Menu Adam R Brown

Return to the Guide to the Utah Legislature.

Representative Brad King
Utah legislator profile

Years served in the Utah legislature

First session in legislature: 1997
Most recent year of service for which data are available: 2016
Total sessions served in Utah House as of 2016: 14
Total sessions served in Utah Senate as of 2016: 0

How to read the statistical profile

I present a variety of statistics about Rep. Brad King'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.

Rep. King's statistical profile

2007200820152016
Service summary. Service prior to 2007 (if any) is not shown here. My database goes back only to 2007.
  Chamber HouseHouseHouseHouse
  District H69H69H69H69
  Party DDDD
Leadership WhipMinLdrNoneNone
Years in chamber 11121314
Years comparison HigherHigherHigherHigherHigherHigherHigherHigher
 
2007200820152016
Bills sponsored (learn more) Bills written and promoted by the legislator in his/her own chamber.
Introduced by King 2011
Chamber average 6.16.16.77.0
Difference -4.1-6.1-5.7-6.0
Comparison LowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLower
 
2007200820152016
Bill passage rate (learn more). What percent of Rep. King's sponsored bills pass and are officially "enrolled"? (I ignore whether the governor signed or vetoted the bill.)
Bills introduced 2011
Bills passed 0010
Passage rate 0.0%0.0%100.0%0.0%
Chamber average 50.6%52.8%63.0%53.5%
Difference -50.6-52.8+37.0-53.5
Comparison LowerLowerLowerLowerLowerHigherHigherLowerLowerLower
 
2007200820152016
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 3342
Chamber average 3.13.23.83.3
Difference -0.1-0.2+0.2-1.3
Comparison ======Lower
 
2007200820152016
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 39401120
Total votes held 602616699657
Absentee rate 6.5%6.5%1.6%3.0%
Chamber average 8.3%8.3%6.3%6.4%
Difference -1.8-1.8-4.7-3.4
Comparison ====LowerLower
 
2007200820152016
"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 59437764
Total votes held 602616699657
"Nay" rate 9.8%7.0%11.0%9.7%
Chamber average 7.2%6.0%8.6%7.3%
Difference +2.6+1.0+2.4+2.4
Comparison HigherHigherHigherHigher
 
2007200820152016
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 47.8%63.2%56.3%57.3%
Chamber average 66.5%68.9%67.3%66.2%
Difference -18.7-5.7-11.0-8.9
Comparison LowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLower
 
2007200820152016
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 21.827.8nana
Chamber average 56.946.6nana
Difference -35.1-18.8nana
Comparison LowerLowerLowerLowernana
 
2007200820152016
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 -70.5-67.5-51.3-40.0
Chamber average 3.7-2.519.025.2
Difference -74.2-65.0-70.3-65.2
Comparison LowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLowerLower
 
2007200820152016
Party support score (overall) (learn more). How consistently does Rep. King 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) 95.2%96.5%94.9%93.7%
Chamber average 94.5%95.4%93.8%94.6%
Difference +0.7+1.1+1.1-0.9
Comparison ==HigherHigherLower
 
2007200820152016
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) 78.6%75.0%73.6%65.1%
Chamber average 79.3%81.7%81.9%85.4%
Difference -0.7-6.7-8.3-20.3
Comparison ==LowerLowerLowerLowerLower

Votes on Rep. King's bills

Only 3 bills sponsored by Rep. King have come to a vote. Listed below are all votes held on bills that Rep. King 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
2007 King HB0019 64 6 82.9% House/ passed 3rd reading
2015 King HB0136 23 0 100.0% Senate/ passed 3rd reading
2015 King HB0136 70 0 100.0% House/ passed 3rd reading
2007 King HB0344 71 0 100.0% House/ passed 3rd reading
2007 King HB0019 24 0 100.0% Senate/ pass 2nd