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.

Lamar S. Smith

Representative Lamar S. Smith's Special Interest Group Ratings

Lamar S. Smith
Full Name: Lamar S. Smith
Current Office: U.S. House - District 21, Republican
First Elected: 11/04/1986
Last Elected: 11/06/2012
Next Election: 2014

Conservative

2012 American Conservative Union - Lifetime Score 92%
2012 American Conservative Union - Ratings of Congress 88%
2011-2012 Heritage Action for America - Positions 61%
2011 American Conservative Union - Lifetime Score 92%
2011 American Conservative Union - Positions 84%
2011 Concerned Women for America - Positions 100%
2011 Eagle Forum - Positions 61%
2011 Heritage Action for America - Positions (House Only) 71%
2011 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 25%
2011 National Journal - Liberal Composite Score 21%
2011 National Journal - Liberal on Social Policy 0%
2011 National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy Score 100%
2011 National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy Score 73%
2011 National Journal - Conservative Composite Score 79%
2011 National Journal - Liberal on Economic Policy Score 27%
2011 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 74%
2011 The Club for Growth - Positions 59%
2011 The John Birch Society - Positions (Spring-Summer) 80%
2011 The John Birch Society - Positions (Summer-Fall) 70%
2011 The New American - Positions on Conservative Issues 70%
2010 American Conservative Union - Lifetime Score 92%
2010 American Conservative Union - Positions 100%
2010 Eagle Forum - Positions 87%
2010 National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy Score 83%
2010 National Journal - Liberal on Social Policy 29%
2010 National Journal - Conservative Composite Score 82%
2010 National Journal - Liberal Composite Score 18%
2010 National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy Score 69%
2010 National Journal - Liberal on Economic Policy Score 17%
2010 National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy Score 0%
2010 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 88%
2010 The Club for Growth - Positions 100%
2010 The John Birch Society - Positions (May 2010 - September 2010) 89%
2009-2010 Americans for Prosperity - Positions 90%
2009-2010 Campaign for Working Families - Positions 100%
2009-2010 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 100%
2009-2010 Concerned Women for America - Positions 100%
2009-2010 The John Birch Society - Positions (November 2009 - June 2010) 80%
2009-2010 The John Birch Society - Positions (Full Session) 89%
2009 American Conservative Union - Lifetime Score 92%
2009 American Conservative Union - Positions 96%
2009 Campaign for Working Families - Positions 100%
2009 Eagle Forum - Positions 95%
2009 Heritage Alliance - Positions 93%
2009 National Journal - Composite Conservative Score 83%
2009 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 75%
2009 National Journal - Composite Liberal Score 17%
2009 National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy Score 77%
2009 National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy Score 83%
2009 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Personal Liberties 77%
2009 Republican Liberty Caucus - Economic Liberties Score 80%
2009 The Club for Growth - Positions 89%
2009 The John Birch Society - Positions (Full Year) 95%
2009 The John Birch Society - Positions (January 2009 - June 2009) 89%
2009 The John Birch Society - Positions (June 2009 - November 2009) 100%
2008 American Conservative Union - Positions 88%
2008 Eagle Forum - Positions 70%
2008 National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy Score 74%
2008 National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy Score 77%
2008 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 88%
2008 National Journal - Composite Conservative Score 80.8%
2008 The Club for Growth - Positions 66%
2007-2008 Americans for Prosperity - Positions 90%
2007-2008 Campaign for Working Families - Positions on Conservative Issues 100
2007-2008 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 90%
2007-2008 Concerned Women for America - Positions 100%
2007-2008 The John Birch Society - Positions 62%
2007 American Conservative Union - Positions 88%
2007 Americans for Prosperity - Positions 90%
2007 Eagle Forum - Positions 94%
2007 GOPUSA - Positions 16%
2007 National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy Score 78%
2007 National Journal - Composite Conservative Score 80.5%
2007 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 72%
2007 National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy Score 75%
2007 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Personal Liberties 61%
2007 Republican Liberty Caucus - Economic Liberties Score 82%
2007 The Club for Growth - Positions 16%
2007 The John Birch Society - Conservative Index Score 50%
2007 Traditional Values Coalition - Positions 50
2006 American Conservative Union - Positions 84%
2006 Americans for Prosperity - Positions 0%
2006 Eagle Forum - Positions 86%
2006 National Journal - Composite Conservative Score 80.3%
2006 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 72%
2006 National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy Score 77%
2006 National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy Score 90%
2006 The Club for Growth - Positions 51%
2006 The John Birch Society - Positions 33%
2006 Traditional Values Coalition - Positions 85%
2005-2006 Campaign for Working Families - Positions 100%
2005-2006 Concerned Women for America - Positions 100%
2005-2006 Irregular Times/Progressive Patriots/That's My Congress - Regressive Conservative Action Score 29%
2005 American Conservative Union - Positions 96%
2005 Eagle Forum - Positions 73%
2005 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 89%
2005 National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy Score 88%
2005 Republican Liberty Caucus - Economic Liberties Score 85%
2005 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Personal Liberties 42%
2005 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions 64%
2005 The John Birch Society - Positions 0%
2004 American Conservative Union - Positions 92%
2004 Christian Action Network - Lifetime Score 97%
2004 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 92%
2004 Eagle Forum - Positions 82%
2004 National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy Score 85%
2004 National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy Score 88%
2004 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 78%
2004 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions 53%
2004 The John Birch Society - Positions (Spring) 25%
2004 The John Birch Society - Positions (Fall) 40%
2003-2004 Campaign for Working Families - Positions 100%
2003-2004 Concerned Women for America - Positions 100%
2003 American Conservative Union - Positions 88%
2003 Campaign for Working Families - Positions 100%
2003 Center for Reclaiming America - Positions 100%
2003 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 92%
2003 Concerned Women for America - Positions 100%
2003 Eagle Forum - Positions 92%
2003 National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy Score 87%
2003 National Journal - Composite Conservative Score 91%
2003 National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy Score 84%
2003 National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy Score 89%
2003 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Conservative Issues 85
2003 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Conservative Issues 85
2003 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Conservative Issues 85
2003 The John Birch Society - Positions (Summer) 38%
2002 American Conservative Union - Positions 96%
2002 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 100%
2002 Eagle Forum - Positions 85%
2002 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Conservative Issues 83
2002 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Conservative Issues 83
2002 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions on Conservative Issues 83
2002 The John Birch Society - Positions 44%
2001-2002 Campaign for Working Families - Positions 91%
2001-2002 Concerned Women for America - Positions 93%
2001 American Conservative Union - Positions 96%
2001 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions 74%
2001 The John Birch Society - Positions 68%
2000 American Conservative Union - Positions 96%
2000 Concerned Women for America - Positions 86%
2000 Liberty Lobby - Positions 33%
2000 Republican Liberty Caucus - Positions 74%
2000 The John Birch Society - Positions 61%
1999-2000 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 93%
1999 American Conservative Union - Positions 84%
1999 Liberty Lobby - Positions 60%
1999 The John Birch Society - Positions 62%
1998 American Conservative Union - Positions 92%
1998 The John Birch Society - Positions 50%
1997-1998 60 Plus Association - Positions 100%
1997-1998 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 100%
1997-1998 Concerned Women for America - Positions 50%
1997 American Conservative Union - Positions 88%
1997 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 89%
1997 Liberty Lobby - Positions 20%
1997 The John Birch Society - Positions 37%
1996 American Conservative Union - Positions 100%
1995-1996 60 Plus Association - Positions 100%
1995-1996 Christian Coalition of America - Positions 100%
1995-1996 Concerned Women for America - Positions 75%
1995-1996 The John Birch Society - Positions 48%
1995 Liberty Lobby - Positions 50%
1993 Liberty Lobby - Positions 70%
1991-1992 Christian Voice - Positions 71%

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.

2012 Endorsements

Back to top