Return to the Guide to the Utah Legislature.
First session in legislature: | 1991 |
Most recent year of service for which data are available: | 2010 |
Total sessions served in Utah House as of 2010: | 13 |
Total sessions served in Utah Senate as of 2010: | 0 |
I present a variety of statistics about Rep. Fred R Hunsaker'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.
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Service summary. Service prior to 2007 (if any) is not shown here. My database goes back only to 2007. | |||||
Chamber | House | House | House | House | |
District | H4 | H4 | H4 | H4 | |
Party | R | R | R | R | |
Leadership | None | None | None | None | |
Years in chamber | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | |
Years comparison | ![]() ![]() | ![]() ![]() | ![]() ![]() | ![]() ![]() |
|
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | ||
Bills sponsored (learn more) Bills written and promoted by the legislator in his/her own chamber. | |||||
Introduced by Hunsaker | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | |
Chamber average | 6.1 | 6.1 | 5.9 | 6.1 | |
Difference | -1.1 | -1.1 | -0.9 | -2.1 | |
Comparison | == | == | == | ![]() |
|
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | ||
Bill passage rate (learn more). What percent of Rep. Hunsaker's sponsored bills pass and are officially "enrolled"? (I ignore whether the governor signed or vetoted the bill.) | |||||
Bills introduced | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | |
Bills passed | 3 | 2 | 4 | 4 | |
Passage rate | 60% | 40% | 80% | 100% | |
Chamber average | 51% | 53% | 60% | 61% | |
Difference | +9.4 | -12.8 | +20 | +39 | |
Comparison | == | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() ![]() |
|
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | ||
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 | 11 | 2 | 6 | 6 | |
Chamber average | 3.1 | 3.2 | 2.8 | 2.8 | |
Difference | +7.9 | -1.2 | +3.2 | +3.2 | |
Comparison | ![]() ![]() ![]() | == | ![]() | ![]() ![]() |
|
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | ||
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 | 12 | 13 | 20 | 44 | |
Total votes held | 602 | 616 | 600 | 614 | |
Absentee rate | 2.0% | 2.1% | 3.3% | 7.2% | |
Chamber average | 8.3% | 8.3% | 6.0% | 6.8% | |
Difference | -6.3 | -6.2 | -2.7 | +0.4 | |
Comparison | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | == | |
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | ||
"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 | 33 | 23 | 22 | 19 | |
Total votes held | 602 | 616 | 600 | 614 | |
"Nay" rate | 5.5% | 3.7% | 3.7% | 3.1% | |
Chamber average | 7.2% | 6.0% | 8.1% | 7.4% | |
Difference | -1.7 | -2.3 | -4.4 | -4.3 | |
Comparison | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() ![]() | ![]() ![]() |
|
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | ||
Winning side rate (learn more). What percentage of the time (excluding near-unanimous votes) is the legislator on the winning side of a floor vote? | |||||
Winning side rate | 77% | 78% | 86% | 89% | |
Chamber average | 67% | 69% | 66% | 69% | |
Difference | +11 | +8.7 | +20 | +20 | |
Comparison | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() ![]() | ![]() ![]() |
|
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | ||
Ideology score (NOMINATE method) (learn more). Using W-NOMINATE algorithm developed by Congressional scholars, I calculate each legislator's relative ideology after each General Session. I describe the method here. Scores have no intrinsic meaning. They are only relative: A legislator with a higher score is to the right ideologically of a legislator with a lower scale. Scores may be compared only within a single chamber and a single year. In most years, a conservative Republican will have a score above 0; a score close to 100 is extreme. | |||||
Contact me for scores. They get misinterpreted often enough that I now provide them only to political scientists. | |||||
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | ||
Party support score (overall) (learn more). How consistently does Rep. Hunsaker 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) | 95% | 96% | 96% | 96% | |
Chamber average | 95% | 95% | 94% | 95% | |
Difference | +0.1 | +0.8 | +1.7 | +1.4 | |
Comparison | == | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | ||
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) | 65% | 64% | 73% | 72% | |
Chamber average | 79% | 82% | 81% | 84% | |
Difference | -14.0 | -18.1 | -8.8 | -12.7 | |
Comparison | ![]() | ![]() ![]() | ![]() | ![]() ![]() |
Only 14 bills sponsored by Rep. Hunsaker have come to a vote. Listed below are all votes held on bills that Rep. Hunsaker 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 | Hunsaker | HB0060S01 | 58 | 14 | 61% | House/ passed 3rd reading |
2007 | Hunsaker | HB0219 | 22 | 5 | 63% | Senate/ pass 2nd |
2007 | Hunsaker | HB0036S02 | 59 | 13 | 64% | House/ concurs with Senate amendments |
2007 | Hunsaker | HB0219 | 61 | 10 | 72% | House/ passed 3rd reading |
2007 | Hunsaker | HB0219 | 25 | 4 | 72% | Senate/ pass 3rd |
2010 | Hunsaker | HB0116 | 20 | 2 | 82% | Senate/ passed 2nd reading |
2009 | Hunsaker | HB0023S02 | 20 | 1 | 90% | Senate/ pass 3rd |
2007 | Hunsaker | HB0110 | 69 | 3 | 92% | House/ passed 3rd reading |
2007 | Hunsaker | HB0110 | 26 | 1 | 93% | Senate/ pass 3rd |
2010 | Hunsaker | HB0044 | 70 | 2 | 94% | House/ passed 3rd reading |