View 2010 Endorsements
Filter by Issue
How To Interpret These Evaluations

Environment

2012 League of Conservation Voters - Lifetime Score 86% 2012 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 40% 2012 Sierra Club - Positions on Clean water (House Only) 100% 2011-2012 Clean Water Action - Positions 100% 2011-2012 Environment America - Positions 55% 2011-2012 Food Policy Action - Positions 93% 2011-2012 League of Conservation Voters - Session Score 66% 2011-2012 National Parks Conservation Association - Positions (House Only) 43% 2011 Clean Water Action California - Positions (Congressional) 100% 2011 Environment America - Positions 100% 2011 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 91% 2011 League of Conservation Voters - Lifetime Score 92% 2011 Sierra Club - Positions on Clean Water (House Only) 100% 2011 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions (House Only) 91 2010-2011 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 100% 2010 League of Conservation Voters - Lifetime Score 92% 2010 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 90% 2009-2010 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 100% 2009-2010 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 96% 2009-2010 National Parks Conservation Association - Positions 83% 2009 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 100% 2009 Environment America - Positions 100% 2009 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 100% 2008 Environment America - Positions 100% 2007-2008 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 88% 2007-2008 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 91% 2007 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 90% 2007 League of Conservation Voters - First Session Score 90% 2006-2012 Global Exchange - Percent Loyalty to Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Lobby 0% 2006 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 92% 2006 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 100% 2005-2006 American Forest and Paper Association - Positions 16% 2005-2006 American Lands Alliance - Positions 100% 2005-2006 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 83% 2005-2006 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 90% 2005-2006 Partnership for America - Positions 6% 2005 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 67% 2005 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 89% 2004 Center for International Policy - Positions 100% 2003-2004 American Lands Alliance - Positions 100% 2003-2004 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 91% 2003-2004 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 87% 2003-2004 National Parks Conservation Association - Positions 84% 2003-2004 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 97% 2003 American Lands Alliance - Positions 100% 2003 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 100% 2003 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 95% 2003 Sierra Club - Positions 100% 2002 Californians for Population Stabilization - Positions 33% 2001-2002 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 80% 2001-2002 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 95% 2001-2002 National Parks Conservation Association - Positions 83% 2001-2002 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 99% 2001 Californians for Population Stabilization - Positions 0% 1999-2000 American Lands Alliance - Positions 100% 1999-2000 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 97% 1999-2000 National Parks Conservation Association - Positions 87% 1999 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 100% 1998 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 93% 1997 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 88% 1995-1996 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 88% 1994 Competitive Enterprise Institute - Environment Score 4%

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.