Congress.org’s latest annual Power Rankings of the members of Congress provides some interesting talking points concerning Arizona’s 10 member delegation.

First a little background: The deep thinkers behind the rankings score each member on a number of factors, including position, indirect influence, legislative activity, earmark passage and “sizzle/fizzle.”

Clearly, nearly all of that is subjective. For example, racking up federal expenditures for earmarks is considered a positive factor in the rankings. Congress.org’s deep thinkers associate earmark passage with political influence. Sure, there’s an argument to be made for that.

Of course, other deep thinkers associate earmark passage with self indulgence, wasteful spending and stains on congressional records. So, what of Sen. John McCain, and Reps. Jeff Flake and John Shadegg who specifically don’t request earmarks? The Power Rankings knock their scores for that. 

Furthermore, Democrats get an automatic edge because they comprise the majority party in both the Senate and House and as a result will score higher in the position and legislative activity categories. That’s to be expected.

So with that preamble…

On the Senate side, Congress.org ranked Republicans McCain is 10^th and Jon Kyl 18^th, or second and third overall among Republicans. Interestingly, McCain’s presidential rivals Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barak Obama place ninth and 11^th in the Senate respectively.

Congress.org attributes McCain’s ranking in part to position as a ranking party member of a committee, his frequent media coverage, positive sizzle and for successfully amending bills.

He’s knocked for running for higher office, because doing so allegedly reduces or defuses his power to help current constituents. Other deep thinkers could offer the argument that emerging as his party’s nominee for president may give him a certain amount of added clout, but, of course, it’s Congress.org’s rankings so their deep thinkers get the final word.

Kyl should climb in coming years with the real and perceived power associated with his new No. 2 position in the GOP leadership team.

On the House side, Congress.org ranked Democrat Ed Pastor 84^th; Republican Shadegg 211^th, Democrats Raul Grijalva 246^th, Gabrielle Giffords 277^th and Harry Mitchell 334^th; and Republicans Jeff Flake 372^nd, Trent Franks 387^th and Rick Renzi dead last at 435^th.

Also of note, Renzi was the only member in either the Senate or House to get a negative score.

A report in Tuesday’s edition of Roll Call could be sobering for the Republican challengers seeking to oust Democratic U.S. Reps. Harry Mitchell’s and Gabrielle Giffords in the fall.

Roll Call, a newspaper that covers Congress, reported that Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has a huge financial advantage against the National Republican Congressional Committee.

The committees direct political expertise, and more importantly funding, toward selected races nationwide. At least they do that most years.

Roll Call writer Nathan L. Gonzales reported that through 2007, the DCCC had collections of $35.1 million, while the NRCC had $5.4 million.

Gonzales wrote, “Both committees generally give first priority and focus to incumbents, followed by open seats and then challenger races. With a number of vulnerable incumbents and more than two dozen open seats to defend, GOP challengers shouldn’t expect much more than a pat on the back from their campaign committees.”

Using that formula, Arizona’s Republican incumbents Reps. Jeff Flake and Trent Franks will get first-priority funding, though in reality, they won’t need it because they’ll only face token opposition.

The second-priority funding will go to whichever candidates emerge from the GOP primaries for the open seats currently held by outgoing Republican Reps. John Shadegg and Rick Renzi.

The third-priority funding will go to the Republican challengers for Mitchell’s and Giffords seats, which could be competitive. That is, if there’s any funding left.