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.

Nathan Deal

Nathan Deal's Ratings and Endorsements on Issue: Foreign Affairs

Full Name: Nathan Deal
Current Office: Governor, Republican
First Elected: 11/02/2010
Last Elected: 11/02/2010
Next Election: 2014
On The Ballot: Running, Republican for Governor
Primary May 20, 2014
General Nov. 4, 2014

Foreign Affairs

2010 Citizens for Global Solutions - Global Issues Score F
2009-2010 ACT! for America - Positions 60%
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%
2009-2010 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights -2%
2009 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 89%
2009 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 20%
2009 Latin America Working Group - Positions 0%
2009 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 26%
2009 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 68%
2009 NewPolicy.org - Positions on International Middle East Policy Advocacy 8%
2009 Peace Action West - Positions 9%
2009 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights -1%
2008 Armenian National Committee of America - Positions on Armenian American Issues C
2008 Citizens for Global Solutions - Global Issues Score D-
2008 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 0%
2008 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 22%
2008 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 74%
2008 Peace Action West - Positions 0%
2008 Resolve Uganda - Lifetime Score F
2007-2009 Citizens for Global Solutions - Global Issues Score F
2007-2008 ACT! for America - Positions 100%
2007-2008 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 100%
2007-2008 Council for a Livable World - Positions 0%
2007-2008 National Foreign Trade Council - Positions 50%
2007-2008 Nuclear Age Peace Foundation - Positions 0%
2007-2008 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights -4
2007-2008 USA Engage - Positions on Trade and Engagement B
2007-2008 Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) - Positions +1
2007 Citizens for Global Solutions - Global Issues Score F
2007 Council for a Livable World - Positions 14%
2007 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 9%
2007 Latin America Working Group - Positions 0%
2007 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 0%
2007 Peace Action West - Positions 9%
2007 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights -2
2007 United To End Genocide - Positions on Darfur C
2007 Voices for Creative Nonviolence - Iraq-Afghanistan Supplemental Spending Score 17%
2006-2012 Global Exchange - Percent Loyalty to Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Lobby 67%
2006 Citizens for Global Solutions - Global Issues Score F
2006 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 27%
2006 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 73%
2006 Peace Action - Positions 9%
2006 Peace Action West - Positions 9%
2006 United To End Genocide - Positions on Darfur D
2006 Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) - Positions 50%
2005-2006 ACT! for America - Positions 100%
2005-2006 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 0%
2005-2006 National Foreign Trade Council - Positions 17%
2005-2006 Nuclear Age Peace Foundation - Positions 0%
2005-2006 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights -6
2005 Citizens for Global Solutions - Global Issues Score D
2005 Council on American-Islamic Relations - Positions 0%
2005 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 0%
2005 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 89%
2005 Peace Action - Positions 8%
2005 PeacePAC - Positions 0%
2004 Center for International Policy - Positions 0%
2004 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 0%
2004 Latin America Working Group - Positions 0%
2004 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 84%
2004 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 16%
2004 Nuclear Age Peace Foundation - Positions 33%
2004 Peace Action - Positions 0%
2003-2004 ACT! for America - Positions 100%
2003-2004 American Muslims for Jerusalem - Positions on International Middle East Policy Advocacy -6
2003-2004 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 100%
2003-2004 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 0%
2003-2004 National Foreign Trade Council - Positions 17%
2003-2004 PeacePAC - Positions 9%
2003-2004 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights -2
2003-2004 USA Engage - Positions 20%
2003-2004 Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) - Positions 100%
2003 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 0%
2003 Latin America Working Group - Positions 0%
2003 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 71%
2003 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 23%
2003 Nuclear Age Peace Foundation - Positions 0%
2003 Peace Action - Positions 0%
2003 United States Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation - Positions on International Middle East Human Rights 0
2002-2006 Voices for Creative Nonviolence - Iraq War Resolution and Funding 80%
2002-2003 Citizens for Global Solutions - Positions 0%
2002 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 75%
2002 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 85%
2002 Peace Action - Positions 10%
2001-2002 American Foreign Service Association - Positions 59%
2001-2002 American Muslims for Jerusalem - Positions on International Middle East Policy Advocacy -2
2001-2002 Council for a Livable World - Positions 0%
2001-2002 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 0%
2001-2002 National Foreign Trade Council - Postions 17%
2001-2002 USA Engage - Positions 20%
2001 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 7%
2001 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 33%
2001 Peace Action - Positions 0%
2001 Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) - Positions 50%
2000 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 18%
2000 National Foreign Trade Council - Positions 0%
2000 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 25%
2000 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 69%
2000 Peace Action - Positions 10%
1999-2000 PeacePAC - Positions 43%
1999 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 43%
1999 National Journal - Conservative on Defense/Foreign Policy Score 92%
1999 Peace Action - Positions 27%
1998-2002 Center for Security Policy - Positions 96%
1998 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 10%
1998 National Journal - Liberal on Defense/Foreign Policy Score 27%
1998 National Journal - Conservative on Defense/Foreign Policy Score 68%
1998 Peace Action - Positions 13%
1997-1998 PeacePAC - Positions 0%
1997 Center for Security Policy - Positions 100%
1997 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 7%
1997 Peace Action - Positions 0%
1996 Center for Security Policy - Positions 86%
1996 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign\Defense Policy 30%
1996 National Journal - Conservative on Defense/Foreign Policy Score 65%
1996 Peace Action - Positions 0%
1996 PeacePAC - Positions 20%
1995-1996 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Peace and Justice Score 20%
1995 Peace Action - Positions 33%
1993-1994 American Security Council Foundation - Positions 80%

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