Search Form
First, enter a politician or zip code
Now, choose a category
 

Thomas 'Tom' E. Petri's Ratings and Endorsements on Issue: Environment

Office: U.S. House (WI) - District 6, Republican

Environment

2013 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 33%
2013 Environment America - Positions 0%
2013 Food Policy Action - Positions 38%
2013 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 11%
2013 League of Conservation Voters - Lifetime Score 42%
2012 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 3%
2012 League of Conservation Voters - Lifetime Score 44%
2012 Sierra Club - Positions on Clean water (House Only) 14%
2011-2012 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 3%
2011-2012 Environment America - Positions 0%
2011-2012 Food Policy Action - Positions 29%
2011-2012 League of Conservation Voters - Session Score 7%
2011-2012 National Parks Conservation Association - Positions (House Only) 14%
2011 Environment America - Positions 12%
2011 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 11%
2011 League of Conservation Voters - Lifetime Score 47%
2011 Sierra Club - Positions on Clean Water (House Only) 17%
2011 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions (House Only) 62
2010-2011 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 5%
2010 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 20%
2010 League of Conservation Voters - Lifetime Score 49%
2009-2010 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 14%
2009-2010 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 29%
2009 ConservAmerica - Positions 56
2009 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 20%
2009 Environment America - Positions 40%
2009 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 36%
2008 Environment America - Positions 54%
2007-2008 ConservAmerica - Positions 72
2007-2008 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 50%
2007-2008 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 46%
2007 ConservAmerica - Positions 80
2007 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 40%
2007 League of Conservation Voters - First Session Score 50%
2006-2012 Global Exchange - Percent Loyalty to Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Lobby 71%
2006 ConservAmerica - Positions 67
2006 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 67%
2006 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 100%
2005-2006 American Forest and Paper Association - Positions 66%
2005-2006 American Lands Alliance - Positions 56%
2005-2006 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 50%
2005-2006 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 46%
2005-2006 Partnership for America - Positions 62%
2005 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 33%
2005 ConservAmerica - Positions 42
2005 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 17%
2004 Center for International Policy - Positions 100%
2004 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 20%
2003-2004 American Lands Alliance - Positions 30%
2003-2004 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 55%
2003-2004 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 39%
2003-2004 National Parks Conservation Association - Positions 50%
2003-2004 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 21%
2003 American Lands Alliance - Positions 25%
2003 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 40%
2003 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 50%
2003 Sierra Club - Positions 63%
2002 Californians for Population Stabilization - Positions 33%
2001-2002 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 20%
2001-2002 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 50%
2001-2002 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 20%
2001 Californians for Population Stabilization - Positions 50%
1999-2000 American Lands Alliance - Positions 0%
1999-2000 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 27%
1999 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 19%
1998 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 45%
1997 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 44%
1995-1996 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 46%
1994 Competitive Enterprise Institute - Environment Score 72%

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.

Skip to top
Back to top