CANOGA PARK, CA – The Free Speech Coalition (FSC) announced today the release of its first Congressional Report Card, part of an “effort to educate its members and the public about next month’s mid-term election choices,” the FSC stated in a press release.The Congressional Report Card and associated documents and reports can be found online here:
http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/FSCView.asp?coid=721

The Report Card, which the FSC said was compiled from numerous online sources and Congressional Roll Call voting records, uses a numerical rating system to calculate each elected official’s “average voting record.”

“Our goal is to inform FSC members how votes in Congress can affect their access to adult entertainment products and to encourage them to vote their ‘erotic interests’ as well as their economic and security interests in this year’s critical mid-term elections,” FSC Legislative Affairs Director Kat Sunlove stated in the release. “With the hostile attitude of this administration and this Congress toward our industry, we felt that our members and our consumers needed this data in order to cast an informed vote.”

In its press release, the FSC outlines the enormous challenge in finding Roll Call votes on which to base ratings, as most legislation that has an impact on the adult entertainment industry “either does not come up for a recorded vote or is buried in unrelated bills, such as the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act (H.R.4472) passed in July.”

The Walsh Act is focused primarily on child sex offender registry rules and has only one section that refers to adult material. A vote for the Walsh Act, the bulk of which the FSC says it favors, “would not be a good measure of a legislator’s attitude toward legal adult sexual material,” The FSC stated in its release. The FSC Report Card instead relies on “votes related to broad free speech, free press, privacy rights and separation of church and state issues for judging the voting patterns of members of Congress.”

The Report Card rating scale is as follows:

-5 – Extremely bad
-4 – Very bad
-3 – Bad
-2 – Somewhat bad
-1 – Mildly bad
0 – Abstain or not voting
+1 – Mildly good
+2 – Somewhat good
+3 – Good
+4 – Very good
+5 – Extremely good

Each individual vote of “aye” or “nay” is assigned a value on the scale, the average of which constitutes the given incumbent’s overall score. For example, a thumbs-up on the measure H.R.3717 – a bill authorizing Federal Communications Commission to increase the penalty for broadcast indecency to a maximum of $500,000 – is given a rating of -5, while a “nay” vote on the measure earns an incumbent a +5 score.

In its guide to voting in House of Representative races this November, the FSC notes that its Report Card “is offered only as a guide in judging the legislative performance of Members of Congress, and has several inherent limitations,” according to a document posted to the FSC website that details the report’s rating scale and methodology.

“It [the Report Card] is no measure of a legislator’s work in committee,” the FSC continues in its House elections guide. “It does not reflect the failure of Congress to deal with major issues, or the individual’s degree of responsibility. These judgments cannot be expressed in numeric values. We urge you to carefully evaluate all aspects of a candidates qualifications and voting record before casting your vote.”

In addition to information on votes relevant to free speech and related issues, the FSC also identifies “Key Races,” runs for the House and Senate “in which there is no clear favorite and each vote can change the outcome,” the FSC stated in its press release.

“We strongly encourage our members and fans to register to vote and to educate themselves on the issues,” FSC Executive Director Michelle L. Freridge stated in the press release. “We certainly hope that this Report Card will help them become more informed voters this fall but our main goal is simply to urge our members to get out and vote.”