Representative Dick Stevenson receives a “D” on the Mercer Conservatives Index

The “Mercer Conservatives Index” (hereby referred to as “The Index”) is a basic grading system designed to compare and rate candidates, elected officials, bills, etc. on a simple scale of fiscal conservatism and public service.

Representative Dick Stevenson (R-8th)
Grade: C (Scored 32 out of 50 = 64%)

The Details of Representative Stevenson’s Grade

Record:
For elected officials, this score is based on the person’s proven record as an elected candidate from a fiscal conservative standpoint. It is completely based on their recorded votes and their public position on specific issues.

Score for “Record”: 3
Representative Dick Stevenson is pretty conservative. He generally votes for issues of sound fiscal policy. I would have given him a 4, but he does not stand out on my list of Fiscal Conservative Representatives. He receives a bit of a deduction in that area.

Leadership:
Leadership is defined at the person’s ability to lead others and their ability to inspire others to follow them. This score is based on my personal interactions with the individuals and the impressions that they left me with.

Score for Leadership: 3
Rep. Stevenson is a positive force in his community and in Harrisburg. He is a “respectable” and “respected” leader to some. I’ve discounted him in this category because he has proven to be a “follower” within County politics (like Representative Michele Brooks). Rather than taking a lead (and stepping up to a higher office), he has taken a back seat to louder voices.

General Intellect:
Based on personal conversation, public presentations, and platform details, General Intellect rates an individual on their level of intelligence. “How Smart” does the person seem.

Score for General Intellect: 5
Based on what I know from experience, what I’ve read, and what I’ve witnessed through video and audio feeds, Representative Stevenson is a smart guy. I have no complaints.

Capability:
Capability differs from General Intellect in that it takes into account the ability of the individual to learn and adapt. Will they be able to step up to the position for which they have been or will be elected using a combination of intellect, hard-work, commitment, and desire?

Score for Capability: 5
Representative Stevenson has proved that he is a capable Representative

Likeability:
Likeability is a simple term. The grades are based on MY impression of the individual, but it also takes into account the way that others may view them.

Score for Likeability: 4
Dick is a nice guy. He is not overwhelmingly friendly, which explains my discount of one point. He is, however, friendly whenever you meet him. Everyone that I talk to agrees.

Transparency and Accountability:
This is an important category for me. It judges each candidate based on my experiences with them thus far. High points are given to those candidates that have been forthcoming with detailed information and who are willing to discuss issues openly and honestly. Low points are given to those candidates that have failed in their ability to communicate and provide specific answers in response to the questions that were asked.

Score for Transparency and Accountability: 0
Representative Stevenson does not answer questions. Instead he claims that all questions are “political”. His refusal to answer gives him a score of 0.

Public Service:
Public Service is somewhat tied to Transparency and Accountability. Public Service specifically rates each candidate on their record of responding to requests. It grades each candidate on their willingness to “go the extra mile” for their constituents. High marks are given for making an effort to communicate by phone, email, social networking, and personal meetings.

Score for Public Service: 2
Representative Stevenson’s low score is based on his unwillingness to respond to constituent inquires. I’ve provided him with 2 points, however, as it seems that he address issues directly to people other than myself. He makes himself accessible at public gatherings (even if very briefly). He deserves higher than a zero, but not much higher.

Desire to Represent “The People” of his District:
This is a very important element of the Index. Based on my discussions with the individuals (and their public remarks), each candidate is graded on their concern for the taxpayers of their District. Are their interests specifically focused on the people of the District, or are they looking at a broader base of constituents?

Score for Desire to Represent: 5
I get the impression that Dick works hard for the people of his District. Of ALL of the Districts, I’m probably the most disconnected from the 8th, so I’m not a particularly good judge. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt.

Scrappy Factor:
I made this one up. Scrappy is hard to describe, but it rates each candidate on their “stick-to-it-iveness” (yes, I made that up to). I wanted to rate each candidate on whether or not they seem like the type that is willing to roll up their sleeves and do the hard work that will be required of them. Are they willing to do the “not-so-glamorous” work that is part of public service, or do they tend to delegate responsibility so as to keep a distance from the more demanding tasks.

Score for Scrappy Factor: 0
Dick Stevenson isn’t “Scrappy”. I think he does what he needs to do to get his job done, but I don’t see him as “going the extra mile”.

Mercer Conservatives Litmus Test:
During the 2008 General Election, I invented the Mercer Conservatives Litmus Test. This score was based on one simple question. “Would I like to sit down and have a cup of coffee with this candidate?” My answer is based on the individual’s ability to impress me as being a “normal person” or the “guy or gal next door”. . . not just a politician.

Score for the Litmus Test: 5
Dick is a good guy, and I’d have coffee with him any time.

In Closing . . .

For a conservative legislator, Rep. Dick Stevenson falls short in my unscientific analysis due to his history of hiding from questions . . . ducking queries . . . and ignoring communications. By refusing to communicate, he demonstrates a complete lack of transparency and accountability and he ignores his responsibilities as a public servant.

As always, just my opinion.
~Mercer Conservatives

HERE ARE THE COMBINED RESULTS OF ALL STATE LEGISLATORS (that represent Mercer County):