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

Steve Chabot's Ratings and Endorsements on Issue: Animals and Wildlife

Office: U.S. House (OH) - District 1, Republican
On The Ballot: Running, Republican for U.S. House - District 1

Animals and Wildlife

2015 American Veterinary Medical Association - Positions on Professional Advocacy 100%
2015 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 0%
2015 Food Policy Action - Positions 18%
2015 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 44%
2014 American Veterinary Medical Association - Positions on Professional Advocacy 100%
2014 Food Policy Action - Positions 22%
2014 Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - Positions 80%
2013-2014 Animal Welfare Institute - Positions 22%
2013-2014 Food Policy Action - Positions 22%
2013-2014 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 25%
2013 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 33%
2013 Food Policy Action - Positions 23%
2012 Sierra Club - Positions on Clean water (House Only) 0%
2012 Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - Positions 75%
2011-2012 Animal Welfare Institute - Positions 17%
2011-2012 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 3%
2011-2012 Food Policy Action - Positions 29%
2011 American Veterinary Medical Association - Positions on Professional Advocacy 100%
2011 Sierra Club - Positions on Clean Water (House Only) 0%
2010-2011 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 0%
2007-2008 Animal Welfare Institute - U.S. House Score 33%
2007-2008 Big Cat Rescue - Positions 66
2007-2008 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 25%
2007-2008 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 58%
2007 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 40%
2007 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions on Animal Protection 67%
2006 National Animal Interest Alliance Trust - Positions 0%
2006 Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - Positions 0%
2005-2006 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 16%
2005-2006 Animal Welfare Institute - U.S. House Score 100%
2005-2006 Big Cat Rescue - Positions 63%
2005-2006 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 6%
2005-2006 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 70%
2005 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 0%
2005 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 50%
2004 American Humane Association - Positions 44%
2004 American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals - Positions 44%
2004 Born Free USA - Positions 44%
2004 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 40%
2004 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 44%
2004 Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - Positions 25%
2003-2004 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 9%
2003 American Humane Association - Positions 44%
2003 American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals - Positions 44%
2003 Animal Welfare Institute - Positions 44%
2003 Born Free USA - Positions 44%
2003 Doris Day Animal League - Positions 44%
2003 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 44%
2003 Sierra Club - Positions 25%
2002 Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - Positions 0%
2001-2002 American Humane Association - Positions 60%
2001-2002 American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals - Positions 60%
2001-2002 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 0%
2001-2002 Animal Welfare Institute - Positions 60%
2001-2002 Born Free USA - Positions 60%
2001-2002 Doris Day Animal League - Positions 60%
2001-2002 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 60%
2000 Animal Welfare Institute - Positions 66%
1999 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 66%
1997 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions on Animal Protection 50%
1995 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 25%

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