GovTrack.us provides an interesting graphic depicting the relative left-right ideology and legislative leadership. Their page on Congresswoman Kristi Noem plots her thus:
Blue marks are House Democrats; red marks are House Republicans. Farther up means higher leadership. Left is left, right is right.
That purple dot is Kristi Noem. According to an analysis based strictly on bill sponsorship patterns, our gal Kristi is a centrist. Relative to the full membership, she's actually a little left of center... which would reflect the hard-right tack of the majority.
Now, do you want to see something really scary?
Looking just at the horizontal ideology axis, Kristi Noem (purple) is closer in ideology to California Congresswoman and former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (blue) than she is to Ohio Congressman and current Speaker John Boehner (red).
Perhaps scarier for Mr. Gibilisco and my other Independent friends: the graph shows a clear V-shaped trend correlating leadership on both sides with ideology. The farther away from the center, the higher the leadership.
So how far from reality is this graph? Are Nancy and Kristi better ideological buds than Kristi and her boss? Review GovTrack's objective, mathematical methodology, then offer your own ideology and leadership metrics!
If the far lefts and the far rights are the leadership (which makes sense for the party, but is bad for getting things done), then shouldn't we be looking for moderates? I think the idea that a person is closer to one side or another should be an indicator of political preference but unless she is voting separately from what she told her constituents she was going to vote for, it shouldn't be a form of censure. Should we be more concerned about candidates voting based upon their beliefs and being willing to vote for issues that cross party lines or candidates who blindly follow the party no matter the issue?
According to my trusted site
http://ontheissues.org
Kristi Noem hasn't defined her positions on enough issues to really "classify" her.
I notice one thing interesting: She's decidedly against privatizing Social Security.
The lack of moderates, reflected by the chart, doesn't surprise me. We as a nation have become more polarized in recent years.
I think the "V" pattern makes sense when you consider House members in leadership are going to tend to be members that have been in the body for a while--meaning they generally come from relatively safe districts--and are therefore more likely to either be genuinely more toward the ideological fringe, or at least able to be more public with their actual ideological positions.
Moderates are more often going to come from districts that are not safe for either party, and will tend to get voted out on a more regular basis because of that.
@Stacy Burkhalter:
"Moderates" and their "scratch-my-back-and-Ill-scratch-yours" .....butt-slapping-good-ol-boy networks....are why we are facing the downfall of The Republic today.
There have been far too many "behind closed door" deals and "I'll vote for your bill if you vote for mine.
What we need.....(a Washington enema)....started in November of 2010 and it is my view that only another housecleaning in 2012...including flushing the toilet that is now the White House will save America as a free republic.