Jon Fleischman

Club For Growth 2012 Scorecard – How Did Californians Score?

Yesterday the Club for Growth released its 2012 Congressional Scorecard, which ranks the voting behavior of members of Congress based on issues relating to limited government and economic growth. As I have said in prior years, I commend every FlashReport reader to look at this scorecard as a key indicator of how their Member of Congress is voting on Capitol Hill.  It’s important that you take the time to review this because there are a lot of Republicans in Congress who talk a good game, but when it comes to casting the key, tough votes — well, you’d be surprised to see who is and who is not.  Oh yes, the Club for Growth, both by direct giving, and by helping to connect up its members with pro-growth candidates, is responsible for millions upon millions of dollars going to great candidates endorsed by the Club.

“2012 was a difficult year for economic freedom,” said Club for Growth President Chris Chocola. “Whether it was the GOP’s support of massive tax increases or the constant assault on liberty by the Obama administration, the pro-growth caucus in Congress has a lot of work to do in 2013. The Club’s scorecard is intended to help our members and the general public understand who talks a good game on limiting government and passing pro-growth policies, and who backs up their words with votes. We urge the next generation of conservative leaders to keep up the fight in the 113thCongress.”

Highlights Nationally from the Club for Growth’s 2012 Congressional Scorecard:

– Three United States Senators received perfect scores in 2012: Jim DeMint (SC), Rand Paul (KY), and Mike Lee (UT) – all of whom also qualify for the Defender of Economic Freedom Award.
– Senators Pat Toomey (PA), Marco Rubio (FL), and Ron Johnson (WI) had 2012 scores and LifeScores high enough to qualify for the Defender of Economic Freedom Award.
– Two current United States Senators will receive Defender of Economic Freedom Awards for their voting record in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2012: Senators Jeff Flake (AZ) and Tim Scott (SC).
– 18 current House members who received scores of 90 percent or better in 2012 also had LifeScores of 90 or better to qualify for the Defender of Economic Freedom Award. Two former House members qualified as well (Quayle, Walsh).
– Three members of Congress received 100 percent ratings in 2012. Of those, two also have 100 percent LifeScores: Congressmen Justin Amash (MI-03), and Tim Huelskamp (KS-01). In addition, Congressman Paul Broun (GA-10) received a 100 percent rating in 2012 and has a LifeScore of 99%.
– One Senate Democrat scored zero in 2012: Senator Jay Rockefeller (WV). 13 House Democrats scored lower than ten percent.
– Republican Leadership scores in 2012 were: Boehner: N/A, Cantor: 66%, McCarthy: 66%, McMorris Rodgers: 70%, Lankford: 80%, Ryan: 71%
– Democratic leadership scores in 2012 were: Pelosi: 17%, Hoyer: 17%, Clyburn: 18%, Becerra: 18%, Van Hollen: 17%.

Below you can see the Club for Growth Scorecard ratings and rankings for California’s Senators and Members of Congress.  You can see the entire scorecard online here, which includes detailed information on what votes were used to score the card.

Some general observations:

-  Needless to say California’s two very liberal U.S. Senators scored very poorly, at 10% and 5% for Feinstein and Boxer, respectively.
-  The Republicans who scored the highest – Tom McClintock, John Campbell, Dana Rohrabacher, Wally Herger and Ed Royce.
-  Only Tom McClintock scored high enough to garner the Club’s Defense of Economic Freedom Award for 2012.
-  The Republicans who scored the lowest – Ken Calvert, Elton Gallegly, and Brian Bilbray.
-  The Democrats who scored the highest (understand this is relative) – Jim Costa and Jerry McNerney.
-  The Democrats who scored the lowest – Dennis Cardoza, Grace Napolitano, Joe Baca and Bob Filner.

 State Dist. Party Member Rank Score Lifetime
 CA Senator D Feinstein, Dianne 72 10% 7%
 CA Senator D Boxer, Barbara 88 5% 3%
 CA 4 R McClintock, Tom 8 96% 98%
 CA 48 R Campbell, John 45 87% 89%
 CA 46 R Rohrabacher, Dana 62 85% 87%
 CA 2 R Herger, Wally 79 80% 87%
 CA 40 R Royce, Edward 79 80% 91%
 CA 49 R Issa, Darrell 85 79% 83%
 CA 52 R Hunter, Duncan D. 96 77% 82%
 CA 42 R Miller, Gary 130 71% 78%
 CA 22 R McCarthy, Kevin 147 66% 82%
 CA 21 R Nunes, Devin 153 65% 76%
 CA 45 R Bono Mack, Mary 169 64% 61%
 CA 41 R Lewis, Jerry 175 62% 68%
 CA 25 R McKeon, Howard 186 60% 70%
 CA 26 R Dreier, David 187 60% 71%
 CA 19 R Denham, Jeff 189 60% 62%
 CA 3 R Lungren, Dan 191 60% 76%
 CA 44 R Calvert, Ken 211 57% 67%
 CA 24 R Gallegly, Elton 222 55% 69%
 CA 50 R Bilbray, Brian 244 47% 71%
 CA 20 D Costa, Jim 254 34% 19%
 CA 11 D McNerney, Jerry 257 30% 11%
 CA 47 D Sanchez, Loretta 290 19% 8%
 CA 12 D Speier, Jackie 292 19% 7%
 CA 14 D Eshoo, Anna 293 19% 9%
 CA 34 D Roybal-Allard, Lucille 298 19% 6%
 CA 10 D Garamendi, John 310 18% 8%
 CA 15 D Honda, Mike 318 18% 7%
 CA 31 D Becerra, Xavier 318 18% 9%
 CA 1 D Thompson, Mike 323 17% 9%
 CA 8 D Pelosi, Nancy 331 17% 6%
 CA 29 D Schiff, Adam 331 17% 8%
 CA 53 D Davis, Susan 331 17% 9%
 CA 5 D Matsui, Doris 331 17% 7%
 CA 28 D Berman, Howard 340 17% 8%
 CA 39 D Sanchez, Linda 343 17% 7%
 CA 37 D Richardson, Laura 351 17% 8%
 CA 23 D Capps, Lois 355 16% 6%
 CA 17 D Farr, Sam 360 16% 9%
 CA 30 D Waxman, Henry 364 15% 9%
 CA 27 D Sherman, Brad 366 15% 6%
 CA 33 D Bass, Karen 378 14% 10%
 CA 6 D Woolsey, Lynn 383 14% 7%
 CA 13 D Stark, Pete 387 13% 13%
 CA 16 D Lofgren, Zoe 389 13% 8%
 CA 7 D Miller, George 392 13% 5%
 CA 36 D Hahn, Janice 394 12% 12%
 CA 32 D Chu, Judy 407 11% 6%
 CA 9 D Lee, Barbara 410 11% 6%
 CA 35 D Waters, Maxine 414 11% 8%
 CA 18 D Cardoza, Dennis 421 9% 15%
 CA 38 D Napolitano, Grace 423 8% 4%
 CA 43 D Baca, Joe 426 8% 5%
 CA 51 D Filner, Bob 430 0% 8%