What it bought

Voters vs. funders

On 12 key bills, a national survey asked the public about the same policy Congress voted on. For each member we compare three things: what most people surveyed in their district or state wanted, what the industries that funded them wanted, and how they voted. The ones to watch are the votes where those two pulled in opposite directions.
Constituent views come from the Cooperative Election Study, a survey of about 60,000 adults a year. A side counts as what constituents wanted only when it leads by more than the margin of error; closer results are shown as split. Party explains most votes, and none of this shows that money changed a vote.

Votes with a clear constituent view

3,043

member votes on 16 roll calls

Voted the way constituents wanted

64%

1,939 of 3,043

Funders and voters disagreed

814

votes where $10K+ industry funders wanted the other side

Sided with funders

44%

356 of those 814 votes

By party

Both parties take money from industries that wanted the unpopular side of these bills. Which side won out splits almost entirely on party lines, so the rankings below mostly sort members by party. The bills covered are limited to those the survey asked about; adding more would change the mix.
PartyWith constituentsFunder-voter conflictsSided with funders
Democrats88%4391 (0%)
Republicans40%373355 (95%)

Funders over voters

Members who most often voted their funders' way when most of their constituents wanted the opposite. At least 2 such votes.
  1. 1Chip RoyTX5 of 5with voters 38% overall
  2. 2Jim BanksIN4 of 4with voters 36% overall
  3. 3John CurtisUT4 of 4with voters 25% overall
  4. 4Tommy TubervilleAL4 of 4with voters 20% overall
  5. 5Bill CassidyLA3 of 3with voters 50% overall
  6. 6Bill HagertyTN3 of 3with voters 33% overall
  7. 7Billy LongMO3 of 3with voters 0% overall
  8. 8Markwayne MullinOK3 of 3with voters 29% overall
  9. 9Matthew RosendaleMT3 of 3with voters 0% overall
  10. 10Mike GarciaCA3 of 3with voters 0% overall
  11. 11Roger MarshallKS3 of 3with voters 33% overall
  12. 12Shelley CapitoWV3 of 3with voters 50% overall
  13. 13Steve DainesMT3 of 3with voters 0% overall
  14. 14Steve ScaliseLA3 of 3with voters 57% overall
  15. 15Ted BuddNC3 of 3with voters 14% overall
  16. 16Tom CottonAR3 of 3with voters 40% overall
  17. 17Yvette HerrellNM3 of 3with voters 0% overall
  18. 18Dan SullivanAK3 of 4with voters 50% overall
  19. 19John CornynTX3 of 4with voters 43% overall
  20. 20Joni ErnstIA3 of 4with voters 43% overall
  21. 21Lindsey GrahamSC3 of 4with voters 40% overall
  22. 22Mitch McConnellKY3 of 4with voters 43% overall
  23. 23Thom TillisNC3 of 4with voters 17% overall
  24. 24Adrian SmithNE2 of 2with voters 20% overall
  25. 25Alexander MooneyWV2 of 2with voters 33% overall

Voters over funders

Members who most often voted with their constituents against the industries funding them.
  1. 1Adam SchiffCA4 of 4with voters 91% overall
  2. 2Andy KimNJ4 of 4with voters 80% overall
  3. 3Debbie DingellMI4 of 4with voters 100% overall
  4. 4Lisa Blunt RochesterDE4 of 4with voters 89% overall
  5. 5Peter WelchVT4 of 4with voters 100% overall
  6. 6Ben LujánNM3 of 3with voters 80% overall
  7. 7Christopher CoonsDE3 of 3with voters 83% overall
  8. 8Dwight EvansPA3 of 3with voters 100% overall
  9. 9Edward MarkeyMA3 of 3with voters 83% overall
  10. 10Gary PetersMI3 of 3with voters 71% overall
  11. 11Jeanne ShaheenNH3 of 3with voters 83% overall
  12. 12Jeff MerkleyOR3 of 3with voters 100% overall
  13. 13John ReedRI3 of 3with voters 100% overall
  14. 14Jon OssoffGA3 of 3with voters 71% overall
  15. 15Mark KellyAZ3 of 3with voters 71% overall
  16. 16Raphael WarnockGA3 of 3with voters 71% overall
  17. 17Richard DurbinIL3 of 3with voters 71% overall
  18. 18Ruben GallegoAZ3 of 3with voters 78% overall
  19. 19Suzanne BonamiciOR3 of 3with voters 100% overall
  20. 20Tina SmithMN3 of 3with voters 83% overall
  21. 21A. McEachinVA2 of 2with voters 100% overall
  22. 22Abigail SpanbergerVA2 of 2with voters 67% overall
  23. 23Adam SmithWA2 of 2with voters 100% overall
  24. 24Adriano EspaillatNY2 of 2with voters 83% overall
  25. 25Al LawsonFL2 of 2with voters 100% overall

The votes and the questions

Each roll call next to the survey question it is read against. National support is from the full survey; members are judged on their own district or state.
VoteSurvey questionNational supportVoted against their constituents
Most-favored-nation drug pricingSenate · 2026-04-23 · 49–49“Allow the government to negotiate with drug companies to get a lower price on prescription drugs, for Medicare and private insurance, capped at 120% of the average price in 6 other countries”CES 2022 · asks about this bill's policy · a Yea matches support · Both tie U.S. drug prices to what other rich countries pay.86%48 of 9746 with funders on the other side
ACA enhanced premium tax creditsSenate · 2025-12-11 · 51–48“Repeal the Affordable Care Act”CES 2024 · related question · a Yea matches opposition · The vote extended ACA premium help; the question asks about repealing the ACA altogether.40%17 of 620 with funders on the other side
ANWR coastal plain leasingSenate · 2025-12-04 · 49–45“Halt new oil and gas leases on federal lands”CES 2024 · related question · a Yea matches opposition · A Yea opened the Arctic refuge to leasing, the opposite of halting new federal leases.45%14 of 570 with funders on the other side
ANWR coastal plain leasingHouse · 2025-11-18 · 217–209“Halt new oil and gas leases on federal lands”CES 2024 · related question · a Yea matches opposition · A Yea opened the Arctic refuge to leasing, the opposite of halting new federal leases.45%10 of 1071 with funders on the other side
One Big Beautiful Bill ActHouse · 2025-07-03 · 218–214“Extend the tax cuts enacted in 2017, which reduced individual and corporate income tax rates”CES 2024 · related question · a Yea matches support · The bill's centerpiece made the 2017 tax cuts permanent; it also cut Medicaid and clean-energy credits, which the question does not cover.63%90 of 2520 with funders on the other side
One Big Beautiful Bill ActSenate · 2025-07-01 · 50–50“Extend the tax cuts enacted in 2017, which reduced individual and corporate income tax rates”CES 2024 · related question · a Yea matches support · The bill's centerpiece made the 2017 tax cuts permanent; it also cut Medicaid and clean-energy credits, which the question does not cover.63%38 of 860 with funders on the other side
Halve Medicare drug prices (Sanders)Senate · 2025-07-01 · 47–53“Allow the government to negotiate with drug companies to get a lower price on prescription drugs, for Medicare and private insurance, capped at 120% of the average price in 6 other countries”CES 2022 · related question · a Yea matches support · The amendment cut Medicare drug prices; the question asks about negotiating them down.86%53 of 10051 with funders on the other side
Lower Energy Costs ActHouse · 2023-03-30 · 225–204“Increase fossil fuel production in the U.S.”CES 2024 · related question · a Yea matches support · H.R. 1 expanded oil, gas and coal production on federal land and sped up permits.57%17 of 1420 with funders on the other side
Strategic Production Response ActHouse · 2023-01-27 · 221–205“Increase fossil fuel production in the U.S.”CES 2024 · related question · a Yea matches support · The bill tied reserve sales to more drilling on federal land.57%13 of 1390 with funders on the other side
Inflation Reduction ActHouse · 2022-08-12 · 220–207“Spend $369 billion on tax credits for solar, wind and batteries; lower ACA premiums; cut the deficit by $300 billion by letting Medicare negotiate some drug prices and changing the tax code (the Inflation Reduction Act)”CES 2022 · asks about this bill's policy · a Yea matches support · CES asked about the Inflation Reduction Act by its contents.66%102 of 30288 with funders on the other side
Inflation Reduction ActSenate · 2022-08-07 · 50–50“Spend $369 billion on tax credits for solar, wind and batteries; lower ACA premiums; cut the deficit by $300 billion by letting Medicare negotiate some drug prices and changing the tax code (the Inflation Reduction Act)”CES 2022 · asks about this bill's policy · a Yea matches support · CES asked about the Inflation Reduction Act by its contents.66%39 of 8815 with funders on the other side
Assault Weapons Ban of 2022House · 2022-07-29 · 217–213“Ban assault rifles”CES 2022 · asks about this bill's policy · a Yea matches support60%41 of 2321 with funders on the other side
Safer Communities Act (post-Uvalde)House · 2022-06-24 · 234–193“Increase spending on mental health and school safety, allow police to take guns from people a judge deems dangerous, bar people convicted of domestic violence from owning guns, and enhance background checks on minors”CES 2024 · asks about this bill's policy · a Yea matches support · The question lists the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act's main provisions.86%193 of 4277 with funders on the other side
Safer Communities Act (post-Uvalde)Senate · 2022-06-23 · 65–33“Increase spending on mental health and school safety, allow police to take guns from people a judge deems dangerous, bar people convicted of domestic violence from owning guns, and enhance background checks on minors”CES 2024 · asks about this bill's policy · a Yea matches support · The question lists the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act's main provisions.86%33 of 983 with funders on the other side
Affordable Insulin Now ActHouse · 2022-03-31 · 232–193“Allow the government to negotiate with drug companies to get a lower price on prescription drugs, for Medicare and private insurance, capped at 120% of the average price in 6 other countries”CES 2022 · related question · a Yea matches support · The question asks about lowering drug prices by negotiation, not the $35 insulin cap itself.86%193 of 424135 with funders on the other side
Bipartisan Background Checks ActHouse · 2021-03-11 · 227–203“Require criminal background checks on all gun sales”CES 2024 · asks about this bill's policy · a Yea matches support · H.R. 8 required background checks on nearly all gun sales.92%203 of 4309 with funders on the other side

How this works

What is measured, and what is not.
  • Constituents. The Cooperative Election Study surveys about 60,000 adults each election year and records their state and congressional district. We weight answers with the study's own weights. House members are judged on their district when at least 100 people there answered and the survey has the district lines in force for that Congress; otherwise on their state, and the page says so. A district or state counts as wanting a side only when that side leads by more than the 95% margin of error.
  • Funders. Each key vote names the industries with a stated side. A member counts as funded when that industry's PACs and outside groups put at least $10K behind them in election cycles held before the vote.
  • What it does not show. Survey questions are not bill text. Where the wording differs we mark it as a related question. Party is the strongest predictor of how a member votes, and these comparisons do not show that money changed any vote. All the contributions are legal and publicly reported.
  • Not covered yet. Crypto, Israel, labor, defense and banking votes have no matching survey question, so they are left out here. Campaign promises come next.

Sources: Cooperative Election Study 2022 (Schaffner, Ansolabehere & Shih), Harvard Dataverse · Cooperative Election Study 2024 (Schaffner, Ansolabehere & Shih), Harvard Dataverse · Voteview member files (district lines per Congress).