J. D. Prose – 3/11/09

This page was last updated on March 14, 2009.

Political Prose: Down in D.C., Altmire making lots of news; J. D. Prose; Beaver County Times; March 11, 2009.

As you read this opinion column, keep in mind Mr. Prose wears at least one other hat for the Times. Mr. Prose is also a reporter covering political stories. Ask yourself this. When a pundit gives his political opinions in one part of the paper, can he be trusted to report politics objectively elsewhere in the paper? After all, would a person whose opinion is 1+1 equals 3 report 1+1 really equals 2?

Rather than subject you to the whole column, I’ll focus on the following section.

Mr. Prose wrote, “In other news, the National Journal has concluded that Altmire is smack in the middle on the conservative-liberal scale for the House. And, when we say ‘the middle,’ we mean the ‘the middle.’

“The nonpartisan magazine gave Altmire a composite score of 50 for both his conservative and liberal votes on economic, social and foreign policy issues. ‘That really does mean that I really do work with both sides,’ said Altmire, who was bashed as an out-of-touch liberal by two-time-losing Republican Melissa Hart in the last election.

“Altmire’s conservative credentials earned him membership in the Blue Dogs, a 51-member House gang more vicious than the Crips or the Bloods. OK, we might’ve exaggerated some. It’s actually a powerful voting bloc of conservative Democrats who aren’t afraid to buck Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s liberal agenda.”

It’s good to know Mr. Prose is a company man. As a reminder, Times editorials promote Mr. Altmire as moderate, et cetera. The Times finally found a vote rating to support that story.

What may be more telling is what Mr. Prose chose not to report. Mr. Prose didn’t tell us about Mr. Altmire’s ratings by Americans for Democratic Action (self-described as “America’s most experienced independent liberal lobbying organization”) and the American Conservative Union (self-described as “the nation’s oldest and largest grassroots conservative lobbying organization”).

Mr. Altmire has an ADA Liberal Quotient (ADA terminology) of 87.5% [for 40 votes in 2007 (95%)/2008 (80%)] and an ACU rating of 28% (25 votes in 2007). Neither of those ratings indicates a politician “smack in the middle on the conservative-liberal scale” or one with “conservative credentials.”

I can’t help but get a chuckle out of pieces like this. Lefties spend much of their time telling us how despicable conservatives are, and then they go and try to convince us they themselves support conservative principles. How stupid do lefties believe the public is?

I posted the above info on the Times website and got the following curious response from “kd”: “Yes, but I put more stock in a non-partisan publication’s study than one that is clearly for one side or the other. Notice the results of both the studies show him as being pretty liberal. If you’re a liberal organization, of course you want you’re [sic] candidate to be on your side. And if you’re a conservative organization, are you really going to admit a Democrat is not that liberal?” In summary, kd wants us to believe a group dedicated to liberalism is going to give someone a high rating even if they aren’t liberal.

kd’s comment appears illogical on at least three points. First, kd takes Mr. Prose’s word that the National Journal is non-partisan. As I’ve written before, I’m very skeptical when someone uses the label “non-partisan.” Second, why would two organizations (ACU & ADA) whose job is lobbying and rating votes along ideological (not party) lines shoot their credibility in the foot by skewing their report? Third, kd appears to ignore the fact each group uses its own fixed set of votes to rate the politicians. Short of misreporting a person’s votes, I think it would be little tough to rig the ratings as kd describes.

In any case, the data doesn’t support kd’s “logic.” For example, the ACU gave at least three Republicans (Collins, Snowe, & Specter) sub-50% ratings. Sen. Snowe had the same rating (28%) for 2007 as Mr. Altmire. ADA gave Sens. Collins and Snowe LQs of 75% and 80% for 2008, respectively. Using kd’s logic, these senators should have received high ratings from the ACU and low ratings from ADA.