Skip to content

Federal level · Current term

New Mexico

New Mexico’s congressional delegation

statements analyzed
9,067
officials covered
5
last updated
Oct 28, 2026

What each party owns

This comparison needs both parties.

Each bar is the share of Democrats’ policy statements that name an area minus the share of Republicans’ that do, in percentage points, among 5 members of New Mexico’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.

This comparison needs both parties. It is on the United States dashboard.

Back to topNext: Who stands out

Who stands out

The five highest rates on four kinds of statement among 5 members of New Mexico’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. 1Ben LujánDU.S. Senate · New Mexico11%
  2. 2Teresa Leger FernandezDU.S. House · NM-039.1%
  3. 3Martin HeinrichDU.S. Senate · New Mexico8.6%
  4. 4Melanie StansburyDU.S. House · NM-017.1%
  5. 5Gabriel (Gabe) VasquezDU.S. House · NM-021.1%

Most credit claiming

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

  1. 1Gabriel (Gabe) VasquezDU.S. House · NM-0247%
  2. 2Martin HeinrichDU.S. Senate · New Mexico30%
  3. 3Ben LujánDU.S. Senate · New Mexico29%
  4. 4Melanie StansburyDU.S. House · NM-0116%
  5. 5Teresa Leger FernandezDU.S. House · NM-0314%

Most bipartisan language

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

  1. 1Gabriel (Gabe) VasquezDU.S. House · NM-0227%
  2. 2Martin HeinrichDU.S. Senate · New Mexico15%
  3. 3Ben LujánDU.S. Senate · New Mexico14%
  4. 4Teresa Leger FernandezDU.S. House · NM-036.7%
  5. 5Melanie StansburyDU.S. House · NM-015.5%

Most policy-focused

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

  1. 1Gabriel (Gabe) VasquezDU.S. House · NM-0286%
  2. 2Martin HeinrichDU.S. Senate · New Mexico79%
  3. 3Ben LujánDU.S. Senate · New Mexico79%
  4. 4Teresa Leger FernandezDU.S. House · NM-0363%
  5. 5Melanie StansburyDU.S. House · NM-0159%

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

Back to topNext: Party comparison

Party comparison

Democrats talk about policy in 72% of statements; 7.7% attack opponents personally and 1.3% use extreme labels. The most-discussed policy area is Health (25% of policy statements).

Each bar is the share of a party’s statements that carry a label, pooled across 5 members of New Mexico’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, New Mexico: Personal attacks Democrats 7.7%; Policy criticism Democrats 32%; Policy discussion Democrats 72%; Bipartisanship Democrats 13%; Credit claiming Democrats 26%; Extreme labels Democrats 1.3%.
MeasureDemocrats
Personal attacks7.7%
Policy criticism32%
Policy discussion72%
Bipartisanship13%
Credit claiming26%
Extreme labels1.3%
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 5 members of New Mexico’s congressional delegation, the current term

Democrats’ personal-attack rate runs from 6.7% of their posts on X to 15.6% of their floor speeches.

0%10%20%Posts on X6,644 statementsPress releases1,757 statementsNewsletters224 statementsFloor speeches442 statements6.7%8.9%13.8%15.6%DemocratsDemocrats
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 8.9%, newsletters 13.8%, floor speeches 15.6%.
VenueDemocrats: personal attacksDemocrats: statements
Posts on X6.7%6644
Press releases8.9%1757
Newsletters13.8%224
Floor speeches15.6%442
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 73% of the 9,067 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 −1.15 on the CSIP scale.

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 −1.2
Show the data
CSIP distributions of 5 Democrats (median −1.15) on one scale from −2 to +2.
GroupOfficialsMedian
Democrats5−1.2

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 26% of policy statements. Energy rose most from Aug ’26 (+14 pts); Public Lands and Natural Resources fell most (−7.3 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

302 policy statements; change since Aug ’26 in grey

  1. Government Operations and Politics26% +8.1 pts
  2. Energy25% +14 pts
  3. Economics and Public Finance21% +0.4 pts
  4. Armed Forces and National Security18% +3.8 pts
  5. Public Lands and Natural Resources15% −7.3 pts

Rising

Up most since Aug ’26

  1. Energy+14 pts
  2. Government Operations and Politics+8.1 pts
  3. Science, Technology, Communications+4.0 pts

Falling

Down most since Aug ’26

  1. Public Lands and Natural Resources−7.3 pts
  2. Emergency Management−5.9 pts
  3. Health−5.4 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 1.9% and the median incumbent’s 5.7%; 1 of 3 challengers post personal attacks more often than the incumbent they face and 2 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, 3 challengers · rates above 20% are drawn at the edge

0%5%10%15%20%+Incumbentsmedian 5.7%Challengersmedian 1.9%
Show the data
Every candidate in the comparison
RaceCandidatePartyStatusPosts on XPersonal attacks
New Mexico 1st DistrictMelanie StansburyDemocratsIncumbent13495.7%
New Mexico 1st DistrictNdidiamaka OkparekeRepublicansChallenger922.2%
New Mexico 2nd DistrictGabriel VasquezDemocratsIncumbent4290.9%
New Mexico 2nd DistrictGreg CunninghamRepublicansChallenger4151.9%
New Mexico 3rd DistrictTeresa Leger FernandezDemocratsIncumbent6377.2%
New Mexico 3rd DistrictMartin ZamoraRepublicansChallenger621.6%

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

New Mexico 3rd District

Teresa Leger Fernandez (D), 637 posts · Martin Zamora (R), 62 posts

New Mexico 1st District

Melanie Stansbury (D), 1,349 posts · Ndidiamaka Okpareke (R), 92 posts

New Mexico 2nd District

Gabriel Vasquez (D), 429 posts · Greg Cunningham (R), 415 posts

Show the data
The races shown, incumbent and challenger
RaceIncumbentRatePostsChallengerRatePostsGap (points)
New Mexico 3rd DistrictTeresa Leger Fernandez (Democrat)7.2%637Martin Zamora (Republican)1.6%62−5.6
New Mexico 1st DistrictMelanie Stansbury (Democrat)5.7%1349Ndidiamaka Okpareke (Republican)2.2%92−3.5
New Mexico 2nd DistrictGabriel Vasquez (Democrat)0.9%429Greg Cunningham (Republican)1.9%415+1.0

Back to top