[CAPTURE PORTAL] 119TH CONGRESS

// Legislative Integrity Monitor

Goblin House Intelligence

Jimmy Panetta

Democratic · Representative, CA ·19

Score Components

31 ELEVATED

Connection Density 20%

0 → 0

Donor Influence 10%

0 → 0

Silence Risk 25%

20 → 5

Contradiction Risk 25%

82 → 21

Intelligence Volume 10%

54 → 5

Constituency Deviation 5%

0 → 0

Voting Misalignment 5%

0 → 0

% = weight in composite score · Raw component 0–100 × weight = weighted contribution (→) · Sum of contributions = overall score. Hover a row for details.

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Cook Partisan Voting Index: D+39

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Citizenship Rate: 90.9%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Median Age: 41.5

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Asian Population Share: 19.2%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Hispanic Population Share: 25%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: White (Non-Hispanic) Share: 47.8%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Foreign-Born Population: 23.3%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Bachelor's Degree or Higher: 47.9%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Median Property Value: $1,110,000

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Homeownership Rate: 64.7%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Poverty Rate: 8.61%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Median Household Income: $126,610

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Ballot measure: Santa Cruz County Measure K — Affordable Housing Bond (2024) (2024) — passed, margin 67%-33%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Ballot measure: California Proposition 33 — Expand Local Rent Control (2024) (2024) — failed, margin 62%-38%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Ballot measure: California Proposition 3 — Marriage Rights Protections (2024) (2024) — passed, margin 63%-37%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Dominant industry: NAICS 72 (Accommodation and Food Services) (share 0.093)

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Dominant industry: NAICS 44-45 (Retail Trade) (share 0.101)

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Dominant industry: NAICS 31-33 (Manufacturing) (share 0.109)

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Dominant industry: NAICS 54 (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services) (share 0.124)

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Dominant industry: NAICS 62 (Health Care and Social Assistance) (share 0.124)

secondary

No connections mapped

Bill	Vote	Date	Alignment
District of Columbia Federal Immigration Compliance Act	nay	2025-06-12	aligned
Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act — 'Nonprofit Ki	yea_unverified	2024-11-21	misaligned
Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act (FIT21) — crypto re	yea_unverified	2024-05-22	aligned
Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024 — $26 billion in military	yea_unverified	2024-04-20	aligned

Last contradiction analysis: Never

platform_vs_vote 90/100

Platform: "Panetta's 2016 campaign pledge: 'I won't take any money-not even 1 penny-from Wall Street or corporate PACs. Congress has been up for sale for too lon"

Vote: on "In the 2023-2024 cycle, 52.31% of Panetta's campaign funds ($1,368,471) came from PAC contributions,"

Panetta's signature anti-corruption pledge to reject corporate PAC money is contradicted by his acceptance of $1,368,471 in PAC contributions (52.31% of his 2024 cycle fundraising), including from major defense contractors and industry PACs. His camp

same_source_inconsistency 30/100

Platform: "At a 2025 town hall, Panetta defended receiving AIPAC money by saying he uses the funds to help other Democrats get elected and that he 'is not influe"

Vote: on "Panetta voted for the Israel Security Supplemental (H.R. 8034) on April 20, 2024 providing $26 billi"

Both quotes come from the same secondary source (the Green Party/reporting on AIPAC contributions). Panetta claimed at a town hall that he is not influenced by AIPAC donations, yet he received a record $143,055 from AIPAC on December 31, 2023, and th

same_source_inconsistency 30/100

Platform: "Panetta voted YES on five Republican bills that overrode D.C. self-governance and expanded carceral policy in 2025 (H.R. 884, H.R. 2096, H.R. 4922, H."

Vote: on "Panetta represents a solidly Democratic district (D+39) that elected him to champion progressive val"

Both quotes come from the same secondary source (PG Progressives wrap-up). Panetta's votes to override D.C. home rule are presented alongside the observation that his solidly Democratic district expects progressive leadership — creating a tension bet

Last silence detection: Never

No-corporate-PAC pledge vs. 52% PAC-funded campaign

1216d silent

Expected position: Panetta's 2016 campaign pledged not to take corporate PAC money, and his Vote Smart profile stated 'I won't take any money-not even 1 penny-from Wall Street or corporate PACs.' With

Accepting $511K crypto PAC support while criticizing Trump crypto profiteering

492d silent

Expected position: Panetta voted for four pro-crypto bills (FIT21, GENIUS Act, CLARITY Act, H.J.Res.25) following substantial crypto industry spending in his race. Constituents would expect him to rec

No donor interests mapped

No constituency baseline modelled

No platform commitments archived

No committee memberships recorded

Scoring Methodology

The Capture Risk Score is a composite 0–100 index measuring potential regulatory capture of elected officials. It is computed from seven weighted components:

Component	Weight	Signal
Silence Risk	25%	Topics where donors have interests but the official is silent
Contradiction Risk	25%	Stated positions contradicted by voting record (recent findings boosted)
Connection Density	20%	Mapped relationships to lobbyists, contractors, interest groups
Intelligence Volume	10%	Documented facts from verified sources (logarithmic scale)
Donor Influence	10%	Distinct donors with interests overlapping committee jurisdiction
Constituency Deviation	5%	Gap between district priorities and legislative focus
Voting Misalignment	5%	Floor votes contradicting stated platform positions

Each component produces a raw score 0–100. The weighted sum yields the overall score. Tier thresholds: Critical ≥ 45, High ≥ 36, Elevated ≥ 22, Moderate ≥ 10, Low < 10.

Officials without at least 2 documented facts, 1 contradiction analysis, 1 voting record, or 1 constituency baseline are marked Insufficient Evidence and excluded from numeric ranking.

Contradiction findings from the last 180 days receive a recency boost. High-severity contradictions (score ≥ 70) receive additional weight.

Full methodology: /congress/methodology

View Full Entity Profile →