Jim Matheson's Special Interest Group Ratings

View 2012 Endorsements
Filter by Issue
How To Interpret These Evaluations

Animals and Wildlife

2014 Food Policy Action - Positions 58% 2014 Goldwater Institute - Positions 17% 2014 Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - Positions 100% 2013-2014 Food Policy Action - Positions 58% 2013-2014 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 17% 2013 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 50% 2013 Food Policy Action - Positions 85% 2013 Goldwater Institute - Positions 22% 2012 Sierra Club - Positions on Clean water (House Only) 14% 2012 Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - Positions 100% 2011-2012 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 28% 2011-2012 Food Policy Action - Positions 71% 2011-2012 Goldwater Institute - Positions 18% 2011 American Veterinary Medical Association - Positions on Professional Advocacy 100% 2011 Goldwater Institute - Positions 25% 2011 Sierra Club - Positions on Clean Water (House Only) 25% 2010-2011 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 45% 2010 Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - Positions 100% 2009-2010 Animal Welfare Institute - U.S. House Score 50% 2009-2010 Big Cat Rescue - House of Representatives Score 66% 2009-2010 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 43% 2009-2010 Goldwater Institute - Positions 53% 2009-2010 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 53% 2009 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 40% 2009 Goldwater Institute - Positions 46% 2008 Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - Positions 100 2007-2008 Animal Welfare Institute - U.S. House Score 0% 2007-2008 Big Cat Rescue - Positions 66 2007-2008 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 63% 2007-2008 Goldwater Institute - Positions on Animal Protection 42% 2007-2008 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 42% 2007 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 50% 2007 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions on Animal Protection 17% 2006 National Animal Interest Alliance Trust - Positions 100% 2006 Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - Positions 100% 2005-2006 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 83% 2005-2006 Animal Welfare Institute - U.S. House Score 0% 2005-2006 Big Cat Rescue - Positions 75% 2005-2006 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 60% 2005-2006 Goldwater Institute - Positions 14% 2005-2006 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 14% 2005 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 67% 2005 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 0% 2004 American Humane Association - Positions 33% 2004 American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals - Positions 33% 2004 Born Free USA - Positions 33% 2004 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 60% 2004 Goldwater Institute - Positions 33% 2004 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 33% 2004 Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - Positions 100% 2003-2004 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 73% 2003 American Humane Association - Positions 33% 2003 American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals - Positions 33% 2003 Animal Welfare Institute - Positions 33% 2003 Born Free USA - Positions 33% 2003 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 53% 2003 Doris Day Animal League - Positions 33% 2003 Goldwater Institute - Positions 33% 2003 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 33% 2003 Sierra Club - Positions 50% 2001-2002 American Humane Association - Positions 50% 2001-2002 American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals - Positions 50% 2001-2002 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 60% 2001-2002 Animal Welfare Institute - Positions 50% 2001-2002 Born Free USA - Positions 50% 2001-2002 Doris Day Animal League - Positions 50% 2001-2002 Goldwater Institute - Positions 50% 2001-2002 Humane Society Legislative Fund - Positions 50%

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.

Help us stay free for all your Fellow Americans

Just $5 from everyone reading this would do it.