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.

Carl Levin

Carl Levin's Ratings and Endorsements on Issue: Agriculture and Food

Full Name: Carl Levin
Current Office: U.S. Senate - Sr, Democratic
First Elected: 11/07/1978
Last Elected: 11/04/2008
Next Election: 2014

Agriculture and Food

2014 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 83%
2014 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions 100%
2013 Food Policy Action - Positions 83%
2013 Food Policy Action - Positions 83%
2013 International Foodservice Distributors Association - Positions 0%
2013 Michigan Farm Bureau - Vote Record 100%
2011-2012 Food Policy Action - Positions 89%
2011-2012 Food Policy Action - Positions 89%
2011-2012 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions 100%
2011 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 60%
2009-2010 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 50%
2009-2010 International Foodservice Distributors Association - Positions 0%
2009-2010 National Farmers Union - Positions 100%
2008 National Association of Wheat Growers - Positions 80%
2007-2008 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 70%
2007-2008 Grassroots Netroots Alliance - Positions 80%
2007-2008 International Foodservice Distributors Association - Positions 14%
2007-2008 National Farmers Union - Family Farm Advocacy Score 91
2007-2008 The National Mining Association - Positions 50%
2007-2008 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions 100%
2007 National Association of Wheat Growers - Positions 79%
2007 National Council of Agricultural Employers - Positions 18%
2006 National Council of Agricultural Employers - Positions 66%
2005-2006 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 47%
2005-2006 National Farmers Union - Positions 100%
2005 National Association of Wheat Growers - Positions 50%
2005 National Council of Agricultural Employers - Positions 100%
2003-2004 National Farmers Union - Positions 100%
2002 American Coalition for Ethanol - Positions 100%
2002 Vote Hemp - Positions on Industrial Hemp Policy Fence Sitter
2001-2002 Minnesota Farm Bureau - Positions 39%
2001-2002 Minnesota Farm Bureau - Positions 25%
2001-2002 National Farmers Union - Positions 100%
2001 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions 100%
2000 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 83%
1999-2000 National Farmers Union - Positions 100%
1998 National Farmers Union - Positions 100%
1997 National Farmers Union - Positions 100%
1997 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions 92%
1996 National Farmers Union - Positions 80%
1995-1996 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 21%
1995 National Farmers Union - Positions 67%
1995 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions on Workplace Rights 100%
1994 Competitive Enterprise Institute - Positions on Agriculture 100%
1994 National Farmers Union - Family Farm Advocacy Score 89%
1994 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions 90%
1993-1994 American Farm Bureau Federation - Positions 33%
1993 National Farmers Union - Positions 89%
1993 United Food & Commercial Workers - Positions on Workplace Rights 88%
1991-1992 National Farmers Organization - Positions 60%

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