U.S. House Is the Most Conservative It's Been in More Than 60 Years

[Ogre Mage]

Data from the Brookings Institution and the American Enterprise Institute track the ideological positions of the Republican and Democratic caucuses over time.  House Republicans have undergone a much more dramatic shift to the right during the past 35 years than House Democrats move to the left.

Interestingly, the U.S. Senate has not undergone a similar shift and has hovered near the center of the ideological spectrum for the last 65 years.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/the-house-is-the-most-conservative-it-s-been-in-more-than-60-years-20130715

[tpfkaw]

I'm assuming that's using DW-Nominate?  That doesn't say anything about ideology, it just tracks how often congressmen vote with the other party.

Obviously, if you transported today's politicians back "more than 60 years" and they were all very principled and professed to believe the exact same things, the Republicans would get circa 85% of the vote (probably an underestimate).

[memphis]

60 years ago would be 1953. Nobody back then would consider a party whose core principle is keeping the top tax rate at 35%.

[barfbag]

Hooray!

[Beet]

I will say this. Last year's important election notwithstanding it certainly feels like Dems are in the opposition. State level policy continues a steady and vigorous march to the right, now effectively nationalized thanks to ALEC, while federal policy is frozen, or even threatening to shift right as the Republicans are able to hold hostage preexisting programs such as food stamps or student loan interest rates. Even judicial vacancies can't get filled-- on the federal DC circuit court, Obama has one appointment to show for his 4 1/2 years in office. Meanwhile the Roberts-led SCOTUS continues to chip away in a pro corporate direction underneath the shiny gay marriage pendant that he dangles in front of the media. It's all Obama can do to get heads of federal agencies confirmed after two years. Obama himself seems pretty powerless on domestic policy.

[barfbag]

I will say this. Last year's important election notwithstanding it certainly feels like Dems are in the opposition. State level policy continues a steady and vigorous march to the right, now effectively nationalized thanks to ALEC, while federal policy is frozen, or even threatening to shift right as the Republicans are able to hold hostage preexisting programs such as food stamps or student loan interest rates. Even judicial vacancies can't get filled-- on the federal DC circuit court, Obama has one appointment to show for his 4 1/2 years in office. Meanwhile the Roberts-led SCOTUS continues to chip away in a pro corporate direction underneath the shiny gay marriage pendant that he dangles in front of the media. It's all Obama can do to get heads of federal agencies confirmed after two years. Obama himself seems pretty powerless on domestic policy.

Bush had a lot of trouble getting court nominees through. I'm glad these things are going on. If we didn't overspend so much, we'd have money for food stamps which is important for a lot of people. I agree it's upsetting, but naturally I see things that could be cut if not for Democrats.

[tpfkaw]

60 years ago would be 1953. Nobody back then would consider a party whose core principle is keeping the top tax rate at 35%.

Cool story bro.  http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1947040900#.UedSSxaTM20

Anyway, rightly or wrongly, people in the year 1953 are not exactly going to cotton to a party with the modern-day Democrats' views on gay rights, abortion, school prayer, racial issues, etc., and propensity for denouncing anyone who disagrees with those views as a bigot.

[krazen1211]

I will say this. Last year's important election notwithstanding it certainly feels like Dems are in the opposition. State level policy continues a steady and vigorous march to the right, now effectively nationalized thanks to ALEC, while federal policy is frozen, or even threatening to shift right as the Republicans are able to hold hostage preexisting programs such as food stamps or student loan interest rates. Even judicial vacancies can't get filled-- on the federal DC circuit court, Obama has one appointment to show for his 4 1/2 years in office. Meanwhile the Roberts-led SCOTUS continues to chip away in a pro corporate direction underneath the shiny gay marriage pendant that he dangles in front of the media. It's all Obama can do to get heads of federal agencies confirmed after two years. Obama himself seems pretty powerless on domestic policy.

Bush had a lot of trouble getting court nominees through. I'm glad these things are going on. If we didn't overspend so much, we'd have money for food stamps which is important for a lot of people. I agree it's upsetting, but naturally I see things that could be cut if not for Democrats.

Bush only had 1 nomination to the federal DC circuit confirmed as of June 2005.

[Frodo]

I'd be curious if there were similar National Journal articles from the early 1970s commenting on how the U.S. House of Representatives was the most liberal it has been in decades...  

[barfbag]

I'd be curious if there were similar National Journal articles from the early 1970s commenting on how the U.S. House of Representatives was the most liberal it has been in decades...  

Which part of our state are you from man?

[jaichind]

I think DW-Nominate is a score that measures relative ideological positions within the Chamber itself and does not really measure positions relative to previous Chambers.  What these data does say is that the partisan differences are greater today than the last 60 years which makes sense.  60 years ago we had the GOP having Conservative and Progressive factions with the Dems have Southern Populist and Northern Liberal factions.  Even FDR thought about an realignment where the Progressive and Liberal factions merge which is what took place over the last 60 years and at lot slower than FDR envisioned.     

[Torie]

Some of this is because the system is under stress fiscally, and when that happens, the ideological divisions as to the appropriate fixes, are laid bare. When the status quo sort of works, there is less pressure to have to deal with the big systemic flaws in the system, so the tough choices are just not made until the stress level is high enough. Pubs have been hostile to tax increases since rocks cooled as a starting point, and Dems have been hostile to entitlement cuts. So thus you get conflict.

[hopper]

Look at how liberal the Southern Dems have become the last 30 years on those charts.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Look at how liberal the Southern Dems have become the last 30 years on those charts.

might have something to do with how black they've become.

[All Along The Watchtower]

60 years ago would be 1953. Nobody back then would consider a party whose core principle is keeping the top tax rate at 35%.

Cool story bro.  http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1947040900#.UedSSxaTM20

Anyway, rightly or wrongly, people in the year 1953 are not exactly going to cotton to a party with the modern-day Democrats' views on gay rights, abortion, school prayer, racial issues, etc., and propensity for denouncing anyone who disagrees with those views as a bigot.

I see both of your points.

Anyway, obviously American politics is more conservative these days, relative to the corresponding  time period (since comparing the conservatism of today to the past in absolute terms is rather silly...the past is usually by definition, more "conservative.")

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Not a surprise, really. The GOP is a largely insular party that appeals to insular people who would rather live in the past than live in the future. The world, meanwhile, is trending hard away from insularity. You can thank modern technology for all that, along with the narcissistic instincts of the younger generation now showing up at the polls.