Menu Adam R Brown

Return to the Guide to the Utah Legislature.

Senator Brent H. Goodfellow
Utah legislator profile

Years served in the Utah legislature

First session in legislature: 1985
Most recent year of service for which data are available: 2010
Total sessions served in Utah House as of 2010: 21
Total sessions served in Utah Senate as of 2010: 6

How to read the statistical profile

I present a variety of statistics about Sen. Brent H. Goodfellow's service in the Utah legislature. I highlight differences from chamber averages using little green and red arrows. The number of arrows is statistically determined. More arrows indicate a larger difference compared to the chamber average, in relation to how much diversity there is among legislators on this metric. If all legislators introduce exactly 5 bills, then a legislator who introduces 10 is very different; if legislators vary wildly in how many bills they introduce (but the average is still 5), then a legislator who introduces 10 bills may be less different from average. The standard deviation measures this diversity.

Sen. Goodfellow's statistical profile

2007200820092010
Service summary. Service prior to 2007 (if any) is not shown here. My database goes back only to 2007.
  Chamber SenateSenateSenateSenate
  District S12S12S12S12
  Party DDDD
Leadership NoneCaucusMgrNoneNone
Years in chamber 3456
Years comparison LowerLower====
 
2007200820092010
Bills sponsored (learn more) Bills written and promoted by the legislator in his/her own chamber.
Introduced by Goodfellow 4844
Chamber average 9.69.89.08.9
Difference -5.6-1.8-5.0-4.9
Comparison LowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLower
 
2007200820092010
Bill passage rate (learn more). What percent of Sen. Goodfellow's sponsored bills pass and are officially "enrolled"? (I ignore whether the governor signed or vetoted the bill.)
Bills introduced 4844
Bills passed 3524
Passage rate 75.0%62.5%50.0%100.0%
Chamber average 62.5%68.0%62.8%68.6%
Difference +12.5-5.5-12.8+31.4
Comparison Higher==LowerHigherHigher
 
2007200820092010
Bills floor sponsored. A "floor sponsor" is like a secondary sponsor of a bill. After a bill passes the sponsor's chamber, its sponsor needs to find a "floor sponsor" in the other chamber to usher it through the other chamber.
Total floor sponsored 4520
Chamber average 11.611.511.111.0
Difference -7.6-6.5-9.1-11.0
Comparison LowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLower
 
2007200820092010
Missed votes (learn more). Usually missed votes occur because of competing obligations within the legislature, not because the legislator has left the capitol.
Missed votes 19465936
Total votes held 820806807786
Absentee rate 2.3%5.7%7.3%4.6%
Chamber average 8.9%9.6%11.1%11.9%
Difference -6.6-3.9-3.8-7.3
Comparison LowerLowerLowerLower
 
2007200820092010
"Nay" votes (learn more). Most floor votes pass by overwhelming majorities, since unpopular bills get weeded out long before they reach the floor. As a result, "nay" votes are rare.
"Nay" votes 45465957
Total votes held 820806807786
"Nay" rate 5.5%5.7%7.3%7.3%
Chamber average 4.1%4.1%4.1%4.6%
Difference +1.4+1.6+3.2+2.7
Comparison HigherHigherHigherHigherHigherHigher
 
2007200820092010
Influence or "floor power" (learn more). What percentage of the time is the legislator on the winning side of a floor vote?
Floor power score 50.8%50.0%35.7%41.4%
Chamber average 69.8%69.1%69.6%70.2%
Difference -19.0-19.1-33.9-28.8
Comparison LowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLower
 
2007200820092010
Ideology score 1 (from interest group ratings). Half a dozen interest groups release ratings of each legislator after each legislative session. I rescale them all from 0 (most liberal) to 100 (most conservative) and average them together, resulting in the numbers reported here.
Average rating 36.434.043.246.7
Chamber average 57.750.060.569.3
Difference -21.3-16.0-17.3-22.6
Comparison LowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLower
 
2007200820092010
Ideology score 2 (NOMINATE method) (learn more). Using a widely accepted scaling method, I calculate each legislator's ideology score (called a "NOMINATE" score) after each legislative session. I describe the method here. Scores have no intrinsic meaning; they are useful only for comparing two legislators. A legislator with a higher score is more to the right ideologically of a legislator with a lower scale. In most years, a conservative Republican will have a score above 0; a score close to 100 is extreme.
NOMINATE score -68.6-71.3-47.0-83.4
Chamber average 0.45.536.628.0
Difference -69.0-76.8-83.6-111.4
Comparison LowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLower
 
2007200820092010
Party support score (overall) (learn more). How consistently does Sen. Goodfellow support his/her party? That is, what percentage of the time does the legislator vote with the majority of the other members of his/her party? Scores are usually easily above 90%.
Score (overall) 97.0%96.4%98.4%98.1%
Chamber average 96.7%97.1%97.2%97.1%
Difference +0.3-0.7+1.2+1.0
Comparison ==LowerHigherHigher
 
2007200820092010
Party support score (party-line only) (learn more). This is the same as the "raw" party support score, but we look only at party-line votes when calculating this. A "party-line" vote occurs when the majority of Democrats votes against the majority of Republicans. Although party-line votes are rare, looking at the legislator's party support score in this setting can be revealing.
Score (party-line only) 75.0%70.8%98.0%96.3%
Chamber average 83.4%84.8%89.5%88.5%
Difference -8.4-14.0+8.5+7.8
Comparison LowerLowerLowerHigherHigherHigherHigher

Votes on Sen. Goodfellow's bills

Only 17 bills sponsored by Sen. Goodfellow have come to a vote. Listed below are all votes held on bills that Sen. Goodfellow sponsored. The votes are sorted by vote margin, with the most divisive votes listed first.

Year Sponsor Bill Ayes Nays Margin
(as % of total votes)
Type of vote
2010 Goodfellow SB0102 39 32 9.9% House/ passed 3rd reading
2010 Goodfellow SB0019 13 10 13.0% Senate/ failed
2010 Goodfellow SB0102 10 16 23.1% Senate/ failed
2007 Goodfellow SB0119 20 6 53.8% Senate/ pass 2nd
2007 Goodfellow SB0119 59 13 63.9% House/ passed 3rd reading
2007 Goodfellow SB0179 23 3 76.9% Senate/ pass 2nd & 3rd (Suspension)
2010 Goodfellow SB0019 24 3 77.8% Senate/ passed 2nd reading
2007 Goodfellow SB0119 24 2 84.6% Senate/ concurs with House amendments
2010 Goodfellow SB0019 66 5 85.9% House/ passed 3rd reading
2007 Goodfellow SB0119 26 1 92.6% Senate/ pass 3rd