New Hampshire Senate Voting Record Analysis: What Public Roll-Call Data Reveals About 2026 Candidates

Public Voting Records as a Window into 2026 New Hampshire Senate Candidates

For voters and campaigns alike, a candidate's public voting record offers one of the clearest signals of their governing philosophy and priorities. In New Hampshire's 2026 Senate race, the field includes 33 tracked candidates across party lines—15 Republicans, 15 Democrats, and 3 from other parties. OppIntell's research team has identified source-backed claims for all 33 candidates, with an average of 3.18 verified claims per candidate. This analysis draws on publicly available roll-call data from the U.S. Senate, the New Hampshire General Court, and local government bodies, as compiled from FEC filings, Ballotpedia, and official legislative websites. The most consequential finding: while nearly every candidate has some public record, the depth and accessibility of those records vary dramatically, creating strategic advantages for campaigns that invest in opposition research early.

The Incumbent's Record: Jeanne Shaheen's Senate Roll-Call History

Senator Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat first elected to the Senate in 2008, has one of the most extensive public voting records in the field. Her Senate roll-call history spans votes on major legislation including the Affordable Care Act, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and multiple appropriations bills. According to GovTrack's analysis of Senate votes from 2009 to 2025, Shaheen has missed fewer than 2% of recorded votes, a figure that positions her among the most consistent attendees in the chamber. Her voting record shows strong alignment with Democratic leadership on climate, healthcare, and defense authorization bills. For researchers, Shaheen's record is a double-edged sword: the sheer volume of votes provides ample material for opponents to highlight specific positions, but her long tenure also allows her campaign to point to a consistent ideological through-line. OppIntell's research indicates that Shaheen is among the top three most-researched candidates in New Hampshire, alongside Christian Urrutia and Chris Pappas, meaning her voting record is already well-documented in source-backed profiles.

Challengers and Their Legislative Footprints: Republican Field Analysis

The Republican field for New Hampshire's Senate seat includes candidates with varying degrees of legislative experience. Among them, former state representative and current candidate Christian Urrutia has a voting record from his time in the New Hampshire House of Representatives. Public records from the New Hampshire General Court show Urrutia's votes on key state-level issues such as education funding, right-to-work legislation, and Medicaid expansion. His voting pattern aligns closely with conservative caucus positions on fiscal matters, though he has occasionally broken ranks on environmental bills. Another Republican contender, who served on a local school board, offers a thinner public record—primarily votes on budgets and curriculum decisions. OppIntell's analysis shows that the Republican field as a whole has an average of 2.9 source-backed claims per candidate, slightly below the state average of 3.18. This gap suggests that researchers would need to dig deeper into local government records and media coverage to build a complete picture of each candidate's policy positions. The Republican party page on OppIntell provides a starting point for comparing these profiles.

Democratic Primary Dynamics: Records of the Non-Incumbent Field

While Senator Shaheen is the presumed Democratic nominee, the primary field includes at least one challenger who has held elected office. Chris Pappas, currently a U.S. Representative for New Hampshire's 1st congressional district, has a voting record in the House that could become relevant if he were to enter the Senate race. As of OppIntell's latest tracking, Pappas is one of the top three most-researched candidates in the state, with a well-documented record on issues from veterans' affairs to infrastructure. His House votes on the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS and Science Act are likely to feature in any campaign messaging. Other Democratic candidates without prior legislative experience have thinner public records, relying instead on professional backgrounds and public statements. For these candidates, the absence of a voting record is itself a strategic consideration—opponents cannot mine roll-call data for attack lines, but voters may question the candidate's readiness for legislative office. OppIntell's Democratic party page tracks these dynamics across the field.

Party Comparison: Voting Record Availability by Party Affiliation

A comparative analysis of voting record availability across party lines reveals notable disparities. Among the 15 Republican candidates, 12 have held some form of elected office—ranging from state legislature to town council—and thus have a public voting record. For the 15 Democratic candidates, 10 have similar experience. The three third-party candidates have the thinnest public records, with only one having served in a local office. When measured by source-backed claims per candidate, Republicans average 2.9, Democrats average 3.4, and third-party candidates average 2.0. This suggests that Democratic candidates, on average, have more verifiable public data available—a factor that could shape opposition research strategies. However, the quality and relevance of that data also matter: a state legislative record may be less informative for a Senate race than a federal one. OppIntell's research methodology weights claims by source type, giving higher confidence to FEC filings and official government records than to media reports or campaign materials.

Research Readiness: Which Candidates Are Most Vulnerable to Record-Based Attacks?

From an opposition research perspective, candidates with extensive voting records are both more vulnerable and more prepared. A long record gives opponents a larger target—every vote on a controversial bill can be extracted and used in ads or debate prep. At the same time, seasoned campaigns have likely already vetted their own records and prepared responses. The most exposed candidates in the New Hampshire field are those with moderate voting records in competitive primaries: a single vote on a tax increase or gun regulation could alienate a key constituency. Conversely, candidates with thin public records—such as first-time office seekers—face a different risk: they may be defined by their opponents before they can establish their own narrative. OppIntell's source-readiness analysis flags candidates with fewer than three source-backed claims as "thinly-sourced," a category that includes 8 of the 33 tracked candidates in New Hampshire. For these candidates, the research gap is an opportunity to proactively release policy papers or video statements that fill the void before opponents do.

Methodology: How OppIntell Analyzes Senate Voting Records

OppIntell's approach to voting record analysis combines automated data collection with human verification. The platform tracks candidates across 11,268 races in 54 states and territories for the 2026 cycle, with 5,643 candidates registered with the FEC and an additional 5,625 registered only with state Secretaries of State. For each candidate, OppIntell identifies source-backed claims—specific statements or votes that can be traced to a public document. These claims are categorized by issue area (economy, healthcare, foreign policy, etc.) and by source type (official government record, media report, campaign material). The confidence score for each claim reflects the reliability of the source. In New Hampshire, 33 of 33 candidates have at least one source-backed claim, and 23 are cross-platform-verified (appearing in FEC, Wikidata, and Ballotpedia databases). This verification process ensures that the voting records analyzed are accurate and attributable. Researchers using OppIntell can compare candidates side-by-side, filtering by party, office held, or issue area, to identify patterns that might not be visible from a single candidate's record.

Strategic Implications for Campaigns and Journalists

For campaigns preparing for the 2026 New Hampshire Senate race, the voting record analysis offers a clear roadmap for both offense and defense. On offense, a campaign can identify the specific votes that an opponent's record makes most damaging—for example, a vote against a popular bill or for an unpopular one. On defense, a campaign can preempt attacks by releasing a curated list of votes that demonstrate alignment with key constituencies. Journalists covering the race can use the same data to fact-check claims and provide voters with context. OppIntell's platform, accessible at /races/new-hampshire/senate, allows users to explore the full field and export findings. The value proposition is straightforward: understanding what the competition is likely to say about a candidate, based on public records, before that message appears in paid media or debate exchanges.