You may have heard that two qualified conservatives are running for the 4th highest position in the House of Representatives, Jeb Hensarling and Michele Bachmann. I was reading an article that assessed the relative strengths of each, and I thought it might be fun to see how you can leverage the work of other groups to assess candidates. (This is the way I do it)

Here’s the background:

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) has the support of many Tea Party supporters for a Republican leadership post, but most leaders of the newly-elected House majority are backing conservative Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas.

Bachmann and Hensarling appear headed for a showdown over the number four spot in the Republican leadership – that of chairman of the House Republican Conference.

And here’s the assessment:

Both candidates have high ratings from conservative organizations.

Hensarling voted 100 percent of the time with the interests of the American Conservative Union in 2009, the same rating earned by Bachmann.

Hensarling has an 89 percent composite conservative rating in the assessment carried out by the National Journal, and a 12 composite liberal score.

National Journal reports he voted more conservative on economic issues than 96 percent of the House and more conservative on social issues than 93 percent of the House. He voted more conservative than 68 percent of the House on foreign policy.

Bachmann does marginally better with conservative votes, according to National Journal, with a 90 percent composite conservative rating and 10 percent liberal composite rating. She has voted more conservative than 92 percent of her colleagues on economic policy, more conservative than 89 percent of colleagues on social policy and more conservative than 75 percent of other House members on foreign policy.

Both get a 0 rating from Americans for Democratic Action for 2009.

The National Right to Life Committee gave both a 100 percent rating for 2010, while NARAL Pro-Choice America gave both a score of 0.

The Family Research Council, a social conservative group that advocates socially conservative policies, such as pro-life policies and opposition to same-sex marriage, gave both Bachmann and Hensarling a score of 100.

Taxpayer advocacy groups also give the two high marks as well. The National Taxpayers Union gave Bachmann an 89 percent rating for 2009. Hensarling upped her by a few points with a 95 percent NTU rating for 2009.

Citizens Against Government Waste, a taxpayer watchdog group focusing on earmarks and other wasteful spending issues, gave Hensarling a 100 percent rating for 2009 (96 percent lifetime rating), slightly surpassing Bachmann’s 99 percent rating (and a 91 percent lifetime rating) with the group that same year.

Evaluated in 2009 by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation’s largest pro-business lobby. Bachmann scored 81 percent and Hensarling 83 percent.

Both received A-ratings from the Gun Owners of America in its 2010 candidates’ rating guide.

Although the House in the 111th Congress “almost entirely avoided the issue of immigration,” according to the pro-border enforcement group Federation for American Immigration Reform, it did rate lawmakers for their votes on two immigration-related measures. Bachmann and Hensarling both earned a positive rating.

And on national security issues for 2009-2010, Hensarling earned a 100 percent rating from the Center for Security Policy, a defense and national security think tank, while Bachmann received 87 percent.

Did you know that all those groups analyzed voting records and graded politicians? There are actually even more groups that give ratings based on voter records. I think that this is a much better way to assess candidates, because their voting record is a much more reliable indicator of what they intend to do than their campaign speeches.

So when you are deciding who to vote for, you can always use these ratings to see where people stand, as long as they have a voting record. For example, if you are concerned about government spending and waste, and the choices are Barack Obama and John McCain, you should know that Obama had a rating of 5 and McCain had a rating of 85 in 2008. That’s how you could know what Obama would do as President.

Regarding the Hensarling vs. Bachmann contest, I think either one would be great. They are equally good. Naturally, I prefer Bachmann because of her personal background. Specifically, her decision to quit her job and homeschool her own 5 children, and to welcome 23 foster children into her home. In my opinion, that is decisive.