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.

Arlen Specter

Arlen Specter's Ratings and Endorsements on Issue: Environment

Full Name: Arlen Specter

Environment

2010 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 86%
2010 League of Conservation Voters - Lifetime Score 46%
2009-2010 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 67%
2009-2010 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 72%
2009 ConservAmerica - Positions 60
2009 ConservAmerica - Positions 60
2009 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 50%
2009 Environment America - Positions 29%
2009 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 64%
2009 PennEnvironment - Positions 29%
2008 Environment America - Positions 60%
2007-2009 PennEnvironment - Positions 29%
2007-2008 ConservAmerica - Positions 62
2007-2008 ConservAmerica - Positions 62
2007-2008 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 40%
2007-2008 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 46%
2007-2008 The National Mining Association - Positions 80%
2007 ConservAmerica - Positions 64
2007 ConservAmerica - Positions 64
2007 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 60%
2007 League of Conservation Voters - First Session Score 60%
2006-2012 Global Exchange - Percent Loyalty to Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Lobby 33%
2006 ConservAmerica - Positions 0
2006 ConservAmerica - Positions 0
2006 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 14%
2005-2006 American Forest and Paper Association - Positions 85%
2005-2006 American Lands Alliance - Positions 0%
2005-2006 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 16%
2005-2006 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 0%
2005-2006 Partnership for America - Positions 90%
2005 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 0%
2005 ConservAmerica - Positions 20
2005 ConservAmerica - Positions 20
2005 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 40%
2005 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 0%
2004 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 0%
2003-2004 American Lands Alliance - Positions 22%
2003-2004 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 25%
2003-2004 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 28%
2003-2004 National Parks Conservation Association - Positions 40%
2003-2004 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 28%
2003 American Lands Alliance - Positions 11%
2003 Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund - Positions 27%
2003 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 32%
2003 Sierra Club - Positions 20%
2001-2002 American Wilderness Coalition - Positions 20%
2001-2002 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 52%
2001-2002 Women's Action for New Directions (WAND) and-WILL - Positions 53%
2001 Californians for Population Stabilization - Positions 0%
1999-2000 American Lands Alliance - Positions 100%
1999-2000 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 38%
1999 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 44%
1998 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 47%
1997 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 43%
1995-1996 League of Conservation Voters - Positions 52%
1994 Competitive Enterprise Institute - Environment Score 33%

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