New Studies Show Bayh the Least Liberal of Democratic Senators
National Journal has assembled an excellent graphic that details which senators have crossed party lines the most frequently on the $410 billion 2009 spending bill. That measure is expected to become law by mid-week but has sparked nagging questions about Democratic party unity from the Beltway media.
It may not surprise many political junkies, but Sen. Evan Bayh (IN) is the Democrat who has crossed party lines most often on the spending bill, voting with the GOP eight times since debate on the legislation began last week. (Sen. Olympia Snowe [R-ME] mirrors him on the Republican side, voting alongside Democrats eight times during the process.)
But that's not the only National Journal study that deems Bayh his party's most conservative senator. When the magazine's annual vote rankings came out a few weeks ago, Bayh was ranked 51st in the Senate on a composite score of liberalism -- placing him ahead of former Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), who placed 43rd, as well as Snowe, who was No. 47, and Collins, who was No. 50.
Now, the National Journal rankings are no ordinary congressional vote study. After then-candidate Barack Obama was ranked the most liberal senator for 2007, the GOP had a field day using the statistic for attack lines on the presidential campaign trail.
It appears that Bayh is emerging as his party's most vocal centrist ... and just in time for the budget debate to heat up.
















"Bayh was ranked 51st in the Senate"
That doesn't make Bayh "his party's most vocal centrist", that makes him a Republican.
March 9, 2009 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Only if you assume that the Senate's 50-50. But there are 56 (57 counting Franken, 59 counting Franken, Sanders, and Lieberman).
March 9, 2009 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.progressivepunch.org/members.jsp?chamber=Senate&sort=overall-current has Bayh at the number 56th most progressive DEM . . . There is always the jack_hole, Ben Nelson.
March 9, 2009 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Any Dem in the Senate who runs for or is up for consideration for a national office will automagically be the most liberal senator EVAR in the National Journal rankings. They did it to Obama, they did it to Kerry. They're a fucking joke, as is anyone who pays them any attention.
March 9, 2009 5:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you have a centrist party and a conservative party, and a member of the centrist party frequently sides with the conservatives instead... does this really make him a "centrist"?
March 9, 2009 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
If they ranked IQs, Bayh's place in the standings would be similar.
March 9, 2009 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bayh is exactly where he wants to be - lining up his 2016 Presidential bid.
March 9, 2009 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which will be about as successful as Gravel's.
March 9, 2009 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
In addition to him being a Benedict Arnold, he has the personality of a wet dishrag. What's he going to run as in 2016, an elderly dishrag?
March 9, 2009 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
And this guy has the nerve to go on the Sunday talk shows giving the impression he is supporting the President. I can't even believe he was a serious contender for VP. Maybe he should have been - then he couldn't vote against the President. I think it's time for Obama to have a heart to heart with Bayh
March 9, 2009 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
BTW, I spend a lot of time at Huffpo and TPM, but I must admit the original reporting here and the commenters are first rate.
March 9, 2009 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why on earth would you write that Bayh "is emerging as the party's most vocal centrist"?
What Bayh is inb fact emerging as, is the most right-wing Democrat in the Senate.
He must really hate his father, who was a reliably liberal senator, and a better man than little Evan will ever be.
March 9, 2009 8:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Birch Bayh was a profile in courage. Evan Bayh is a profile in cowardice. He's also evidence (as with W.) that the second generation in political dynasty often pales next to the first.
March 9, 2009 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
TRANSLATION: the National Journal rankings are a stupid fucking JOKE. their methodology is total bullshit and there is no reason to hold them out for anything except ridicule.
March 10, 2009 6:43 AM | Reply | Permalink