When kerry was liberal- alook at the "most liberal" ranking

What's going on here?

The "most liberal" label comes from a credible source: the National Journal, bible of Beltway wonks. Guided by contributing editor and CNN commentator William Schneider, the National Journal has been using the same complicated, computerized process to rank "conservative" and "liberal" members of Congress since 1981.But if Kerry is so liberal, why did Kucinich, Howard Dean, and even John Edwards attract more support from labor, peace activists, and other groups traditionally associated with the left? Why did Democratic Party leaders applaud when these "unelectable" progressives gave way to the more mainstream, moderate Kerry?

Using a different ranking system, the liberal group Americans for Democratic Action put Kerry at number twenty-five among Senate liberals in 2003. (Ted Kennedy ranked number five.) Nor does Kerry make the ADA's lifetime top-ten list of Senate liberals, headed by the late Paul Wellstone at number one.

Jeff Blodgett runs Wellstone Action, a group that trains political organizers and promotes progressive politics."Paul saw himself as part of a movement, connected to organizations around the country," Blodgett says. Wellstone proposed legislation that he knew would not pass, like a single-payer health insurance bill "just because he thought it should be part of the debate." More than anything he saw himself as an activist and a "voice for the voiceless," Blodgett says.

The same can hardly be said of John Kerry. He endorsed the idea of campaign finance reform but spent heavily to drive away potential opponents in his reelection campaigns. And he annoyed progressives in Massachusetts with his opposition to single-payer health care and his unenthusiastic support for raising the minimum wage--a major cause of his colleague Ted Kennedy. Kerry also supported the welfare reform bill that did away with Aid to Families with Dependent Children--a vote that more than anything divided the Wellstone liberals from the Clinton New Democrats.

A couple of things to know about the National Journal rankings: Kerry rated number one last year for the first time in more than a decade. Not coincidentally, 2003 was also the year he missed thirty-seven of the sixty-two votes tallied in the ranking process because he was out on the campaign trail.What was not included in the National Journal rankings is at least as important as what was. The Journal looks at votes cast by Senators and Representatives in three areas: economic, social, and foreign policy. Kerry missed all the 2003 votes in two of the three categories. So his ranking is based entirely on economic policy. Trade, an area where Kerry has always been at odds with the Democratic base, barely showed up on the radar screen. Some of the most significant votes he cast on the issue--for NAFTA, Fast Track, and normal trade relations with China--did not take place in 2003. On the most important trade votes in 2003, such as dropping trade barriers with Africa and the Caribbean, and free trade agreements with Chile and Singapore, Kerry was a no-show.

Kerry isn't the only one whose record seems distorted in the National Journal. Some of the most conservative members of Congress found themselves rated as moderates because of their votes opposing the President's Medicare plan, supplemental appropriations for the reconstruction of Iraq, and the drug war in South America, all of which they viewed as wasteful government spending. Representative Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, a proud rightwinger who was rated among the moderates in 2003, told the National Journal it should change its ratings system.
http://www.progressive.org/may04/conn0504.html

Nader or Bush?

If Kerry doesnt make amends.

I doubt that Kerry is going to making special concessions for you and corporatewhore. Maybe Hugo would, though.

but you wouldnt want to factor "safe states" or "givens" under a winner take all electoral college scam into your simplistic, bullying propaganda. Sleeping well? Imagine a coordinated voter pledge among disappointed lefties? I think Kerry and his coordinators should start showing some interest in the progressives.

Kerry may have had a few votes in the past that we don't like (IWR, Patriot Act) but he has also voted for almost all of the Democratic bills. IWR and Patriot Act are pretty much inexcusable, but he is still a hell of a lot better than four more years of Shrub.

You said it. So why doesn't he decry how wrong they were ? Is that too much to ask?

We all know the answer to that , don't we?
Saddam or the USA? who are you voting for? Same rhetorical choice isn't it.

The fact that Kerry has been ranked differently by different organizations shows that 'liberal' and 'conservative' are meaningless when used to describe a politician. Just as Bush could be termed ultra-conservative socially and just idiotic fiscally, Kerry can be termed liberal on some issues and conservative on others. Instead of worrying about some ranking and looking at a tiny fraction of Kerry's Senate votes (hmm... sounds like a Bush ad), you should consider the political fact: our nominee is a firm Democrat, in line with most of the mainstream Democratic planks. I for one am quite fine with that.

that Bush is trying to paint Kerry with. With the last few years of votes and non-votes myself I would not rate Kerry as the "most liberal" in Congress. I would think that this news that the National Journal ratings may be skewed would be welcome news to those moderates that are araid of the "liberal" label.

Myself I would rather have the "most liberal" Senator running for President but since I cannot I will vote for what we have.

and if he really is then this country is in very bad shape

And you do realize that Dennis Kucinich would be proven a DINO statistically if all his votes were analyzed over his years in Congress?

Heh...I fought that accusation for over a decade in regard to Dennis Kucinich and I'll fight the distortions against Kerry today.

The writer CONVENIENTLY leaves out the fact that Kerry was the FIRST Senator to advocate for gays legislatively.

That Kerry was the FIRST to say gays should serve openly in the military.

That Kerry advocated for felons to receive their voting rights back after serving their time.

That Kerry helped craft the Kyoto Protocol.

That Kerry has exposed more government corruption than ANY lawmaker in modern history.

Ms. Conniff cherry picks years and timeframes, has deluded herself and vainly will be deluding others who are ignorant of the fuller story.

It would seem your "firsts" might be quantified just a little? ...."first" Senator from Mass? First Senator with two terms?
I'm just wondering if you can back this up with any links ?

Not that I find this suspect, because my only comment if this were true is
WTF HAPPENED TO HIM , THEN????????

It's laid out there.

And it is FIRST Senator in the US Senate. His first gay friendly legislation was in 85 and noone would join him as sponsor.

The article admits that single-payer is dead in the water, but typically gives Kerry no credit for proposing a very impressive alternative that can actually pass.

Also, the article talks about his free trade votes, but ignores the bills he introduced, some more incremental than others, but all striving to put in place strong labor and environmental protections while trying to eliminate the secret tribunal system. Which is why these bills usually come with support from labor and environmental groups.

As for campaign finance reform, he didn't just "endorse" it - with Wellstone he created the model which put the issue back on the table. Not to mention voluntarily refusing to take PAC money for his campaigns.

And, naturally, Ruth Conniff fails to even mention Kerry's environmental leadership in the Senate which is one of the most impressive records in Senate history. Why break up a good whining session? What fun would being a progressive be if we couldn't bitch incessantly at our own?

I won't even go into secondary progressive issues like consumer protection, food safety and such that groups like Public Citizen have shown Kerry to be one of the most progressive members of the Senate, despite Ms. Conniff's attempts to complain that he is not Dennis.

that is an important issue and one kerry is perfect on.and separation of church and state also.

And although he has attempted to portray himself as a more moderate alternative to Kerry on the campaign trail, Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Edwards (D-NC) was ranked as the fourth most liberal Senator in 2003 with a rating of 94.5. Like Kerry, Edwards also missed many of the votes used in the survey because he was campaigning for president.

One noteworthy observation about Edwards is the fact that he had previously maintained a consistently moderate voting record throughout the first four years of his first six-year term in the U.S. Senate. However, when he decided to forgo running for reelection to the U.S. Senate in 2003 to make a run for president, his record abruptly moved to the left.

http://www.talonnews.com/news/2004/march/0301_kerry_liberal.shtml

Nader, and, I'm sure the Greens will run someone other than a "not quite as bad as dumbya". If not, I like the idea of writing Hugo Chavez in.

Of course, the DLC/rightwing types will whine about "wasting" our votes as they slap themselves on the back, try to convince themselves that they are progressives, and vote for more of the same.

It's the DLC democrats who think that progessives HAVE to vote for Kerry.

Not if he doesn't do something remotely progressive they don't. Nader's million plus votes last election demonstrate this.

You'd think the Kerry campaign would be more worried about the progressives than the moderate republicans. From the remarks here, it seems apparent that is the farthest thing from their minds.

:nuke:

Feel weird everytime I see a Kerry supporter say that.

But, I do not think he is some Bush-lite scumbag who will continue on the same course as the Repukes.

Kerry is not as liberal as Kuicinch or Nader that I will give you.

However, Kerry is more liberal than Clinton, Lieberbush, or the way the DLC ran Gore the last time.

After all, the idea of changing NAFTA has entered from the fringe of political discussion into the national debate. He has said he will not back the FTAA.

The idea of National Healthcare has entered back into the National debate in a way Gore would not approach last time.

We are now talking about a program of National Service where kids can get money for college WITHOUT having to carry a gun.

Kerry will not take a unilateral piss on our allies in his approach to foreign relations.

He will protect a woman's right to choose.

He has pledged to lift the gag order Bush enacted on family clinics.

He will fight for real environmental legislation instead of Orwellian giveaways to the corporate powers that be.

He has pledged to let the Patriot Act lapse.

He will take away the tax benefits for corporations that ship jobs overseas.

He has pledged to close corporate tax loopholes.

He wants to get rid of the tax cuts for the wealthy and stop the deficit leak.

He wants to fight for strong enforcement of Civil Rights Laws listing the ADA and reversing Buckhannon which makes enforcement of all Civil Rights laws difficult.

He will fully fund Head Start. (really important never been funded right)

He wants a College Opportunity Tax Credit to help people to be able to afford college.

He is the first national candidate to not only talk about cleaner fuels and reducing our dependence on foreign oil but to actually talk about loosing ourselves from the "demon oil."

He has a 90% lifetime record of voting with the AFL/CIO and stands beside the base of organized labor. He does not demonize workers and their unions.

This is a man who can change his mind and makes an informed decision.

_

life time rating place him at a rather less liberal level than Kerry.

Kucinich had a consistant record of not only voting against right to choice, but also voted consistantly against allowing federal employees health insurance to pay for birth control pills or any other form of contraception.

I will accept Dennis Kucinich's recent change of heart, but facts are fact, and a lot of people were unable to make medical choices regarding family planning through their health insurance because of Kucinichs opposition to birth control.

When you look at Kerry's rating from a dozen organizations that rate a candidates political leanings, every one places Kerry as being among the top liberal in congress, He rates overall even more liberal than Dennis Kucinich:

Kerry's latest ratings, done in 2000 are the following:

ADA gives him 95 percent

AFSCME gives him a 100 percent

League of Conservation Voters 100 percent

Concord Coalition 45 percent

National Taxpayers Union(Conservative)11 percent

Chamber of Commmerce of the U.S.(Business) 53 percent


Amercan Conservative Union 0 percent

Kerry has the highest record of voting along with Ted Kennedy, who conservatives use as a measure of liberalism. And who in fact is has the most liberal voting record in COngress. Kerry has the highest percentage of voting with Kennedy of any other member of Congress. 94 percent.

Gephardt has pretty much the same rating from the ADA and AFSCME
Is close to Kerry from the Leagus of Conservation Voters at 94 percent, has the same 0 percent from the American Conservatives Union.
Was given an even lower score from the Concod Coalition (28 percent)
Almost as low as Kerry from the American Taxpayers Unions (13 percent)

ON the other hands, ADA gives Edwards a 90 percent, ACLU gives Edwards a 67 percent, for 2000 the League of Conservation Voters gave him a 100 percent, but the priot year he got a 78 percent.

On the other hand, the Concord Coalition gave Edwards an 88 percent,

American Taxpayers Union places him a little better in their eyes than Kerry or Gephardt, at 15 percent,and the American Conservative Unions gave Edwards an 8 percent.

Not making Edwards a massive conservative, but he has been a bit more conservative than either Kerry or Gephardt. What do you expect from the South though. For the South, Edwards is a raging pinko.WHich is good for Edwards in my book.

So you have A number of Liberal watchdog organizations rating Kerry as being extremely Liberal, a number of COnservative Watchdog Organizations giving Kerry the lowest score they can give in real numbers (zero) and Business related organizations giving him low bit mpoderately low scores due to his opposition of big business, and support for small businesses.

Sorry, Kerry is still , by the rating of pretty much everyone who analyzes these things, among the top five most liberal membersin the Senate, and the top ten most liberal elected officials in Washington.