Representative Jim Cooper's Special Interest Group Ratings

Biographical

Full Name: Jim Cooper
Current Office: U.S. House - District 5, Democratic
First Elected: 11/05/2002
Last Elected: 11/06/2012
Next Election: 2014
On The Ballot: Running, Democratic for U.S. House - District 5
Primary Aug. 7, 2014
Gender: Male
Family: Wife: Martha; 3 Children: Mary, Jamie, Hayes
Birth Date: 06/19/1954
Birth Place: Nashville, TN
Home City: Nashville, TN
Religion: Episcopalian
Chris Carter

(Running)

Republican

Paul Deakin

(Running)

Independent

Ronnie Holden

(Running)

Republican

Bob Ries

(Running)

Republican

Big John Smith IV

(Running)

Republican

Filter by Issue
How To Interpret These Evaluations

Women

2013 Concerned Women for America - Positions 0% 2013 Federally Employed Women - Positions 60% 2013 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100% 2012 Federally Employed Women - Positions 80% 2012 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 50% 2011-2012 American Association of University Women - Positions 80 2011-2012 Concerned Women for America - Positions 20% 2011 American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists - Positions (House Only) 100% 2011 Concerned Women for America - Positions 18% 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) 46 2010 Federally Employed Women - Positions 40% 2010 NARAL Pro-Choice America - Positions 100% 2009-2010 American Association of University Women - Positions 73% 2009-2010 Concerned Women for America - Positions 22% 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 90% 2007-2008 Concerned Women for America - Positions 27% 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 89% 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 0% 2005-2006 Concerned Women for America - Positions 46% 2005-2006 Federally Employed Women - Positions 60% 2005-2006 National Organization for Women - Positions 73% 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 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 62% 2003-2004 Concerned Women for America - Positions 36% 2003-2004 Federally Employed Women - Positions 60% 2003-2004 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 72% 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%

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.