap of 9.5 points; Armed Forces and National Security in 23.4% of Republicans’ and 18.5% of Democrats’, a gap of 4.9 points. On 5 of the 25 areas the two parties are within one point of each other.

Each bar is the share of Democrats’ policy statements that name an area minus the share of Republicans’ that do, in percentage points, among 19 members of Illinois’s congressional delegation in the current term. Bars to the right are areas Democrats name more often; bars to the left, areas Republicans name more often. The AI model tags each policy statement with any of the Congressional Research Service’s 25 policy areas. The figures beside each bar are both parties’ shares.

Policy areas, Democrats minus Republicans

Share of policy statements naming each area, members of Congress, the current term, sorted by the gap

← Republicans say moreDemocrats say more →−5 pts+5 ptsHealth: Democrats 24.6%, Republicans 15.2%; gap +9.5 pointsHealth+9.5D 25% · R 15%Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues: Democrats 15.0%, Republicans 9.1%; gap +5.9 pointsCivil Rights+5.9D 15% · R 9.1%International Affairs: Democrats 10.8%, Republicans 5.5%; gap +5.3 pointsIntl. Affairs+5.3D 11% · R 5.5%Law: Democrats 7.0%, Republicans 2.0%; gap +5.1 pointsLaw+5.1D 7.0% · R 2.0%Government Operations and Politics: Democrats 20.5%, Republicans 16.7%; gap +3.8 pointsGovernment+3.8D 20% · R 17%Economics and Public Finance: Democrats 16.7%, Republicans 13.8%; gap +3.0 pointsPublic Finance+3.0D 17% · R 14%Environmental Protection: Democrats 3.7%, Republicans 2.2%; gap +1.5 pointsEnvironment+1.5D 3.7% · R 2.2%Crime and Law Enforcement: Democrats 11.6%, Republicans 10.3%; gap +1.3 pointsCrime+1.3D 12% · R 10%Science, Technology, Communications: Democrats 4.9%, Republicans 3.7%; gap +1.2 pointsScience and Tech+1.2D 4.9% · R 3.7%Labor and Employment: Democrats 6.4%, Republicans 5.2%; gap +1.2 pointsLabor+1.2D 6.4% · R 5.2%Foreign Trade and International Finance: Democrats 4.1%, Republicans 3.1%; gap +1.0 pointsForeign Trade+1.0D 4.1% · R 3.1%Finance and Financial Sector: Democrats 2.2%, Republicans 1.5%; gap +0.7 pointsFinance+0.7D 2.2% · R 1.5%Water Resources Development: Democrats 1.4%, Republicans 1.4%; gap 0.0 pointsWater0.0D 1.4% · R 1.4%Emergency Management: Democrats 2.4%, Republicans 2.5%; gap −0.1 pointsEmergencies−0.1D 2.4% · R 2.5%Public Lands and Natural Resources: Democrats 0.8%, Republicans 1.1%; gap −0.3 pointsPublic Lands−0.3D 0.8% · R 1.1%Housing and Community Development: Democrats 4.0%, Republicans 5.2%; gap −1.2 pointsHousing−1.2D 4.0% · R 5.2%Energy: Democrats 4.8%, Republicans 6.0%; gap −1.2 pointsEnergy−1.2D 4.8% · R 6.0%Education: Democrats 7.2%, Republicans 10.1%; gap −2.9 pointsEducation−2.9D 7.2% · R 10%Immigration: Democrats 16.1%, Republicans 19.0%; gap −3.0 pointsImmigration−3.0D 16% · R 19%Transportation and Public Works: Democrats 4.3%, Republicans 7.5%; gap −3.2 pointsTransportation−3.2D 4.3% · R 7.5%Families: Democrats 3.9%, Republicans 7.2%; gap −3.3 pointsFamilies−3.3D 3.9% · R 7.2%Commerce: Democrats 4.1%, Republicans 7.5%; gap −3.4 pointsCommerce−3.4D 4.1% · R 7.5%Taxation: Democrats 5.2%, Republicans 9.5%; gap −4.2 pointsTaxation−4.2D 5.2% · R 9.5%Agriculture and Food: Democrats 8.4%, Republicans 12.7%; gap −4.3 pointsAgriculture−4.3D 8.4% · R 13%Armed Forces and National Security: Democrats 18.5%, Republicans 23.4%; gap −4.9 pointsArmed Forces−4.9D 19% · R 23%
Show the data
Diverging bars for 25 policy areas: Democrats’ share minus Republicans’ share of policy statements, the current term. Democrats name Health (9.5 points more), Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues (5.9 points more), International Affairs (5.3 points more) more often; Republicans name Armed Forces and National Security (4.9 points more), Agriculture and Food (4.3 points more), Taxation (4.3 points more) more often.
Policy areaDemocratsRepublicansGap, D − R (points)
Health24.6%15.2%+9.5
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues15.0%9.1%+5.9
International Affairs10.8%5.5%+5.3
Law7.0%2.0%+5.1
Government Operations and Politics20.5%16.7%+3.8
Economics and Public Finance16.7%13.8%+3.0
Environmental Protection3.7%2.2%+1.5
Crime and Law Enforcement11.6%10.3%+1.3
Science, Technology, Communications4.9%3.7%+1.2
Labor and Employment6.4%5.2%+1.2
Foreign Trade and International Finance4.1%3.1%+1.0
Finance and Financial Sector2.2%1.5%+0.7
Water Resources Development1.4%1.4%0.0
Emergency Management2.4%2.5%−0.1
Public Lands and Natural Resources0.8%1.1%−0.3
Housing and Community Development4.0%5.2%−1.2
Energy4.8%6.0%−1.2
Education7.2%10.1%−2.9
Immigration16.1%19.0%−3.0
Transportation and Public Works4.3%7.5%−3.2
Families3.9%7.2%−3.3
Commerce4.1%7.5%−3.4
Taxation5.2%9.5%−4.2
Agriculture and Food8.4%12.7%−4.3
Armed Forces and National Security18.5%23.4%−4.9
Notes

Health is the most-named area overall (23.5% of policy statements). Each side’s leading areas, labelled in its colour, are those at least one point apart and within half of that side’s widest gap, up to three.

Back to topNext: Who stands out

Who stands out

The five highest rates on four kinds of statement among 19 members of Illinois’s congressional delegation. An official needs at least 50 statements in the current term to be ranked.

An AI model labels every statement. An official’s rate is the share of their statements that carry a label.

Most personal attacks

Overtly questions a named person’s character, integrity or loyalty, or calls them names. Criticising a record or a policy does not count.

  1. 1Tammy DuckworthDU.S. Senate · Illinois22%
  2. 2Delia RamirezDU.S. House · IL-0313%
  3. 3Richard DurbinDU.S. Senate · Illinois12%
  4. 4Chuy GarcíaDU.S. House · IL-0410%
  5. 5Robin KellyDU.S. House · IL-029.9%

Most credit claiming

Claims credit for passing legislation, securing funding or grants, or other accomplishments in office.

  1. 1Darin LaHoodRU.S. House · IL-1646%
  2. 2Lauren UnderwoodDU.S. House · IL-1443%
  3. 3Mike BostRU.S. House · IL-1239%
  4. 4Nicole (Nikki) BudzinskiDU.S. House · IL-1333%
  5. 5Eric SorensenDU.S. House · IL-1732%

Most bipartisan language

Emphasises working across the aisle, compromise or common ground between the parties.

  1. 1Richard DurbinDU.S. Senate · Illinois18%
  2. 2Tammy DuckworthDU.S. Senate · Illinois16%
  3. 3Darin LaHoodRU.S. House · IL-1615%
  4. 4Danny DavisDU.S. House · IL-0713%
  5. 5Eric SorensenDU.S. House · IL-1713%

Most policy-focused

Discusses a specific public policy or policy area (health care, taxes, defense, …).

  1. 1Raja KrishnamoorthiDU.S. House · IL-0883%
  2. 2Tammy DuckworthDU.S. Senate · Illinois83%
  3. 3Nicole (Nikki) BudzinskiDU.S. House · IL-1380%
  4. 4Robin KellyDU.S. House · IL-0280%
  5. 5Jan SchakowskyDU.S. House · IL-0980%

Each official’s rates are on their profile and in the bulk file.

Back to topNext: Party comparison

Party comparison

Democrats attack opponents personally 2.8 times as often as Republicans (9.4% of statements against 3.3%). 5.3% of Republican and 3.2% of Democratic statements carry an extreme label, most often aimed at Trump.

Each bar is the share of a party’s statements that carry a label, pooled across 19 members of Illinois’s congressional delegation in the current term. Officials who post more count more. A statement can carry several labels, so a party’s shares can sum to more than 100%.

Statements by label and party

Share of each party’s statements, the current term

  • Personal attacks
  • Policy criticism
  • Policy discussion
  • Bipartisanship
  • Credit claiming
  • Extreme labels
Show the data
Share of statements in each category by party, Illinois: Personal attacks Democrats 9.4%, Republicans 3.3%; Policy criticism Democrats 33%, Republicans 16%; Policy discussion Democrats 76%, Republicans 67%; Bipartisanship Democrats 10%, Republicans 6.1%; Credit claiming Democrats 23%, Republicans 37%; Extreme labels Democrats 3.2%, Republicans 5.3%.
MeasureDemocratsRepublicans
Personal attacks9.4%3.3%
Policy criticism33%16%
Policy discussion76%67%
Bipartisanship10%6.1%
Credit claiming23%37%
Extreme labels3.2%5.3%
The measures

Personal attacks. Overtly questions a named person’s character, integrity or loyalty, or calls them names. Criticising a record or a policy does not count.

Policy criticism. Objects to a specific policy, law or court ruling with fact-based arguments, without personal attacks or emotional appeals.

Policy discussion. Discusses a specific public policy or policy area (health care, taxes, defense, …).

Bipartisanship. Emphasises working across the aisle, compromise or common ground between the parties.

Credit claiming. Claims credit for passing legislation, securing funding or grants, or other accomplishments in office.

Extreme labels. Calls a politician, a party or a policy “far left”, “far right”, “MAGA”, “extreme”, “radical”, “woke”, “fascist” or “communist”.

Personal attacks by venue

Share of statements by 19 members of Illinois’s congressional delegation, the current term

Both parties’ personal-attack rates change with the venue. Democrats run from 7.8% of their posts on X to 16.9% of their press releases; Republicans from 0.5% of their press releases to 5.5% of their newsletters.

0%10%20%Posts on X23,368 statementsPress releases4,205 statementsNewsletters827 statementsFloor speeches2,490 statements7.8%16.9%12.3%10.3%DemocratsDemocrats3.7%0.5%5.5%0.9%RepublicansRepublicans
Show the data
Slope chart of each party’s personal-attack rate across four venues, the current term. Democrats: posts on x 7.8%, press releases 16.9%, newsletters 12.3%, floor speeches 10.3%. Republicans: posts on x 3.7%, press releases 0.5%, newsletters 5.5%, floor speeches 0.9%.
VenueDemocrats: personal attacksDemocrats: statementsRepublicans: personal attacksRepublicans: statements
Posts on X7.8%200263.7%3342
Press releases16.9%40150.5%190
Newsletters12.3%6815.5%146
Floor speeches10.3%20580.9%432
Notes

Each point is the share of a party’s statements in one venue that the AI model labelled a personal attack, pooled across members. A line joins each party’s four venues. A statement counts once and carries the label if any of its passages does.

Posts on X are 76% of the 30,890 statements here, so the pooled rates elsewhere on this page sit closest to the X points.

A party needs 50 statements in a venue before its point is drawn.

Back to topNext: Polarization

Polarization

The median Democrat scores −1.14 and the median Republican +0.89 on the CSIP scale, a gap of 2.03. The gap widened from 1.70 in the 113th Congress to 2.03 in the 119th Congress.

CSIP, the lab’s Common-Space Ideal Point, places every official on one left–right scale estimated from roll-call votes, campaign contributions and the text of their statements. Negative scores are to the left and positive scores to the right. The gap is the distance between the two parties’ medians.

CSIP scores by party

← More liberal · 0 · More conservative →

−2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →Democratsmedian −1.1Republicansmedian +0.9
Show the data
CSIP distributions of 16 Democrats (median −1.14) and 3 Republicans (median +0.89) on one scale from −2 to +2.
GroupOfficialsMedian
Democrats16−1.1
Republicans3+0.9

Medians: Democrats −1.14, Republicans +0.89. Gap: 2.03.

Gap between the party medians

Members of each Congress

113th Congress (2013–14): 1.701.70113th114th Congress (2015–16): 1.731.73114th115th Congress (2017–18): 1.921.92115th116th Congress (2019–20): 1.931.93116th117th Congress (2021–22): 1.981.98117th118th Congress (2023–24): 2.032.03118th119th Congress (2025–26): 2.032.03119th
Show the data
Gap between the Democratic and Republican CSIP medians: 113th Congress (2013–14) 1.70, 114th Congress (2015–16) 1.73, 115th Congress (2017–18) 1.92, 116th Congress (2019–20) 1.93, 117th Congress (2021–22) 1.98, 118th Congress (2023–24) 2.03, 119th Congress (2025–26) 2.03.
ItemValue
113th Congress (2013–14)1.70
114th Congress (2015–16)1.73
115th Congress (2017–18)1.92
116th Congress (2019–20)1.93
117th Congress (2021–22)1.98
118th Congress (2023–24)2.03
119th Congress (2025–26)2.03
Notes

Each dot is one official, blue left of 0 and red right of 0, darker further from 0. Overlapping dots form darker patches where officials cluster. The rule in each row marks the party median.

Each official has a single score for 2014–2026, so the gap changes over time only as the membership of Congress turns over.

Each official’s score is on their profile, and the full table is in Downloads.

Back to topNext: Trends

Policy topics

Government Operations and Politics led in Sep ’26, named in 24% of policy statements. Armed Forces and National Security rose most from Aug ’26 (+5.3 pts); Commerce fell most (−3.3 pts).

The AI model tags each policy statement with any of 25 policy areas, so shares can sum to more than 100%. A share is the percentage of a month’s policy statements by members of Congress that name the area. The lists compare the last two complete months, with changes in percentage points. A month needs at least ten policy statements to be compared.

Most discussed, Sep ’26

1,046 policy statements; change since Aug ’26 in grey

  1. Government Operations and Politics24% +4.7 pts
  2. Armed Forces and National Security22% +5.3 pts
  3. Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues18% +2.9 pts
  4. Health18% −0.3 pts
  5. International Affairs16% +4.9 pts

Rising

Up most since Aug ’26

  1. Armed Forces and National Security+5.3 pts
  2. International Affairs+4.9 pts
  3. Science, Technology, Communications+4.8 pts

Falling

Down most since Aug ’26

  1. Commerce−3.3 pts
  2. Education−1.6 pts
  3. Agriculture and Food−1.6 pts

Back to topNext: States

States

The state maps are on the United States dashboard.

The left map is the share of statements by each state’s congressional delegation that the AI model labelled a personal attack, the current term (members of Congress, by the state they represent). The right map is the lab’s survey estimate of affective polarization in each state: residents’ rating of their own party minus their rating of the other, on a 0–100 thermometer. Each state is a square of the same size, shaded by quintile; darker is higher.

The two maps are on the United States dashboard.

Back to topNext: Challengers

Challengers and incumbents

Challengers post personal attacks more often than the incumbents they face. On posts on X since Oct 1, 2025, the median challenger’s rate is 3.7% and the median incumbent’s 2.8%; 5 of 7 challengers post personal attacks more often than the incumbent they face and 2 less often, across 7 House and Senate races with both sides measured.

Every 2026 House and Senate race with an incumbent running and at least one challenger. A candidate’s rate is the share of their posts on X that the AI model labelled a personal attack. Both sides are measured over the same months, since Oct 1, 2025, and incumbents’ press releases, newsletters and floor speeches are excluded. Candidates with fewer than 10 posts are left out.

Incumbents and challengers

Personal attacks, share of posts on X · 7 incumbents, 7 challengers · rates above 20% are drawn at the edge

0%5%10%15%20%+Incumbentsmedian 2.8%Challengersmedian 3.7%
Show the data
Every candidate in the comparison
RaceCandidatePartyStatusPosts on XPersonal attacks
Illinois 1st DistrictJonathan JacksonDemocratsIncumbent4866.0%
Illinois 1st DistrictChristian MaxwellRepublicansChallenger54056.3%
Illinois 11th DistrictBill FosterDemocratsIncumbent4285.1%
Illinois 11th DistrictJeffrey WalterRepublicansChallenger9020.4%
Illinois 12th DistrictMichael BostRepublicansIncumbent2980.0%
Illinois 12th DistrictJulie FortierDemocratsChallenger3621.4%
Illinois 14th DistrictLauren UnderwoodDemocratsIncumbent1782.8%
Illinois 14th DistrictJames MarterRepublicansChallenger28712.9%
Illinois 16th DistrictDarin LahoodRepublicansIncumbent3980.0%
Illinois 16th DistrictPaul NolleyDemocratsChallenger823.7%
Illinois 17th DistrictEric SorensenDemocratsIncumbent5121.2%
Illinois 17th DistrictDillan VancilRepublicansChallenger147.1%
Illinois 3rd DistrictDelia RamirezDemocratsIncumbent144112.9%
Illinois 3rd DistrictAngel OakleyRepublicansChallenger1021.0%

Both are measured on posts on X since Oct 1, 2025.

The races with the widest gaps

Each incumbent (outlined) and the challenger whose rate differs most, personal attacks as a share of posts on X

Illinois 3rd District

Delia Ramirez (D), 1,441 posts · Angel Oakley (R), 102 posts

Illinois 14th District

Lauren Underwood (D), 178 posts · James Marter (R), 287 posts

Illinois 17th District

Eric Sorensen (D), 512 posts · Dillan Vancil (R), 14 posts

Illinois 11th District

Bill Foster (D), 428 posts · Jeffrey Walter (R), 902 posts

Illinois 16th District

Darin Lahood (R), 398 posts · Paul Nolley (D), 82 posts

Show the data
The races shown, incumbent and challenger
RaceIncumbentRatePostsChallengerRatePostsGap (points)
Illinois 3rd DistrictDelia Ramirez (Democrat)12.9%1441Angel Oakley (Republican)1.0%102−11.9
Illinois 14th DistrictLauren Underwood (Democrat)2.8%178James Marter (Republican)12.9%287+10.1
Illinois 17th DistrictEric Sorensen (Democrat)1.2%512Dillan Vancil (Republican)7.1%14+6.0
Illinois 11th DistrictBill Foster (Democrat)5.1%428Jeffrey Walter (Republican)0.4%902−4.7
Illinois 16th DistrictDarin Lahood (Republican)0.0%398Paul Nolley (Democrat)3.7%82+3.7

Back to top