Search Form
Now choose a category »
 

Rush D. Holt, Jr.'s Ratings and Endorsements on Issue: National Security

Office: U.S. House (NJ) - District 12, Democratic

National Security

2014 Peace Action West - Positions (June 3, 2014) 100%
2013-2014 Council for a Livable World - Positions (House) 60%
2013 Peace Action West - Positions (Nov. 20, 2013) 100%
2011-2012 ACT! for America - Positions 8%
2011-2012 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 10%
2011-2012 Center for Security Policy - Positions 0%
2011-2012 PeacePAC - Positions (PeacePAC is sister organization of Council for a Livable World rating House Only) 100%
2011 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 20%
2010 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 20%
2009-2010 ACT! for America - Positions 40%
2009-2010 Center for Security Policy - Positions 0%
2009-2010 Council for a Livable World - Positions 100%
2009-2010 PeacePAC - Positions (PeacePAC is sister organization of Council for a Livable World rating House Only) 100%
2009 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 50%
2007-2008 ACT! for America - Positions 0%
2007-2008 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 10%
2007-2008 Center for Security Policy - Positions 4%
2007-2008 Council for a Livable World - Positions 100%
2007 Council for a Livable World - Positions 100%
2005-2006 ACT! for America - Positions 6%
2005-2006 Center for Security Policy - Positions 7%
2005 PeacePAC - Positions 100%
2003-2004 ACT! for America - Positions 37.5%
2003-2004 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 10%
2003-2004 PeacePAC - Positions 100%
2002 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 25%
2001-2010 Keep America Safe - Positions 7%
2001-2002 Council for a Livable World - Positions 100%
1999-2000 PeacePAC - Positions 71%
1998-2002 Center for Security Policy - 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