What: All Issues
 Who: Senate
[POW!]
 

To sort by a column, click on the down-pointing triangle above that column. To reverse the sort,
click on the triangle above the current sort column and the triangle will now point up once it's reverse sorted.

PROGRESSIVE SCORE Progressive Score
Rank Member of Congress Party State Crucial Votes % Overall % State Tilt vs. State Tilt
Lifetime 2013-14 Lifetime 2013-14 % Rating
1 Booker, Cory D NJ 100.00 100.00 99.14 99.14 Strong Dem + 16.67 rank 5
2TIE Menendez, Bob D NJ 93.47 98.46 96.89 99.62 Strong Dem + 10.14 rank 5
2TIE Reed, Jack D RI 96.45 98.46 97.22 98.88 Strong Dem + 13.12 rank 5
2TIE Sanders, Bernie I VT 95.74 98.46 97.43 98.11 Strong Dem + 12.41 rank 5
5 Boxer, Barbara D CA 94.74 98.41 95.35 99.23 Strong Dem + 11.41 rank 5
6TIE Baldwin, Tammy D WI 96.92 96.92 98.88 98.88 Leaning Dem + 16.92 rank 5
6TIE Blumenthal, Richard D CT 94.57 96.92 97.58 98.88 Strong Dem + 11.24 rank 5
6TIE Brown, Sherrod D OH 96.53 96.92 98.54 99.25 Swing + 19.86 rank 5
6TIE Cantwell, Maria D WA 86.01 96.92 91.45 99.25 Strong Dem + 2.68 rank 5
6TIE Hirono, Mazie D HI 96.92 96.92 99.25 99.25 Strong Dem + 13.59 rank 5
6TIE Murphy, Chris D CT 96.92 96.92 98.51 98.51 Strong Dem + 13.59 rank 5
6TIE Schumer, Chuck D NY 90.87 96.92 93.93 99.25 Strong Dem + 7.54 rank 5
13 Whitehouse, Sheldon D RI 95.20 96.88 97.72 97.74 Strong Dem + 11.87 rank 5
14 Markey, Ed D MA 96.77 96.77 98.61 98.61 Strong Dem + 13.44 rank 5
15TIE Cardin, Ben D MD 94.27 95.38 97.80 98.88 Strong Dem + 10.94 rank 5
15TIE Gillibrand, Kirsten D NY 93.48 95.38 97.63 98.50 Strong Dem + 10.15 rank 5
15TIE Schatz, Brian D HI 95.83 95.38 98.94 98.87 Strong Dem + 12.50 rank 5
18 Mikulski, Barbara D MD 87.74 95.31 92.07 98.86 Strong Dem + 4.41 rank 5
19TIE Durbin, Dick D IL 95.49 93.85 96.02 98.50 Strong Dem + 12.16 rank 5
19TIE Feinstein, Dianne D CA 79.83 93.85 87.04 98.13 Strong Dem - 3.50 rank 5
19TIE Leahy, Pat D VT 90.28 93.85 93.27 98.13 Strong Dem + 6.95 rank 5
19TIE Merkley, Jeff D OR 93.79 93.85 96.73 96.63 Strong Dem + 10.46 rank 5
19TIE Stabenow, Debbie Ann D MI 87.46 93.85 92.82 98.50 Leaning Dem + 7.46 rank 5
19TIE Udall, Tom D NM 92.28 93.85 97.37 98.13 Leaning Dem + 12.28 rank 5
25 Franken, Al D MN 96.14 92.31 98.24 97.76 Leaning Dem + 16.14 rank 5
26TIE Murray, Patty D WA 88.04 92.19 91.69 98.05 Strong Dem + 4.71 rank 5
26TIE Warren, Elizabeth D MA 92.19 92.19 97.73 97.73 Strong Dem + 8.86 rank 5
28 Rockefeller, Jay D WV 82.58 90.77 88.96 97.25 Strong Rep + 12.58 rank 5
29TIE Harkin, Tom D IA 89.67 89.23 93.58 96.96 Swing + 13.00 rank 5
29TIE Wyden, Ron D OR 86.08 89.23 90.37 96.27 Strong Dem + 2.75 rank 5
31 Levin, Carl D MI 91.30 89.06 94.12 97.35 Leaning Dem + 11.30 rank 5
32 Shaheen, Jeanne D NH 87.31 87.69 94.44 95.49 Swing + 10.64 rank 5
33TIE Johnson, Tim1 D SD 78.58 87.50 87.14 96.99 Leaning Rep + 5.25 rank 5
33TIE Walsh, John D MT 87.50 87.50 92.86 92.86 Leaning Rep + 14.17 rank 5
35 Nelson, Bill D FL 78.22 85.71 86.27 96.51 Swing + 1.55 rank 5
36TIE Casey, Bob D PA 85.50 84.62 93.56 95.00 Leaning Dem + 5.50 rank 5
36TIE Heinrich, Martin D NM 84.62 84.62 95.51 95.51 Leaning Dem + 4.62 rank 5
36TIE Klobuchar, Amy D MN 82.82 84.62 90.82 95.51 Leaning Dem + 2.82 rank 5
39TIE Carper, Tom D DE 72.00 83.08 83.03 94.38 Leaning Dem - 8.00 rank 5
39TIE Coons, Chris D DE 85.64 83.08 94.33 95.47 Leaning Dem + 5.64 rank 5
41 Bennet, Michael D CO 77.78 81.54 89.94 94.78 Swing + 1.11 rank 5
42 Udall, Mark D CO 79.19 79.69 91.13 94.62 Swing + 2.52 rank 5
43 Kaine, Tim D VA 76.92 76.92 93.96 93.96 Swing + 0.25 rank 5
44 Landrieu, Mary D LA 65.43 74.60 78.88 90.77 Strong Rep - 4.57 rank 5
45 Tester, Jon D MT 76.67 73.85 87.66 89.51 Leaning Rep + 3.34 rank 5
46 Begich, Mark D AK 78.93 73.44 91.06 91.47 Leaning Rep + 5.60 rank 5
47TIE Heitkamp, Heidi D ND 72.31 72.31 89.53 89.53 Leaning Rep - 1.02 rank 5
47TIE King, Angus I ME 72.31 72.31 91.35 91.35 Leaning Dem - 7.69 rank 5
49 McCaskill, Claire D MO 71.46 72.13 79.86 89.62 Leaning Rep - 1.87 rank 5
50 Warner, Mark D VA 74.29 71.43 88.92 91.51 Swing - 2.38 rank 5
51TIE Donnelly, Joe D IN 69.23 69.23 86.57 86.57 Leaning Rep - 4.10 rank 5
51TIE Reid, Harry D NV 77.54 69.23 86.00 91.95 Swing + 0.87 rank 5
53 Hagan, Kay D NC 70.37 64.62 87.18 87.31 Swing - 6.30 rank 5
54 Pryor, Mark D AR 66.25 58.46 80.78 82.46 Strong Rep - 3.75 rank 5
55 Manchin, Joe D WV 61.19 56.92 76.35 77.95 Strong Rep - 8.81 rank 5
56 Collins, Susan R ME 27.91 35.38 38.63 57.84 Leaning Dem - 52.09 rank 5
57 Murkowski, Lisa R AK 8.91 32.26 24.40 54.69 Leaning Rep - 64.42 rank 5
58 Heller, Dean R NV 22.49 20.31 20.63 15.09 Swing - 54.18 rank 5
59 Kirk, Mark1 R IL 13.74 20.00 24.43 26.75 Strong Dem - 69.59 rank 5
60 Ayotte, Kelly R NH 5.79 12.31 13.79 19.17 Swing - 70.88 rank 5
61 McCain, John R AZ 12.06 9.38 13.33 22.09 Leaning Rep - 61.27 rank 5
62 Portman, Rob R OH 4.19 9.23 12.32 13.91 Swing - 72.48 rank 5
63 Vitter, David R LA 4.56 4.76 6.08 6.56 Strong Rep - 65.44 rank 5
64 Wicker, Roger R MS 2.83 4.69 10.26 14.12 Strong Rep - 67.17 rank 5
65TIE Alexander, Lamar R TN 2.08 4.62 12.23 17.51 Strong Rep - 67.92 rank 5
65TIE Cochran, Thad R MS 3.64 4.62 11.22 14.07 Strong Rep - 66.36 rank 5
65TIE Lee, Mike R UT 6.35 4.62 6.27 4.17 Strong Rep - 63.65 rank 5
65TIE Toomey, Pat R PA 3.70 4.62 5.89 6.02 Leaning Dem - 76.30 rank 5
69 Johanns, Mike R NE 1.55 3.17 9.73 10.38 Strong Rep - 68.45 rank 5
70TIE Coats, Dan R IN 4.80 3.12 7.80 7.95 Leaning Rep - 68.53 rank 5
70TIE Hatch, Orrin R UT 3.10 3.12 7.65 18.39 Strong Rep - 66.90 rank 5
70TIE Moran, Jerry R KS 4.32 3.12 10.15 5.14 Strong Rep - 65.68 rank 5
73TIE Corker, Bob R TN 2.10 3.08 12.04 15.79 Strong Rep - 67.90 rank 5
73TIE Paul, Rand R KY 6.84 3.08 7.17 4.65 Strong Rep - 63.16 rank 5
75 Cruz, Ted R TX 1.64 1.64 1.60 1.60 Strong Rep - 68.36 rank 5
76 Flake, Jeff R AZ 1.59 1.59 18.50 18.50 Leaning Rep - 71.74 rank 5
77TIE Blunt, Roy R MO 6.88 1.56 16.45 13.67 Leaning Rep - 66.45 rank 5
77TIE Crapo, Mike R ID 1.69 1.56 4.11 2.26 Strong Rep - 68.31 rank 5
77TIE Enzi, Mike R WY 1.81 1.56 3.49 1.88 Strong Rep - 68.19 rank 5
77TIE Graham, Lindsey R SC 4.87 1.56 9.68 19.29 Leaning Rep - 68.46 rank 5
77TIE Rubio, Marco R FL 2.66 1.56 7.12 7.60 Swing - 74.01 rank 5
82TIE Burr, Richard R NC 2.40 1.54 4.56 8.61 Swing - 74.27 rank 5
82TIE Grassley, Chuck R IA 5.43 1.54 8.44 3.36 Swing - 71.24 rank 5
82TIE Hoeven, John R ND 5.82 1.54 18.72 12.36 Leaning Rep - 67.51 rank 5
82TIE Johnson, Ron R WI 0.52 1.54 2.40 1.91 Leaning Dem - 79.48 rank 5
82TIE McConnell, Mitch R KY 1.87 1.54 3.95 5.99 Strong Rep - 68.13 rank 5
82TIE Risch, James R ID 0.31 1.54 3.01 1.53 Strong Rep - 69.69 rank 5
82TIE Shelby, Richard R AL 7.04 1.54 11.98 7.22 Strong Rep - 62.96 rank 5
89TIE Barrasso, John R WY 1.09 0.00 2.74 1.50 Strong Rep - 68.91 rank 5
89TIE Boozman, John R AR 2.62 0.00 8.66 7.09 Strong Rep - 67.38 rank 5
89TIE Chambliss, Saxby R GA 1.88 0.00 4.88 13.18 Leaning Rep - 71.45 rank 5
89TIE Coburn, Tom R OK 3.15 0.00 3.96 2.90 Strong Rep - 66.85 rank 5
89TIE Cornyn, John R TX 1.47 0.00 2.94 4.23 Strong Rep - 68.53 rank 5
89TIE Fischer, Deb R NE 0.00 0.00 4.48 4.48 Strong Rep - 70.00 rank 5
89TIE Inhofe, Jim R OK 1.87 0.00 3.13 1.63 Strong Rep - 68.13 rank 5
89TIE Isakson, Johnny R GA 1.69 0.00 6.28 15.56 Leaning Rep - 71.64 rank 5
89TIE Roberts, Pat R KS 1.37 0.00 6.26 1.13 Strong Rep - 68.63 rank 5
89TIE Scott, Tim R SC 0.00 0.00 1.12 1.12 Leaning Rep - 73.33 rank 5
89TIE Sessions, Jeff R AL 2.39 0.00 4.50 4.51 Strong Rep - 67.61 rank 5
89TIE Thune, John R SD 3.82 0.00 6.33 5.24 Leaning Rep - 69.51 rank 5

1Member's score adjusted - medical absence

State Tilt

We've assessed the State or District Tilt of each political jurisdiction as indicated below. The assessments are based on what could reasonably be expected to happen in an open seat (no incumbent running) race where no scandal was attached to either candidate. The odds calculations are based on a moderately liberal Democrat's chances of winning [NOT a conservative Democrat] in that State or District against a Republican candidate.

Strong Democratic District = 80-100% chance moderately liberal Democrat wins open seat general election.

Leaning Democratic District = 60-80% chance moderately liberal Democrat wins open seat general election.

Marginal = 40-60% chance moderately liberal Democrat wins open seat general election.

Leaning Republican = 20-40% chance moderately liberal Democrat wins open seat general election.

Strong Republican = 0-20% chance moderately liberal Democrat wins open seat general election.

Progressive Score vs. State Tilt

The “%” and “Rating” columns underneath the “Progressive Score vs. State Tilt” are two different ways of measuring the same thing. They both measure how naughty or nice a member of Congress' voting record has been relative to how hospitable his/her state is to a moderate to liberal Democrat. We're grading on a curve. A 5 star in the “Rating” column indicates members of Congress who are doing the best in terms of voting MORE progressively than could necessarily be expected given their states. Those with a 1 star are performing the worst in relation to their states.

We do this in a 3 step process:

  1. We start with Progressive Punch's Lifetime Crucial Votes score for each member of Congress.

  2. We identify which of five categories of Democratic strength that member of Congress belongs in (Strong Dem/ Leaning Dem/ Swing/ Leaning Rep/ Strong Rep). To see which of those five categories a given member of Congress is in, view the “District Tilt” category for House members & the “State Tilt” column for Senators.

    [Our assessments of the districts & states are just that, assessments of the districts & states themselves NOT at all how politically comfortable or weak the given member of Congress is in his or her district.]

    For each one of the five categories, there is a minimum percentage that we consider acceptable using the Progressive Punch Lifetime Crucial Votes scores. The percentages that we consider acceptable are:

    Strong Dem83.33 (B)
    Leaning Dem80.00 (B-)
    Swing76.67 (C+)
    Leaning Rep73.33 (C)
    Strong Rep.70.00 (C-)
  3. We then subtract the minimum acceptable percentages listed above in number 2 from that member's Actual Lifetime Crucial Votes percentage. And that's how we come up with the percentage numbers under the “%” underneath the Progressive Score vs. State Tilt column.

    So for example, as of 1/20/09 Raul Grijalva (Dem – Arizona 7th) had a Lifetime Crucial Votes score of 96.77%. We have him in a Strong Democratic district. The minimum acceptable Lifetime Crucial Votes score for a Strong Democratic district we have as 83.33%. Subtract 83.33% (minimum desired) from 96.77% (actual) and you get 13.44% which puts him in first place among all Democrats in the House and in fact among all House members in general. So Representative Grijalva is the best example of Nice!

    Conversely Joe Donnelly (Dem – Indiana 2nd) has a Lifetime Crucial Votes Score of 33.33%. We have him in a Leaning Democratic district where the minimum Lifetime Crucial Votes score to be acceptable is 80.00%. Subtract 80.00% (minimum desired) from 33.33% (actual) and you get -46.67%. In other words Donnelly is failing, and by a lot.

The “Rating” column with the 1 – 5 stars in it is a quick and dirty graphic indication of how well a member is performing in terms of voting record compared to their district.

+6.67% and above = 5 stars (we'd say go out and work for these people)

+3.33% to +6.66% = 4 stars (worthy of support)

Zero to +3.32% = 3 stars (acceptable)

-3.33% to Zero = 2 stars (tolerable)

< -3.33% = 1 star (intolerable, although “intolerable” members from Strong Republican districts probably aren't worth fighting with)