Congressional Scorecards: Fair Territory or Drifting Foul?

National Journal
Billy House
Add to Briefcase
Billy House
Feb. 26, 2014, 3:48 p.m.

The crack of the bat and the smell of spring are un­mis­tak­able signs that it’s time to wade through all the rank­ings and rat­ings again. No, not for fantasy base­ball stats. For con­gres­sion­al score­cards.

Like the moun­tain of in­form­a­tion avail­able to sports geeks, polit­ic­al junkies get their fix, too — and the rank­ings have nev­er been more di­vis­ive. Blamed for everything from com­plic­at­ing the budget deal and killing a gun-con­trol bill last year to a stalled flood-in­sur­ance bill this week, con­gres­sion­al score­cards are see­ing a back­lash from law­makers who say they ag­grav­ate an already po­lar­ized en­vir­on­ment.

“The only voter score­cards they should be at­tuned to are the ones that come from their own dis­tricts — and they should put less stock in everything else,” said Rep. Steve Is­rael, chair­man of the Demo­crat­ic Con­gres­sion­al Cam­paign Com­mit­tee.

Each year, dozens of polit­ic­al and ad­vocacy groups, from the League of Con­ser­va­tion Voters to the Hu­mane So­ci­ety, grade law­makers based on how they vote on bills these or­gan­iz­a­tions care about. In some cases, groups use these grades to pres­sure law­makers even be­fore the vote. It’s all le­git­im­ate ad­vocacy — but it can cause ten­sion, es­pe­cially when these re­com­mend­a­tions stall or de­rail le­gis­la­tion.

Such was the case this week, when con­ser­vat­ive groups Her­it­age Ac­tion and the Club for Growth both came out against a bill to ad­dress high flood-in­sur­ance premi­ums that was headed to the floor, warn­ing law­makers their votes will be part of their le­gis­lat­ive score­cards.

Sup­port for the bill faltered, and a planned Thursday vote was scuttled Wed­nes­day by GOP lead­ers. The Club for Growth im­me­di­ately is­sued a press re­lease ap­plaud­ing the de­cision to not pro­ceed with the bill and “stick tax­pay­ers with a bill for high­er sub­sidies to beach­front prop­er­ties.”

But law­makers like Rep. Bill Cas­sidy, a Louisi­ana Re­pub­lic­an run­ning for the Sen­ate who is lead­ing the charge on the bill, chal­lenged wheth­er any group could lay claim to the true “con­ser­vat­ive po­s­i­tion.”

“Guess what?” Cas­sidy said. “I say I am a con­ser­vat­ive, too. So, at some point, you can thump your chest and try and say it more loudly.”

Oth­er law­makers said their con­stitu­ents come first. “They need this. This has been cata­stroph­ic to the hous­ing mar­ket in Flor­ida,” said GOP Rep. Gus Bi­lira­kis.

Speak­er John Boehner has also been crit­ic­al in re­cent weeks. After Her­it­age Ac­tion and oth­er con­ser­vat­ive groups op­posed a budget deal in Decem­ber, Boehner took the un­char­ac­ter­ist­ic step of cri­ti­ciz­ing them pub­licly.

“They’re us­ing our mem­bers and they’re us­ing the Amer­ic­an people for their own goals. This is ri­dicu­lous,” Boehner said.

In fact, the speak­er’s frus­tra­tions with Her­it­age had been build­ing for some time, dat­ing from the group’s op­pos­i­tion to his “Plan B” pro­pos­al for the fisc­al cliff in 2012, which he ul­ti­mately scuttled.

In­deed, sim­il­ar ten­sions have emerged more than once this ses­sion. In April last year, a House vote on a bill sup­por­ted by Re­pub­lic­an lead­er­ship to ex­tend a pro­gram in the pres­id­ent’s health care law, the Pre-Ex­ist­ing Con­di­tions In­sur­ance Plan, was pulled from the floor after the Club for Growth is­sued a state­ment ur­ging a “no” vote.

Of course, Boehner and Re­pub­lic­ans are not alone in ex­press­ing frus­tra­tion.

Last April, Sen. Joe Manchin com­plained that the de­cis­ive event that doomed an amend­ment to ex­pand back­ground checks for gun pur­chases was the Na­tion­al Rifle As­so­ci­ation’s de­cision to count Sen­ate votes on its score­card.

“If they hadn’t scored it we’d have got­ten 70 votes. I pre­dict 70 votes without scor­ing,” Manchin, a West Vir­gin­ia Demo­crat, told re­port­ers at a break­fast.

In­stead, the amend­ment he co­sponsored with Re­pub­lic­an Sen. Pat Toomey got just 54 votes, few­er than the 60 re­quired to ad­vance, des­pite the wide­spread pop­ular­ity of the meas­ure in pub­lic polling. “There’s a de­fin­ing mo­ment when you know that noth­ing else mat­ters ex­cept do­ing what the facts prove to be right,” Manchin said. “And I got that de­fin­ing mo­ment, and I have to live with whatever hap­pens.”

More re­cently, sev­er­al ma­jor pieces of le­gis­la­tion, in­clud­ing the budget deal and a bill to in­crease the debt ceil­ing, have passed des­pite op­pos­i­tion from con­ser­vat­ive groups.

Is­rael con­ceded that score­cards might be help­ful to voters on cer­tain “niche is­sues,” but law­makers in the end should not overly fo­cus on “this war of score­cards.”

“Look, if it’s one group’s voter score­card versus an­oth­er group’s voter score­card, what is more im­port­ant? It’s the score­card that your voters are com­pil­ing,” he said.

Still, these rat­ings will con­tin­ue to be a part of the Wash­ing­ton land­scape, as they have for dec­ades. The Club for Growth un­veiled its 2013 rank­ings this week. The Na­tion­al Tax­pay­ers Uni­on is plan­ning to do so soon.

And the groups strongly de­fend their right to ad­voc­ate — and keep score.

“Com­mu­nic­a­tion between law­makers and their con­stitu­ents is crit­ic­al to our sys­tem of gov­ern­ment, but law­makers do not have a mono­poly on com­mu­nic­a­tion,” said Dan Holler, a spokes­man for Her­it­age Ac­tion. “We are talk­ing with their con­stitu­ents every day about what is hap­pen­ing in Wash­ing­ton and what the im­plic­a­tions are for con­ser­vat­ive policy.”

He ad­ded: “So long as they are com­fort­able with their ac­tions in Wash­ing­ton, they should have no ob­jec­tion to a fully in­formed con­stitu­ency.”

What We're Following See More »
TWO MONTHS AFTER REFUSING AT CONVENTION
Cruz to Back Trump
1 days ago
THE LATEST
WHO TO BELIEVE?
Two Polls for Clinton, One for Trump
1 days ago
THE LATEST

With three days until the first debate, the polls are coming fast and furious. The latest round:

  • An Associated Press/Gfk poll of registered voters found very few voters committed, with Clin­ton lead­ing Trump, 37% to 29%, and Gary John­son at 7%.
  • A Mc­Clatchy-Mar­ist poll gave Clin­ton a six-point edge, 45% to 39%, in a four-way bal­lot test. Johnson pulls 10% support, with Jill Stein at 4%.
  • Rasmussen, which has drawn criticism for continually showing Donald Trump doing much better than he does in other polls, is at it again. A new survey gives Trump a five-point lead, 44%-39%.
NO SURPRISE
Trump Eschewing Briefing Materials in Debate Prep
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

In contrast to Hillary Clinton's meticulous debate practice sessions, Donald Trump "is largely shun­ning tra­di­tion­al de­bate pre­par­a­tions, but has been watch­ing video of…Clin­ton’s best and worst de­bate mo­ments, look­ing for her vul­ner­ab­il­it­ies.” Trump “has paid only curs­ory at­ten­tion to brief­ing ma­ter­i­als. He has re­fused to use lecterns in mock de­bate ses­sions des­pite the ur­ging of his ad­visers. He prefers spit­balling ideas with his team rather than hon­ing them in­to crisp, two-minute an­swers.”

Source:
TRUMP NO HABLA ESPANOL
Trump Makes No Outreach to Spanish Speakers
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Donald Trump "is on the precipice of becoming the only major-party presidential candidate this century not to reach out to millions of American voters whose dominant, first or just preferred language is Spanish. Trump has not only failed to buy any Spanish-language television or radio ads, he so far has avoided even offering a translation of his website into Spanish, breaking with two decades of bipartisan tradition."

Source:
$1.16 MILLION
Clintons Buy the House Next Door in Chappaqua
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Bill and Hillary Clinton have purchased the home next door to their primary residence in tony Chappaqua, New York, for $1.16 million. "By purchasing the new home, the Clinton's now own the entire cul-de-sac at the end of the road in the leafy New York suburb. The purchase makes it easier for the United States Secret Service to protect the former president and possible future commander in chief."

Source:
×