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.

John M. Spratt, Jr.

John M. Spratt, Jr.'s Ratings and Endorsements on Issue: Women

Full Name: John M. Spratt, Jr.

Women

2010 Federally Employed Women - Positions 50%
2010 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
2009-2010 American Association of University Women - Positions 64%
2009-2010 Concerned Women for America - Positions 13%
2009 American Association of University Women - Positions 67%
2009 Federally Employed Women - Positions 80%
2009 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 50%
2009 Women Employed - Positions 50%
2007-2008 American Association of University Women - Positions 100%
2007-2008 Concerned Women for America - Positions 28%
2007-2008 Federally Employed Women - Equality in Government Score 50
2007-2008 National Organization for Women - Positions 100%
2007 American Association of University Women - Positions 100
2007 Federally Employed Women - Positions 70%
2007 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
2006 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 35%
2006 United States Women's Chamber of Commerce - Positions 100%
2006 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 100%
2005-2006 American Association of University Women - Positions 90%
2005-2006 Business and Professional Women USA - Positions 50%
2005-2006 Concerned Women for America - Positions 43%
2005-2006 Federally Employed Women - Positions 60%
2005-2006 National Organization for Women - Positions 77%
2005 American Association of University Women - Positions 100%
2005 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 60%
2005 National Organization for Women - Positions 86%
2004 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 35%
2004 United States Women's Chamber of Commerce - Positions 50%
2003-2004 American Association of University Women - Positions 100%
2003-2004 Business and Professional Women USA - Positions 46%
2003-2004 Concerned Women for America - Positions 41%
2003-2004 Federally Employed Women - Positions 70%
2003-2004 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 90%
2003 American Association of University Women - Positions 100%
2003 American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists - Positions 0%
2003 Business and Professional Women USA - Positions 43%
2003 Concerned Women for America - Positions 38%
2003 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 30%
2002 American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists - Positions 0%
2001-2002 American Association of University Women - Positions 82%
2001-2002 Business and Professional Women USA - Positions 82%
2001-2002 Concerned Women for America - Positions 45%
2001-2002 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 73%
2001 American Association of University Women - Positions 100%
2001 American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists - Positions 75%
2001 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 65%
2000 Concerned Women for America - Positions 69%
2000 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 60%
1999-2000 American Association of University Women - Positions 87%
1999 American Association of University Women - Positions 100%
1999 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 70%
1998 National Organization for Women - Positions 60%
1997-1998 American Association of University Women - Positions 88%
1997-1998 Concerned Women for America - Positions 50%
1997 American Association of University Women - Positions 80%
1997 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 54%
1996 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 75%
1995-1996 American Association of University Women - Positions 88%
1995-1996 Concerned Women for America - Positions 25%
1995 The Woman Activist - Positions 60%

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