Sun 31 Aug 2008
An Honest Comparison of Obama & McCain’s Senate Voting Records
Posted by Andrew Blanco under Politics
I have always assumed that Senator Barack Obama has voted “Present”, the equivalent of NO VOTE, the majority of the time during his short stint as a Senator. This was at least the impression I received from the news media. On the flip side, I never even thought to question what Senator John McCain’s voting record was. I guess I just always assumed he was more decisive than Obama, given that he’s been in the Senate 22 years, as opposed to Obama’s 4 years.
Using the detailed records of Senate votes available on VoteSmart.org, I was able to compute some very basic statistics about each candidate’s voting habits between the years 2005-2008. I used this time period because that is how long Obama has voted as a senator. I’m including McCain’s voting stats between 1995-2008, as those are available and may provide a more comprehensive picture of his voting patterns.
The Data: (Updated for accuracy thanks to B. Ginsberg)
Obama (2005-2008)
- Not Voting = 228 (40%)
- Yay = 253 (45%)
- Nay = 87 (15%)
McCain (2005-2008)
- Not Voting = 300 (53%)
- Yay = 136 (24%)
- Nay = 132 (23%)
McCain (1995-2008)
- Not Voting = 335 (35%)
- Yay = 380 (40%)
- Nay = 234 (25%)
The Results
From the above data it becomes clear that between 2005 and 2008 Senator McCain has actually abstained from decisive voting more often than Senator Obama. This is interesting in so much as the issue of abstaining from Senate votes has been used as a key point against supporting Obama’s presidential bid. The reasons why a senator would choose to abstain from voting are varied and can range from indecision to conflicts of interest.
Also, I could not categorize the issues that were voted on according to importance, as importance is subjective and depends on which community or group is being affected by that vote. To call an abortion bill more important than a farming bill would be nothing more than personal opinion.
Download the attached Excel workbook for issue by issue voting data by clicking the icon at the top of the post. To find out the specific bills that each candidate voted on, go to VoteSmart.
About the Author
September 1st, 2008 at 10:44 am
Andrew, the weather channel is usually wrong because they do nothing but compute in a room with no windows.
September 1st, 2008 at 11:14 am
I like the idea of this blog, but it really falls short of my expectations. I know that you said you didn’t categorize the votes on issues in terms of importance because that is subjective (very true), but you still could have at least categorized the content to some extent. As it stands now, the only thing this tells me is the frequency with which each candidate votes on issues. That means nothing, as a Non-vote could be for many reasons. So really, this tells me nothing. Sorry dude.
September 1st, 2008 at 11:27 am
The only reason I left this blog with such limited data is because limited data, with barely any specifics, seems to be the popular way of accusing either McCain or Obama of their shortcomings. I can’t count how many times I’ve heard someone use the “Obama votes Present on important issues but McCain doesn’t” argument. Its as empty an argument as, well, the above stats.
I have the voting content categorized on my computer if anyone wants me to attach the document for download.
September 1st, 2008 at 1:33 pm
I have been intentionally on the fringe of this election, so I admit I have never heard such specific criticism of Obama’s voting record. But anyone who attempts to use the rationale you quote above is an uneducated voter whose logic is flawed.
I guess I would just have liked a “hot” issue by issue comparison. Things that have relevance to issues in the limelight of this election, such as national security, healthcare, taxes, etc. That is the lazy voter in me, I suppose it is wrong to condemn you for not doing my research for me. Sorry if you took my criticism as a personal offense.
September 1st, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Jay, like I said, its all good.
But for anyone else who’s interested I just added a link to the categorized voting records at the end of the post. It’s still just a frequency table, but I also am too lazy to do anybody else’s work for them, lol. And plus Vote Smart provides all the bill details for any curious voter who has the energy to search.
September 1st, 2008 at 5:02 pm
A “hot” issue by issue comparison is exactly what is needed. I am creating such a thing on Atlas called “Atlas Electorals” It will be an actual page on the site, not just an entry…stay tuned!
September 1st, 2008 at 7:53 pm
Don’t be too hard on yourself, el Blanco. I mean, its not like you wrote a blog with the words “honest”, “comparison”, and “voting records” in the title without comparing anything, honestly or otherwise, other than the sheer number of yes, no and no votes…
September 1st, 2008 at 9:19 pm
To redeem myself I must write the 21st Century equivalent of Don Quixote and retire to the Spanish countryside. Ole.
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:48 am
El Blanco is Spanish for The Blanco…
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:28 am
I thought it was Spanish for “The White”
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:39 am
It most certainly is. I was just referencing the old Saturday Night Live skit with Chris Farley. “El Nino is Spanish for … The Nino.”
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:01 am
If we wanted to be politically correct, my name should really translate into “The Cream”.
“The Cream” has way less racial connotations than “The White”. And I guess if my name was “El Negro”, we would translate that into “The Chocolate”.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:35 pm
LOL @ “The Cream”
…Cash Rules Everything Around Me
September 8th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
Dude, you did a good job. I just refused to go count all those votes to battle naysayers. I it’s quite interesting how the right can throw whatever argument out there, but when someone does the work to point out the truth, it gets criticized in a way that the original argument hasn’t and then it’s asked to show things that the orginal argument didn’t show.
Again, good job and if someone wants to know more they can go look it up for themselves.
The only thing I’m curious about is Hillary’s votes, which might show he was pretty much doing what his party wanted for some of the votes (but I’ll look for myself)& reflect them both being out there campaigning. I’m pretty sure that campaigning in 2008 counted for alot of NV for both, but moreso for Obaman since he was on the trail longer.
September 8th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
So, MIAS, you are advocating the political tactic of counter-arguing but still leaving everyone in the dark as to the true nature of the situation. You must already be a politician, or just as lazy as Andrew.
September 9th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Are you sure you have your Yay’s and Nay’s correct for Obama? I believe you have them backwards. I did a quick count on the voting record site and came up with 254 Y’s and 89 N’s. Granted I was just counting using Find whole word Y or whole word N so easily could be off a few but I found the opposite results as you.
September 9th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Mr. Ginsberg, do it by hand if you want to be accurate. Thats how I got my first set of numbers, and then I double checked with a computer.
September 9th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
B. Ginsberg is right. Andrew, your numbers in the post do not match the numbers represented in your spreadsheet. I went ahead and used the summation function for each column and came up with the following results:
Obama 2005-2008
No Vote: 228
Yay: 253
Nay: 87
McCain 2005-2008
No Vote: 300
Yay: 136
Nay: 132
September 9th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Wow. My apologies. I officially need to learn Excel or not post any more analysis of numbers.
Thanks.
September 9th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
It can happen to the best of us.
I recommend updating the data in the post, thanking B. Ginsberg for catching the error.
September 9th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
I recommend seeing comment #1 in this post.
September 9th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
B. Ginsberg,
Thanks for catching that mistake! The original data most definitely had Obama’s Yay’s & Nay’s reversed. The Excel attachment has been updated as well as the post.
What just happened with this post is exactly what should happen with any kind of analysis of data. It got peer reviewed.
Mind you, the peer review should be performed BEFORE the material is posted, but hey, mistakes happen. You live you learn.