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.

Joseph 'Joe' I. Lieberman

Joseph 'Joe' I. Lieberman's Special Interest Group Ratings

Joseph 'Joe' I. Lieberman
Full Name: Joseph 'Joe' I. Lieberman

Environment

2011-2012 Irregular Times/Progressive Patriots/That's My Congress - Net Congressional Score 57%
2011-2012 Irregular Times/Progressive Patriots/That's My Congress - Liberal Action Score 44%
2011-2012 Irregular Times/Progressive Patriots/That's My Congress - Conservative Action Score 31%
2011 Environment America - Positions 100%
2011 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 100%
2011 League of Conservation Voters - Lifetime Score 87%
2010 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 57%
2010 League of Conservation Voters - Lifetime Score 87%
2009-2010 Irregular Times/Progressive Patriots/That's My Congress - Net Congressional Score 64%
2009-2010 Irregular Times/Progressive Patriots/That's My Congress - Regressive Action Score 32
2009-2010 Irregular Times/Progressive Patriots/That's My Congress - Progressive Action Score 59%
2009-2010 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 83%
2009 Environment America - Positions 100%
2009 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 100%
2008-2011 Global Exchange - Percent Loyalty to Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Lobby 67%
2008 Environment America - Positions 100%
2007-2008 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 91%
2007-2008 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 96%
2007 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 80%
2007 League of Conservation Voters - First Session Score 93%
2007 League of Private Property Voters - Land Rights Advocacy Score 40
2006 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 71%
2006 League of Private Property Voters - Positions 11%
2005-2006 American Lands Alliance - Positions 50%
2005-2006 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 66%
2005-2006 Partnership for America - Positions 0%
2005 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 50%
2005 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 70%
2005 League of Private Property Voters - Positions 17%
2004 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 100%
2004 League of Private Property Voters - Positions 0%
2003-2004 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 75%
2003-2004 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 56%
2003-2004 National Parks Conservation Association - Positions 60%
2003 American Lands Alliance - Positions 0%
2003 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 42%
2003 League of Private Property Voters - Positions 0%
2002 California Park & Recreation Society - Positions 100%
2001-2002 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 88%
2001-2002 League of Private Property Voters - Positions 0%
2001-2002 National Parks Conservation Association - Positions 100%
2001 League of Private Property Voters - Positions 0%
2000 League of Private Property Voters - Positions 0%
1999-2000 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 94%
1999-2000 National Parks Conservation Association - Positions 100%
1999 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 100%
1999 League of Private Property Voters - Positions 22%
1998 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 100%
1997-1998 League of Private Property Voters - Positions 0%
1997 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 100%
1997 League of Private Property Voters - Positions 0%
1995-1996 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 89%
1994 Competitive Enterprise Institute - Environment Score 22%

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