How do you research your representatives in government?

Votesmart is a useful tool, but I don't believe anything is "non partisan" I have lived and worked in and around Washington, D.C. since the Carter Administration. I follow politics closely and have written about it for the past 7 tears on my website http://ewross.com. Not everyone has the time do this, however. They must rely on the media and other sources for the information they need. In my opinion, more important than a list of policy positions is assessing the character and personality of the individual politician. I loved working in the Reagan administration because I could predict what President Reagan would do on just about every issue. I understood who the man was and what he believed and I trusted his judgment. Bottom line, I had faith in him. How many politicians can you say that about today. Choosing who to vote for is most often, however, deciding on the lesser of two evils. Just remember what Will Rogers said about politicians during the 1932 presidential election. "The good thing about this election is that only one of the son of a bitches can win."

I use a lot of online resources and look to see what their goals are and their main ideals are. But I have also gone to town hall meetings- you can tell a lot about someone about how they dodge a question or how they respond to an question in general..

I have congressional votes emailed to me from Congress.org and use the site to research what is happening in legislative development, check up on my senators at http://www.senate.gov/
check up on other parts of the Federal Government at http://www.usa.gov/index.shtml

I use VoteSmart, although frustratingly, in state level offices, they depend on the actual candidate and/or their campaign to populate relevant data. When you go to look up your candidates, and all you get is a name and a party, it's troubling. Now, most states do publish their voting records including votes on committee, but it can be like reading a foreign language trying to understand a) their vote and b) what the bill was about. In the end, half of them end up voting with their caucus anyway so the broader caucus talking points I suppose are the best we can get.

I ran for state representative last year (National Guard on m-day status can do this), and found voter apathy to be the most dispiriting thing ever. I ran in a district where my party was outnumbered 11 to 1, so the important part was just trying to increase turnout. Turnout was 30% across the board, but just 40% turnout from my own party would have narrowed the election enough that they could be taken more seriously by the incumbent. Strategically, too, their turnout could have helped candidates they favored in overlapping federal Congressional or State Senate districts.

We don't just need people to vote, we need people to run, from municipal offices to federal ones. I worry!

The majority of politicians are just self serving criminals who make laws that they will never have to follow. It's all about the reelection, most could care less about constituents. You just have to find the least criminal and cast your vote. Party denomination no longer matters, both the the same.

I prefer to read Canadian and British news, they have less invested in lying/spinning to Americans.

I look up the history of their actions, what have they stood for in the past, what did they do right, wrong and is their improvement? do they make decisions based on the party or other politicians or based on what they feel is truly best for the people they represent?

As an IT professional I have a saying: "Google is your friend." Also, my representative is Martha McSally, a retired Air Force Colonel so I know she's looking out for veterans.

I usually listen to the pundits on all sides (mostly Libertarian at this point, though). I also research online from more than one site (I mean, I know that there is no bias on any one particular site...lol!)

I look at there goals and how they are able to handle adversity in real life.