or Login to see your representatives.

Access Candidates' and Representatives' Biographies, Voting Records, Interest Group Ratings, Issue Positions, Public Statements, and Campaign Finances

Simply enter your zip code above to get to all of your candidates and representatives, or enter a name. Then, just click on the person you are interested in, and you can navigate to the categories of information we track for them.

Mark Dayton

Mark Dayton's Ratings and Endorsements on Issue: Foreign Affairs

Full Name: Mark Dayton
Current Office: Governor, Democratic/Farmer/Labor
First Elected: 11/02/2010
Last Elected: 11/02/2010
Next Election: 2014
On The Ballot: Running, Democratic/Farmer/Labor for Governor
Primary Aug. 12, 2014

Foreign Affairs

2006 Citizens for Global Solutions - Global Issues Score B
2006 Peace Action West - Positions 67%
2006 United To End Genocide - Positions on Darfur A
2005-2006 ACT! for America - Positions 33%
2005-2006 Council for a Livable World - Positions 66%
2005-2006 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 83%
2005 Citizens for Global Solutions - Global Issues Score A+
2005 Latin America Working Group - Positions 75%
2005 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 72%
2005 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 25%
2005 Peace Action - Positions 78%
2005 PeacePAC - Positions 75%
2004 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 50%
2004 Latin America Working Group - Positions 50%
2004 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 8%
2004 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 86%
2004 Nuclear Age Peace Foundation - Positions 100%
2004 Peace Action - Positions 100%
2003-2004 ACT! for America - Positions 50%
2003-2004 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 22%
2003-2004 Bread for the World - Positions 100%
2003-2004 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 81%
2003-2004 Population Action International - Positions 100%
2003-2004 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights -3
2003-2004 USA Engage - Positions 20%
2003-2004 Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) - Positions 0%
2003 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 78%
2003 Latin America Working Group - Positions 67%
2003 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 90%
2003 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 0%
2003 Peace Action - Positions 100%
2003 Population Action International - Positions 100%
2003 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights -1
2002-2003 Citizens for Global Solutions - Positions 77%
2002 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 50%
2002 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 11%
2002 Peace Action - Positions 60%
2001-2004 Council for a Livable World - Positions 92%
2001-2002 American Foreign Service Association - Positions 80%
2001-2002 American Muslims for Jerusalem - Positions on International Middle East Policy Advocacy -2
2001-2002 Bread for the World - Positions 100%
2001-2002 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 100%
2001-2002 USA Engage - Positions 40%
2001 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 100%
2001 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 3%
2001 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 87%
2001 Peace Action - Positions 57%
1998-2002 Center for Security Policy - Positions 11%

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.

Back to top