Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [govtrack] Unrecorded Votes

Expand Messages
  • David Steinbrunner
    ... Early on I thought I had an off by one in my determining the date stuff myself but my findings, at least in this case, show that it is not the issue. I
    Message 1 of 11 , Jan 4, 2011
    On 1/4/11 11:11 PM, "Josh Tauberer" <tauberer@...> wrote:

    >Thanks for looking so closely into this everyone. Everything sounded
    >right to me up till:
    >
    >> someone can be in office per the data but not start actually voting for
    >>days.
    >
    >That doesn't sound right. (I'm assuming there were votes in the
    >intervening time right?) Occasionally there's the question of if
    >someone's sworn in at noon do I round the day up or down? So off-by-one
    >is plausible. If it's more than that, the start date could be wrong. For
    >House members, the clerk website has a list of "vacancies" (I think
    >archivally as well) that would answer this question.

    Early on I thought I had an off by one in my determining the date stuff
    myself but my findings, at least in this case, show that it is not the
    issue.

    I checked here:
    http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/vacancies.html

    And did not see anything related to the example I'm working with. Gary
    Miller has actually held this perticualr seat since 2003 per Wikipedia:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Miller

    Looking at the govtrack web view you can see that rolls 1-11 are missing
    with the exception of 2 being "Not Voting":
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes.xpd?year=2009&person=400277

    I'm assuming the source of these early 2009 votes is here and it seems to
    match up with what govtrack reports:
    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/ROLL_000.asp

    I have attached the latest result sets I have from my script if anyone is
    interested. I have a smaller, cleaned up version of the output_in.csv
    file with excludes data from the Speaker and the US Territory/DC reps and
    am not attaching the output_out.csv file since it is large and ultimately
    not as useful as the other smaller files.

    --
    David Steinbrunner
  • Derek Willis
    Now I remember this situation - the Clerk s office did not publish Gary Miller s votes in the initial portion of the 111th congress. He did vote, but the
    Message 2 of 11 , Jan 5, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Now I remember this situation - the Clerk's office did not publish Gary Miller's votes in the initial portion of the 111th congress. He did vote, but the Clerk's site does not reflect that. This is a very rare occurrence - the only time I can remember it happening - so I would not consider it typical. But it has not been fixed, either.

      Derek

      On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 1:03 AM, David Steinbrunner <dsteinbrunner@...> wrote:
       
      [Attachment(s) from David Steinbrunner included below]

      On 1/4/11 11:11 PM, "Josh Tauberer" <tauberer@...> wrote:

      >Thanks for looking so closely into this everyone. Everything sounded
      >right to me up till:
      >
      >> someone can be in office per the data but not start actually voting for
      >>days.
      >
      >That doesn't sound right. (I'm assuming there were votes in the
      >intervening time right?) Occasionally there's the question of if
      >someone's sworn in at noon do I round the day up or down? So off-by-one
      >is plausible. If it's more than that, the start date could be wrong. For
      >House members, the clerk website has a list of "vacancies" (I think
      >archivally as well) that would answer this question.

      Early on I thought I had an off by one in my determining the date stuff
      myself but my findings, at least in this case, show that it is not the
      issue.

      I checked here:
      http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/vacancies.html

      And did not see anything related to the example I'm working with. Gary
      Miller has actually held this perticualr seat since 2003 per Wikipedia:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Miller

      Looking at the govtrack web view you can see that rolls 1-11 are missing
      with the exception of 2 being "Not Voting":
      http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes.xpd?year=2009&person=400277

      I'm assuming the source of these early 2009 votes is here and it seems to
      match up with what govtrack reports:
      http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/ROLL_000.asp

      I have attached the latest result sets I have from my script if anyone is
      interested. I have a smaller, cleaned up version of the output_in.csv
      file with excludes data from the Speaker and the US Territory/DC reps and
      am not attaching the output_out.csv file since it is large and ultimately
      not as useful as the other smaller files.

      --
      David Steinbrunner


    • David Steinbrunner
      ... Ok, looking at other examples in my speardsheets I m seeing how vacancies and day of taking office appear to account for most of the issue but I m not done
      Message 3 of 11 , Jan 6, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        On 1/5/11 9:58 AM, "Derek Willis" <dwillis@...> wrote:

        >Now I remember this situation - the Clerk's office did not publish Gary
        >Miller's votes in the initial portion of the 111th congress. He did vote,
        >but the Clerk's site does not reflect that. This is a very rare
        >occurrence - the only time I can remember it happening - so I would not
        >consider it typical. But it has not been fixed, either.

        Ok, looking at other examples in my speardsheets I'm seeing how vacancies
        and day of taking office appear to account for most of the issue but I'm
        not done making sure that is 100% case aside from the above.

        In the case of the Clerk's site not being correct, what is the proper way
        to get the ball rolling so it can be correct, or is this 2 year odd issue
        evidence that it doesn't? Should calling and/or emailing the clerk's
        office along with the office of the legislator in question be enough or is
        there a better route?

        Also, is there a plan to include vacancy info in the govtrack data set?

        Thanks,

        --
        David Steinbrunner
      • Derek Willis
        I ve contacted the Clerk s office before about this issue but it s still there, so take that for what it s worth. I should note that in Gary Miller s case, as
        Message 4 of 11 , Jan 6, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          I've contacted the Clerk's office before about this issue but it's
          still there, so take that for what it's worth. I should note that in
          Gary Miller's case, as in Peter DeFazio of Oregon this term, the seat
          is "vacant" because both men were not present on the first day of the
          session to be sworn in, and thus were not sworn in at that time. So
          the Clerk is technically correct, I suppose, even though DeFazio is
          the duly elected member from Oregon's 4th District. But if they're not
          sworn in, they can't vote, so I don't think this is truly an error.

          Derek

          On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, David Steinbrunner
          <dsteinbrunner@...> wrote:
          > On 1/5/11 9:58 AM, "Derek Willis" <dwillis@...> wrote:
          >
          >>Now I remember this situation - the Clerk's office did not publish Gary
          >>Miller's votes in the initial portion of the 111th congress. He did vote,
          >>but the Clerk's site does not reflect that. This is a very rare
          >>occurrence - the only time I can remember it happening - so I would not
          >>consider it typical. But it has not been fixed, either.
          >
          > Ok, looking at other examples in my speardsheets I'm seeing how vacancies
          > and day of taking office appear to account for most of the issue but I'm
          > not done making sure that is 100% case aside from the above.
          >
          > In the case of the Clerk's site not being correct, what is the proper way
          > to get the ball rolling so it can be correct, or is this 2 year odd issue
          > evidence that it doesn't? Should calling and/or emailing the clerk's
          > office along with the office of the legislator in question be enough or is
          > there a better route?
          >
          > Also, is there a plan to include vacancy info in the govtrack data set?
          >
          > Thanks,
          >
          > --
          > David Steinbrunner
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • David Steinbrunner
          ... So the Clerk s site currently saying 0 vacancies is technically not correct it seems. In the subject of vacancy data, having a sworn in date or datetime
          Message 5 of 11 , Jan 6, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            On 1/6/11 10:05 AM, "Derek Willis" <dwillis@...> wrote:

            >I've contacted the Clerk's office before about this issue but it's
            >still there, so take that for what it's worth. I should note that in
            >Gary Miller's case, as in Peter DeFazio of Oregon this term, the seat
            >is "vacant" because both men were not present on the first day of the
            >session to be sworn in, and thus were not sworn in at that time. So
            >the Clerk is technically correct, I suppose, even though DeFazio is
            >the duly elected member from Oregon's 4th District. But if they're not
            >sworn in, they can't vote, so I don't think this is truly an error.

            So the Clerk's site currently saying 0 vacancies is technically not
            correct it seems.

            In the subject of vacancy data, having a sworn in date or datetime would
            be helpful for this type of situation.

            Thanks again,

            --
            David Steinbrunner
          • Derek Willis
            Well, DeFazio was just sworn in, so now it s correct :-) On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:47 AM, David Steinbrunner
            Message 6 of 11 , Jan 6, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              Well, DeFazio was just sworn in, so now it's correct :-)

              On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:47 AM, David Steinbrunner
              <dsteinbrunner@...> wrote:
              > On 1/6/11 10:05 AM, "Derek Willis" <dwillis@...> wrote:
              >
              >>I've contacted the Clerk's office before about this issue but it's
              >>still there, so take that for what it's worth. I should note that in
              >>Gary Miller's case, as in Peter DeFazio of Oregon this term, the seat
              >>is "vacant" because both men were not present on the first day of the
              >>session to be sworn in, and thus were not sworn in at that time. So
              >>the Clerk is technically correct, I suppose, even though DeFazio is
              >>the duly elected member from Oregon's 4th District. But if they're not
              >>sworn in, they can't vote, so I don't think this is truly an error.
              >
              > So the Clerk's site currently saying 0 vacancies is technically not
              > correct it seems.
              >
              > In the subject of vacancy data, having a sworn in date or datetime would
              > be helpful for this type of situation.
              >
              > Thanks again,
              >
              > --
              > David Steinbrunner
              >
              >
              >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.