Rep Steve Vaillancourt
In my posting of New Hampshire State Reps with 99 percent attendance yesterday, I inadvertently left off Lester Bradley from Grafrton County. He missed only two votes, so he should have been included. Mea culpa. If you find anyone else I missed, please let me know.
I also was informed by the House Clerk that Moe Villeneuve, of Bedford, was one with 289 votes and since there were only 289 (not 300), he deserves a 100 percent ranking. In fact, I'm told that the clerk checked into the numbers when she saw that Mo was not at 100 percent. She probably would have done the same when she saw I was not at 100 percent, but then I'm sure she remembered the tyranny by the speaker. It's hard to vote when the tyrant has the voting key ripped away, a moment that will live in infamy.
UPDATE--Since I posted this story, I have been informed by the House Clerk that there were 289 roll call votes rather than 290. While this will not change the percentages much at all, we will discover a few more people with 100 percent. Sorry.
There may be some adjustments to these numbers as we go along, but the House Clerk's office has released the much anticipated (at least for yours truly) attendance record for all 400 State Reps for the 2012 session.
The data is based on 290 roll call votes for the year which appears to be some type of a record. Neither committee attendance nor votes other than roll calls in taken into account, but with so many roll calls, we can assume the percentage represents a good indication of the work put forth by each of the 400.
The average attendance was 81.9 percent. In other words, the average Rep was present for 237 of the 290 roll call votes.
Only 14 Reps had perfect attendance, a significant decrease over prior years. However, 32 more Reps had at least 99 percent. In other words, 32 missed three or fewer votes.
27 Reps (not counting a couple who never showed up at all due to year-long illness) were on hand for less than 50 percednt of the votes.
I consider it vital that every voter know the attendance record of all incumbents seeking re-election. I'm not sure if these are avaialble on line, but the Clerk's office should certainly have them for any and all media wishing to inform the electorate.
Here, I will list the 14, the 32, and the 27 alphabetically.
Present for all 290 votes were: David Bates (not running again); John Burt; Labor Committee Chair Gary Daniels; Mary Griffin; Edith Hogan; Lawrence Kappler; Neal Kurk; Thomas Laware; Jeanine Notter; Joe Osgood (running for State Senate); Laurie Pettengill; William Remick; Chares Townsend; and Stella Tremblay.
Those present for 99 percent of the votes were: Mary Allen; Susan Almy; David Babson (not running for Rep again); Anne Cartwright; Sam Cataldo (running for State Senate); Jennifer Daler; Susan DeLemus; Joe Duarte; Philip Ginsburg; Harry Hardwick; Tim Horrigan; Laura Jones; Joseph Krasucki; Donald LeBrun; Jonathan Maltz; Sean McGuinness; Carol McGuire (Dan had 98.6 percent); Robert Moore; Robbie Parsons; Laurence Rappaport; David Russell; Stephen Shurtleff; Steven Smith; Franklin Tilton; Jordan Ulery; Steve Vaillancourt (any guess why I missed the 100 percent mark for the first time in years???); Moe Villeneuve (another who usually is at 100 percent); Carol Vita; Lucien Vita; David Watters (running for the Senate); David Welch; and Finance Chair Kenneth Weyler.
Worst attendance for a Chair of Vice Chair was Manchester's Will Infantine (Labor Vice Chair). He was present for only 181 of 290 votes, 62.4 percent (yet he's running again--against Ben Baroody with an 85 percent attendance and Larry Gagne with 87 percent!).
I've saved the worst for last. Here are the 27 Reps who missed for than 50 percent of the roll call votes (and their percentage scores. There may have been good reasons--such as prolonger illness, but my guess is that most of the 27 do not have good reasons. 7 of the 27 were from Manchester, meaning that a city which has 8.75 percent of the Reps had 26 percent of the worst no-shows. That's more than a statistical glitch!
Tom Beattie, Manchester West Side, 14; Norma Champage, Manchester Ward 5, 26; Baldwin Domingo 19; Stephnie Eaton 15; Susan Emerson 36; Larry Emerton 19; Pat Garrity, Manchester Ward 7, 31; Tim Hogan 24; Dorothea Hooper 44 (she was furious last time I named her, but I'm only the messenger here); Karen Hutchinson 6 (although I do recall her getting out of a sick bed to vote against gay marriage repeal); Jean Jeudy, Manchester Ward 3, 23; Tom Katsiantonis, Manchester Ward 8, 24 (he and his no show brother George from Ward 10 are both running this year; Fred Leonard 47; David Lundgren 49; Bruce McMahon 37; Bruce Marcus 41; Jeff Oligny 23; William Panek 6; Michele Peckham 46; Leo Pepino (since deceased), Manchester Ward 4, 49.7; Peter Ramsey, Manchester Ward 1, 46; Jon Richardson 45; Marie Sapienza 15; Dino Scala 33; Kevin Sullivan 49.7; James Summers 49.7; Dan Tamburello (part of the O'Brien re-election team) 44; and Michael Weeden 46.
Even as Barack Obama continues to lead Mitt Romney by merely a point in national polls but by three points or so in the ten battleground states, Gallup has discovered a trend which could really hurt Democratic chances come November.
Democrats are significantly less likely to vote this year than they were in either 2008 or 2004. Of course, these numbers will certainly change by election day, but Gallup finds that only 39 percent of Democrats, as opposed to 51 percent of Republicans, are more enthusiastic than usual about voting.
In 2008, Democrats held a 61 to 35 percent advantage in this important category. In 2004, their advantage was 68 to 51 percent.
As the election nears, we most likely will find numbers turning up on the enthusiastic question. In fact, at this time in 2008, the overall enthusisam number was 48 percent; it increased to 64 percent prior to the election. At this time in 2004, the enthusiasm level was 59 percent, but it jumped to 65 percent by election day.
Both parties combined, the enthusiasm level stands at 44 percent right now.
Most pundits believe that Obama will lose much of winning marginal base of younger and minority voters from 2008 if enthusisam remains muted this year.
That's one reason why Democrats need to be concerned even as Obama continues to enjoy a 1.3 percent lead (46.3-45.0) in the Real Clear Politics average of polls. Most polls (except Rasmussen) include the entire universe of potential voters, not merely likely voters. Thus, Obama could easily lose two or three points depending on turnout.
Today, for example, Rasmussen has Romney up three points (47-44); Gallup has Romney up one (46-45), but other polls out this week give the edge to Obama--he was up as much as six points in an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll yesterday (49-43). Go figure!
Among the ten battleground states (Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Florida, Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, and Michigan), Obama leads by 3.5 points. Five Thirty Eight tells us that Obama has led in 43 polls in those states since June 1 while Romney has led ikn only nine (there have been four ties).
Those numbers, while good talking point notes for Democrats, don't really mean all that much.
As always, trends are more important than past numbers.
538 has Florida as a dead toss-up, projecting 49.5 percent for each candidate. Virginia is next closest with Obama up 50.0-48.9. Then it's Ohio with Obama up 50.2-48.2, then Colorado at 50.3-48.1 for Obama, and New Hampshire (52-48) and Nevada (51,5-47.1) for Obama.
Interesting, pollster has Obama leading in electoral votes 272-191 with only four states rated too close to call--Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia. Even if Romney were to win all four of those states, he'd still be shy by three electoral votes. Guess which state would give him the four electoral votes to carry the election?
Mais oui, this we!
Two polling anamolies stand out this week. Survey USA has Obama up five points (48-43) in Florida at the same time that Republican Senatorial candidate Connie Mack has pulled six points (48-42) ahead of Democrat Nelson. Go figure.
And just look at Michigan. The Democrat house organ, PPP, has Obama up 14 points (53-39) while the same day, Mithell Research actually has Romney up one (45-44) in the state. Yesterday, Rasmussen had Obama up six (48-42) in the state. Any wonder why I trust Rasmussen much more than PPP? PPP, on the other hand, only has Obama up six (49-43) in Pennsylvania, so we can imagine it's really a dead heat there. There's also a Survey USA poll which has Romney withn six in Minnesota (46-40)
Mass Inc (which I'd never heard of before) has Elizabeth I Really Am An Indian Warren up two over Scott Brown in Massachusetts, but it's only 40-38, and I suspect this is one time the mass of undecided voters will not break for the challenger.
American Research Group is out with nationwide approval numbers at minus five (46-51) for Obama. Both Gallup and Rasmussen have it at minus three (45-48 abd 48-51); the RCP average is minus 0.8 (47.1-47.9)
I didn't report here last week, but I did jot down these numbers--30, 19, 8, and 8. That's 30 percent of Republican who want Condi Rice to be Obama's choice for V.P., 19 percent (including me) for Marco Rubio, and 8 percent for both Paul Ryan and Chris Christie. Neither Tim Palwenty nor Senator Portman come with enough support to be even listed.
Maybe I should take the summer off from this polling pursuit....but then maybe not. An addiction is after all, an addiction.