Representative Jack Kingston's Special Interest Group Ratings

Office: U.S. House (GA) - District 1, Republican
Filter by Issue
How To Interpret These Evaluations

Defense

2014 Peace Action West - Positions (June 3, 2014) 19% 2013-2014 Center for Security Policy - Positions 88% 2013-2014 Council for a Livable World - Positions (House) 20% 2013 Peace Action West - Positions (Nov. 20, 2013) 19% 2011-2012 Center for Security Policy - Positions 91% 2011-2012 PeacePAC - Positions (PeacePAC is sister organization of Council for a Livable World rating House Only) 8% 2009-2010 Center for Security Policy - Positions 100% 2009-2010 Council for a Livable World - Positions 0% 2009-2010 PeacePAC - Positions (PeacePAC is sister organization of Council for a Livable World rating House Only) 0% 2007-2008 Center for Security Policy - Positions 88% 2007-2008 Council for a Livable World - Positions 12% 2007 Council for a Livable World - Positions 14% 2007 Voices for Creative Nonviolence - Iraq-Afghanistan Supplemental Spending Score 17% 2006 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 0% 2005-2006 Center for Security Policy - Positions 96% 2005 PeacePAC - Positions 0% 2003-2004 PeacePAC - Positions 0% 2003-2004 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 3% 2001-2010 Keep America Safe - Positions 100% 2001-2002 Council for a Livable World - Positions 0% 2001-2002 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 2% 1999-2000 PeacePAC - Positions 43% 1999 National Journal - Conservative on Defense/Foreign Policy Score 81% 1998-2002 Center for Security Policy - Positions 100% 1998 National Journal - Conservative on Defense/Foreign Policy Score 75% 1998 National Journal - Liberal on Defense/Foreign Policy Score 19% 1997-1998 PeacePAC - Positions 0% 1997 Center for Security Policy - Positions 94% 1996 Center for Security Policy - Positions 86% 1996 National Journal - Conservative on Defense/Foreign Policy Score 65% 1996 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign\Defense Policy 35% 1996 PeacePAC - Positions 20%

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.