Skip to content

Federal level · Current term

Kentucky

Kentucky’s congressional delegation

statements analyzed
12,131
officials covered
8
last updated
Oct 28, 2026

What each party owns

Democrats name Health, Education and Immigration more often than Republicans do; Republicans name Government and Intl. Affairs more often. Health is named in 30.9% of Democrats’ policy statements and 15.9% of Republicans’, a gap of 15.0 points; Government Operations and Politics in 24.4% of Republicans’ and 16.9% of Democrats’, a gap of 7.6 points. On 4 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 8 members of Kentucky’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−10 pts+5 pts+10 ptsHealth: Democrats 30.9%, Republicans 15.9%; gap +15.0 pointsHealth+15.0D 31% · R 16%Education: Democrats 13.7%, Republicans 4.1%; gap +9.6 pointsEducation+9.6D 14% · R 4.1%Immigration: Democrats 16.7%, Republicans 8.4%; gap +8.3 pointsImmigration+8.3D 17% · R 8.4%Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues: Democrats 13.6%, Republicans 5.8%; gap +7.8 pointsCivil Rights+7.8D 14% · R 5.8%Labor and Employment: Democrats 10.2%, Republicans 2.6%; gap +7.6 pointsLabor+7.6D 10% · R 2.6%Housing and Community Development: Democrats 9.2%, Republicans 2.0%; gap +7.2 pointsHousing+7.2D 9.2% · R 2.0%Families: Democrats 6.1%, Republicans 1.7%; gap +4.4 pointsFamilies+4.4D 6.1% · R 1.7%Foreign Trade and International Finance: Democrats 6.8%, Republicans 3.5%; gap +3.3 pointsForeign Trade+3.3D 6.8% · R 3.5%Agriculture and Food: Democrats 10.7%, Republicans 7.4%; gap +3.3 pointsAgriculture+3.3D 11% · R 7.4%Environmental Protection: Democrats 5.8%, Republicans 2.6%; gap +3.2 pointsEnvironment+3.2D 5.8% · R 2.6%Water Resources Development: Democrats 4.4%, Republicans 1.7%; gap +2.7 pointsWater+2.7D 4.4% · R 1.7%Taxation: Democrats 7.5%, Republicans 5.1%; gap +2.4 pointsTaxation+2.4D 7.5% · R 5.1%Emergency Management: Democrats 6.4%, Republicans 4.3%; gap +2.2 pointsEmergencies+2.2D 6.4% · R 4.3%Commerce: Democrats 9.2%, Republicans 7.1%; gap +2.2 pointsCommerce+2.2D 9.2% · R 7.1%Transportation and Public Works: Democrats 5.3%, Republicans 4.0%; gap +1.3 pointsTransportation+1.3D 5.3% · R 4.0%Armed Forces and National Security: Democrats 18.7%, Republicans 18.2%; gap +0.5 pointsArmed Forces+0.5D 19% · R 18%Public Lands and Natural Resources: Democrats 1.5%, Republicans 1.2%; gap +0.3 pointsPublic Lands+0.3D 1.5% · R 1.2%Crime and Law Enforcement: Democrats 11.7%, Republicans 11.9%; gap −0.2 pointsCrime−0.2D 12% · R 12%Economics and Public Finance: Democrats 23.8%, Republicans 24.4%; gap −0.6 pointsPublic Finance−0.6D 24% · R 24%Finance and Financial Sector: Democrats 1.7%, Republicans 3.0%; gap −1.3 pointsFinance−1.3D 1.7% · R 3.0%Law: Democrats 3.4%, Republicans 5.9%; gap −2.5 pointsLaw−2.5D 3.4% · R 5.9%Science, Technology, Communications: Democrats 4.1%, Republicans 6.8%; gap −2.7 pointsScience and Tech−2.7D 4.1% · R 6.8%Energy: Democrats 4.1%, Republicans 6.9%; gap −2.7 pointsEnergy−2.7D 4.1% · R 6.9%International Affairs: Democrats 3.9%, Republicans 10.3%; gap −6.4 pointsIntl. Affairs−6.4D 3.9% · R 10%Government Operations and Politics: Democrats 16.9%, Republicans 24.4%; gap −7.6 pointsGovernment−7.6D 17% · R 24%
Show the data
Diverging bars for 25 policy areas: Democrats’ share minus Republicans’ share of policy statements, the current term. Democrats name Health (15.0 points more), Education (9.6 points more), Immigration (8.3 points more) more often; Republicans name Government Operations and Politics (7.6 points more), International Affairs (6.4 points more) more often.
Policy areaDemocratsRepublicansGap, D − R (points)
Health30.9%15.9%+15.0
Education13.7%4.1%+9.6
Immigration16.7%8.4%+8.3
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues13.6%5.8%+7.8
Labor and Employment10.2%2.6%+7.6
Housing and Community Development9.2%2.0%+7.2
Families6.1%1.7%+4.4
Foreign Trade and International Finance6.8%3.5%+3.3
Agriculture and Food10.7%7.4%+3.3
Environmental Protection5.8%2.6%+3.2
Water Resources Development4.4%1.7%+2.7
Taxation7.5%5.1%+2.4
Emergency Management6.4%4.3%+2.2
Commerce9.2%7.1%+2.2
Transportation and Public Works5.3%4.0%+1.3
Armed Forces and National Security18.7%18.2%+0.5
Public Lands and Natural Resources1.5%1.2%+0.3
Crime and Law Enforcement11.7%11.9%−0.2
Economics and Public Finance23.8%24.4%−0.6
Finance and Financial Sector1.7%3.0%−1.3
Law3.4%5.9%−2.5
Science, Technology, Communications4.1%6.8%−2.7
Energy4.1%6.9%−2.7
International Affairs3.9%10.3%−6.4
Government Operations and Politics16.9%24.4%−7.6
Notes

Economics and Public Finance is the most-named area overall (24.3% 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 8 members of Kentucky’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. 1James ComerRU.S. House · KY-0113%
  2. 2Morgan McGarveyDU.S. House · KY-036.6%
  3. 3Rand PaulRU.S. Senate · Kentucky5.3%
  4. 4Thomas MassieRU.S. House · KY-045.0%
  5. 5Andy BarrRU.S. House · KY-062.1%

Most credit claiming

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

  1. 1Hal RogersRU.S. House · KY-0571%
  2. 2Andy BarrRU.S. House · KY-0651%
  3. 3Mitch McConnellRU.S. Senate · Kentucky40%
  4. 4Brett GuthrieRU.S. House · KY-0239%
  5. 5James ComerRU.S. House · KY-0125%

Most bipartisan language

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

  1. 1Mitch McConnellRU.S. Senate · Kentucky18%
  2. 2Brett GuthrieRU.S. House · KY-0214%
  3. 3Hal RogersRU.S. House · KY-0513%
  4. 4James ComerRU.S. House · KY-017.3%
  5. 5Morgan McGarveyDU.S. House · KY-036.9%

Most policy-focused

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

  1. 1Hal RogersRU.S. House · KY-0593%
  2. 2Mitch McConnellRU.S. Senate · Kentucky79%
  3. 3Andy BarrRU.S. House · KY-0674%
  4. 4Rand PaulRU.S. Senate · Kentucky67%
  5. 5Morgan McGarveyDU.S. House · KY-0366%

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

Back to topNext: Party comparison

Party comparison

Republicans use extreme labels 2.4 times as often as Democrats (2.1% of statements against 0.9%). Across all officials, 1.9% of statements carry an extreme label, most often aimed at Democrats.

Each bar is the share of a party’s statements that carry a label, pooled across 8 members of Kentucky’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, Kentucky: Personal attacks Democrats 6.6%, Republicans 4.7%; Policy criticism Democrats 28%, Republicans 21%; Policy discussion Democrats 66%, Republicans 57%; Bipartisanship Democrats 6.9%, Republicans 5.9%; Credit claiming Democrats 17%, Republicans 26%; Extreme labels Democrats 0.9%, Republicans 2.1%.
MeasureDemocratsRepublicans
Personal attacks6.6%4.7%
Policy criticism28%21%
Policy discussion66%57%
Bipartisanship6.9%5.9%
Credit claiming17%26%
Extreme labels0.9%2.1%
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 8 members of Kentucky’s congressional delegation, the current term

Republicans’ personal-attack rate changes more with the venue than Democrats’. Democrats run from 5.6% of their floor speeches to 7.1% of their press releases; Republicans from 2.1% of their floor speeches to 9.3% of their newsletters.

0%5%10%15%Posts on X10,165 statementsPress releases780 statementsNewsletters175 statementsFloor speeches1,011 statements6.7%7.1%6.0%5.6%DemocratsDemocrats5.1%2.8%9.3%2.1%RepublicansRepublicans
Show the data
Slope chart of each party’s personal-attack rate across four venues, the current term. Democrats: posts on x 6.7%, press releases 7.1%, newsletters 6.0%, floor speeches 5.6%. Republicans: posts on x 5.1%, press releases 2.8%, newsletters 9.3%, floor speeches 2.1%.
VenueDemocrats: personal attacksDemocrats: statementsRepublicans: personal attacksRepublicans: statements
Posts on X6.7%10165.1%9149
Press releases7.1%992.8%681
Newsletters6.0%679.3%108
Floor speeches5.6%722.1%939
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 84% of the 12,131 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 −0.82 and the median Republican +0.99 on the CSIP scale, a gap of 1.81.

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 −0.8Republicansmedian +1.0
Show the data
CSIP distributions of 1 Democrats (median −0.82) and 7 Republicans (median +0.99) on one scale from −2 to +2.
GroupOfficialsMedian
Democrats1−0.8
Republicans7+1.0

Medians: Democrats −0.82, Republicans +0.99. Gap: 1.81.

Gap between the party medians

By election cycle

Not enough Congresses with scored members of both parties to draw a trend.

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’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 27% of policy statements. Science, Technology, Communications rose most from Aug ’26 (+7.5 pts); Economics and Public Finance fell most (−10 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

384 policy statements; change since Aug ’26 in grey

  1. Government Operations and Politics27% −2.1 pts
  2. Economics and Public Finance19% −10 pts
  3. Health18% −1.7 pts
  4. Armed Forces and National Security16% +4.0 pts
  5. Crime and Law Enforcement16% +6.1 pts

Rising

Up most since Aug ’26

  1. Science, Technology, Communications+7.5 pts
  2. Energy+6.8 pts
  3. Crime and Law Enforcement+6.1 pts

Falling

Down most since Aug ’26

  1. Economics and Public Finance−10 pts
  2. Agriculture and Food−8.3 pts
  3. Taxation−2.7 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

Incumbents post personal attacks more often than the challengers they face. On posts on X since Oct 1, 2025, the median challenger’s rate is 3.6% and the median incumbent’s 5.1%; 1 of 4 challengers post personal attacks more often than the incumbent they face and 3 less often, across 3 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 · 3 incumbents, 4 challengers · rates above 20% are drawn at the edge

0%5%10%15%20%+Incumbentsmedian 5.1%Challengersmedian 3.6%
Show the data
Every candidate in the comparison
RaceCandidatePartyStatusPosts on XPersonal attacks
Kentucky 1st DistrictJames ComerRepublicansIncumbent34912.0%
Kentucky 1st DistrictJohn WilliamsDemocratsChallenger6060.2%
Kentucky 2nd DistrictBrett GuthrieRepublicansIncumbent3390.0%
Kentucky 2nd DistrictMegan WingfieldDemocratsChallenger1323.1%
Kentucky 4th DistrictThomas MassieRepublicansIncumbent22805.1%
Kentucky 4th DistrictMelissa StrangeDemocratsChallenger803.8%
Kentucky 4th DistrictEd GallreinRepublicansChallenger3523.4%

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

Kentucky 2nd District

Brett Guthrie (R), 339 posts · Megan Wingfield (D), 13 posts

Kentucky 1st District

James Comer (R), 349 posts · John Williams (D), 606 posts

Kentucky 4th District

Thomas Massie (R), 2,280 posts · Ed Gallrein (R), 352 posts

Show the data
The races shown, incumbent and challenger
RaceIncumbentRatePostsChallengerRatePostsGap (points)
Kentucky 2nd DistrictBrett Guthrie (Republican)0.0%339Megan Wingfield (Democrat)23.1%13+23.1
Kentucky 1st DistrictJames Comer (Republican)12.0%349John Williams (Democrat)0.2%606−11.9
Kentucky 4th DistrictThomas Massie (Republican)5.1%2280Ed Gallrein (Republican)3.4%352−1.7

Back to top