Winners and Scoring Methodology
| Scores | Senate |
|---|---|
| 25 | Collins-Smith |
| 23 | Flippo |
| 23 | Rice |
| 22 | B. Johnson |
| 22 | B. King |
| 16 | G. Stubblefield |
| Scores | House |
|---|---|
| 25 | Copeland |
| 25 | Speaks |
| 15 | Payton |
| 22 | Jean |
| 22 | B. Smith |
| 22 | Ladyman |
| 19 | C. Douglas |
| 19 | Tosh |
| 18 | Wallace |
| 17 | Richmond |
| 17 | G. Hodges |
| 17 | Bentley |
| 17 | Miller |
| 17 | Deffenbaugh |
| 15 | M. Gray |
| 15 | Sullivan |
Much like any specific vote, the CFC scoring of bills, committee votes (when known) floor votes, primary sponsorships, and co-sponsorships is not an exact science or a technique which may be described as linear. Our scoring is weighted for principles based upon the following preferred likely outcomes: 1) reduces the size of government, 2) reduces dependency on government, and/or 3) reduces spending by government. It is believed that this method will ultimately yield a better assessment of the pattern of voting by a specific Legislator helpful in measuring differences in expectations by voters. Ultimately it is the intent of CFC that the voting pattern of these elected officials, as they relate to the above principles, is made clear.
July 31, 2015
