Search Form
First, enter a politician or zip code
Now, choose a category
 

Ray Vandeveer's Ratings and Endorsements

2010 Endorsements

Abortion

2012 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions [Excused and no-votes not counted] 100%
2012 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions [Factoring excused and no-votes] 100%
2012 NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota - Positions 0%
2011 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions 100%
2010 NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota - Positions on Reproductive Rights 0%
2009 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions 100%
2008 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions on Pro-Life Policy 100
2008 NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota - Positions on Reproductive Rights 0
2007 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions 100
2007 NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota - Positions on Reproductive Rights 25
2006 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions 100%
2006 NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota - Positions 0%
2005 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions 86%
2005 NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota - Positions 0%
2004 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions 100%
2004 NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota - Positions 0%
2003 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions 100%
2003 NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota - Positions 0%
2002 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions 100%
2001 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions 100%
2001 NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota - Positions 0%
2000 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions 100%
1999 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions 100%
1999 NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota - Positions 0%
1998 Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life - Positions 100%
1998 NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota - Positions 0%
1998 Planned Parenthood of Minnesota Advocate - Positions 0%
1996 Planned Parenthood of Minnesota Advocate - Positions on Reproductive Rights 0%

Labor Unions

2012 AFSCME Council 5 - Positions 13%
2012 Minnesota Nurses Association - Positions on Nursing, Health Care, and Workforce Issues 25%
2011 Minnesota Nurses Association - Positions 0%
2010 AFSCME Council 5 - Positions 20%
2010 Minnesota Association of Professional Employees - Positions 23%
2010 Minnesota Association of Professional Employees - Lifetime Score 26%
2010 Minnesota Nurses Association - Positions 16%
2009 AFSCME Council 5 - Positions 0%
2009 Minnesota AFL-CIO - Positions 18%
2009 Minnesota Association of Professional Employees - Positions 29%
2008 AFSCME Council 5 - Positions on Workplace Rights 0
2008 Minnesota AFL-CIO - Positions 21
2007 AFSCME Council 5 - Positions on Workplace Rights 25
2007 Minnesota AFL-CIO - Positions on Workplace Rights 17
2006 AFSCME Council 5 - Positions 20%
2006 Minnesota AFL-CIO - Positions 13%
2005 AFSCME Council 5 - Positions 0%
2005 Minnesota AFL-CIO - Positions 0%
2004 AFSCME Council 5 - Positions 60%
2004 AFSCME Joint Councils 6, 14, 65, & 96, AFL-CIO - Positions 20%
2004 Minnesota AFL-CIO - Positions 15%
2004 Minnesota Association of Professional Employees - Positions 30%
2003 AFSCME Council 5 - Positions 60%
2003 AFSCME Joint Councils 6, 14, 65, & 96, AFL-CIO - Positions 20%
2003 Minnesota AFL-CIO - Positions 25%
2001 Minnesota AFL-CIO - Positions 18%
2001 Minnesota Chamber of Commerce - Positions (Labor Policy) 100%
2000 Minnesota AFL-CIO - Positions 43%
1999 Minnesota AFL-CIO - Positions 25%
1998 Minnesota AFL-CIO - Positions 23%

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

2008 OutFront Minnesota - Positions 0%

How to Interpret these Evaluations

Project Vote Smart displays all known interest group ratings for each candidate and official, regardless of issue or bias.

Keep in mind that ratings done by special interest groups often do not represent a non-partisan stance. In addition, some groups select votes that tend to favor members of one political party over another, rather than choosing votes based solely on issues concerns. Nevertheless, they can be invaluable in showing where an incumbent has stood on a series of votes in the past one or two years, especially when ratings by groups on all sides of an issue are compared. Website links, if available, and descriptions of the organizations offering performance evaluations are accessible by clicking on the name of the group.

Most performance evaluations are displayed in a percentage format. However, some organizations present their ratings in the form of a letter grade or endorsement based on voting records, interviews, survey results and/or sources of campaign funding. For consistency and ease in understanding, Project Vote Smart converts all scores into a percentage when possible. Please visit the group's website or call 1-888-VOTESMART for more specific information.

Skip to top
Back to top