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
201Brendan Boyle
D-PA · House
Pharmaceutical$175k33% (9)-9[-30, +23]-21vs 54%CI ∋ 0
202Brendan Boyle
D-PA · House
Financial services$125k25% (12)-9[-25, +19]-58vs 83%CI ∋ 0
203Derek Tran
D-CA · House
Defense & aerospace$100k58% (43)+9[-6, +23]-19vs 77%CI ∋ 0
204Earl Carter
R-GA · House
Defense & aerospace$100k70% (10)-9[-39, +10]-7vs 77%CI ∋ 0
205Elise Stefanik
R-NY · House
Banking$50k77% (22)-9[-29, +4]-1vs 78%CI ∋ 0
206Lois Frankel
D-FL · House
Pharmaceutical$50k33% (9)-9[-30, +23]-21vs 54%CI ∋ 0
207Cynthia Lummis
R-WY · Senate
Oil & gas$250k75% (73)+9[-2, +17]+11vs 64%CI ∋ 0
208John Hickenlooper
D-CO · Senate
Health insurance$150k54% (61)-8[-21, +4]+2vs 53%CI ∋ 0
209Richard Hudson
R-NC · House
Pharmaceutical$160k63% (24)-8[-28, +8]+9vs 54%CI ∋ 0
210Dan Sullivan
R-AK · Senate
Banking$50k65% (69)-8[-20, +2]-5vs 70%CI ∋ 0
211Beth Van Duyne
R-TX · House
Banking$50k78% (9)-8[-41, +8]+0vs 78%CI ∋ 0
212Blake Moore
R-UT · House
Banking$125k78% (9)-8[-41, +8]+0vs 78%CI ∋ 0
213Jeff Merkley
D-OR · Senate
Auto$50k50% (48)+8[-6, +22]-13vs 63%CI ∋ 0
214Brad Knott
R-NC · House
Pharmaceutical$140k63% (24)-8[-28, +8]+9vs 54%CI ∋ 0
215Cynthia Lummis
R-WY · Senate
Renewable energy$50k68% (47)+8[-6, +20]+15vs 53%CI ∋ 0
216Daniel Meuser
R-PA · House
Pharmaceutical$50k63% (24)-8[-28, +8]+9vs 54%CI ∋ 0
217Darren Soto
D-FL · House
Electric utilities$125k33% (40)+8[-5, +23]-47vs 80%CI ∋ 0
218Darren Soto
D-FL · House
Pharmaceutical$55k50% (24)+8[-11, +27]-4vs 54%CI ∋ 0
219John Joyce
R-PA · House
Banking$100k78% (9)-8[-41, +8]+0vs 78%CI ∋ 0
220Don Bacon
R-NE · House
Telecom$50k87% (15)+8[-17, +17]+14vs 73%CI ∋ 0
221Andrew Garbarino
R-NY · House
Telecom$50k87% (15)+8[-17, +17]+14vs 73%CI ∋ 0
222Dan Crenshaw
R-TX · House
Oil & gas$150k74% (47)-7[-20, +4]-7vs 81%CI ∋ 0
223Dan Newhouse
R-WA · House
Defense & aerospace$175k72% (43)-7[-22, +4]-5vs 77%CI ∋ 0
224Angie Craig
D-MN · House
Telecom$135k67% (15)+7[-18, +25]-6vs 73%CI ∋ 0
225Blake Moore
R-UT · House
Financial services$150k83% (12)-7[-35, +5]+0vs 83%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.