117th Congress: scored on the current twelve-axis methodology using 2020-cycle financial data and 117th-Congress voting/committee data. Off-cycle senators (Sanders, Schumer, Paul) show artificially low scores because their election activity falls outside 2020.
The 117th Congress of the United States
56.1
average exposure to donor influence
Every member of Congress takes money. The question is whether it changes how they vote. This Index answers that question, member by member, score by score.
Most exposed
Highest exposure to donor influence. Voting patterns, contribution timing, and financial ties most closely track the money behind them.
Highly exposed
Significant financial ties. Industry funding, lobbying access, and vote alignment indicate meaningful exposure.
Moderately exposed
Takes money, but the patterns linking it to voting behavior and policy are weaker.
Least exposed
Minimal financial ties suggesting donor influence on their votes.
Contributions timed to legislative action12,307,460
Dollars timed to legislative action$73.50B
Funding networks detected from raw filings2,296
Dark money entities identified137
Dark money share of outside spending22%
Congressional trades analyzed2,864
Scoring categories per member10
— ◊ —
The Index scores every member on twelve categories: direct contributions, outside spending, lobbying inside the policy areas they regulate, revolving-door lobbying access, vote alignment with funders, contribution timing around legislative action, dark-money concentration in outside spending, stock trades inside the industries they regulate, money distributed to other members, the breadth of a member's funding networks, committee jurisdiction power, and Israel-policy PAC money. Evidence of capture — how members vote, when money arrives, and whether they trade in the sectors they regulate — carries more weight than the money itself.