Conservative Ratings of Congress
Ed Koch, the former mayor of New York City, used to open his press conferences with the question: “How am I doing?” How would conservatives answer that question posed by our current representation in Congress?
The pre-recess 1st session of the 112th Congress is now history and the first comprehensive conservative ratings of Congress is out, and we can now begin to answer that question so far.
Heritage Action for America has released their legislative scorecard and their methodology helps expose the real courage of conservative legislators…..those who will stand for their conservative principles even against their party leadership.
In just the first seven months of the legislative session, they scored 30 votes in the House and 19 in the Senate, many of which dealt with obscure amendments that sought to cut spending BEYOND THE COMFORT ZONE OF THE GOP LEADERSHIP. These votes encompass all three facets of conservatism; fiscal, social, and national defense.
Additionally, Heritage Action scored four co-sponsorships in the Senate and five in the House, each worth only one point. Thus, even if a senator voted the right way on every issue, he could only score a 96%, unless he co-sponsored the four highlighted bills. This is why Jim DeMint (R-SC) the highest scorer, only received a 99%.
As you comb through the scorecard to examine the voting records of various members of Congress, it is important to keep in mind the following:
1) It is impossible to offer a perfectly objective numerical score for a voting record – something that is inherently very subjective.
Some conservatives opposed Cut, Cap, and Balance for conservative reasons; nevertheless, causing a negative against their overall score. Ron Paul obviously suffered the most from this, as well as Michele Bachmann.
2) Only 13 Senators and 27 Representatives received scores above 85%. This scorecard is more than just a measure of someone’s personal belief in conservatism; it is a measure of how much courage a member has to implement their beliefs, even if it elicits opposition from their own leadership.
3) You should take a more unforgiving approach to the Senate scores. First, the Senate is more decentralized, making it easier for an individual member to oppose leadership. Also, many of the House votes stem from the debt deal, the FY 2011 continuing resolution, and amendments to appropriations bills. All of them were either the creations of John Boehner, Republican leaders, and/or the House-passed budget. It took a lot of courage to vote against those bills (or for additional cuts) – a position that was widely viewed as a snub of leadership. The same cannot be said about the Senate. In other words, a 75% score in the House is a lot stronger than a 75% in the Senate. There is really no reason for a Republican senator to score below an 85%.
A few notable highlights:
Republican leadership scores: Most of House leadership scored identical votes. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy scored a 60%, Chief Deputy Whip Peter Roskam- 63%, Conference Vice-Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers 62%. Conference Chairman Jeb Hensarling was the bright spot, scoring 84%, but for him, that was a bit disappointing. Among the leaders of the Freshman members, Austin Scott (GA) scored a 80%, while Kristi Noem got a dismal 51%. On the Senate side, Minority Leader McConnell scored a 72%, Minority Whip Jon Kyl scored a 77%, Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander scored 67%, and Conference Vice-Chair John Barrasso scored a 78%.
The lowest achievers in the Senate were Lisa Murkowski (40%), Susan Collins (45%), and Olympia Snowe (51%). No surprises here.
These conservative ratings should serve as an initial evaluation of accountability from our Republican members of Congress, who run as conservatives, but all too often, fail to deliver on their promises.
Click on this link to view the top performers.
Editor’s Note: Heritage Action for America is a conservative policy advocacy group founded in 2010 and a sister organization of The Heritage Foundation think tank.
