Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Near the Bottom in Power Rankings

Via Minnesota Monitor, I see that John Kline ranks near the bottom in the Knowlegis Power Rankings. He ranks 396 out of 435:
The power rankings rate members of Congress based on position by virtue of committee or tenure, indirect influence through media influence or caucus membership, the number of bills or amendments that each member succeeds in getting passed and how successful they are at getting earmarks for their state or district.
The site does say that there are limitations to the rankings:
The Knowlegis Power Rankings project team acknowledges that Members of Congress sometimes exercise power in ways that cannot be seen or measured. For example, we did not measure some variables such as effectiveness in assisting constituents in the district and state, known as "casework." Nor did we measure legislators' visibility in the district and state, such as public appearances or communication with voters. Finally, legislators often play important roles as liaisons with federal agencies in matters where state or local governments have a vested interest in a special project (such as military base closures). These factors - while crucial to a member's re-election and extremely important to constituents - are hard to measure and rarely contribute to power in the House or Senate.
Factoring in these limitations can only drop Kline further. Visibility in the district and state? We are represented by a man who has virtually no influence and who uses what little influence he has to vote against the interests of his constituents.

3 comments:

Joey said...

He doesn't vote against my interests and I'm a constituent. True, he doesn't have a lot of clout in Congress, but it's inaccurate to say he votes against his constituents' interests. Partisan blanket statements like that are what turn me off to politics.

Truth & Justice said...

Well then we know where your interest lay given his vote record is over 95% with BushCo. And if you look at the data, his low rating isn't because of his vote record, but his lack of leadership, inability to drive issues or legislation, and his newly found stance against earmarks...which btw won't save taxpayers one cent...but will allow the constituents he represents to 'go without' a return on their tax dollars...naturally he conveniently took the stance after two terms of big time porking with his fellow republicans...nice!

Joey said...

True, Republicans have been big porkers, which is why I'm so disinterested in the party. I'm not arguing that point one bit.

And what's the "then we know where your interests lay" supposed to imply? That I love Bush? (Again, a petty partisan slap with "BushCo".) Well, I identified with him more than Kerry, so I guess that says something, but no, I'm not a Bush fan.

It's also a fact that newer members of Congress who are also members of the minority party always have less clout and will rank lower. That's not to say I'm loving the rating, but it's pretty unlikely that any legislator in his position will rank in the top 50%.

Again, partisan bickering...what ticks me off about so many people in both parties.

Kline's not perfect, but overall I like him. That's all I'm saying, along with the fact that blanket statements like saying he "uses what little influence he has to vote against the interests of his constituents" don't do anything to help political dialogue, are rather petty, and demeaning and destructive to the political process.

But, it's Politics 101...be negative, it works.