Senate Ukraine Champions Methodology

Senate’s Ukraine Champions

  • Lindsey Graham

    (R-SC)

  • Roger Wicker

    (R-MS)

  • Chuck Grassley

    (R-IA)

  • Sheldon Whitehouse

    (D-RI)

Check the whole list of Senate Ukraine Champions

Methodology Overview

Senate Ukraine Champions were selected using a comprehensive, data-driven congressional ranking system and then refined through a Senate-specific champion filter. Each Member was evaluated across three core dimensions:

  • Support for Ukraine (0–10)

  • Power and Influence in Congress (0–13)

  • Safety of Seat (0–4)

for a maximum composite score of 27 points.

Finally, Senate Ukraine Champions were selected using a comprehensive, data-driven congressional ranking system and then refined through a Senate-specific champion filter.

Ukraine Champions were selected from top-ranking Members who meet elevated thresholds for overall score, demonstrate clear and consistent support for Ukraine, hold meaningful institutional influence, maintain secure seats, and are running for re-election. The result is a group of Senators who combine a strong pro-Ukraine record with the power and political durability to advance that support within Congress.

1. Support for Ukraine

~ was measured through a weighted report card based on votes on key Ukraine-related legislation, producing a baseline classification of negative, supporter, or strong supporter (0–3 points). Additional weight was assigned to legislative leadership, including sponsorship and co-sponsorship of key Ukraine bills (up to 7 points), with greater value given to primary sponsors of high-impact legislation.

2. Institutional influence

~ was assessed based on party status, leadership positions, and roles across key committees, subcommittees, and relevant entities. Priority was given to Senators serving on:

  • Appropriations:

    • Defense

    • State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

  • Armed Services:

    • Cybersecurity

    • Emerging Threats and Capabilities

  • Foreign Relations:

    • Multilateral International Development, Multilateral Institutions, and International Economic, Energy, and Environmental Policy

  • Finance:

    • Energy, Natural Resources, and Infrastructure

  • Intelligence

  • Budget.

Additional weight was assigned to participation in the Ukraine Caucus and the Helsinki Commission, which are treated as equivalent to subcommittee-level influence.

4. Legislative engagement

‍ ~ was evaluated against a defined set of key Ukraine-related bills, including:

  • S.3513: Decreasing Russian Oil Profits Act

  • S.2978: State Sponsor of Terrorism Act

  • S.2918: REPO Implementation Act

  • S.2904: SHADOW Fleet Sanctions Act

  • S.2657: STOP China and Russia Act

  • S.2119: Abducted Ukrainian Children Accountability Act

  • S.1490: GHOST Act

  • S.1364: Supporting American Allies Act

  • S.1241: Sanctioning Russia Act

  • S.Res. 236: Resolution on Abducted Ukrainian Children

3. Electoral security

~ was incorporated to reflect political durability:

Senators up for re-election in 2030 receive the highest score, followed by those in 2028, while those up in 2026 are scored based on race competitiveness (Safe, Likely, Lean, Toss-up).