There were two reasons Rep. Baron Hill, D-Ind., voted “no” on a handful of Democratic-supported budget matters during the last year.

“I thought the spending was a little out of control,” Hill said during a telephone interview earlier this week. Secondly, he said, his party wanted to use Social Security money to balance the budget by 2012 — funds which he had made a campaign pledge not to use.

“I get some flack [from party leaders], but it doesn’t last,” he said.

Such outcry also accompanied Hill’s vote against reauthorization of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, commonly known as S-CHIP.

“I was trying to represent the interest of my district,” he said of the vote. The program was paid for by a tobacco tax hike which he said would have hurt farmers in Indiana’s 9th congressional district. There were other “sin taxes” that could have been considered to pay for the program, he said.

Voting contrary to his party’s position wasn’t an anomaly for the congressman during the last year.

The Evening News and The Tribune compared Hill’s votes on 107 key issues during the current term with the votes of party leaders — Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C. and Democratic Caucus chairman Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill. Hill, who was brought back to congress in 2006 during the Democratic takeover of the House of Representatives and the Senate, voted with his party’s leaders about 89 percent of the time, the records showed.

Commonly, it was budget matters with which he took issue. Hill also voted in favor of a bill which authorized U.S. monitoring foreign electronic communications routed through the country — something party leaders rejected. He also voted against a patient reform bill that changes the methods for obtaining and challenging patient claims.

IS 89 PERCENT GOOD OR BAD?

“That’s a pretty decent number,” said Indiana political writer Brian Howey, who publishes the Howey Political Report.

If a Democratic representative gets under that 75 percent mark, many are going to start questioning their Democratic credentials, he said.

Howey notes that Hill has sided with the Republican Party on a couple of issues recently but notes that he represents a pretty conservative district. The situation is the same for Rep. Brad Ellsworth, D-Ind., from the state's 8th District, he said.

Hill's 89 percent score is up slightly from his previous term in 2003 and 2004. Then, he voted with the same party positions about 82 percent of the time. Howey said the change is likely a blip on the radar.

“I look at it as 70-80 percent is revealing some common sense,” he said. “I don’t think either party has cornered the market on wisdom.”

PAYING ATTENTION?

Howey said such numbers are commonly tracked because they're a good indication of party loyalty. However, he added, “I’ll be amazed if it's an issue that helps or hurts Baron Hill in the primary,” he said.

Congressional primaries are on May 6 in Indiana. Hill is facing three fellow Democrats for the nomination but is expected to face a much tougher challenge from former congressman Mike Sodrel during the general election in November.

“To the average voter, I don't think [party loyalty] is an issue,” said Linda Gugin, professor of political science at Indiana University Southeast in New Albany. She’s also co-faculty adviser for the College Democrats. It might make a difference in other districts but likely not here, she said.

Voters understand that a lot of the issues on which their congressional representative is deciding are complex. Hill’s S-CHIP vote was the perfect example of that, Gugin said. He was for the program but didn't like the way it was funded.

The 9th District is more Democrat than Republican, said Joe Wert, a fellow IUS political science professor and faculty advisor to the College Republicans. Because of that, Republican opposition may use such averages to paint him as “liberal,” rather than as a “Democrat.” The “liberal” label tends to evoke thoughts of someone who will be weak on defense or raise taxes, he said.

Sodrel and Hill have faced each other three times in the past. Sodrel challenged and lost in 2002, then tried again and won in 2004. He was ousted in 2006.

“[Sodrel’s] election in 2004 hinged on the fact that he painted Baron as a liberal,” Wert said.

Hill said such labeling is all politics. He points to a recent article by the National Journal that ranked him as being the third-most-centrist Democrat in the House of Representatives.

MUST YOU AGREE?

“There were times when I was on the other side of the party,” Sodrel said.

He recalls a time when a fellow Republican brought forth a bill that used $25 million in tax money to create a federal boxing commission. He sponsored an amendment which took the tax money out of the bill, which was passed. Then, to the dismay of some in the party, voted against the bill and the amendment he sponsored.

“When you amend a bill you're expected to vote for it,” he said.

Sodrel is unopposed for his party’s nomination and declined to comment on Hill until after the primary.

Libertarian Eric Schansberg is also vying for the 9th District seat. Schansberg, an economics professor at IUS, ran last year and took about 5 percent of the vote.

Party struggles are not as much of an issue for him because there are no Libertarians in the House.

“For us it’s much more philosophical, than practical,” he said. There are debates about issues within the party — a small percentage of Libertarians support the war in Iraq, for example.

There are two big issues that stand out for him during the current term — continued funding of the war without a withdraw plan and the economic stimulus package. Both are issues that he would have expected to turn out differently considering that it’s a Democrat-controlled congress.

A PARTY LEADER?

Hill had scheduled a meeting with Hoyer last week to discuss turning Congresses’ pay-as-you-go rules into pay-as-you-go laws. Under those rules, congress has to find ways to pay for the legislation it enacts. However, he said, rules can be suspended — having it as a law would be more stringent.

Hill said he harbors no aspirations of ever becoming a part of the party leadership, but with such fiscally conservative measures hopes to influence the caucus.

“When you're either an extreme conservative or an extreme liberal you lock yourself into a place where you can't solve problems,” he said.