2006 Congressional Vote Ratings Released

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis and more, subscribe to Mother Jones' newsletters.


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.

THE BIG PICTURE

You expect the big picture, and it's our job at Mother Jones to give it to you. And right now, so many of the troubles we face are the making not of a virus, but of the quest for profit, political or economic (and not just from the man in the White House who could have offered leadership and comfort but instead gave us bleach).

In "News Is Just Like Waste Management," we unpack what the coronavirus crisis has meant for journalism, including Mother Jones’, and how we can rise to the challenge. If you're able to, this is a critical moment to support our nonprofit journalism with a donation: We've scoured our budget and made the cuts we can without impairing our mission, and we hope to raise $400,000 from our community of online readers to help keep our big reporting projects going because this extraordinary pandemic-plus-election year is no time to pull back.

THE BIG PICTURE

You expect the big picture, and it's our job at Mother Jones to give it to you. And right now, so many of the troubles we face are the making not of a virus, but of the quest for profit, political or economic (and not just from the man in the White House who could have offered leadership and comfort but instead gave us bleach).

In "News Is Just Like Waste Management," we unpack what the coronavirus crisis has meant for journalism, including Mother Jones’, and how we can rise to the challenge. If you're able to, this is a critical moment to support our nonprofit journalism with a donation: We've scoured our budget and made the cuts we can without impairing our mission, and we hope to raise $400,000 from our community of online readers to help keep our big reporting projects going because this extraordinary pandemic-plus-election year is no time to pull back.

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight 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

We have a new comment system! We are now using Coral, from Vox Media, for comments on all new articles. We'd love your feedback.