Last night was a hell of a night for news.
Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., has represented the state since 1981, and his announcement at around 5 p.m. that he wouldn’t seek another term sent many of us news people scrambling. For me, it meant becoming instantly educated on the political game that’s been going on since at least 2005.
The previous year, Republican John Thune had beaten the most senior Democrat in the Senate, Tom Daschle, in South Dakota and the GOP was thinking Dems in the other Dakota were as vulnerable. Gov. John Hoeven‘s name came up a lot because he was and is arguably the most popular state Republican.
Well, I guess the Dems are vulnerable now with Dorgan out of the race.
I’ll admit that I was shocked and disappointed by his announcement. While I generally like the man — I like Hoeven, too, so don’t get started. — I liked his ability to bring home the bacon even more.
Being from a fairly populous state, Washington, with a good-sized Congressional delegation, I’m very aware that I now live in a sparsely-populated state with the minimum number of Congressional members. The only way to be smaller is to not have a vote like Washington, D.C., or Guam. So every Congressional member counts and the more seniority they’ve got the better.
At one time, I was going to write a story about the ridiculous kind of clout this state’s delegation has, based on Congress.org’s Congressional power rankings. Those guys were nerds after my own heart, calculating how much clout each lawmaker had and assigning them points for things like party offices held, committees led, earmarks passed and just sheer fame. Congress.org apparently doesn’t do that anymore so I never wrote the story, but I did jot down the 2007 rankings, just in case I couldn’t get access again when the 2009 rankings came out.
You can read the stats at the bottom of this post, but, suffice to say, pound-for-pound, North Dakota’s got a lot of power for its size. Besides federal funding, clout also translates into influence over national policy, such as farm bills and military base assignments.
One way to continue with the clout is to have Rep. Earl Pomeroy run for Dorgan’s seat, though I’m sure tenure in the House wouldn’t translate directly into equivalent clout in the Senate. But the word is Pomeroy’s not interested.
I wouldn’t have a hard time voting for Hoeven — I’ve done so three times already — but I’m still disappointed with the decrease in power for North Dakota. Even if Dorgan were to get some key position in the Obama administration, as some have speculated, he’ll be largely out of the North Dakota orbit.
So here’s what I’ve got from Congress.org:
| Â | Byron Dorgan, D | Kent Conrad, D | Earl Pomeroy, D |
|---|---|---|---|
| Position | 68 | 52 | 54 |
| Influence | 5 | 10 | 8 |
| Legislation | 13 | 2 | 1 |
| Earmarks | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Power score | 43.57 | 32.33 | 31.88 |
| Earmark amount | $175,222,730 | $127,607,730 | $60,673,040 |
| Earmark count | 91 | 78 | 47 |
| Rank in chamber | 15 | 30 | 60 |
| Rank in party | 13 | 24 | 56 |
| Rank in state | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Rank in class | 2 (1992) | 3 (1986) | 9 (1992) |
| 2005 power score | 40.64 | 26.56 | 8.63 |
| 2006 power score | 41.56 | 29.69 | 15 |
| 2007 power score | 43.57 | 32.33 | 31.88 |
| 2005 rank | 29 | 64 | 332 |
| 2006 rank | 32 | 61 | 239 |
| 2007 rank | 15 | 30 | 60 |
| General factors affecting score (2007) | Member of Appropriations Committee; Chair of committee or subcommittee; Successfully passed one or more bills out of the House or Senate; Successfully amended one or more bills on the floor of the House or Senate; Holds leadership position in the House or Senate | Chair of committee or subcommittee; Successfully passed one or more bills out of committee; Successfully amended one or more bills on the floor of the House or Senate | Member has good committee assignments that reflect greater influence or longer tenure; Receives significant PAC funds, indicating special interest groups consider Member powerful; Successfully passed one or more bills out of the House or Senate |
Compare this with some of the Minnesota delegation (I’ve limited it to just the northwest Minnesota):
| Â | Norm Coleman, R | Amy Klobuchar, D | Collin Peterson, D |
|---|---|---|---|
| Position | 17 | 18 | 29 |
| Influence | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Legislation | 11 | 1 | 2 |
| Earmarks | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Power score | 16.63 | 13.26 | 18.98 |
| Earmark amount | $172,180,750 | $200,881,250 | $14,401,100 |
| Earmark count | 91 | 99 | 21 |
| Rank in chamber | 82 | 94 | 177 |
| Rank in party | 37 | 51 | 150 |
| Rank in state | 1 | 2 | 4 |
| Rank in class | 6 (2002) | 10 (2006) | 13 (1990) |
| 2005 power score | 23.81 | Â | 10 |
| 2006 power score | 24.5 | Â | 12.56 |
| 2007 power score | 16.63 | 13.26 | 18.98 |
| 2005 rank | 75 | Â | 305 |
| 2006 rank | 71 | Â | 283 |
| 2007 rank | 82 | 94 | 177 |
| General factors affecting score (2007) | Too few terms or years in office in Congress to have significant clout; Ranking member (Senior Republican) of a committee in either chamber, or Appropriations subcommittee in either chamber, or any subcommittee in the House; Successfully passed one or more bills out of the House or Senate; Successfully amended one or more bills on the floor of the House or Senate | Too few terms or years in office in Congress to have significant clout; Successfully amended one or more bills on the floor of the House or Senate; Member has reduced power due to Freshman status | Chair of committee or subcommittee; Successfully passed one or more bills out of the House or Senate; Successfully amended one or more bills on the floor of the House or Senate |
Now, South Dakota:
| Â | John Thune, R | Tim Johnson, D | Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, D |
|---|---|---|---|
| Position | 17 | 46 | 19 |
| Influence | 3 | -19 | 2 |
| Legislation | 15 | 1 | 3 |
| Earmarks | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Power score | 17.56 | 14.24 | 12.56 |
| Earmark amount | $168,327,478 | $222,238,585 | $67,340,900 |
| Earmark count | 53 | 103 | 42 |
| Rank in chamber | 77 | 90 | 287 |
| Rank in party | 32 | 48 | 201 |
| Rank in state | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Rank in class | 5 (2004) | 13 (1996) | 17 (2004) |
| 2005 power score | 22 | 23.5 | 5.12 |
| 2006 power score | 22.75 | 20.81 | 9.25 |
| 2007 power score | 17.56 | 14.24 | 12.56 |
| 2005 rank | 80 | 76 | 410 |
| 2006 rank | 81 | 85 | 351 |
| 2007 rank | 77 | 90 | 287 |
| General factors affecting score (2007) | Too few terms or years in office in Congress to have significant clout; Successfully passed one or more bills into law; Successfully amended one or more bills on the floor of the House or Senate | Member of Appropriations Committee; Chair of committee or subcommittee; Successfully amended one or more bills on the floor of the House or Senate; Member had reduced influence this year due to illness | Too few terms or years in office in Congress to have significant clout; Chair of committee or subcommittee; Successfully passed one or more bills out of the House or Senate; Successfully amended one or more bills on the floor of the House or Senate |
Now the Congressional leadership:
| Â | Harry Reid, D-Nev., Majority Leader | Nancy Pelosi, D- Calif., Speaker of the House | Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Minority Leader | John Boehner, R-Ohio, Minority Leader |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Position | 144 | 140 | 78 | 79 |
| Influence | 32 | 46 | 16 | 35 |
| Legislation | 42 | 7 | 4 | 1 |
| Earmarks | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| Power score | 109.7 | 97.3 | 49.34 | 56.88 |
| Earmark amount | $305,289,470 | $94,332,500 | $185,140,000 | $0 |
| Earmark count | 177 | 52 | 67 | 0 |
| Rank in chamber | 1 | 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Rank in party | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Rank in state | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Rank in class | 1 (1986) | 1 (1986) | 1 (1984) | 1 (1990) |
| 2005 power score | 71.06 | 41.89 | 64.56 | 28.88 |
| 2006 power score | 65.75 | 54.44 | 70.5 | 89.69 |
| 2007 power score | 109.7 | 97.3 | 49.34 | 56.88 |
| 2005 rank | 5 | 8 | 7 | 33 |
| 2006 rank | 5 | 5 | 4 | 2 |
| 2007 rank | 1 | 1 | 7 | 6 |
| General factors affecting score (2007) | Member garners frequent media coverage; Member’s Leadership PAC receives significant contributions indicating special interest groups and wealthy contributors consider Member powerful; Successfully passed a bill out of both chambers, but vetoed by Pres. Bush; Successfully passed one or more bills into law; Sponsor or co-sponsor of significant legislation in 2007; Successfully amended one or more bills on the floor of the House or Senate; Holds leadership position in the House or Senate | Long tenure or years in office in Congress can provide clout; Member garners frequent media coverage; Contributes significant campaign funds to colleagues, which can translate into influence; Receives significant PAC funds, indicating special interest groups consider Member powerful; Successfully passed one or more bills into law; Holds leadership position in the House or Senate | Member of Appropriations Committee; Successfully passed one or more bills out of the House or Senate; Successfully amended one or more bills on the floor of the House or Senate; Holds leadership position in the House or Senate | Member garners frequent media coverage; Receives significant PAC funds, indicating special interest groups consider Member powerful; Member’s Leadership PAC receives significant contributions indicating special interest groups and wealthy contributors consider Member powerful; Allowed to offer one or more unsuccessful amendments on the House floor; Holds leadership position in the House or Senate |
The days of “bringing home the bacon” may be over. The majority of Americans may be willing go without if it means borrowing or printing money.
We may be on the cusp of major change in our political system. I for one would ride a bicycle on a dirt road if I could preserve a little of the great American experience that I’ve experienced for my kid.
I know Dorgan stated that his age didn’t have anything to do with it; however, I’d hate to see ND have a Byrd in the Senate. I think he didn’t want to commit to the next 6 years. I know if I was 67 years old, I’m not sure if I could commit to a job for the next 6 years.
Well, sometimes “the bacon” isn’t money but a growing UAV mission! Also consider that sometimes the role of someone in government is to stop people from doing things your people don’t like, like CAFTA.
i am just glad to see him gone.
thanks for your service, but buh-bye.