See also Who’s progressive in the Washington State House? — based on combined data from five scorecards

Here is the list of five scorecards on which the ranking is based:

Note: if you visit the above pages now, the listed scores may differ from what’s shown below, because the groups update the scores as time goes on. Take this ranking with a grain of salt.

The combined score is based on the five component scores and the following formula:

   Combined Score = labor_lifetime + conservation_lifetime +
racial_justice + 0.5*choice - 2*conservative
.

The highest possible score is 100+100+100+50+0=350. Each component score is from 0 to 100, except for choice, which is -100, 0, or 100.  (For choice, zero means either “neutral on choice” or “insufficient data”.  Because Choice data is missing for several senators, I use a factor of 0.5 above.)  The combined scores are shown below, ordered from highest to lowest.

If you want to set your own parameters, to weigh the components differently and generate your own ranking, use the form at the end of this article.  For example, if you ignore Choice by setting its weight to zero, the rankings change quite a bit.

Democrats are shown in blue. Republicans are shown in red.

Higher scores are better (more progressive)

Senator Party Score Conser-vation Racial Labor Choice Conser-vative
Kohl-Welles_Jeanne D 323.0 97 90 92 100 3
Nelson_Sharon D 319.0 100 80 95 100 3
Murray_Ed D 313.0 94 85 94 100 5
Chase_Maralyn D 313.0 100 75 98 100 5
Kline_Adam D 309.0 97 80 94 100 6
Conway_Steve D 303.0 90 80 99 100 8
Fraser_Karen D 301.0 95 75 95 100 7
Rolfes_Christine D 300.0 98 80 84 100 6
Brown_Lisa D 298.0 91 80 91 100 7
McAuliffe_Rosemary D 297.0 93 80 90 100 8
Ranker_Kevin D 294.0 95 80 91 100 11
Harper_Nick D 292.0 100 85 93 100 18
Eide_Tracey D 274.0 88 80 86 100 15
Frockt_David D 257.0 100 89 84 0 8
Regala_Debbie D 253.0 92 85 90 0 7
Prentice_Margarita D 242.0 90 85 89 0 11
Pridemore_Craig D 241.0 95 80 86 0 10
Hobbs_Steve D 224.0 72 80 68 100 23
Haugen_MaryMargaret D 205.0 73 75 61 100 27
Hatfield_Brian D 190.0 49 80 73 100 31
Shin_Paull D 181.0 75 70 84 0 24
Kastama_Jim D 181.0 77 80 74 0 25
Kilmer_Derek D 180.0 82 70 80 0 26
Tom_Rodney D 136.0 74 77 53 0 34
Hargrove_James D 58.0 54 80 68 -100 47
Litzow_Steve R 55.0 80 75 22 0 61
Fain_Joe R 8.0 50 55 25 0 61
Hill_Andy R 4.0 50 65 19 0 65
Pflug_Cheryl R -28.0 43 64 21 0 78
Sheldon_Tim D -55.0 33 49 29 0 83
Swecker_Dan R -57.0 42 47 22 0 84
Padden_Mike R -90.0 25 27 8 100 100
King_Curtis R -97.0 17 37 19 0 85
Benton_Don R -97.0 30 37 30 -100 72
Zarelli_Joseph R -108.0 23 38 15 0 92
Roach_Pam R -111.0 25 40 40 -100 83
Stevens_Val R -126.0 12 49 9 0 98
Carrell_Mike R -132.0 20 37 21 -100 80
Parlette_LindaEvans R -137.0 27 47 15 -100 88
Becker_Randi R -143.0 18 42 17 -100 85
Baumgartner_Michael R -143.0 30 30 19 -100 86
Hewitt_Mike R -155.0 22 47 12 -100 93
Ericksen_Doug R -160.0 0 35 17 -100 81
Delvin_Jerome R -165.0 15 36 16 -100 91
Schoesler_Mark R -171.0 15 38 12 -100 93
Morton_Bob R -173.0 15 43 9 -100 95
HolmquistNewbry_Janéa R -197.0 15 13 15 -100 95
Honeyford_Jim R -203.0 8 23 8 -100 96

Here’s a 3D visualization of Washington State Senators along three progressive dimensions, from about two years ago:

http://truthsite.org/political-visualization/wa-senators.html

Economic justice is another dimension along which it might be useful to have a scorecard.

See the similar visualization for US senators’ voting records and visualization for US representatives’ voting records.

Compare: http://livableworld.org/scorecards/votes/


Set your own factors, make your own ranking

Labor: , Conservation: , Racial: ,
Choice: Conservative: