Any organization that ranks someone like Bobby Scott an "A+" must be somewhat skewed to favor Democrats. I think the partisan breakup of the list clarifies that pretty well. And I'm not saying that the list is invalid or that such a skew is uncommon; most organizations that issue these types of rankings are partisansly skewed in one manner or another.

So given that, the fact that Frank Wolf scores the highest among all Republicans, and in fact scores higher than a 50%, indicating he voted in line with this group's agenda over half of the time, is a pretty solid indication that Wolf has a solid moderate voting record.

One who votes against stem cell research, for never-ending war in Iraq, against the environment time and time again, against a woman's right to choose, for tax cuts for the super-rich while screwing over the working and middle classes, for torture, etc., etc.  Yes, verrry "moderate."

Judy Feder is elected and we say "Farewell Frank" once and for all, I will guarantee you that the 10th CD rep's grade will go from "C" to "A". Is there any reason 10th CD voters should stick with mediocrity (at best) when they can have excellence?

both scored A+ (100%), while McCain got a INC (50%).    

After all, the DMI is one of the most left-leaning groups outside of the American Socialist Party.  I'm surprised that they would rate any Republican higher than D- and I suspect that they downgraded Senator Webb for carrying a concealed weapon.  (Horrors!)

Would you publish a series of similar ratings from the American Enterprise Institute and give it anything other than the ridicule that it would deserve for its blantantly partisan bias?

of the fact that the Republican Party is for the rich and against the middle and working class people of this country?  Maybe you should talk to Jim Webb sometime, he can discuss with you why this was one of the main reasons he switched from the Republican to the Democratic Party.

By the way, I had never heard of DMI before today, but their analysis looks sound to me.  What's wrong with it, specifically?

in the grading? You did not give us any of the methodology.  The careful selection of just which bill, which amendments, veto-overide attempts, and so on were used to arrive at the grade---- and why.  I ask because I am curious as to just what they think constitutes "pro-middle class" or "favors middle class interests" (however you define middle class); and, also, because the selection process itself can skew the results.  We see this all the time with the various special interest groups, from right- to-lifers to gay rights.  

here and here for methodology.  

It looks to be a reasonable set of criteria, based on well-defined choice of legislation, with no contortions or sophistry involved. I especially apprreciated their definition of "Middle Class," based on life-style and opportunities. Here is their definition (or description):

What do you mean by "middle class"?
The middle class is more than an income bracket. Over the past fifty years, a middle-class standard of living in the United States has come to mean having a secure job, the opportunity to own a home, access to health care, retirement security, time off for vacation, illness and the birth or adoption of a child, opportunities to save for the future and the ability to provide a good education, including a college education, for one's children. When these middle-class fundamentals are within the reach of most Americans, the nation is stronger economically, culturally and democratically. Most Americans identify themselves as middle class. Yet DMI is concerned not only with those who currently enjoy a middle-class standard of living, but also with expanding the middle class by increasing the ability and opportunities of poor people to enter the middle class. The middle class is strengthened when more poor people are able to work their way into its ranks. In a nation that is increasingly polarized between the very wealthy and everyone else, DMI sees the poor and middle class as sharing many of the same interests. Simply put: what strengthens and expands the middle class is good for America.

I see.  The Republican Party is for the rich and against the middle class and the working class people of this country.  They are the party of coruption and pollution.  They support evil, big corporate interests at the expense of the average citizen.  Gracious, has this been publicized to the voters?

If so, explain to me again how the Republicans managed to defeat 5 of the last 7 Democrats who ran against them for President.  Tell me again how they took control of Congress while the only two-term Democratic President since WWII was in his first term.

Basically what you are saying, Lowell, is that the American voters are dupes who aren't smart enough to know what is good for them.  Sorry, but I have a different theory.  The truth is that occassionally both parties can get way out on a tangent and the voters haul them back in.  Both parties on occassion have the best idea.  And, in all circumstances, politicians of both parties are generally trying to do what they think is in the best interest of the nation as a whole.

Keep drinking your own bathwater (or Kool-Aid) and the Republicans will do us in again.  To paraphrase Gary Trudeau on Richard Nixon, "The President is a lot smarter than you think."

When one looks at the health of our economy, it's almost as if we are living in two different countries. Some say that things have never been better. The stock market is at an all-time high, and so are corporate profits. But these benefits are not being fairly shared. When I graduated from college, the average corporate CEO made 20 times what the average worker did; today, it's nearly 400 times. In other words, it takes the average worker more than a year to make the money that his or her boss makes in one day.

Wages and salaries for our workers are at all-time lows as a percentage of national wealth, even though the productivity of American workers is the highest in the world. Medical costs have skyrocketed. College tuition rates are off the charts. Our manufacturing base is being dismantled and sent overseas. Good American jobs are being sent along with them.

In short, the middle class of this country, our historic backbone and our best hope for a strong society in the future, is losing its place at the table. Our workers know this, through painful experience. Our white-collar professionals are beginning to understand it, as their jobs start disappearing also. And they expect, rightly, that in this age of globalization, their government has a duty to insist that their concerns be dealt with fairly in the international marketplace.

In the early days of our republic, President Andrew Jackson established an important principle of American-style democracy ­that we should measure the health of our society not at its apex, but at its base. Not with the numbers that come out of Wall Street, but with the living conditions that exist on Main Street. We must recapture that spirit today.

And under the leadership of the new Democratic Congress, we are on our way to doing so. The House just passed a minimum wage increase, the first in 10 years, and the Senate will soon follow. We've introduced a broad legislative package designed to regain the trust of the American people. We've established a tone of cooperation and consensus that extends beyond party lines. We're working to get the right things done, for the right people and for the right reasons.

Source

Another reason Rick Boucher is the best darn Congressman serving today!

It is an argument I am having with our County chair person.  I maintain that letting them go unopposed is a defacto endorsement of their crummy voting records.  It is better to oppose them even if we lose rather than that.