Vermont, Part 2: Scoring the State Senate

For the second installment of my Vermont series, I want to illustrate one of the ways that LDI scores can be useful in non-electoral analysis. One of the the biggest issues citizens face when it comes to state government is that they often know very little about what the people they are voting for support - especially in a state with districts as small as Vermont, where campaigns for state legislature aren't high-spending ultra-partisan affairs. While the recall will be the true barometer, if Wisconsin residents knew what the legislators they were electing really wanted to do with state government, would they have ever had the numbers to take such destructive acts?

In order to combat this lack of information, third party groups often try to inform voters about candidate positions on their individual issues, and this is helpful, to a point. Scorecard scores tend to be intentionally divisive, looking to paint one party as against their issues, and another for it - furthermore, on something like environmental issues, a Democrat with a far from perfect record on the environment might be a considerable improvement over someone who will vote against environmental interests 100% of the time.

By using these third-party scorecards, and plotting them against the District Index scores for the districts these legislators represent, we have better context to evaluate which legislators are pulling their weight on which issues, and to what degree a legislator might be deviating from the rest of his party.

Below I have taken four scorecards that cover the 2009-2010 members of the Vermont Senate, and plotted them against the index score for the Senate district they represent.



Chamber of Commerce scores tend to be balanced in favor of Republicans, with Democrats much more likely to receive lower scores. Unlike some below, these scores are just based on the 09/10 session, and the full list of bills included can be found on the Vermont Chamber of Commerce website. The black line is a simple linear regression of the data. The results speak to the amount of ideological diversity within the Democratic party. Take the Chittenden Senate district (D+10) for example: Sen. Diane Snelling (50%) only receives the third highest score in the district, behind Doug Racine (56%), and Sen. Hinda Miller, whose 79% score is tied among Democrats only by Bob Starr, whose Essex-Orleans seat (R+16) is one of the most Republican districts in the entire state.



The VPIRG scores also only cover the last session, and are significantly less partisan, with all but five senators scoring 80% or higher. The underachieving six? Democratic Senators Dick Sears and Dick Mazza, both just hovering above 50%, and then Republicans Randy Brock, Kevin Mullin, and then-Sen. Phil Scott, whose 44% is only higher than Peg Flory. Sen. Flory's score is artificially deflated however, as she did not have a full session's worth of votes to be recorded on.



The League of Conservation Voters release lifetime scores, which are even better indicators to really get a grip on where legislators stand. Again, Sen. Flory brings up the rear at 13%, but just as significant is the fact that the second lowest score again belong to Sen. Starr. Also worth a mention is Sen. Alice Nitka's score of 67%. While it's not as low as some other members of the Democratic caucus, it is notable for the fact that among the cluster of Democrats in districts comparable to her own, it is significantly lower than her colleagues.



Finally, the AFL-CIO also releases a lifetime scorecard. The only word of caution I would give is that they are incredibly selective about what votes are counted, and as a result, for first-term senators, the only scored vote was their decision to close Vermont Yankee as planned, which they scored as a "bad" vote. That is why someone like Progressive Senator Tim Ashe, who you would expect to see near the top of this graph, is instead on the bottom line. It's also worth noting the Republican scores on this one: Sen. Snelling's score is 2nd in her Caucus to Sen. Vince Illuzzi. Effectively, the two most pro-labor Republicans come from the two Republican Senators whose districts are farthest apart.

If this data is interesting to you, it is worth checking out a post I made on Green Mountain Daily a while back, looking at these same scores for members of the Vermont House. With Vermont behind us, I'll have more states on the way shortly.