Skip to content

Federal level · Current term

Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania’s congressional delegation

statements analyzed
21,452
officials covered
19
last updated
Oct 28, 2026

What each party owns

Democrats name Health and Civil Rights more often than Republicans do; Republicans name Commerce, Energy and Education more often. Health is named in 28.6% of Democrats’ policy statements and 20.2% of Republicans’, a gap of 8.4 points; Commerce in 12.9% of Republicans’ and 4.9% of Democrats’, a gap of 8.0 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 19 members of Pennsylvania’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 28.6%, Republicans 20.2%; gap +8.4 pointsHealth+8.4D 29% · R 20%Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues: Democrats 8.8%, Republicans 4.5%; gap +4.2 pointsCivil Rights+4.2D 8.8% · R 4.5%Law: Democrats 3.8%, Republicans 1.6%; gap +2.2 pointsLaw+2.2D 3.8% · R 1.6%Foreign Trade and International Finance: Democrats 5.0%, Republicans 3.4%; gap +1.7 pointsForeign Trade+1.7D 5.0% · R 3.4%Economics and Public Finance: Democrats 22.4%, Republicans 20.9%; gap +1.5 pointsPublic Finance+1.5D 22% · R 21%Government Operations and Politics: Democrats 19.1%, Republicans 18.1%; gap +1.0 pointsGovernment+1.0D 19% · R 18%Housing and Community Development: Democrats 4.7%, Republicans 4.9%; gap −0.2 pointsHousing−0.2D 4.7% · R 4.9%Water Resources Development: Democrats 1.2%, Republicans 1.9%; gap −0.7 pointsWater−0.7D 1.2% · R 1.9%Environmental Protection: Democrats 3.4%, Republicans 4.3%; gap −0.9 pointsEnvironment−0.9D 3.4% · R 4.3%Public Lands and Natural Resources: Democrats 0.8%, Republicans 2.2%; gap −1.4 pointsPublic Lands−1.4D 0.8% · R 2.2%Agriculture and Food: Democrats 8.0%, Republicans 9.4%; gap −1.4 pointsAgriculture−1.4D 8.0% · R 9.4%Families: Democrats 3.4%, Republicans 5.0%; gap −1.6 pointsFamilies−1.6D 3.4% · R 5.0%Immigration: Democrats 7.0%, Republicans 8.7%; gap −1.7 pointsImmigration−1.7D 7.0% · R 8.7%Transportation and Public Works: Democrats 5.2%, Republicans 7.0%; gap −1.8 pointsTransportation−1.8D 5.2% · R 7.0%International Affairs: Democrats 7.3%, Republicans 10.0%; gap −2.6 pointsIntl. Affairs−2.6D 7.3% · R 10.0%Labor and Employment: Democrats 8.0%, Republicans 10.8%; gap −2.8 pointsLabor−2.8D 8.0% · R 11%Emergency Management: Democrats 1.7%, Republicans 4.6%; gap −2.9 pointsEmergencies−2.9D 1.7% · R 4.6%Taxation: Democrats 8.5%, Republicans 11.5%; gap −3.0 pointsTaxation−3.0D 8.5% · R 12%Crime and Law Enforcement: Democrats 7.5%, Republicans 10.9%; gap −3.4 pointsCrime−3.4D 7.5% · R 11%Armed Forces and National Security: Democrats 18.5%, Republicans 22.6%; gap −4.1 pointsArmed Forces−4.1D 19% · R 23%Finance and Financial Sector: Democrats 1.2%, Republicans 5.4%; gap −4.1 pointsFinance−4.1D 1.2% · R 5.4%Science, Technology, Communications: Democrats 4.0%, Republicans 8.8%; gap −4.7 pointsScience and Tech−4.7D 4.0% · R 8.8%Education: Democrats 7.2%, Republicans 12.1%; gap −4.8 pointsEducation−4.8D 7.2% · R 12%Energy: Democrats 5.3%, Republicans 10.2%; gap −4.9 pointsEnergy−4.9D 5.3% · R 10%Commerce: Democrats 4.9%, Republicans 12.9%; gap −8.0 pointsCommerce−8.0D 4.9% · R 13%
Show the data
Diverging bars for 25 policy areas: Democrats’ share minus Republicans’ share of policy statements, the current term. Democrats name Health (8.4 points more), Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues (4.2 points more) more often; Republicans name Commerce (8.0 points more), Energy (4.9 points more), Education (4.8 points more) more often.
Policy areaDemocratsRepublicansGap, D − R (points)
Health28.6%20.2%+8.4
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues8.8%4.5%+4.2
Law3.8%1.6%+2.2
Foreign Trade and International Finance5.0%3.4%+1.7
Economics and Public Finance22.4%20.9%+1.5
Government Operations and Politics19.1%18.1%+1.0
Housing and Community Development4.7%4.9%−0.2
Water Resources Development1.2%1.9%−0.7
Environmental Protection3.4%4.3%−0.9
Public Lands and Natural Resources0.8%2.2%−1.4
Agriculture and Food8.0%9.4%−1.4
Families3.4%5.0%−1.6
Immigration7.0%8.7%−1.7
Transportation and Public Works5.2%7.0%−1.8
International Affairs7.3%10.0%−2.6
Labor and Employment8.0%10.8%−2.8
Emergency Management1.7%4.6%−2.9
Taxation8.5%11.5%−3.0
Crime and Law Enforcement7.5%10.9%−3.4
Armed Forces and National Security18.5%22.6%−4.1
Finance and Financial Sector1.2%5.4%−4.1
Science, Technology, Communications4.0%8.8%−4.7
Education7.2%12.1%−4.8
Energy5.3%10.2%−4.9
Commerce4.9%12.9%−8.0
Notes

Health is the most-named area overall (24.6% 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 Pennsylvania’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. 1Brendan BoyleDU.S. House · PA-0212%
  2. 2Madeleine DeanDU.S. House · PA-046.8%
  3. 3Summer LeeDU.S. House · PA-126.3%
  4. 4Chrissy HoulahanDU.S. House · PA-065.9%
  5. 5Mary ScanlonDU.S. House · PA-055.6%

Most credit claiming

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

  1. 1Mike KellyRU.S. House · PA-1655%
  2. 2Guy ReschenthalerRU.S. House · PA-1453%
  3. 3Glenn ThompsonRU.S. House · PA-1551%
  4. 4Robert BresnahanRU.S. House · PA-0849%
  5. 5John JoyceRU.S. House · PA-1348%

Most bipartisan language

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

  1. 1Glenn ThompsonRU.S. House · PA-1528%
  2. 2Brian FitzpatrickRU.S. House · PA-0123%
  3. 3John FettermanDU.S. Senate · Pennsylvania21%
  4. 4Dave McCormickRU.S. Senate · Pennsylvania20%
  5. 5Robert BresnahanRU.S. House · PA-0819%

Most policy-focused

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

  1. 1Summer LeeDU.S. House · PA-1278%
  2. 2Dave McCormickRU.S. Senate · Pennsylvania78%
  3. 3Glenn ThompsonRU.S. House · PA-1577%
  4. 4Mike KellyRU.S. House · PA-1675%
  5. 5Chris DeluzioDU.S. House · PA-1775%

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

Back to topNext: Party comparison

Party comparison

Democrats attack opponents personally 6.5 times as often as Republicans (5.9% of statements against 0.9%). 1.6% of Republican and 1.4% 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 Pennsylvania’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, Pennsylvania: Personal attacks Democrats 5.9%, Republicans 0.9%; Policy criticism Democrats 34%, Republicans 14%; Policy discussion Democrats 71%, Republicans 67%; Bipartisanship Democrats 8.4%, Republicans 15%; Credit claiming Democrats 18%, Republicans 37%; Extreme labels Democrats 1.4%, Republicans 1.6%.
MeasureDemocratsRepublicans
Personal attacks5.9%0.9%
Policy criticism34%14%
Policy discussion71%67%
Bipartisanship8.4%15%
Credit claiming18%37%
Extreme labels1.4%1.6%
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 Pennsylvania’s congressional delegation, the current term

Both parties’ personal-attack rates change with the venue. Democrats run from 5.7% of their posts on X to 8.1% of their newsletters; Republicans from 0.5% of their floor speeches to 1.9% of their newsletters.

0%5%10%Posts on X17,153 statementsPress releases1,754 statementsNewsletters1,069 statementsFloor speeches1,476 statements5.7%7.2%8.1%6.6%DemocratsDemocrats0.9%0.9%1.9%0.5%RepublicansRepublicans
Show the data
Slope chart of each party’s personal-attack rate across four venues, the current term. Democrats: posts on x 5.7%, press releases 7.2%, newsletters 8.1%, floor speeches 6.6%. Republicans: posts on x 0.9%, press releases 0.9%, newsletters 1.9%, floor speeches 0.5%.
VenueDemocrats: personal attacksDemocrats: statementsRepublicans: personal attacksRepublicans: statements
Posts on X5.7%93510.9%7802
Press releases7.2%8700.9%884
Newsletters8.1%2951.9%774
Floor speeches6.6%3790.5%1097
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 80% of the 21,452 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 −0.96 and the median Republican +0.87 on the CSIP scale, a gap of 1.84. The gap widened from 1.72 in the 113th Congress to 1.84 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 −1.0Republicansmedian +0.9
Show the data
CSIP distributions of 8 Democrats (median −0.96) and 11 Republicans (median +0.87) on one scale from −2 to +2.
GroupOfficialsMedian
Democrats8−1.0
Republicans11+0.9

Medians: Democrats −0.96, Republicans +0.87. Gap: 1.84.

Gap between the party medians

Members of each Congress

113th Congress (2013–14): 1.721.72113th114th Congress (2015–16): 1.721.72114th115th Congress (2017–18): 1.691.69115th116th Congress (2019–20): 1.851.85116th117th Congress (2021–22): 1.901.90117th118th Congress (2023–24): 1.841.84118th119th Congress (2025–26): 1.841.84119th
Show the data
Gap between the Democratic and Republican CSIP medians: 113th Congress (2013–14) 1.72, 114th Congress (2015–16) 1.72, 115th Congress (2017–18) 1.69, 116th Congress (2019–20) 1.85, 117th Congress (2021–22) 1.90, 118th Congress (2023–24) 1.84, 119th Congress (2025–26) 1.84.
ItemValue
113th Congress (2013–14)1.72
114th Congress (2015–16)1.72
115th Congress (2017–18)1.69
116th Congress (2019–20)1.85
117th Congress (2021–22)1.90
118th Congress (2023–24)1.84
119th Congress (2025–26)1.84
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

Armed Forces and National Security led in Sep ’26, named in 23% of policy statements. Government Operations and Politics rose most from Aug ’26 (+5.6 pts); Crime and Law Enforcement fell most (−3.7 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

702 policy statements; change since Aug ’26 in grey

  1. Armed Forces and National Security23% +3.8 pts
  2. Government Operations and Politics22% +5.6 pts
  3. Health20% +2.4 pts
  4. Economics and Public Finance19% −3.5 pts
  5. Labor and Employment12% −0.1 pts

Rising

Up most since Aug ’26

  1. Government Operations and Politics+5.6 pts
  2. Armed Forces and National Security+3.8 pts
  3. Energy+3.2 pts

Falling

Down most since Aug ’26

  1. Crime and Law Enforcement−3.7 pts
  2. Economics and Public Finance−3.5 pts
  3. Commerce−2.4 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

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 3.6% and the median incumbent’s 0.8%; 4 of 6 challengers post personal attacks more often than the incumbent they face and 1 less often, across 6 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 · 6 incumbents, 6 challengers · rates above 20% are drawn at the edge

0%5%10%15%20%+Incumbentsmedian 0.8%Challengersmedian 3.6%
Show the data
Every candidate in the comparison
RaceCandidatePartyStatusPosts on XPersonal attacks
Pennsylvania 10th DistrictScott PerryRepublicansIncumbent4104.6%
Pennsylvania 10th DistrictJanelle StelsonDemocratsChallenger5375.8%
Pennsylvania 11th DistrictLloyd SmuckerRepublicansIncumbent4650.4%
Pennsylvania 11th DistrictNancy MannionDemocratsChallenger1581.3%
Pennsylvania 12th DistrictSummer LeeDemocratsIncumbent6084.1%
Pennsylvania 12th DistrictJames HayesRepublicansChallenger5432.8%
Pennsylvania 14th DistrictGuy ReschenthalerRepublicansIncumbent150.0%
Pennsylvania 14th DistrictDavid BradstockDemocratsChallenger780.0%
Pennsylvania 7th DistrictRyan MackenzieRepublicansIncumbent4390.0%
Pennsylvania 7th DistrictBob BrooksDemocratsChallenger58911.5%
Pennsylvania 9th DistrictDaniel MeuserRepublicansIncumbent7561.2%
Pennsylvania 9th DistrictRachel WallaceDemocratsChallenger3404.4%

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

Pennsylvania 7th District

Ryan Mackenzie (R), 439 posts · Bob Brooks (D), 589 posts

Pennsylvania 9th District

Daniel Meuser (R), 756 posts · Rachel Wallace (D), 340 posts

Pennsylvania 12th District

Summer Lee (D), 608 posts · James Hayes (R), 543 posts

Pennsylvania 10th District

Scott Perry (R), 410 posts · Janelle Stelson (D), 537 posts

Pennsylvania 11th District

Lloyd Smucker (R), 465 posts · Nancy Mannion (D), 158 posts

Show the data
The races shown, incumbent and challenger
RaceIncumbentRatePostsChallengerRatePostsGap (points)
Pennsylvania 7th DistrictRyan Mackenzie (Republican)0.0%439Bob Brooks (Democrat)11.5%589+11.5
Pennsylvania 9th DistrictDaniel Meuser (Republican)1.2%756Rachel Wallace (Democrat)4.4%340+3.2
Pennsylvania 12th DistrictSummer Lee (Democrat)4.1%608James Hayes (Republican)2.8%543−1.3
Pennsylvania 10th DistrictScott Perry (Republican)4.6%410Janelle Stelson (Democrat)5.8%537+1.1
Pennsylvania 11th DistrictLloyd Smucker (Republican)0.4%465Nancy Mannion (Democrat)1.3%158+0.8

Back to top