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.

CA Dutch 'Dutch' Ruppersberger

CA Dutch 'Dutch' Ruppersberger's Ratings and Endorsements on Issue: Women

Full Name: CA Dutch 'Dutch' Ruppersberger
Current Office: U.S. House - District 2, Democratic
First Elected: 11/05/2002
Last Elected: 11/06/2012
Next Election: 2014
On The Ballot: Running, Democratic for U.S. House - District 2
General Nov. 4, 2014
Primary June 24, 2014
David Banach
(Running)
Republican
Ian Schlakman
(Potential)
Green
Mark Shell
(Potential)
Libertarian
Joseph Sperber
(Potential)
No Party Affiliation

Women

2013 Concerned Women for America - Positions 0%
2013 Federally Employed Women - Positions 100%
2013 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
2012 Federally Employed Women - Positions 90%
2012 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
2011-2012 American Association of University Women - Positions 90
2011-2012 Concerned Women for America - Positions 13%
2011 American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists - Positions (House Only) 100%
2011 Concerned Women for America - Positions 15%
2011 Federally Employed Women - Positions 100%
2011 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
2011 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions (House Only) 8
2010 Federally Employed Women - Positions 70%
2010 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
2009-2010 American Association of University Women - Positions 78%
2009-2010 Concerned Women for America - Positions 4%
2009 American Association of University Women - Positions 71%
2009 Federally Employed Women - Positions 70%
2009 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
2009 Women Employed - Positions 50%
2007-2008 American Association of University Women - Positions 90%
2007-2008 Concerned Women for America - Positions 27%
2007-2008 Federally Employed Women - Equality in Government Score 70
2007-2008 National Organization for Women - Positions 100%
2007 American Association of University Women - Positions 100
2007 Federally Employed Women - Positions 80%
2007 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
2006 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
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 100%
2005-2006 Business and Professional Women USA - Positions 50%
2005-2006 Concerned Women for America - Positions 31%
2005-2006 Federally Employed Women - Positions 80%
2005-2006 National Organization for Women - Positions 86%
2005 American Association of University Women - Positions 100%
2005 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
2005 National Organization for Women - Positions 71%
2004 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100%
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 64%
2003-2004 Concerned Women for America - Positions 41%
2003-2004 Federally Employed Women - Positions 80%
2003-2004 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 88%
2003 American Association of University Women - Positions 100%
2003 American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists - Positions 0%
2003 Business and Professional Women USA - Positions 50%
2003 Concerned Women for America - Positions 54%
2003 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 30%

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