Windjammer senators vote ratings (foreign scores and activity scores revealed)

[windjammer]

Well, now I'm elected, I guess it's time to reveal a big project I have in mind: analyzing how our dear senators vote. Globally this: http://www.nationaljournal.com/2013-vote-ratings

This will be simple, I will make 4 scores for each senator:
-Are they active? The first score would just show if they often miss the votes or not. If the senator gets 100% for this score, it would mean that he wouldn't have missed a single vote.
-Economy: I will analyze as well how they vote on economic issues. If the senator gets 100%, it would mean that he always votes like a progressist would vote. If the senator gets 0%. It would mean he would always vote like a fiscal conservative would do.
-Same thing for social issues, and foreign issues!


Have you any questions?

[windjammer]

I was thinking of doing something like this, but you beat me to the punch

How will you define whether a bill is progressive or conservative?

Well, by myself . I mean, if a bill for instance, wants to cut the income tax, I will obviously consider that as a conservative bill .

[windjammer]

Sounds like it could be pretty cool. Will you be doing amendments as well as final votes?

Good question! While I believe a final vote is more important than an amendment to a bill, amendments are still useful in order to determinate if the senator is moderate, progressive, conservative for Atlasian standards. Indeed, amendments (to a bill) are often more partisan than the final vote.
So, what I plan to do for that: I give 1 point for an amendment to a bill, and 3 for the final vote! Any suggestion will obviously be welcome .

This Economic things looks weird... You can be a progressive and not stupid enough to raise expenditures until the country go Bankrupt...

Superique, I don't understand the problem. My project won't make any judgement like this: "this senator is a bad senator". I want to analyze how conservative, progressive senators are by Atlasian standards.

I like this...

I support this 100%

I would enjoy this.

This Economic things looks weird... You can be a progressive and not stupid enough to raise expenditures until the country go Bankrupt...

Presumably, the goal isn't to be at either extreme (unless you're TNF).

Thank you all .

Are you trying to get me teabagged? Just kidding! I like this man.

You raise a good point . I don't plan to only analyze the vote of the senators. I plan to do basically the same project of primary colors: http://primarycolors.net/senate/
How conservative, progressive,..; you are compared with your region.
For instance, a typical Fed from the Mideast will be more socially conservative and less economically moderate than a typical Fed from the South!
And a typical Laborite senator in the Northeast will be less fiscal progressive than a typical Laborite senator in the MW/PA.

This will be much more difficult to do that, but as I love math, I'm ready to try .

However, even if I plan to determinate progressive value/conservative value of the senator, like primary color, I won't make however the "should be primaried/good federalist,...". Why? For two reasons:
1) I know I will make mistakes.
2) And openly advocating to primary senators, how to say, they could be quite angry against me, and considering my future position, I prefer to keep good relations with everyone .

[windjammer]

With the expection of Spiral, True Con, and maybe Franzl, in my time, most Mideast Senators have generally been populist to some extent (Ben, HappyWarrior, Tmth, HappyWarrior, Ben, TJ, and now DC al Fine somewhat. Did I mention Ben?).

Yep, that's why I believe a fed from the Mmideast would be more socially conservative and less economically conservative than a fed from the South .

[windjammer]

Sounds like it could be pretty cool. Will you be doing amendments as well as final votes?

Good question! While I believe a final vote is more important than an amendment to a bill, amendments are still useful in order to determinate if the senator is moderate, progressive, conservative for Atlasian standards. Indeed, amendments (to a bill) are often more partisan than the final vote.
So, what I plan to do for that: I give 1 point for an amendment to a bill, and 3 for the final vote! Any suggestion will obviously be welcome .

Something to keep in mind, there is the complication of the final vote before and after a presidential redraft.  If you score the redraft vote, it can be hard to determine whether to count it as a vote for the bill itself, or just for redrafting the bill, as these can suggest different ideological positions.

Hmmm, you raise a good point.
Since I plan to give 3 points for the final text. If there is a redraft, maybe giving 2 points for the final vote, and 1 point for the redraft vote???

[windjammer]

Will hawkish or dovish votes result in a higher foreign policy score?

Not really.
A pure hawkish would get 0%, a pure libertarian on foreign issues would get 100%.

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I consider this amendment as LIBERTARIAN

On foreign issues:
-TNF, Bore and Tyrion get 1 point
-Lumine, Alfred and NC Yankee get 0 point.
- DC, Goldwater, Griffin and shua have failed to vote in time.

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I consider this bill as economically progressive.
On economic issues:
-Alfred gets 0 point
-DC, Shua, Goldwater, Tyrion, Lumine, Yankee, Bore and Yankee get 3 points.
-Griffin and TNF have failed to vote in time.


--------------------------
This is a good idea Bore! But the problem is that it could complicate a bit my calculus . But I will try to do that!
Thanks!

[windjammer]

Since I have the most points, do I win the Senate?

I'm not sure you will have the most points at the end of the 62th senate .

----------------

This is weird.

[windjammer]

Are you doing a separate foreign policy axis?

Of course!
There will be 5 scores:
- the foreign score
-the economic score
-the social score
-the activity score
-and finally, the "average score": (6*Economic score+2*social score+ 2*foreign score)/10

I still plan to give 1 point for amendments, and 3 for a final vote (or 2 final vote + 1 redraft if there is a redraft).

For the "average score", I think we can all fairly agree economy is "more" important than social and foreign issues?

[windjammer]

What is the average score supposed to represent?

The average score? How the senator is globally conservative or progressive!

[windjammer]

Are you doing a separate foreign policy axis?

Of course!
There will be 5 scores:
- the foreign score
-the economic score
-the social score
-the activity score
-and finally, the "average score": (6*Economic score+2*social score+ 2*foreign score)/10

I still plan to give 1 point for amendments, and 3 for a final vote (or 2 final vote + 1 redraft if there is a redraft).

For the "average score", I think we can all fairly agree economy is "more" important than social and foreign issues?

Some of us would say social and foreign are both more important. but I'm looking forward to this.

True, and Windjammer, you indicated that activity is part of the average score, however you said that the score represents how conservative or progressive someone is. If this is an ideological measurement then why is the Vice President doing it? It seems rather partisan and not very productive -- and two why include activity in an ideological measurement?

It's one thing if you rate Senator's on how they vote with the Administration (a rather binary measurement), but ideological scores? Do you really want to start off with the Senate by labeling them further?

For activity, this isn't a part of the average score (the average score= (6*economic score+ 2*social score+2*foreign score)/10). Sorry if I hadn't been clearer.

I obviously can change the "6","2","2", in something else. Maybe I will make a poll about that.

But I don't understand your concern with the ideological score. I mean, for each bill, I will always say how I see this bill openly (progressive, conservative,...). So you will all be aware about that and you will obviously be able to contest my view of this bill. I mean, I don't want to be controversial with that. I plan to do that fairly. But I believe Atlasians should be able to know how their senators vote!

[windjammer]

Why don't we give a little patience regarding this. It will probably take some time and adjustment to get it right anyway and there is no sense giving Windjammer grief after just two or three data points.

Thank you Yankee!

Looking good so far! I'm curious, how would votes on international organizations like the UN affect a Senator's FP score?

Thanks Deus!

Well, it will depend I guess. But I guess I need to explain a bit how I see the current foreign divide. This is for me a fight between isolationnists and interventionnists. I know that some bills can be interpreted in both way. For instance, the bill abolishing the veto system in the UNO, it could be both seen as interventionnist, because some promoters of this measure would do that in order to make a more effective international society. But on the other hand, it can be seen as "libertariab", because Atlasia would renounce to some of its power, so weaker on foreign issues.

On this issue, I consider these UNO reforms would be "isolationnist". Because Atlasia would have a weaker influence in the world.

I will basically consider that if Atlasia joins a new organization, that would be interventionnist, because its international role would be increased (except of course if Atlasia joins a libertarian organization, like "peace for ever" ). If they leave an organization, that would be considered as "isolationnist".

For the tobin Tax, I consider this measure as interventionnist, even if there is no deployment of forces in the world,... Because Atlasia would participate to a new international program.


Is it clearer Deus? Maybe you had something in mind particularly? I'm obviously available if you have any other question.

[windjammer]

The Atlasian Calendar: well, I sincerely don't know how to consider that. So I will just consider this bill for the activty vote. Every Senator has voted.

The Demilitarization Act:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I consider the Demilitarization act as: LIBERTARIAN.
On foreign issues:
-Yankee, DC, Goldwater and Lumine get 0 point.
-Griffin, TNF, Alfred, Bore, Tyrion and Shua get 2 points.

Yep, only 2 points because there is a redraft.

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The results of the vote:
Aye (6): Senator shua, senator North Carolina Yankee, Senator bore, Senator DC, Senator Golwater, Senator Lumine
Nay (2): Senator Griffin, Senator TNF
Abstain (1): Senator Tyrion
Non voting (1): Senator Alfred

This amendment passes
I, Windjammer, President of the Senate, certify these results are accurate.

I consider this amendment as economically conservative.
Shua, Yankee, bore, DC, Goldwater and Lumine get 1 point.
Griffin and TNF get 0 point.
Tyrion gets 0.5 point.
Alfred has missed the vote.


-----------------
Well, I won't make the average score. I don't think that's a necessity.

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The results of the vote:
Aye (6): Senator Tyrion, Senator bore, Senator shua, Senator Alfred F. Jones, Senator Griffin, Senator TNF
Nay (0):
Abstain (3): Senator Lumine, Senator Goldwater, Senator North Carolina Yankee
Non voting (1): Senator DC


The redraft passes.
I, Windjammer, President of the Senate, certify these results are accurate.

I consider this redraft as LIBERTARIAN.
Griffin, TNF, Tyrion, Alfred, Shua and bore get 1 point.
Lumine, Yankee and Goldwater get 0.5 point.
DC has missed the vote.


------------------------
After some careful consideration, I will change a bit the economic score. Instead of having the score of 100%, a hardcore fiscal progressive will get 0%.

Why this change? Simply because that would be more accurate with the other scores. Indeed, for the social and foreign scores, higher is your score, higher you're libertarian on these issues. The issue is accuracy, not a big deal.

I have decided to ignore the confirmation threads. That doesn't mean a lot of things to count that. You can totally disagree with the nominee's views but at the same time voting for it.

[windjammer]

Activity score: some clarification have to be made:
1) I don't count at all the nominees vote.
2) When an amendment has enough to pass/fail, as VP, I have to stop the vote (not even the 24 hour vote change). So in this case, senators who vote after the vote stop but have voted before 3 days after I have declared the vote: I would consider they would have voted.

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The results of the vote:
Aye (6): Senator Shua, Senator Lumine, Senator Alfred, Senator DC, Senator Goldwater, Senator North Carolina Yankee
Nay (3): Senator Griffin, Senator Tyrion, Senator TNF
Abstain (1): Senator Bore

This bill passes.

I, Windjammer, President of the senate, certify these results are accurate.

I obviously consider this bill as HAWKISH.
Griffin, Tyrion and TNF get 2 points (not 3 because there is a veto override)
bore gets 1 point
Goldwater, Yankee, Alfred, Shua, DC, Lumine get 0 point.

[windjammer]

Interesting. On social issues scale, would a higher score be more libertarian or more liberal? For example, would voting against gun control increase or decrease your score?

Since the social score= advocating for animal, human rights+ for liberty, if someone votes against gun control, I believe that will increase the score, since he supports "liberty".

My senators vote ratings is quite funny considering my views, I will probably be on all issues (economic, social and foreign) close to 0 haha. (And my foreign score would be 0 right now haha )

[windjammer]

On the veto override:
Goldwater, Yankee, shua and Alfred get 0.
Bore, tyrion, TNF and Adam get 1 point.
Lumine and DC have missed the vote.

I will soon reveal the temporary foreign policy score (and the activity score). I should have enough votes after the final vote for ukraine (or veto or redraft).

[windjammer]

Wait, missing the vote gives one no points, correct? So that's the same as whatever would give you a score of 0, no? That doesn't seem right - perhaps we should make abstaining/missing a vote 0 points and change whatever gives you 0 points to negative points? That way we could differentiate between the three things and center our scale of ideology on 0.

Well, I think I need to be clearer .
For each law, there are always 2 scores: the activity score, and the foreign/economic/social score.
For the foreign/economic/social score: when they get 0, that means they vote as a hawkish/economic progressive/social conservative person.

For the activity score, that's simply. People who vote (Aye; Nay, Abstain) get 1 point, people who don't get 0.

Is it clearer?

[windjammer]

The amendment vote?

sorry for being late, I worked today .

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A vote is now open.
Please senators, vote AYE, NAY or Abstain.

The results of the vote:
Aye (7): Senator Goldwater, Senator bore, Senator shua, Senator Tyrion, Senator DC, Senator Griffin, Senator North Carolina Yankee
Nay (1): Senator TNF
Abstain (1): Senator Alfred Jones
Non Voting (1): Senator Lumine

This amendment passes.
I, Windjammer, certify these results are accurate.

I consider this amendment as FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE.
Goldwater, bore, shua, tyrion, dc, griffin, yankee get 1.
Alfred gets 0.5 point
TNF gets 0 point
Lumine has failed to vote in time.

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The results of the vote:
Aye (4): Senator Griffin, Senator bore, Senator Alfred, Senator Tyrion
Nay (4): Senator DC, Senator North Carolina Yankee, Senator TNF, Senator Goldwater
Non voting (2): Senator Lumine, Senator shua

This amendment fails.
I, Windjammer, President of the Senate, certify these results are accurate.

I consider this amendment as anti socially libertarian.
Griffin, Alfred, bore  and Tyrion get 0 point.
DC, Yankee, TNF and Goldwater get 3 points.

[windjammer]

The amendment vote?

sorry for being late, I worked today .

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A vote is now open.
Please senators, vote AYE, NAY or Abstain.

The results of the vote:
Aye (7): Senator Goldwater, Senator bore, Senator shua, Senator Tyrion, Senator DC, Senator Griffin, Senator North Carolina Yankee
Nay (1): Senator TNF
Abstain (1): Senator Alfred Jones
Non Voting (1): Senator Lumine

This amendment passes.
I, Windjammer, certify these results are accurate.

I consider this amendment as FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE.
Goldwater, bore, shua, tyrion, dc, griffin, yankee get 0.
Alfred gets 0.5 point
TNF gets 1 point
Lumine has failed to vote in time.

Don't you have this backwards? I thought you just said higher scores were more fiscally conservative? Why does voting against the amendment increase your score?

Ooops, I made a mistake. I will correct that. Thanks for having seen that Goldwater. (TNF gets 0, the 7 senator het 1 point)

-----------------------

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Aye (3): Senator Goldwater, Senator DC, Senator North Carolina Yankee
Nay (4): Senator TNF, Senator Tyrion, Senator Griffin, Senator bore
Not Voting (3): Senator Alfred F. Jones, Senator shua, Senator Lumine

This amendment fails.
I, Windjammer, certify these results are accurate.

I consider this amendment as FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE.
Goldwater, DC and Yankee get 1 point.
TNF, Tyrion, Griffin and bore get 0 point.
Alfred, shua and Lumine missed the vote.

[windjammer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

2. A Section 5 shall be added to F.L. 52-12 to read:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Aye (5): Senator shua, Senator bore, Senator TNF, Senator North Carolina Yankee, Senator Goldwater
Nay (1): Senator Tyrion
Abstain (1): Senator Alfred F Jones
Non Voting (3): Senator DC, Senator Griffin, Senator Lumine

This bill passes.
I, Windjammer, certify these results are accurate.


[/quote]

I don't know how to consider this amendment.
So this vote will just serve for my activity score.