The National Republican Party Platform Ratings were developed through an independent research initiative conducted by the Institute for Legislative Analysis (ILA), the non-profit (501(c)(3)) sister organization of the Institute for Legislative Advocacy. The ILA possesses the most extensive and detailed dataset of ideological positions and legislative policies ever compiled concerning the U.S. Congress, and its data serves a wide array of purposes, including academic research, advocacy, and opposition research for political candidates.

To construct the Republican platform ratings, ILA’s team of experienced research analysts undertook a comprehensive review of congressional records. This involved analyzing thousands of pages of congressional journals, legislative texts, fiscal notes, and official documents to identify every substantive roll call vote related to the Republican platform. Due to current limitations of artificial intelligence in interpreting complex policy issues – such as amendments, procedural motions, and nuanced legislative language – this process relied heavily on manual analysis by trained analysts, ensuring the greatest accuracy and context.

In contrast to traditional “scorecards” produced by think tanks or advocacy groups – which often select a limited subset of votes – this methodology includes all pertinent votes, thus preventing cherry-picking and providing a holistic picture of congressional actions. Furthermore, the ILA system utilizes legislation as its reference point, eliminating the inaccuracies of other statistical evaluation methods, such as “DW NOMINATE”. Such methods measure ideology based on how frequently lawmakers vote with or against each other but fail to account for many nuances, such as when progressives and conservatives are both aligned in opposition to a policy but for entirely different reasons.

To appropriately reflect the significance of each vote, a simple weighting system was employed on a scale of 1 to 3. This scale balances granularity with clarity, avoiding excessive subjectivity while capturing the varying policy impacts of different votes – ranging from minor appropriations to major legislative actions.

Together, these validation steps aimed to produce the most unbiased and precise measurement of lawmaker ideology to date.

Lawmakers are assessed not only on an overall adherence score but also across each of the ten articles comprising the Republican platform. This multi-dimensional approach provides a nuanced understanding of where individual legislators align most closely with, or diverge from, the party’s official positions.

In addition, the analysis aggregates individual scores to generate Congressional Delegation Scores, enabling comprehensive comparisons across states and regions. This granular breakdown facilitates a clearer view of ideological trends and regional differences within the party.