Effectiveness of Senator
May 20th, 2018 at 9:25:44 AM permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 | Credit to SOOPOO who was interested in NY Senator's Sponsored Legislation (not co-sponsored bills) .
In December 2008, President-elect Barack Obama nominated second-term incumbent U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton as United States Secretary of State, leaving an empty seat in the Senate. Gillibrand was appointed to the Senate by Governor David Paterson but she was required to run in a special election in 2010 for the permanent position after her inauguration, which she won with 63% of the vote. She was reelected to a full six-year term in 2012 with 72% of the vote, the highest margin for any statewide candidate in New York. Senator Gillibrand has 15 pieces of legislation to propose Post Office name changes like the bill passed into law by Hillary Clinton. Out of the 15, 7 have reached committee consideration, and 6 have passed one chamber and zero have passed two chambers. If she is re-elected she may get one of these bills passed into law. How are your Senators doing? https://www.congress.gov/member/hillary-clinton/C001041?r=1&q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22hillary+clinton%22%5D%2C%22sponsorship%22%3A%22sponsored%22%7D |
May 20th, 2018 at 11:02:22 AM permalink | |
rxwine Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 188 Posts: 18632 | I'm not sure whether you can learn enough from these stats. Passing what looks like "easy" legislation might be difficult because of a limited budget even though it's an easy choice. Someone who is really trying to accomplish something may get little passed because there is a constant ideological battle. Ron or Rand Paul may have tried to pass some of their ideas year after year knowing they had little support. But I if I wanted that style of government, I'd still want them in office year after year and not someone with less libertarian views who was "accomplishing" something. Then there are things like so. Like a kid on the honor roll, and then you look at the subjects he took that year. Gym. study hall. Art class. Same with Senators who add up a tally. Then, people like Schumer should become more influential the longer they stay. That can be good if you agree with him and bad if you don't. You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really? |
May 20th, 2018 at 11:31:58 AM permalink | |
Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 |
Certainly they don't seem to be important to most voters, For Hillary Clinton to have three pieces of sponsored legislation make it into law in 8 years, (1) a road name change, (2) a post office name change, (3) an upgrade from "historic landmark" to "historic site" does not on the face of it seem like good qualifications to be Secretary of State. |
May 20th, 2018 at 11:41:56 AM permalink | |
Evenbob Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 146 Posts: 25010 |
That's way more than I thought She would do, nothing burgers that they are. I thought all She did was run for president in 08, the whole time she was senator. That was the point of Her being elected. If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose. |
May 20th, 2018 at 1:47:43 PM permalink | |
SOOPOO Member since: Feb 19, 2014 Threads: 22 Posts: 4157 | First of all, thanks to Paco for doing this at my request. The reason I asked was I was at a fundraiser for my local State assemblyman and sat next to a woman named Chele Farley, who told me she is the Republican nominee for US Senator to run against Kirsten Gillebrand. I asked her what her plan was in the heavily Democrat State (NY) that we live in. Her answer was simple... she just had to get Gillebrand's record out into the public! She told me that in her 10 years in the Senate that Gillebrand has proposed around 300 (Paco now tells me it is over 400) pieces of legislation with ZERO becoming law. She is big on proposing name changes to post offices , but not even one of those has been signed into law! Whatever reasons/ excuses you want to make, ZERO is an astounding number for 10 years, 8 of which had a Democrat President. I can't wait until she announces her run for President! Because of all she has 'accomplished' in the Senate! Of course I think KG will win re-election to Senate because the NY Democrats will not care that she has been an utter failure...... Sort of like when another Democrat ex Senator was nominated for President despite not accomplishing anything of note in the Senate..... |
May 20th, 2018 at 2:11:34 PM permalink | |
rxwine Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 188 Posts: 18632 | Would you really vote for a very left liberal progressive in your District because they had enacted lots of lefty legislation, over a Republican who did little but keep your brand of status quo in place as far as laws? I'm not saying you'd vote a do nothing for President, but I'd be surprised if you actually care about effective politicians to the point of voting for one for that reason. You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really? |
May 20th, 2018 at 4:29:14 PM permalink | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 |
BTW I pulled the stats for 9.3 years as a Senator plus 2.06 years as a Representative, so that could explain the mismatch. The assertion is verified, but rxwine wants a deeper analysis. I think you are asking for an almost philosophical piece of analysis. Would we be better off of Adolf Hitler stuttered? Probably, but then he is unlikely to have ruled Germany and we wouldn't know who he was. But more importantly is it permissible to base a senator on "sponsored legislation only", and ignore "co-sponsored legislation". Perhaps the senior senators are more often listed as sponsors, and the junior senators are more often listed as co-sponsors.
Barack Obama's (January 3, 2005 – November 16, 2008) Laws
Hillary Clinton's (January 3, 2001 – January 21, 2009) Laws
Obama's two laws that passed based on his Sponsored Legislation on seem more substantive than Hillary's three laws. |
May 20th, 2018 at 6:50:36 PM permalink | |
Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 | http://www.thelawmakers.org/#/find Center for Effective Lawmaking ranks the 44 Democratic Senators from Least to Most effective for 114th congress 44 Donnelly, Joe IN 43 Mikulski, Barbara MD 42 Reed, Jack RI 41 Murphy, Christopher CT 40 Merkley, Jeff OR 39 Stabenow, Debbie MI 38 Warner, Mark VA 37 Manchin, Joe WV 36 Kaine, Tim VA 35 Reid, Harry NV 34 Warren, Elizabeth MA 33 Coons, Christopher DE 32 Gillibrand, Kirsten NY ----------------------------------------------------- 31 Bennet, Michael CO 30 Durbin, Richard IL 29 Heinrich, Martin NM 28 McCaskill, Claire MO 27 Menendez, Robert NJ 26 Brown, Sherrod OH 25 Blumenthal, Richard CT 24 Markey, Edward MA 24 Hoeven, John ND 23 Murray, Patty WA 22 Baldwin, Tammy WI 21 Nelson, Bill FL 20 Leahy, Patrick VT 19 Peters, Gary MI 18 Schumer, Charles NY 17 Hirono, Mazie HI 16 Schatz, Brian HI 15 Boxer, Barbara CA 14 Booker, Cory NJ 13 Franken, Al MN 12 Klobuchar, Amy MN 11 Shaheen, Jeanne NH 10 Cantwell, Maria WA 9 Heitkamp, Heidi ND 8 Udall Tom NM 7 Casey, Robert PA 6 Whitehouse, Sheldon RI 5 Feinstein, Dianne CA 4 Tester, Jon MT 3 Cardin, Benjamin MD 2 Carper, Thomas DE 1 Wyden, Ron OR |
May 20th, 2018 at 7:54:20 PM permalink | |
Fleastiff Member since: Oct 27, 2012 Threads: 62 Posts: 7831 | Party affiliation means little. They are all politicians. They have to hold onto their fund raising and their own turf, then they have to develop a record to run on. The problem is that no one really runs on their record they run on their press releases and other concocted "records" of what they did in office. |
May 21st, 2018 at 12:27:38 AM permalink | |
rxwine Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 188 Posts: 18632 | Senior senators obviously have more wallop or just more time. For instance, Harry Reid, as Senate Majority leader probably influenced legislation which his name is not even on. All the senior senators probably do that as well. That's another thing that is not necessarily recorded. I'm pretty sure the rest of the nation would have had Yucca Mountain up and running if he hadn't been Senate Majority leader during that period. Because it wasn't popular among Democrats and most Republicans there. In fact, now that Reid is gone, Trump has reintroduced legislation to turn Yucca into the depository again. The rest of the nation loves the idea as long as it's not their state. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/16/the-yucca-mountain-nuclear-waste-dump-a-political-hot-potato-is-back.html You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really? |