Blogs > Cliopatria > The Polarized Congress

Mar 2, 2009

The Polarized Congress




National Journal just released its 2008 congressional rankings. The most liberal senator? Washington's Patty Murray. The most conservative? A quartet of Republicans, including Wyoming's two GOP senators. The most liberal members of the House: twelve Democrats, of whom the most prominent is current Labor Secretary Hilda Solis. The most conservative: three House Republicans, including Georgia's Paul Broun, who claimed of Barack Obama's agenda,"That’s exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany, and it’s exactly what the Soviet Union did."

I agree completely with Brendan Nyhan that the individual rankings are of little value, largely because the Journal doesn't use enough votes and calculates absences in odd ways. (That's how the magazine came up with Barack Obama as the most liberal senator for 2007.) But taken as a whole, the rankings reveal some interesting trends. Take this graph prepared by Washington University political science professor Stephen Smith. It shows how, in both the House and the Senate, the most conservative Democrat is still more liberal than the most liberal Republican. The reverse side of the ideological equation holds true as well.

As recently as 1994, such a finding would have been inconceivable--giving a sense of just how much more polarized, along partisan and ideological lines, Congress became during the Clinton and Bush presidencies.



comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


Ralph E. Luker - 3/3/2009

Sure. I don't think that there's anyone who will argue seriously with you against that. The devil's, of course, in the details. What demographic do you privilege in order to enhance the likelihood of its representation?


Sterling Fluharty - 3/3/2009

Thanks for the counterexample. I for one hope the tyranny of the majority has come to an end. I would love to see our elected representatives reflect the demographics of their constituents.


Ralph E. Luker - 3/3/2009

In fairness, Sterling, the Republicans have no monopoly on gerrymandering. If they done it rather relentlessly in Texas, for example, you should have seen the map produced by the last Democratic governor and state legislature in Georgia. Redistricting, both for the U. S. House of Representatives and for state legislative bodies, is essentially a state responsibility. Only in the most extreme cases have federal courts intervened and the consequences of their intervention have not necessarily been benign. District lines drawn to favor the election of a racial minority are some of the most obviously gerrymandered districts. The courts have encouraged legislatures to ignore county lines and tolerated the creation of districts that are not even geographically contiguous.


Sterling Fluharty - 3/3/2009

Will this change after the 2010 census? Will the Obama administration be able to end Republican gerrymandering?