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

Ken S. Calvert's Ratings and Endorsements on Issue: Agriculture and Food

Office: U.S. House (CA) - District 42, Republican

Agriculture and Food

2014 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 50%
2013 Food Policy Action - Positions 15%
2011-2012 Food Policy Action - Positions 43%
2011 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 100%
2009-2010 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 66%
2009-2010 National Farmers Union - Positions 0%
2008 National Association of Wheat Growers - Positions 7%
2007-2008 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 38%
2007-2008 Grassroots Netroots Alliance - Positions 9%
2007-2008 National Farmers Union - Family Farm Advocacy Score 12
2007 National Association of Wheat Growers - Positions 27%
2007 National Council of Agricultural Employers - Positions 100%
2007 United Fresh Produce Association - Positions 0%
2005-2006 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 88%
2005-2006 National Farmers Union - Positions 0%
2005 National Association of Wheat Growers - Positions 100%
2005 National Council of Agricultural Employers - Positions 66%
2003-2004 National Farmers Union - Positions 17%
2002 Vote Hemp - Positions on Industrial Hemp Policy Fence Sitter
2001-2002 Minnesota Farm Bureau - Positions 93%
2001-2002 Minnesota Farm Bureau - Positions 88%
2001-2002 National Farmers Union - Positions 20%
2001 American Coalition for Ethanol - Positions 0%
2000 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 100%
1999-2000 National Farmers Union - Positions 67%
1998 National Farmers Union - Positions 56%
1997 National Farmers Union - Positions 86%
1996 National Farmers Union - Positions 53%
1995-1996 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 100%
1995 National Farmers Union - Positions 30%
1994 National Farmers Union - Family Farm Advocacy Score 56%
1993-1994 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 93%
1993 National Farmers Union - Positions 56%

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