Mother Jones - Comments for "2006 Congressional Vote Ratings Released"

So reproductive rights don't count as liberal? Or is it just that they don't count as important?

Kucinich has a staunch pro-life voting record. "He supported Bush's reinstatement of the gag rule for recipients of US family planning funds abroad. He supported the Child Custody Protection Act, which prohibits anyone but a parent from taking a teenage girl across state lines for an abortion. He voted for the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which makes it a crime, distinct from assault on a pregnant woman, to cause the injury or death of a fetus. He voted against funding research on RU-486. He voted for a ban on dilation and extraction (so-called partial-birth) abortions without a maternal health exception. He even voted against contraception coverage in health insurance plans for federal workers--a huge work force of some 2.6 million people (and yes, for many of them, Viagra is covered)." -Katha Pollitt

I agree, these rankings are totally useless. Instead, rank them on a graph like this:

http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2

That solves the problem Richard Aberdeen point out. His example politician would end up in the lower left (probably a little bit above Nelson Mandela in the last chart on that page).

Who determines whether a vote is liberal or conservative? For example, would someone who supports the death penalty (for all congressmen and women and certain administration officials), favors abortion (in the case of all religious conservative fundamentalists), opposses enviornmental pollution (including especially speechs by Dick Cheney), supports a maximum wage allowable and supports allowing open discussion of any and all viewpoints in our nation's science classrooms, be classified as a high-ranking liberal, low-ranking liberal, moderate conservative or high-ranking conservative?