The 30-second read · every claim links to its source
Votes with the Democratic majority 94% of the time - the 6 recent party breaks are the clearest signal of where Gottlieb actually stands. official roll calls
Advocacy groups split on the record - Americans for Prosperity - Florida scores it 73.53, Florida Chamber of Commerce 50% (2 published scorecards). published scorecards
Sponsored 14 bills and co-sponsored 29 on record; most recently HB 6517 “Relief/Heriberto A. Sanchez-Mayen/City of St. Petersburg” (Jul 1, 2026). bill records
What we don’t cover yet 1 gaps
What we don’t cover yet
Campaign finance filings for this office aren’t wired in yet - when they’re sourced, they’ll appear here.
The record
official roll calls · every vote links to the bill
94%
Votes with the Democratic majority.
Where both parties recorded a position on the same roll call, Gottlieb’s vote matched the Democratic position 94% of the time. That makes the 6 recent breaks the clearest signal of where Gottlieb actually stands - they’re first, below. official roll calls · Jun 2, 2026
1,450 votes · 1,113 yes · 230 no · 55 absent · 52 not voting
Where Gottlieb broke from the party - the high-signal votes
VOTED YES
Collective Bargaining
Democrats voted no, 9–19; Gottlieb was one of the 9 in favor · HB 5201E · May 29, 2026
roll call
VOTED NO
Taxation
Democrats voted yes, 15–10; Gottlieb was one of the 10 against · HB 7031E · May 12, 2026
roll call
VOTED NO
Taxation
Democrats voted yes, 16–10; Gottlieb was one of the 10 against · HB 7031E · May 12, 2026
roll call
Votes by topic: top topics first, the rest behind filters
conference committee16 votes · yes on 12, no on 4
Law Enforcement13 votes · yes on 10, no on 1, 2 other
state budget12 votes · yes on 10, no on 2
Public Safety10 votes · yes on 7, no on 1, 2 other
State Government10 votes · yes on 5, no on 4, 1 other
One vote can touch several topics.
LATEST: NOT VOTINGProperty Tax AdministrationSB 4F · Jun 2, 2026CommitteesRanking Member · Judiciary CommitteeRanking Member · Rules & Ethics CommitteeRanking Member · Select Committee on Property TaxesCivil Justice & Claims Subcommittee
2 ratings from advocacy groups, across 2 issue areas. Scores are shown on a shared 0–100 scale so groups can be read side by side, with each group’s own published score kept next to it. Every score is the group’s opinion, never our verdict, and every row links to the scorecard.
Taxes & Economy · 1
Americans for Prosperity - Floridaconservative · 2025
third-party academic estimates - never our verdict
Left–right estimates (academic)
Shor-McCarty · votesVery Liberal
D
R
LeftRight
More liberal than 94% of Florida House members
Details
Score−1.43 on a −2.5 to +2.5 scale
BasisFrom roll-call votes
Party median0.32 more liberal than the Democratic median in this group (−1.11)
Compared with604 members of Florida House members (1996–2022)
Covers2019–2022
● This person Democrats (244) Republicans (360)Thick bar: middle half · thin line: middle 80%
Shor, Boris. 2025. "Individual State Legislator Shor-McCarty Ideology Data, January 2025 Update." Harvard Dataverse, V1. Method: Shor, Boris, and Nolan McCarty. 2011. "The Ideological Mapping of American Legislatures." American Political Science Review 105(3). Shor-McCarty ↗
DIME CFscore · donorsLiberal
D
R
I
LeftRight
More liberal than 67% of 2022 Florida House candidates
Details
Score−0.71 on a −2.5 to +2.5 scale
BasisFrom campaign donors
Party median0.21 more conservative than the Democratic median in this group (−0.92)
Compared with311 members of 2022 Florida House candidates
Covers2018–2022
● This person Democrats (131) Republicans (175) Independents (5)Thick bar: middle half · thin line: middle 80%
Bonica, Adam. 2024. Database on Ideology, Money in Politics, and Elections: Public version 4.0. Stanford University Libraries. https://data.stanford.edu/dime DIME CFscore ↗
About these scores
These are third-party academic estimates of one left–right dimension, computed by researchers from roll-call votes or campaign donors. They are not Poliscope’s judgment. Each source uses its own scale, so compare people within a source rather than across sources.
