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

Norm Coleman's Ratings and Endorsements on Issue: Foreign Affairs

Foreign Affairs

2008 Armenian National Committee of America - Positions on Armenian American Issues A+
2008 Citizens for Global Solutions - Global Issues Score C-
2008 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 37%
2008 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 61%
2008 Voices for Creative Nonviolence - Iraq-Afghanistan Supplemental Spending Score 0%
2007-2008 ACT! for America - Positions 100%
2007-2008 National Foreign Trade Council - Positions 17%
2007-2008 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights -2
2007-2008 Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) - Positions -2
2007 Citizens for Global Solutions - Global Issues Score D+
2007 Council for a Livable World - Positions 18%
2007 Latin America Working Group - Positions 0%
2007 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 44%
2007 Peace Action West - Positions 0%
2007 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights -1
2007 United To End Genocide - Positions on Darfur A
2007 Voices for Creative Nonviolence - Positions on Iraq War Amendments 75%
2006-2012 Global Exchange - Percent Loyalty to Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Lobby 100%
2006 Citizens for Global Solutions - Global Issues Score C
2006 Latin America Working Group - Positions 33%
2006 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 50%
2006 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 47%
2006 Peace Action - Positions 22%
2006 Peace Action West - Positions 22%
2006 United To End Genocide - Positions on Darfur A
2006 Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) - Positions 17%
2005-2006 ACT! for America - Positions 75%
2005-2006 Council for a Livable World - Positions 16%
2005-2006 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 50%
2005-2006 National Foreign Trade Council - Positions 50%
2005-2006 Nuclear Age Peace Foundation - Positions 16%
2005-2006 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights -5
2005 Citizens for Global Solutions - Global Issues Score F
2005 Latin America Working Group - Positions 25%
2005 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 74%
2005 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 0%
2005 Peace Action - Positions 33%
2005 PeacePAC - Positions 25%
2004 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 0%
2004 Latin America Working Group - Positions 0%
2004 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 33%
2004 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 61%
2004 Nuclear Age Peace Foundation - Positions 0%
2004 Peace Action - Positions 0%
2003-2004 ACT! for America - Positions 100%
2003-2004 American Muslims for Jerusalem - Positions on International Middle East Policy Advocacy -6
2003-2004 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 100%
2003-2004 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 6%
2003-2004 National Foreign Trade Council - Positions 50%
2003-2004 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights -4
2003-2004 USA Engage - Positions 60%
2003-2004 Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) - Positions 14%
2003 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 11%
2003 Latin America Working Group - Positions 0%
2003 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 78%
2003 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 0%
2003 Peace Action - Positions 0%
2003 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights -1
2002-2003 Citizens for Global Solutions - Positions 11%
2001-2004 Council for a Livable World - 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