2008 Congressional Ratings Database

At a Glance

Press Release

Introduction

Since 1989, the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) has examined Congressional roll call votes to determine which members of Congress are voting in the interest of taxpayers and which are wasting Americans’ hard-earned money.

Those who protect tax dollars and cut spending deserve recognition, while those who prefer big government and using public funds for pet programs need cajoling from their constituents to improve their performance.

CCAGW’s 2008 Congressional Ratings scored 48 votes in the House and 42 votes in the Senate.  By comparison, in 2007, CCAGW rated 100 votes in the House due to the inclusion of 50 amendments that were intended to eliminate earmarks and pork-barrel spending.  While CCAGW continued to score such proposals, far fewer were permitted in the House in 2008

In 2008, Americans experienced the longest and perhaps the most intense presidential election in history. At the same time, the economy began to collapse and the nation felt the effects of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.  As a result, the members of Congress were more partisan as both chambers attempted to ram through major tax-and-spend legislation.

CCAGW rates members on a 0 to 100 percent scale. Members are placed in the following categories: 0-19% Hostile; 20-39% Unfriendly; 40-59% Lukewarm; 60-79% Friendly; 80-99% Taxpayer Hero; 100% Taxpayer Super Hero.

House and Senate Breakdown

In the House, Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.) was the sole “Taxpayer Super Hero” with a grade of 100 percent. In 2007, there were three members with a perfect score. There were 59 “Taxpayer Heroes” with a grade of 80 percent or above, the same as in 2007. The big difference was in the number of members with a perfectly abysmal score of zero.  In 2006, there were nine members with a zero rating, and in 2007 there were only two.  In 2008, the number of members with a score of zero skyrocketed to 34; a 1,600 percent increase and an indication of growing partisanship as all of them are Democrats.  That list includes Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.).  The zeroes also include House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), whose committee is responsible for the tax provisions in healthcare reform legislation, and House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar (D-Minn.), who wants his committee to approve a $600 billion highway reauthorization bill.  In 2006 and 2007, there were no “Taxpayer Super Heroes” (scoring 100 percent) in the Senate, and, unfortunately, that did not change for 2008.  There were, however, a total of 14 “Taxpayer Heroes,” one fewer than the 15 in 2007.  The two highest scores were achieved by Senators Jon Kyl (RAriz.) and Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) at 98 percent.  There were 17 senators with a score of zero, compared to 13 in 2007.  Five senators scored zero for the second year in a row, including current Vice President Joe Biden (D-Del.), Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii), then-Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), and Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.).

The Thrill of Victory

Members of the House voted against overriding President Bush’s veto of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) reauthorization, a bill that would have increased the program by $35 billion and extended it to families earning up to three times the federal poverty level.

Another important victory in the House was the defeat of Rep. Nick Rahall’s (D-W.Va.) motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill that would require current holders of oil and natural gas exploration leases to develop or forfeit existing leases before they could obtain new ones.  The legislation presumed that holders of these leases had no incentive to explore and develop the land, and that they all either had the resources to take such action or that the marketplace would allow them to obtain a reasonable return on their investment.  Enactment of this bill would have done nothing to reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign oil; in fact, it would have increased the nation’s dependence on foreign oil by impeding domestic exploration and development of oil and gas fields.

Despite the increasing attention given to earmarks and the associated scandals, members of Congress seem to have little reservation when it comes to naming a pork-barrel project after themselves.  These “monuments to me” are growing in number and absurdity.  In a small, yet important victory, the House passed Rep. Michael McCaul’s (R - Texas) amendment to the fiscal year 2009 Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act to bar funding for projects named for individuals currently serving as a House member, delegate, resident commissioner or senator.  This amendment set a precedent for future appropriations spending, as the fiscal year 2010 bills, at least in the House, will apparently not have any such earmarks.

In 2007, the Senate successfully passed a one-year adjustment for the alternative minimum tax (AMT), exempting 21 million middle-class taxpayers from receiving a tax increase, and did so without including a tax increase elsewhere to“pay for” the AMT exemption.  This was the right course of action, as the AMT was implemented in 1969 to prevent 155 wealthy taxpayers from using provisions in the tax code to avoid paying taxes.

The law, however, was never indexed for inflation, and so the AMT currently subjects an increasing number of taxpayers to a tax increase every year.  Therefore, any effort to stop the AMT from taking effect should not require any offsetting tax
increase.  Taxpayers had another AMT victory in 2008, defeating Sen. Kent Conrad’s (D-N.D.) amendment to provide a one-year adjustment to prevent up to 22 million taxpayers from paying the AMT, offset in part through taxes on oil and natural gas produced from the Outer Continental Shelf.

The Agony of Defeat

The economic “stimulus” and Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) bills were undoubtedly landmark pieces of legislation for the 110th Congress.

As the housing market collapsed and Americans felt the effects of the recession, Congress passed a “stimulus” package to provide advance refund of tax credits for most taxpayers and to raise the size of mortgage loans that the Federal Housing Administration could insure and that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could purchase.  That led to a massive expansion of government involvement in the housing market and future liabilities that may never be repaid.

Congress also faced immense pressure from the Treasury Department to hastily pass the massive TARP package, allowing the Treasury to use up to $700 billion to buy certain troubled mortgage assets.  While TARP passed with a majority in the Senate (74-25) and the House (263-171), this expensive, pork-laden piece of legislation has left taxpayers holding a multi-billion dollar bill, and set the tone for the first six months of spending in 2009.  CCAGW cautioned against both the “stimulus” and TARP packages, and has continued to advocate for the repayment of TARP funds.

Another expensive loss was the reauthorization of the Farm Bill and the override of President Bush’s veto of the legislation.  The nation’s failed farm subsidy programs should have been replaced by a revenue insurance system that would have provided a real safety net for farmers when revenues fall.  Instead, Congress chose to simply continue the present, inefficient system that dates back to the early 1930s, and continues to dole out huge payments to wealthy farmers, whether they are needed or not.  Rep. Jeff Flake’s (R-Ariz.) common-sense motion to set a $40,000 per person limit for annual direct payments to farmers was rejected by a vote of 157-259.

While Rep. McCaul’s “monument to me” amendment was successful, nearly all other earmark related amendments were rejected.  For example, Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) proposed a one-year moratorium on earmarks and a point of order against bills with earmarks for 2009.  His motion was shot down 29-71.  Similarly, Rep. Jeff Flake’s (R-Ariz.) amendment to eliminate 103 earmarks from the Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act was defeated by a vote of 63-350.

Further Analysis

CCAGW also broke down ratings based on party affiliation and membership in two fiscally conservative groups, the Republican Study Committee and the Blue Dog Democrats.  The averages were:

Senate Republicans 72 percent, up 5 percentage points from their 67 percent score in 2007; Senate Democrats 4 percent, down one percentage point from their grade of 5 percent in 2007; House Republicans 70 percent, up 10 percentage points from their average of 60 percent in 2007; House Democrats 6 percent, up one percentage point from their 5 percent score in 2007; House Republican Study Committee 79 percent, up 6 percentage points from their 73 percent score in 2007; and, House Blue Dog Democrats 10 percent, down one percentage point from their 11 percent score in 2007.

As the economy fell into a slump over the past year, Americans set new spending priorities, adjusted their family budgets, and curbed spending habits.  Unfortunately, Congress did not follow their lead, spending billions in spite of the financial crisis.  CCAGW will remain vigilant on behalf of taxpayers, and will continue to hold members of Congress accountable for their spendthrift behavior.