question: who are the "true" progressives in the Senate

[onenote]

There seems to be a lot of debate on DU as to whether this Democrat or that Democrat is "progressive" or a "Dino" or DLC or whatever. Personally, I think attempts to label Democratic office holders is a waste of time.

Anyway, what I'm particularly interested in is which members of the US Senate the DUer who identify themselves as progressives would label as fellow progressives?

[Deep13]

1. define 'progressive'

:shrug:

[onenote]

3. as I said, I think labels are silly, so I can't

but there are DUers who identify themselves as progressives, so I leave it to them...

[Deep13]

4. I prefer the historic definition.

The idea that society as a whole needs to act together to improve the conditions of society. This places a premium on science, regularity in qualifications for professionals and regularity of standards. It seeks to insulate the acquisition of evidence for policy formation from the political process. It also stands for having the widest possible inclusion in democracy. Put simply, it is a fact-based approach rather than a traditional or values-based approach.

Modern surveys tend to lump progressive in with ultra-liberal, which is not the same think. Liberal is another word for generous and tends to stand for egalitarianism and the equitable distribution of social assets. That certainly overlaps with progressive, but it is from a different fairness-based perspective. Following traditional definitions, liberals and progressives agree on much, but not all. Following the values-based argument, liberals are likely to want to end the suffering of laboratory animals. In the beginning of the 20th century, progressives prevented them from doing so because it would interfere with the new scientific approach to disease control. My guess is that liberals are more likely to side with individual rights on many things while progressives side with medical evidence and a broad view of social need.

[longship]

2. I suggest the following list:

Akaka (HI)
Boxer (CA)
Conrad (ND)
Dorgan (ND)
Durbin (IL)
Feingold (WI)
Harkin (IA)
Kennedy (MA)
Kerry (MA)
Leahy (VT)
Levin (MI)
Murray (WA)
Sanders (VT)

Corrections, additions, please.

[rep the dems]

5. You forgot the most progressive of them all!

Ben Nelson of course! :rofl:


And lest we forget former Senator Zell Miller. That guy was something else.

[Deep13]

6. He's progressively losing his mind.

[Zodiak]

7. I offer no corrections, longship, nor additions

Harkin (Iowa).................. 90*
Boxer (California)............. 86*
Lautenberg (New Jersey)........ 86
Durbin (Illinois).............. 81*
Feingold (Wisconsin)........... 81*
Kennedy (Massachusetts)........ 81*
Corzine (New Jersey) now Gov... 77
Kerry (Massachusetts).......... 76*
Akaka (Hawaii)................. 76*
Levin (Michigan)............... 76*
Mikulski (Maryland)............ 76
Reed (Rhode Island)............ 76
Sarbanes (Maryland)............ 76

Just a comparison. These are my most progressive senators, as I score them. The * are the ones we have in common. Sorry 'bout Corzine still being on my list. When the 110th Congress starts, he will be removed.

[cali]

8. Lousy list n/t

[Bullet1987]

9. Obama...

...if you go by voting record. He has the second or third most Progressive voting record in the Senate.

[Zodiak]

10. Obama is just below that...at 71.

Of course, I need to update. The last 4 months or so are not added in.

[Zodiak]

11. Thank you for you unsolicited approval n/t

[Bullet1987]

12. Oh Please...

Of course, I need to update. The last 4 months or so are not added in.

Oh please, you little survery is based off your (probably biased) opinion. There's nothing scientific about it. Most of the legitimate voting websites that extrapolate how liberal(Progressive) or Conservative a Senator is puts Obama in the Top 5...if not Top 3.

[Zodiak]

16. Yes, it is

So when you can cite where I have stated that my list is scientific or totally unbiased, then your argument will hold water.

Otherwise you are reacting to a figment of your imagination.

That's my list, and I am sticking to it.

You don't like it, make your own. I went by bill passages and nominations...you can feel free to do whatever you wish. You can even PM me your email addie and I will send you the Excel file and you can tweak it to your heart's desire. And then post your own results.

You should do that anyways because it is a good mental exercise and gets you close to the issues.

[longship]

15. Thanks for this.

I forgot about Lautenberg. I'd have added him if I would have remembered him.

About Mikulski, Reed, and Sarbanes, I'm just not that educated about them, but I'll take your word on it.

I take it that you'd place Sanders near the top of your list.

[Zodiak]

18. We all have our own opinions

I suggest you do a little exercise for yourself. It is not that hard with the "do nothing" Congress of 109th because there really is not that much to score (if you only do the Democrats). It should take you one afternoon or so. Put the scores in Excel or similar format.

I got 21 votes that were important to me and scored them because there is so much BS on message boards. I do not like arguing without a rudder and my feet not planted in the facts. I went with this system to see who was good and who was bad in my eyes...and that means, basically, that they must be against the Bush agenda.

I really need to update this list for the last four months worth of votes. I chose not to do it before because I thought that posting my results before the election would really make a few people mad because we needed to win so badly. But I need to do it now.

Thanks for your response.

If you would like, my journal has the methodology and all of the bills I scored (as well as the full list of Dem senators). It will let you know better what those numbers exactly mean and give you an idea whether or not you can "take my word for it".

If you would like, PM me your email addie and I can send you the Excel file to save you some research. You can add/subtract what bills you feel are important or include amendment votes you feel are important (which is why I did it because I think amendments are not a good indicator). Just promise that if you find a mistake, let me know.

...and the critic above is welcome to do it, too. Maybe he can find a mistake somewhere and strut around DU like a game rooster!

[Debs]

21. If you are including the new Senators

Then Sherrod Brown should also be on the list.

[Hippo_Tron]

13. Here's some additions (including incoming Senators)

Inouye (HI), Mikulski (MD), Brown (OH), Tester (MT). Lautenberg and Menendez would both be on this list if not for their vote for the torture act. I'll have to see how they vote in the next congress to make my judgement on them.

[Zodiak]

19. Those two odious votes will be added...

to my list post haste. They score well on my list, but that vote will knock 'em down a notch or two. There are a lot of senators from the 75-60 range.

[cali]

22. What about Bernie? n/t

[longship]

17. I deliberately left Obama off the list.

My reason is that I don't have enough data on him. He's such a new Senator, I just can't form an opinion about him. Also, Barack seems to talk a lot less progressive than he votes, which is worrisome.

[Zodiak]

20. I concur

He is pretty good, though....71 on my list. Less than I thought he would be, but better than some others that are considered on the "left".

[depakid]

14. Hardly a waste of time

Since a half dozen or more of them ROUTINELY vote with Republicans- and advance far right policies on TV.

[Pushed To The Left]

23. Here's a good way to find out who the true progressives are:

http://action.aclu.org/site/VoteCenter?JServSessionIdr011=xzpl9df731.app26a&congress=109&location=S&session_num=1&page=congScorecard


ACLU scorecard!

[gulliver]

24. They are all progressives on the Dem side, of course.

Progressivism comprises a wide range of attitudes. I really get sick of hearing one particular branch using the term indiscrimately. When talking environmentalism, talk environmentalism. When talking civil rights, talk civil rights. When talking peace advocacy, talk peace advocacy. When talking social justice, talk social justice. But don't argue "progressivism" unless you are in a discussion where each part is given its due.

Which Senators listen to true Rock and Roll?

(Trick question...only Liebermann. All the rest are into corporate metal.)

[Bullet1987]

25. Good point...

Progressivism comprises a wide range of attitudes. I really get sick of hearing one particular branch using the term indiscrimately. When talking environmentalism, talk environmentalism. When talking civil rights, talk civil rights. When talking peace advocacy, talk peace advocacy. When talking social justice, talk social justice. But don't argue "progressivism" unless you are in a discussion where each part is given its due.

Which Senators listen to true Rock and Roll?

(Trick question...only Liebermann. All the rest are into corporate metal.)

Good point. There are different aspects of Progressivism. I know Obama is very big on social justice and civil rights. I don't know about enviromentalism though.