I'm sorry to let my curiosity get the best of me. But I just had to know - where did Elizabeth Dole's "ranked 93rd in effectiveness" come from? I first heard about this in a political ad from Kay Hagan, who is running against Elizabeth Dole for senate, and I mentioned it on a blog post Oct 9th.
There are all kinds of organizations that rank our elected officials. Most have an agenda. An environmental group would probably give Elizabeth Dole a 0% rating, while a right to life group would give her a 100% rating. These types of ratings are based on how well her beliefs reflect their agenda, and in my opinion are fairly meaningless. I'm sure the ACLU gives her a low ranking and the NRA gives her a high ranking. There's no news there, those are groups with an agenda.
The "ranked 93rd in overall effectiveness" rating can be found on a site called congress.org & apparently comes form a company called Knowlegis. Click here to go the Congress.org site & look around. You'll find it. Knowlegis apparently tries to rate individual members of the House & Senate based on many criteria, some tangible and measurable, others intangible, with some criteria weighted more than others. It seems fairly complex and involved. It is NOT based on how they voted, but it comes with lots of caveats. Senator Dole could probably argue that their methodology is flawed, you can find something wrong in anything complex, especially when it involves items that can't readily be measured, and are weighted.
I was wondering why neither of the candidates would tell us straight out who came up with that rating. I still wonder. I dont know if Senator Dole could argue that they are biased or not. Using their methods, which they applied to everybody in the Senate (John McCain was #10, Barack Obama #11), she was listed as #93, out of 100. She could certainly argue that their methods were not accurate, and perhaps make it stick. But she hasnt. Maybe she's decided it's best to let it go & hopes it blows over.
My prediction: I'll be surprised if Elizabeth Dole loses the election. This is the south, she's a fairly conservative Republican, I dont think I need to paint a picture.
Anyway, interesting reading if you're interested. If you aren't interested, its pretty boring. This most likely is, but possibly not, my last commentary of any kind on the 2008 elections.