The Sierra Club did not endorse Boswell in the general election and we did 
not endorse anyone in the primary who was running for that seat.
 
pam
 
In a message dated 5/3/2009 1:11:59 PM Central Standard Time, 
[log in to unmask] writes:

So, did Boswell get the Sierra Club Iowa Chapter endorsement in the 2008 
general election?
 
What about the primary? As I recall, the Club generally does not endorse in 
primaries, but this was one where we should have--Boswell conducted one of 
the dirtiest, most dishonest primary campaigns in recent memory, loaded with 
tactics Karl Rove would admire, and a SC endorsement of Ed Fallon, his 
primary challenger, might have helped.
Tom
 
In a message dated 5/3/2009 11:53:14 A.M. Central Daylight Time, 
[log in to unmask] writes:

This is an interesting analysis of the voting records of our Congressional 
delegation, especially Boswell
 
Wally Taylor
 
Replacing Boswell By The Numbers

Congressional vote rating site Progressive Punch has added a new 
measurement to its cluster of counts that illustrates even more clearly why Leonard 
Boswell neds to be replaced though retirement or primary.

The new measure is called "_Progressive Score vs. District Tilt_ 
(http://progressivepunch.org/members.jsp?chamber=House&sort=benchmark-percent&order=dow
n&party=All) ," and it looks at the partisan leanings of a district 
compared to the member's voting record. It's a five star system, with more stars 
being better.

Progressive Punch _argues_ 
(http://progressivepunch.org/members.jsp?chamber=House&sort=benchmark-percent&order=down&party=All#progvsbench)  that a 
member from a strong Democratic district should be voting progressive at least 
83.33 percent of the time. The scale drops to 70% for a member from a deep 
red district. This give a break to someone like Timothy Bishop of New York, 
who has only an 85.5% progressive record but comes from a swing seat. He gets 
all five stars, whereas Debbie Wasserman Schultz, with a similar record but 
a solid Dem district, gets only three.

The scale tends to lose meaning near the top, with the usual cluster of 
urban districts. Only 29 members get all five stars; even Speaker Pelosi gets 
only four.

Things get more interesting as you move down the scale. Iowa's top member 
is Dave Loebsack at number 128, near the middle of the House Democratic 
caucus. He has a lifetime score 0f 80.25 on "critical progressive votes" from a 
strong Democratic district. Punch thinks he should be at 83.33, so Loebsack's 
score is -3.05 for a two start "tolerable." 

Bruce Braley is number 154. He's at -7.28 for a one star "intolerable." A 
harsh description, but even Dennis Kucinich rates only an "acceptable" three 
stars. The number is what's significant.

And by the numbers, Leonard Boswell is near the bottom of the Democratic 
list, number 194 of 221 ranked Democrats (freshmen aren't listed). With a 
Leaning Democratic district, Boswell should be at 80 percent progressive. 
Instead, his lifetime record on crucial votes is only 64.06, for a score of -15.96.

But if you put Leonard into Steve King's district, where he lived before he 
carpetbagged into Des Moines, without changing his voting behavior (which 
he should), the bar for Boswell drops from the 80 percent mark to 70 percent. 
That moves his score up from a -16 to a -6 and his rank up to about 150th, 
better than Braley. Still a harsh one star, but even Progressive Punch 
acknowledges that “'intolerable' members from Strong Republican districts 
probably aren’t worth fighting with."

But intolerable members from good Democratic districts are worth the fight. 
Braley may just need a nudge from time to time, but Boswell is a lost 
cause. This measuring system, more than anything else I've found, explains 
plainly why Leonard Boswell needs replacement. Iowa 3 is electing a member who 
votes like someone from a deep red seat like Stephanie Herseth Sandlin of South 
Dakota or Chet Edwards of Texas. They should be able to sustain someone 
like Robert Wexler or Kendrick Meek of Florida or... lookee here, Dave Loebsack.

One interesting quirk of the scoring: Steve King is actually not Iowa's 
worst member under this system, because his district is so awful. He ranks at 
number 300, but Tom Latham, from a swing district, is number 368, or number 8 
from the bottom, with a whopping -75 points.

 
____________________________________
The Average US Credit Score is 692. _See Yours in Ju_ 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222376998x1201454298/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditrepo
rt.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=May5309AvgfooterNO62) 




**************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the 
web. Get the Radio Toolbar! 
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]

Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship
e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's
latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent
editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/