Skip to main content
PTP

Money-Vote Gap

Leaderboard

Two views into the gap between PAC dollars in and votes out. Members ranks (member, industry) cells by how far the member's Yes-rate diverges from the median for their own party in the same chamber. Bills ranks bills by revealed-preference subterfuge — industries lobbying to pass the bill while not appearing in its stated subject tags.Methodology →

#MemberIndustryPAC $Yes / nParty Δ (95% CI)Chamber ΔConfidence
176Ashley Moody
R-FL · Senate
Agriculture$50k38% (8)-10[-35, +21]-22vs 60%CI ∋ 0
177Dan Crenshaw
R-TX · House
Electric utilities$50k73% (40)-10[-26, +1]-7vs 80%CI ∋ 0
178Dan Newhouse
R-WA · House
Construction$155k60% (20)-10[-31, +8]-5vs 65%CI ∋ 0
179Angie Craig
D-MN · House
Banking$167k55% (22)+10[-10, +28]-23vs 78%CI ∋ 0
180Ben Cline
R-VA · House
Tech$96k77% (30)-10[-28, +1]-6vs 83%CI ∋ 0
181Bill Huizenga
R-MI · House
Construction$160k60% (20)-10[-31, +8]-5vs 65%CI ∋ 0
182Carlos Gimenez
R-FL · House
Construction$68k60% (20)-10[-31, +8]-5vs 65%CI ∋ 0
183Bradley Schneider
D-IL · House
Banking$100k55% (22)+10[-10, +28]-23vs 78%CI ∋ 0
184Chris Pappas
D-NH · House
Banking$150k55% (22)+10[-10, +28]-23vs 78%CI ∋ 0
185Chris Pappas
D-NH · House
Construction$50k60% (20)+10[-11, +28]-5vs 65%CI ∋ 0
186Chuck Edwards
R-NC · House
Construction$225k60% (20)-10[-31, +8]-5vs 65%CI ∋ 0
187Cynthia Lummis
R-WY · Senate
Transportation$200k44% (27)-10[-26, +9]-21vs 65%CI ∋ 0
188Dale Strong
R-AL · House
Construction$175k60% (20)-10[-31, +8]-5vs 65%CI ∋ 0
189Darren Soto
D-FL · House
Tech$155k67% (30)+10[-8, +24]-16vs 83%CI ∋ 0
190Darren Soto
D-FL · House
Banking$150k55% (22)+10[-10, +28]-23vs 78%CI ∋ 0
191Derek Tran
D-CA · House
Banking$150k55% (22)+10[-10, +28]-23vs 78%CI ∋ 0
192Ed Case
D-HI · House
Banking$95k55% (22)+10[-10, +28]-23vs 78%CI ∋ 0
193Elise Stefanik
R-NY · House
Construction$100k60% (20)-10[-31, +8]-5vs 65%CI ∋ 0
194Mariannette Miller-Meeks
R-IA · House
Construction$50k60% (20)-10[-31, +8]-5vs 65%CI ∋ 0
195Mark Messmer
R-IN · House
Tech$60k77% (30)-10[-28, +1]-6vs 83%CI ∋ 0
196Mark Messmer
R-IN · House
Construction$140k60% (20)-10[-31, +8]-5vs 65%CI ∋ 0
197Joyce Beatty
D-OH · House
Financial services$590k25% (12)-9[-25, +19]-58vs 83%CI ∋ 0
198André Carson
D-IN · House
Pharmaceutical$50k33% (9)-9[-30, +23]-21vs 54%CI ∋ 0
199Dina Titus
D-NV · House
Pharmaceutical$50k33% (9)-9[-30, +23]-21vs 54%CI ∋ 0
200Brad Knott
R-NC · House
Banking$70k77% (22)-9[-29, +4]-1vs 78%CI ∋ 0

Members tab — Party Δ (primary) = member's Yes% − party median Yes% on the same industry's bills (same chamber, same cycle), with Wilson 95% confidence bounds. Chamber Δ (secondary, dim) = member's Yes% − chamber median Yes%. Chamber Δ is partisan-biased when the chamber has a partisan majority; shown for context but ranking uses Party Δ.

Sorting: rows are ranked by the lower bound of |Party Δ| at 95% confidence — i.e. the minimum deviation we can claim given the sample size. When the confidence interval on Party Δ crosses zero, the row is marked CI ∋ 0: the direction of the deviation is not confidently signed and the row ranks below all cells with a confidently-signed deviation. This kills the small-sample noise floor that point-estimate ranking lets through.

Confidence column: CI ∋ 0 means direction not confidently signed (Wilson CI on the deviation crosses zero). Preliminary means the direction IS signed but the cell does not pass Benjamini-Hochberg FDR correction across all leaderboard cells — could be a false positive from running ~1500 tests; treat as suggestive. A severity label (Slight / Moderate / High / Extreme) means the cell is BOTH confidently signed AND passes FDR — the rigorous-stats-claim tier.

Min 5 votes per cell, ≥$1 in industry PAC dollars. Min 5 same-party members in the pool for Party Δ; rows below that floor show "low-n party" and rank by Chamber Δ. See docs/audits/mvg-partisan-median-artifact-2026-05-14.md (party-conditional fix) and docs/audits/mvg-wilson-ci-2026-05-15.md (Wilson CI rigor) for the methodology audits.

Bills tab: subterfuge_score = Σ over unstated supporters of (1 + log₁₀(filings)). See methodology for the full audit.