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.

Dana T. Rohrabacher

Dana T. Rohrabacher's Ratings and Endorsements on Issue: Agriculture and Food

Full Name: Dana T. Rohrabacher
Current Office: U.S. House - District 48, Republican
First Elected: 11/08/1988
Last Elected: 11/06/2012
Next Election: 2014
On The Ballot: Running, Republican for U.S. House - District 48
Primary June 3, 2014

Agriculture and Food

2013 Food Policy Action - Positions 31%
2013 Food Policy Action - Positions 31%
2013 International Foodservice Distributors Association - Positions 100%
2011-2012 Food Policy Action - Positions 21%
2011-2012 Food Policy Action - Positions 21%
2011-2012 International Foodservice Distributors Association - Positions (House) 100%
2011-2012 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions 0%
2011 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 64%
2009-2010 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 66%
2009-2010 International Foodservice Distributors Association - Positions 100%
2009-2010 National Farmers Union - Positions 0%
2009 ConservAmerica - Positions 22
2008 National Association of Wheat Growers - Positions 7%
2007-2008 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 23%
2007-2008 ConservAmerica - Positions 12
2007-2008 Grassroots Netroots Alliance - Positions 15%
2007-2008 International Foodservice Distributors Association - Positions 100%
2007-2008 National Farmers Union - Family Farm Advocacy Score 0
2007-2008 The National Mining Association - Positions 83%
2007-2008 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions 6%
2007 ConservAmerica - Positions 13
2007 National Association of Wheat Growers - Positions 15%
2007 National Council of Agricultural Employers - Positions 100%
2007 United Fresh Produce Association - Positions 0%
2006 ConservAmerica - Positions 33
2005-2006 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 76%
2005-2006 National Farmers Union - Positions 16%
2005 ConservAmerica - Positions 4
2005 National Association of Wheat Growers - Positions 75%
2005 National Council of Agricultural Employers - Positions 66%
2003-2004 National Farmers Union - Positions 33%
2002 Vote Hemp - Positions on Industrial Hemp Policy Anti Hemp
2001-2002 National Farmers Union - Positions 30%
2001 American Coalition for Ethanol - Positions 0%
2001 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions 0%
2000 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 33%
1999-2000 National Farmers Union - Positions 25%
1998 National Farmers Union - Positions 22%
1997 National Farmers Union - Positions 14%
1997 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions 15%
1996 National Farmers Union - Positions 27%
1996 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions 8%
1995-1996 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 77%
1995 National Farmers Union - Positions 20%
1995 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions on Workplace Rights 0%
1994 Competitive Enterprise Institute - Positions on Agriculture 100%
1994 National Farmers Union - Family Farm Advocacy Score 44%
1994 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions 25%
1993-1994 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 79%
1993 National Farmers Union - Positions 44%
1993 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions on Workplace Rights 0%
1991-1992 National Farmers Organization - Positions 10%

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