2006 Congressional Vote Ratings Released

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.


I’m going to spoil the big surprise up front: Barack Obama is more liberal than Dennis Kucinich.

Now the context. National Journal has put out a series of lists in which they rate every lawmaker in the House and Senate on how they voted in 2006. (There’s a link on the Mother Jones News and Politics page, your home for 2008 presidential coverage and general Washington news.) You can see the most liberal and most conservative members of Congress. You can see where Lieberman stands (not the most conservative Dem). And perhaps most interestingly, you can see where the presidential candidates fall.

The New York Times political blog dug a little deeper and found lifetime ratings. The results?

On a scale of one to 100, with 100 being the most liberal, here are the Dems:

Senator Barack Obama: 84.3
Representative Dennis Kucinich: 79.4
Senator Christopher J. Dodd: 79.2
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton: 78.8
Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr.: 76.8

On a scale of one to 100, with 100 being the most conservative, here are the Republicans:

Representative Duncan Hunter: 82.5
Senator Sam Brownback: 81
Representative Tom Tancredo: 75.9
Senator John McCain: 71.8
Senator Chuck Hagel: 71.5
Representative Ron Paul: 51.7

Due to lack of votes in Congress, certain contenders for the nominations are left off.

ONLY HOURS LEFT—AND EVERYTHING RIDING ON IT

A full one-third of our annual fundraising comes in this month alone. That’s risky, because a strong December means our newsroom is on the beat and reporting at full strength—but a weak one means budget cuts and hard choices ahead.

With just hours left, we need a huge surge in reader support to get to our $400,000 year-end goal. Whether you've given before or this is your first time, your contribution right now matters. All gifts are 3X matched and tax-deductible.

Managing an independent, nonprofit newsroom is staggeringly hard. There’s no cushion in our budget—no backup revenue, no corporate safety net. We can’t afford to fall short, and we can’t rely on corporations or deep-pocketed interests to fund the fierce, investigative journalism Mother Jones exists to do. That’s why we need you right now. Please chip in to help close the gap.

ONLY HOURS LEFT—AND EVERYTHING RIDING ON IT

A full one-third of our annual fundraising comes in this month alone. That’s risky, because a strong December means our newsroom is on the beat and reporting at full strength—but a weak one means budget cuts and hard choices ahead.

With just hours left, we need a huge surge in reader support to get to our $400,000 year-end goal. Whether you've given before or this is your first time, your contribution right now matters. All gifts are 3X matched and tax-deductible.

Managing an independent, nonprofit newsroom is staggeringly hard. There’s no cushion in our budget—no backup revenue, no corporate safety net. We can’t afford to fall short, and we can’t rely on corporations or deep-pocketed interests to fund the fierce, investigative journalism Mother Jones exists to do. That’s why we need you right now. Please chip in to help close the gap.

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate