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

Charles 'Chuck' T. Hagel's Ratings and Endorsements

Office: U.S. Secretary of Defense, Republican

Conservative

2008 American Conservative Union - Positions 73%
2008 Eagle Forum - Positions 71%
2008 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 53%
2008 National Journal - Composite Conservative Score 59.8%
2007-2009 The New American - Positions on Conservative Issues 44%
2007-2008 Americans for Prosperity - Positions 82%
2007-2008 Concerned Women for America - Positions 75%
2007-2008 The John Birch Society - Positions 44%
2007 American Conservative Union - Positions 79%
2007 Americans for Prosperity - Positions 91%
2007 ConservAmerica - Positions 21
2007 Eagle Forum - Positions 52%
2007 GOPUSA - Positions 23%
2007 National Journal - Composite Conservative Score 61.3%
2007 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 48%
2007 The John Birch Society - Conservative Index Score 50%
2006 American Conservative Union - Positions 75%
2006 Americans for Prosperity - Positions 86%
2006 ConservAmerica - Positions 0
2006 Eagle Forum - Positions 44%
2006 National Journal - Composite Conservative Score 72%
2006 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 76%
2006 The John Birch Society - Positions 34%
2005-2006 Campaign for Working Families - Positions 88%
2005-2006 Concerned Women for America - Positions 100%
2005 American Conservative Union - Positions 96%
2005 ConservAmerica - Positions 0
2005 Eagle Forum - Positions 50%
2005 National Journal - Composite Conservative Score 69%
2005 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 64%
2005 National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy Score 86%
2004 American Conservative Union - Positions 87%
2004 Christian Action Network - Lifetime Score 84%
2004 Eagle Forum - Positions 100%
2004 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 51%
2004 The John Birch Society - Positions (Fall) 90%
2003-2004 Campaign for Working Families - Positions 100%
2003-2004 Concerned Women for America - Positions 100%
2003 American Conservative Union - Positions 100%
2003 Campaign for Working Families - Positions 100%
2003 Concerned Women for America - Positions 100%
2003 Eagle Forum - Positions 87%
2003 National Journal - Composite Conservative Score 72%
2003 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 68%
2002 American Conservative Union - Positions 95%
2002 Eagle Forum - Positions 75%
2002 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 76%
2002 National Journal - Composite Conservative Score 83%
2002 The John Birch Society - Positions 65%
2001-2002 Campaign for Working Families - Positions 87%
2001-2002 Concerned Women for America - Positions 75%
2001 American Conservative Union - Positions 84%
2001 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 72%
2001 The John Birch Society - Positions 85%
2000 American Conservative Union - Positions 88%
2000 Concerned Women for America - Positions 86%
2000 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 53%
2000 The John Birch Society - Positions 67%
1999 American Conservative Union - Positions 88%
1999 National Journal - Conservative on Defense/Foreign Policy Score 44%
1999 National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy Score 83%
1999 The John Birch Society - Positions 62%
1998 American Conservative Union - Positions 72%
1998 National Journal - Conservative on Defense/Foreign Policy Score 52%
1998 The John Birch Society - Positions 35%
1997-1998 60 Plus Association - Positions 90%
1997-1998 Concerned Women for America - Positions 100%
1997 American Conservative Union - Positions 80%
1997 The John Birch Society - Positions 55%

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