May 10, 2005

Congressional Breakdown History Complete

I've finished the historical breakdowns of Congress, which I had slated for yesterday. It was quite a large amount of information and I might have to do some more work, like breaking it into four different pages to improve readability and navigation. For now, it's all on one long page.

It can be found on the site here, and is listed on the issue articles page as a tutorial here.

I can now update the list of stuff I have to do.

- quiz report function
- historical party breakdown of Congress
- Global Warming Sham
- Dar al-Islam
- genocide overview
- World Report country summaries
- Supreme Court expositions

I'll start sprucing up my incomplete second essay on global warming and either post the two of them tonight/tomorrow or write a third for posting sometime Thursday night or Friday. No doubt you're all waiting on the edges of your seats.

If anyone has questions or corrections on the party summaries and history, please don't hesitate to shut your damned mouth.

No, really, please pose questions or make comments either in the comments section or e-mail me. I definitely tried to keep the summaries limited so there's stuff that may be confusing or even less-than-fully-accurate (i.e. dead-ass wrong). If you want the resources I used, then there are several.

First is a chart I made over a year ago of all the parties, including a map of their development. I'm debating whether to make it correct, because I've found errors in it. I may just separate out the map and eliminate the numbers in order to show the development, source and termination of various notable parties. I do not guarantee the accuracy of this map, although I promise it's at least 99% accurate given how much information is there. Parties.

The two best resources, which provided the best information for both the Parties JPG and the Historical Party Breakdowns page were the House Clerk and Senate Clerk. They had great info that I trusted implicitly. If they're wrong then I don't think I can be blamed for using them as sources.

One source that I found to be disappointingly incomplete and even at times demonstrably false was through Wikipedia, a list of US Congresses by session. Don't trust too much of the stuff you find there. For example, I saw them list John Adams as a Representative in the 23rd Congress, even though he would have been dead for more than eight years before the 1832 election. Moreover, they list him directly above his son John Quincy Adams, and they say that John Adams was a Jacksonian - which he would NEVER have been. He was far too New England, educated and religious to associate himself with the Jacksonians. It's silly to say that he would've served concurrently in the Congress with his son post-JQA's Presidency, since John Adams died while his boy was in office. But it's even dumber to list them right next to each other as beloning to divergent factions.

I assume part of the error lies in the computer generation of those pages, but I also wasn't impressed at how the 33rd, 34th, 37th-54th, 56th-64th, 66th-68th, 70th, 75th-79th, 86th, 88th and 89th Congresses were just missing from the list. I tried to 'cheat' by typing in the URL directly but that didn't work the few times I tried it. If it's computer generated, why didn't they generate all of them?

Still, it's useful for finding specific members of different sessions. Sometimes that was a handy way to track the development of political factions if you saw that a particular, say, Anti-Masonic, later joined the Whigs and Republicans (e.g. Seward).

But I have to stress again that, though they offer more or less nothing about the platforms and ideas behind the caucuses, the House Clerk and Senate Clerk had complete information that you can trust more than most any other online source.

If those resources don't answer your questions or you have a comment, leave it in the comments or e-mail me.


Post a Comment

<< Home