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.

John Reid Edwards

John Reid Edwards's Ratings and Endorsements on Issue: Social

Full Name: John Reid Edwards

Social

2004 Vote Hemp - Positions on Industrial Hemp Policy B-
2003-2004 ACT! for America - Positions 50%
2003-2004 National Right to Life Committee - Positions 0%
2003 American Humane Association - Positions 60%
2003 Americans for Democratic Action - Positions 65%
2003 Campaign for Working Families - Positions 4%
2003 Center for Reclaiming America - Positions 33%
2003 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 0%
2003 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 0%
2003 Concerned Women for America - Positions 0%
2003 Concerned Women for America - Positions 0%
2003 Eagle Forum - Positions 0%
2003 Family Research Council - Positions 0%
2003 Family Research Council - Positions 0%
2003 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
2003 National Committee for an Effective Congress - Positions 95%
2003 National Journal - Liberal on Social Policy Score 85%
2003 National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy Score 0%
2003 National Network for Youth - Positions 100%
2003 NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby - Positions 100%
2003 NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby - Positions 100%
2003 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Conservative Issues 6
2003 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Conservative Issues 6
2003 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Conservative Issues 6
2002 American Immigration Lawyers Association - Positions 0%
2002 Americans for Democratic Action - Positions 70%
2002 Eagle Forum - Positions 33%
2002 National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy Score 38%
2002 National Journal - Liberal on Social Policy Score 56%
2002 NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby - Positions 67%
2002 NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby - Positions 67%
2002 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Conservative Issues 35
2002 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Conservative Issues 35
2002 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Conservative Issues 35
2002 The John Birch Society - Positions 20%
2002 The John Birch Society - Positions 20%
2001-2002 American Bar Association - Positions 100%
2001-2002 American Humane Association - Positions 71%
2001-2002 American Muslims for Jerusalem - Positions on International Middle East Policy Advocacy -7
2001-2002 Bread for the World - Positions 100%
2001-2002 Campaign for Working Families - Positions 7%
2001-2002 Concerned Women for America - Positions 25%
2001-2002 Concerned Women for America - Positions 25%
2001-2002 Family Research Council - Positions 11%
2001-2002 Family Research Council - Positions 11%
2001-2002 National Committee for an Effective Congress - Positions 85%
2001-2002 National Right to Life Committee - Positions 0%
2001-2002 People for the American Way - Positions 85%
2001 Americans for Democratic Action - Positions 95%
2001 Children's Defense Fund - Positions 91%
2001 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 0%
2001 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 0%
2001 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
2001 National Committee for an Effective Congress - Positions 90%
2001 National Journal - Liberal on Social Policy Score 60%
2001 National Youth Advocacy Coalition - Positions 100%
2001 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions 16%
2001 The John Birch Society - Positions 20%
2001 The John Birch Society - Positions 20%
2000 Americans for Democratic Action - Positions 85%
2000 Bread for the World - Positions 100%
2000 Children's Defense Fund - Positions 100%
2000 Concerned Women for America - Positions 14%
2000 Concerned Women for America - Positions 14%
2000 Family Research Council - Positions 50%
2000 Family Research Council - Positions 50%
2000 Legion for the Survival of Freedom, Inc. (formerly Liberty Lobby) - Positions 100%
2000 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
2000 National Journal - Liberal on Social Policy Score 66%
2000 National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy Score 21%
2000 NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby - Positions 82%
2000 NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby - Positions 82%
2000 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions 25%
2000 The John Birch Society - Positions 13%
2000 The John Birch Society - Positions 13%
1999-2000 American Bar Association - Positions 100%
1999-2000 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 15%
1999-2000 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 15%
1999-2000 Home School Legal Defense Association - Positions 40%
1999-2000 National Right to Life Committee - Positions 0%
1999 Americans for Democratic Action - Positions 90%
1999 Bread for the World - Positions 100%
1999 Children's Defense Fund - Positions 100%
1999 Legion for the Survival of Freedom, Inc. (formerly Liberty Lobby) - Positions 40%
1999 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
1999 National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy Score 12%
1999 National Journal - Liberal on Social Policy Score 81%
1999 National Right to Life Committee - Positions 0%
1999 NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby - Positions 91%
1999 NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby - Positions 91%
1999 The John Birch Society - Positions 17%
1999 The John Birch Society - Positions 17%

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