Representative Peter 'Pete' T. King's Special Interest Group Ratings

Biographical

Full Name: Peter 'Pete' T. King
Current Office: U.S. House - District 2, Republican
First Elected: 11/03/1992
Last Elected: 11/06/2012
Next Election: 2014
Gender: Male
Family: Wife: Rosemary; 2 Children: Sean, Erin
Birth Date: 04/05/1944
Birth Place: Manhattan, NY
Home City: Seaford, NY
Religion: Roman Catholic
Filter by Issue
How To Interpret These Evaluations

Budget, Spending and Taxes

2011 National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy Score 57% 2011 National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy Score 47% 2011 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 43% 2011 National Journal - Liberal on Economic Policy Score 43% 2011 National Journal - Liberal on Social Policy 53% 2011 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 54% 2011 National Taxpayers Union - Positions on Tax and Spending 65% 2010 Citizens Against Government Waste - Positions 82% 2010 National Taxpayers Union - Positions on Tax and Spending 81% 2009 Citizens Against Government Waste - Positions 27% 2009 National Taxpayers Union - Positions 61% 2008 Citizens Against Government Waste - Lifetime Score 48% 2008 Citizens Against Government Waste - Positions 49% 2007-2008 National Tax Limitation Committee - Positions 67% 2007 Americans for Tax Reform - Positions 90% 2007 FreedomWorks - Positions 47% 2006 Americans for Tax Reform - Positions 95% 2006 FreedomWorks - Positions 67% 2006 National Taxpayers Union - Positions 49% 2005-2006 Citizens for Tax Justice - Positions 0% 2005-2006 National Tax Limitation Committee - Positions 63% 2005 Americans for Tax Reform - Positions 83% 2005 FreedomWorks - Positions 59% 2005 National Taxpayers Union - Positions 52% 2005 Taxpayers for Common Sense - Positions 0% 2004 Americans for Tax Reform - Positions 85% 2004 American Shareholders Association - Positions 80% 2004 National Taxpayers Union - Positions 46% 2004 Taxpayers for Common Sense - Positions 25% 2003-2004 FreedomWorks - Positions 45% 2003-2004 National Tax Limitation Committee - Positions 70% 2003 Americans for Tax Reform - Positions 70% 2003 National Taxpayers Union - Positions 59% 2003 Taxpayers for Common Sense - Positions 15% 2002 Americans for Tax Reform - Positions 95% 2002 National Taxpayers Union - Positions 53% 2002 Taxpayers for Common Sense - Positions 17% 2001-2002 Concord Coalition - Positions 2% 2001-2002 FreedomWorks - Positions 75% 2001-2002 National Tax Limitation Committee - Positions 89% 2001 Americans for Tax Reform - Positions 85% 2001 American Shareholders Association - Positions 86% 2001 National Taxpayers Union - Positions 59% 2001 Taxpayers for Common Sense - Positions 36% 2000 Americans for Tax Reform - Positions 77.5% 2000 Concord Coalition - Positions 11% 2000 Taxpayers for Common Sense - Positions 21% 1999-2000 National Tax Limitation Committee - Positions 58% 1999 Americans for Tax Reform - Positions 80% 1999 Concord Coalition - Positions 2% 1999 National Taxpayers Union - Positions 52% 1998 Americans for Tax Reform - Positions 85% 1998 Concord Coalition - Positions 25% 1998 National Taxpayers Union - Spending Score 52% 1998 Taxpayers for Common Sense - Positions 21% 1997-1998 National Tax Limitation Committee - Positions 71% 1997 Concord Coalition - Positions 39% 1997 National Taxpayers Union - Spending Score 36% 1997 Taxpayers for Common Sense - Positions 14% 1996 Concord Coalition - Positions 39% 1995-1996 National Tax Limitation Committee - Positions 98% 1995 Concord Coalition - Positions 50% 1995 National Taxpayers Union - Spending Score 82% 1994 Competitive Enterprise Institute - Taxes Score 100% 1994 Competitive Enterprise Institute - Deregulation Score 71% 1994 Competitive Enterprise Institute - Budget Score 85% 1994 Competitive Enterprise Institute - Spending Score 69% 1994 Competitive Enterprise Institute - Total Score 77%

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.