A total of forty votes from 2005 and 2006 were used to score the current members of the House of Representatives on their views of fiscal policy and economic rights. The votes for the economic scorecard were selected in order to fix one of the major problems in the previous Freedom Democrats scorecards. By focusing on high profile votes in which the Republican leadership was pushing for spending increases, such as the Medicare prescription drug plan, the scorecard overestimated the support for limited government among Democrats who were voting largely on partisanship and not out of ideological opposition to big government. This new scorecard also avoids the issue of trade, as there is a significant split in libertarianism with a "paleo" faction opposed to trade agreements because of the potential threat to American sovereignty.

Twenty votes from 2005 were selected for the scorecard and twenty from 2006. In an attempt to build a scorecard without partisan bias, the 2005 votes were selected in order to have overlap with votes from the RLC's scorecard and avoid disagreement. A total of six economic votes overlap between the RLC's scorcard and this scorecard. This scorecard also includes a vote on protecting private property from eminent domain, which the RLC included in their scorecard on personal liberty. Clifford Thies, the compiler of the RLC, was e-mailed in order to discuss votes from 2006, but he did not return the e-mail.

The number of votes is larger than the social scorecard because the attempt was to find a wide range of votes on cuts to spending in many categories. Some votes are on cuts to specific programs, others are on across the board cuts. All of Congressman Flake's amendments from 2006 targetting earmarks are included. The scorecard also includes votes on property rights and regulatory reform.

The scorecard was only conducted for members of Congress who were in office for the entire 109th Congress; members who left or entered Congress were not included on the scorecard. Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the House, does not traditionally vote and was also excluded. The score assigned to each member of the House was based on how often they voted with the scorecard out of the forty possible votes. Below is a summary of all of the votes used:

Vote 1- Kennedy Amendment on Transportation Reform, H.R. 3. On March 9, 2005, Congressman Kennedy of Minnesota offered an amendment to authorize new tolls on high-volume roads in a move toward making users of public highways pay a true cost of the services they receive. It was defeated 155 to 265. The scorecard's position is in favor of the amendment.

Vote 2- Udall Amendment on Uranium Subsidies, H.R. 6. On April 21, 2005, Congressman Udall of New Mexico offered an amendment to the energy bill which would have removed subsidies to the uranium industry. A vote for the amendment was a vote against wasteful spending. It was defeated 204 to 225.

Vote 3- Hefley Amendment on Across the Board EPA-Interior Spending Cuts, H.R. 2361. Congressman Hefley of Colorado offered several across the board spending cuts to various appropriation bills in 2005. The scorecard's position is in favor of all such Amendments from Congressman Hefley. This cut of 1% in discretionary spending to the EPA and Interior budgets was defeated by a vote of 90 to 326 on May 19, 2005.

Vote 4- Bradley Amendment on the BRAC Commission, H.R. 1815. This amendment attempted to delay the implimentation of the BRAC Commission. It is opposed by the scorecard and was defeated on May 25, 2005, by a vote of 112 to 316.

Vote 5- Blumenauer Amendment on Sugar Loans, H.R. 2744. This amendment, which would have cut the loans programs by a small 6%, would have been a first step in rolling back all of the patronage for the sugar industry. The House rejected the amendment on June 8, 2005 in a 146 to 280 vote. The scorecard's position is in support of the amendment.

Vote 6- Chabot Amendment on Agricultural Export Subsidies, H.R. 2744. This amendment would have eliminating funding for the Market Access Program, a program that supports agricultural marketing overseas. It failed by a vote of 66 to 356 on June 8, 2005. The scorecard supports the amendment.

Vote 7- Hefley Amendment on Across the Board Spending FDA-USDA Cuts, H.R. 2744. Congressman Hefley of Colorado offered several across the board spending cuts to various appropriation bills in 2005. The scorecard's position is in favor of all such Amendments from Congressman Hefley. This cut of 1% in discretionary spending to the FDA and USDA budgets was defeated by a vote of 80 to 335 on June 8, 2005.

Vote 8- Hefley Amendment on Across the Board Commerce-Justice-Science Spending Cuts, H.R. 2862. Congressman Hefley of Colorado offered several across the board spending cuts to various appropriation bills in 2005. The scorecard's position is in favor of all such Amendments from Congressman Hefley. This cut of 1% in discretionary spending to the Commerce, Justice, and Science budgets was defeated by a vote of 91 to 336 on June 16, 2005.

Vote 9- Hefley Amendment on Across the Board Legislative Branch Spending Cuts, H.R. 2985. Congressman Hefley of Colorado offered several across the board spending cuts to various appropriation bills in 2005. The scorecard's position is in favor of all such Amendments from Congressman Hefley. This cut of 1% in discretionary spending to the Legislative Branch budget was defeated by a vote of 114 to 294 on June 22, 2005.

Vote 10- Hefley Amendment on Across the Board Labor-HHS-Education Spending Cuts, H.R. 3010. Congressman Hefley of Colorado offered several across the board spending cuts to various appropriation bills in 2005. The scorecard's position is in favor of all such Amendments from Congressman Hefley. This cut of 1% in discretionary spending to the Labor, HHS, and Education budgets was defeated by a vote of 84 to 323 on June 24, 2005.

Vote 11- Sanders Amendment on Subsidizing Chinese Nuclear Power, H.R. 3057. This amendment prohibited the Export-Import Bank from issuing loans to the construction of nuclear power plants in China. The House adopted the amendment 313 to 114 on June 28, 2005. The position of the scorecard is in support of the amendment.

Vote 12- Hefley Amendment on Across the Board State-Foreign Ops Spending Cuts, H.R. 3057. Congressman Hefley of Colorado offered several across the board spending cuts to various appropriation bills in 2005. The scorecard's position is in favor of all such Amendments from Congressman Hefley. This cut of 1% in discretionary spending to the State and foreign operations budgets was defeated by a vote of 117 to 309 on June 28, 2005.

Vote 13- Corrine Brown Amendment on Amtrak Subsidies, H.R. 3058. By a vote of 269 to 152, the House on June 29, 2005 approved an amendment by Congresswoman Corrine Brown of Florida to continue federal subsidies for 18 Amtrak routes. The scorecard is opposed to this amendment.

Vote 14- Souder Amendment on Anti-Drug Ads, H.R. 3058. On June 29, 2005, the House approved an amendment by Congressman Souder of Indiana by a vote of 268 to 151 that would increase funding for a national youth anti-drug media campaign. The scorecard views this vote as separate from the War on Drugs and more of an issue of fiscal restraint; the position of the scorecard is against the amendment.

Vote 15- Garrett Amendment on Eminent Domain, H.R. 3058. In this scorecard special attention has been paid to the issue of eminent domain, two votes on the issue are included. This amendment to the Transportation, Treasury and HUD appropriations bill by Congressman Garrett, offered shortly after the Kelo decision, would prevent the use of federal transportation and HUD funding for local government programs that use eminent domain to acquire private property for private development. It passed on June 30, 2005 with a vote of 231 to 189.

Vote 16- Hefley Amendment on Across the Board Transportation-Treasury-Hud Spending Cuts, H.R. 3058. Congressman Hefley of Colorado offered several across the board spending cuts to various appropriation bills in 2005. The scorecard's position is in favor of all such Amendments from Congressman Hefley. This cut of 1% in discretionary spending to the Transportation, Treasury, and HUD budgets was defeated by a vote of 88 to 338 on June 30, 2005.

Vote 17- Small Business Health Care, H.R. 525. On July 26, 2005, the House passed this bill 263 to 165 to allow the creation of new health plans that would enable companies to join together to buy insurance for their employees. The scorecard supports this bill.

Vote 18- Flake Amendment on Post Office Reform, H.R. 22. On July 26, 2005, Congressman Flake offered this amendment to create pilot programs for up to 20 communities to determine if alternative mail delivery systems could replace the current USPS monopoly. The House rejected the amendment 51 to 379, but the scorecard supports the amendment.

Vote 19- Paul Amendment on Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, H.R. 1461. This amendment, if passed, would have eliminated the ability of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Bank Board to borrow from the Treasury. The House rejected the amendment on October 26, 2005 by a vote of 47 to 371. The scorecard supports this amendment from Congressman Paul.

Vote 20- Private Property Rights Protection Act, H.R. 4128. Two votes on the scorecard deal with attempts to restrict the ability of government to abuse eminent domain. This bill, which prevents federal funding of any state or local government project that uses eminent domain for private economic purposes, is the second of these two votes. It was approved by the House on November 3, 2005 by a vote of 376 to 38. The scorecard's position is in support of the act.

The following nineteen votes (Votes 21 through 39) are all amendments offered by Congressman Jeff Flake of Arizona this year to cut specific pork projects that were earmarked in various bills. All were defeated; the position of the scorecard is in support of the amendments.

Vote 21- Dairy education in Iowa ($229,000)

Vote 22- Hydroponic tomato production in Ohio ($180,000)

Vote 23- National Grape and Wine Initiative ($100,000)

Vote 24- Virginia Science Museum ($250,000)

Vote 25- Juniata Locomotive Demonstration ($1,000,000)

Vote 26- Swimming pool in Banning, CA ($500,000)

Vote 27- "Facilities" in Weirton, West Virginia ($100,000)

Vote 28- Multipurpose facility in Yucaipa, California ($500,000)

Vote 29- Strand Theater Arts Center in Plattsburgh, New York ($250,000)

Vote 30- Mystic Aquarium in New London, Conn. ($1,000,000)

Vote 31- The Jason Foundation in Ashburn, VA ($1,000,000)

Vote 32- Northwest Manufacturing Initiative ($2,500,000)

Vote 33- Lewis Center for Education Research ($4,000,000)

Vote 34- Leonard Wood Research Institute ($20,000,000)

Vote 35- Arthur Avenue Retail Market ($150,000)

Vote 36- Bronx Council for the Arts in Bronx, N.Y. ($300,000)

Vote 37- Johnstown Area Regional Industries ($800,000)

Vote 38- Fairmont State University ($900,000)

Vote 39- Tourism Development Association in Kentucky ($1,000,000)

Vote 40- Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, H.R. 4411. On July 11, 2006, the House passed 317 to 93 this act which would ban most forms of internet gambling, with exceptions for state lotteries and horse racing. The scorecard opposes this government intrusion into Internet commerce.

There was only one perfect score, Jeff Flake of Arizona with a 100% voting record. Rather surprisingly, no one scored an absolutely imperfect score. The two lowest scores were Solomon Ortiz of Texas and John Murtha of Pennsylvania with 2.5% (1 out of 40). The average score for the Democrats is 14.29% and the average score for the Republicans is 36.02%. This translates into about six votes out of forty for the Democrats and fourteen votes out of forty for the Republicans.

These results are a significant change from the previous Freedom Democrats scorecard, which I stated had several problems. In that scorecard, the two parties were practically even. As I stated above, my concern is that the old scorecard was boosting Democratic scores by using high profile votes where partisanship may have been more important than ideology. This new scorecard, in which Republicans receive roughly the same score as in the past but the Democrats are significantly lower, appears to have been successful in being a more accurate measurement of support for spending restraint and economic liberty. But both parties still fail overall in their support for these issues. The graphic below illustrates how Congress and the two parties still have significant overlap in economic scores.

The graphic shows that the Republican Party in many ways has two wings, a small wing that supports economic liberty and a much larger wing with a lackluster voting record. The Democratic Party does not have a comparible wing that supports economic liberty, although a few members do stand out with strong records: Melissa Bean of Illinois with a score of 80.00%, Jim Cooper of Tennessee with a score of 67.50%, and Jim Matheson of Utah with a score of 60.00%. No other Democrats scored over 50%. Thirty-two Republicans scored lower than the Democratic average. The lowest Republican score is Joe Schwarz with a score of 5%; he was recently defeated in the Republican primary by a candidate backed by the Club for Growth.

The breakdown of the scorecard can be found here in Excel. I'm sorry if you don't like Excel, but I crash my computer every time I try to put it into Word. The social aspect is discussed at another page, as are the overall findings of the scorecard.