How Do You Measure The Job A Senator Is Doing?

I've heard and read a comment recently that has my curiosity up. For instance, a commentator will say something like this: "Well, you may not agree with Hillary Clinton, but you've got to admit she is doing a good job as a Senator." And for me it raises this question: How do you measure whether a Senator is doing a good job or not?

I think it is fair to say every Senator should make the roll call votes, and so far as I know she does that. But does that make her a good Senator? I'm sure the national Democrats will give her a good rating, for she consistently votes the party line, but what about the Democrats in the state she represents, New York? And once she becomes a Senator, she is supposed to represent all the citizens of that state, so how do the all the voters in New York state feel she is doing? To make the comparison: here in Georgia Democrat Senator Zell Miller certainly does not vote the Democrat line all the time, and a whole lot of people here think he is doing a good job as a Senator. But the question is this ... do these media folks think Hillary is doing a good job as a Senator simply because she votes with her party all the time? If so, a bunch of Senators meet that criteria; why single her out? Is she good at "bringing home the bacon", Like Senator Byrd from West Virginia? And, if so, is that one of the measures they are applying when media folks say she is doing a good job?

Some press people say Hillary has a good Media Relations staff, and I would expect that, But I would ask of the press people who are repeating the dogma that says Hillary Clinton is doing a good job as a Senator: how do you measure good job and bad job? I measure by whether they vote liberal or conservative, and Hillary votes way too liberal for me to say she is doing a good job.

This is Gordon Sawyer, and may the wind always be at your back.

http://accesswdun.com/article/2003/8/173886