Search Form
First, enter a politician or zip code
Now, choose a category
 

Ike Skelton's Issue Positions (Political Courage Test)

Project Vote Smart does not permit the use of its name or programs in any campaign activity, including advertising, debates, and speeches.
Ike Skelton refused to tell citizens where he stands on any of the issues addressed in the 2010 Political Courage Test, despite repeated requests from Vote Smart, national media, and prominent political leaders.

What is the Political Courage Test?

Issue Positions

In response to the increasing unwillingness of candidates to answer issue questions, Project Vote Smart has researched Presidential and Congressional candidates' public records to determine candidates' likely responses on certain key issues. These issue positions, from the year 2010, are provided below as a courtesy to voters.

Pro-life Inferred Answer Abortion Issues: Do you consider yourself pro-choice or pro-life? View Citations

Vote Smart's Research

  • Planned Parenthood. 2008. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. Ike Skelton supported the interests of Planned Parenthood 8 percent in 2008. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. S 3. 108th Congress. A bill to prohibit the procedure commonly known as partial-birth abortion. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted YES on 2 October 2003. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. H Amdt 209 to HR 1815. 109th Congress. An amendment numbered 12 printed in House Report 109-96 to lift the current ban on privately funded abortions at U.S. military facilities overseas. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted NO on 25 May 2005. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. H Amdt 509 to HR 3962. 111th Congress. An amendment printed in Part C of House Report 111-330 to codify the Hyde Amendment in H.R. 3962. The amendment prohibits federal funds for abortion services in the public option. It also prohibits individuals who receive affordability credits from purchasing a plan that provides elective abortions. However, it allows individuals, both who receive affordability credits and who do not, to separately purchase with their own funds plans that cover elective abortions. It also clarifies that private plans may still offer elective abortions. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted YES on 7 November 2009. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. HR 3660. 106th Congress. To amend title 18, United States Code, to ban partial-birth abortions. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted YES on 4 May 2000. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. HR 760. 108th Congress. To prohibit the procedure commonly known as partial-birth abortion. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted YES on 4 June 2003. (votesmart.org)
  • NARAL Pro-Choice America. 2009. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. Ike Skelton supported the interests of NARAL Pro-Choice America 0 percent in 2009. (votesmart.org)
  • National Right to Life Committee. 2009. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. Ike Skelton supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 75 percent in 2009. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. House Health Insurance Reform Proposals Not The Answer. 16 October 2009. "Fourth, as a pro-life Member of Congress, I cannot support a measure that allows for federal funding for abortion services." (votesmart.org)
Yes Inferred Answer Budget, Spending, and Tax Issues: Do you support the elimination of the federal estate tax? View Citations

Vote Smart's Research

  • Ike Skelton. HR 5638. 109th Congress. To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the unified credit against the estate tax to an exclusion equivalent of $5,000,000 and to repeal the sunset provision for the estate and generation-skipping taxes, and for other purposes. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted YES on 22 June 2006. (votesmart.org)
  • National Taxpayers Union. 2009. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. Ike Skelton supported the interests of the National Taxpayers Union 12 percent in 2009. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. HR 8. 108th Congress. To make the repeal of the estate tax permanent. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted YES on 13 April 2005. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. Permanent Estate Tax Relief For Families, Farmers, And Small Businesses Act Of 2009. 7 December 2009. Through the years, I have voted to eliminate the estate tax or to maintain suitably high exemptions to better shield farmers and small business owners from the burdens of the tax. This year, I cosponsored H.R. 3905, bipartisan legislation written by Congresswoman Shelley Berkley (D-NV) that would permanently exempt estates valued at less than $5 million for single filers and $10 million for joint filers and set the tax rate on estates valued above that amount at 45 percent on a decreasing scale to 35 percent over the next ten years." (votesmart.org)
Yes Inferred Answer Budget, Spending, and Tax Issues: Do you support using government funds in an effort to stimulate and improve the economy? View Citations

Vote Smart's Research

  • Club for Growth. 2008. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. Ike Skelton supported the interests of the Club for Growth 0 percent in 2008. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. HR 1. 111th Congress. Making supplemental appropriations for job preservation and creation, infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, assistance to the unemployed, and State and local fiscal stabilization, for fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted YES on 13 February 2009. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. HR 1424. 111th Congress. To provide authority for the Federal Government to purchase and insure certain types of troubled assets for the purposes of providing stability to and preventing disruption in the economy and financial system and protecting taxpayers, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for energy production and conservation, to extend certain expiring provisions, to provide individual income tax relief, and for other purposes. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted YES on 10 March 2008. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. 28 January 2009. "Our economy has been in decline since December 2007, and the downturn has accelerated in recent months. Consumer confidence and spending have fallen, businesses have shed millions of jobs, housing values have diminished, and mortgage foreclosures have risen dramatically. Economists from all political stripes warn us that without additional stimulus, deflation could sink the American economy for years to come." (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. Issue Position: Jobs & Economy. "We must focus on creating new jobs in Missouri's 4th District by building on the businesses already here, attracting new industries and supporting our agricultural base. We should have the good-paying jobs of the new century right here in our own communities so we aren't just educating our kids to leave home for jobs in St. Louis, Chicago or Denver." -- Ike Skelton Ike Skelton has championed job creation and economic development in the communities of Missouri's 4th Congressional District, having served as chairman of the U.S. House Small Business Subcommittee on Procurement, Tourism and Rural Development and the Congressional Rural Caucus." (votesmart.org)
No Inferred Answer Business and Employment Issues: Do you support privatizing elements of Social Security? View Citations

Vote Smart's Research

  • Ike Skelton. Preserving Social Security for Another 75 Years. 29 August 2010. "As Congress works to put our nation on sound financial footing, some have resurrected plans to alter Social Security through privatization -- a risky proposal that would invest portions of Social Security funds in the stock market. While I recognize that preserving Social Security for future generations will require tough bipartisan steps, privatization is not the answer. Imagine, for example, that the previous Administration had been successful in investing Social Security funds in private investments, like the S&P 500 Index, in 2001. By the beginning of 2009, these funds would have been devastated by the Great Recession, losing on average over 30 percent of their value. The subsequent massive cut in benefits would have thrown millions of Americans into poverty. This is simply unacceptable and not the way forward. As the debate on the future of Social Security continues, we must make sure that any adjustments strengthen and improve the program, building upon the successes of the last 75 years." (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. Social Security Privatization Particularly Harmful to Rural America. 19 June 2005. "All Americans who depend upon Social Security would feel the effects of benefit cuts resulting from privatization, but a recent study points out that rural Americans would be affected more dramatically by these proposals than those who live in other parts of the country. As a Member of Congress who represents rural residents in 25 Missouri counties, this news is very troubling and gives me even more reason to object to the President's privatization plan....As a whole, rural Americans tend to be older and more likely to depend upon Social Security. More than 90 percent of counties in America with high senior populations are rural counties. Women in rural communities are more dependent on Social Security than their non-rural counterparts, and because work in rural communities is often physically intensive and dangerous, more people with disabilities receive Social Security in rural communities than in non-rural communities.Social Security is crucial to the economic independence of seniors who have worked hard and paid taxes all of their lives. Currently, 13 percent of rural seniors live in poverty. But if privatization moves forward, the study predicts that benefit cuts could swell the ranks of the rural poor to levels not seen since the Great Depression. Although individuals and families would feel the benefit cuts most directly, the economies of small town rural America would also suffer as reductions in retirement income squeeze small town budgets and hurt local businesses. Almost 48 million Americans, including more than 380,000 rural Missourians, receive Social Security benefits. Our nation cannot afford to pursue a policy that would overturn one of the most successful domestic programs of the 20th century. In the days ahead, I will continue to work with the House Democratic Rural Working Group and other colleagues who oppose weakening Social Security through risky privatization plans." (votesmart.org)
Yes Inferred Answer Crime Issues: Do you support capital punishment for certain crimes? View Citations

Vote Smart's Research

  • Ike Skelton. H Amdt 497 to HR 2181. 105th Congress. An amendment to add a new section which provides that in further consideration of death sentence recommendations, life imprisonment shall be imposed instead, if the court has any doubt that a defendent actually committed the offense. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted NO on 25 February 1998. (votesmart.org)
  • Citizens United for the Rehabilitation of Errants. 2005-2006. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. Ike Skelton supported the interests of the Citizens United for the Rehabilitation of Errants 40 percent in 2005-2006. (votesmart.org)
Unknown Position Unknown Answer Education Issues: Do you support federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students? View Citations

Vote Smart's Research

  • Home School Legal Defense Association. 1999-2000. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. Ike Skelton supported the interests of the Home School Legal Defense Association 20 percent in 1999-2000. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. HR 1. 107th Congress. To close the achievement gap with accountability, flexibility, and choice, so that no child is left behind. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted YES on 23 May 2001. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. Funding Bill Shortchanges Education. 15 October 2006. "Americas schools today face record student enrollments, greater accountability for student achievement, and continuing fiscal pressures. During the 2007 school year, all public schools will be held accountable for No Child Left Behind mandates, including: reading and math testing in grades 3 through 8; science testing at least once in each of three grade spans; assessing all students for their ability to read and speak English; ensuring 'highly qualified' teachers for core academic subjects; and continued progress toward reaching academic proficiency for all students by 2014. But even as we ask our schools to do more, federal help is declining." (votesmart.org)
Unknown Position Unknown Answer Environment and Energy Issues: Do you support enacting environmental regulations aimed at reducing the effects of climate change? View Citations

Vote Smart's Research

  • Environment America. 2009. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. Ike Skelton supported the interests of Environment America 100 percent in 2009. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. HR 2454. 111th Congress. To create clean energy jobs, achieve energy independence, reduce global warming pollution and transition to a clean energy economy. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted YES on 26 June 2009. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. Congress Should Get A Better Handle On The EPA. 3 February 2010. "This year, Congress must set aside cap and trade and instead piece together a scaled back, bipartisan energy bill that gets a better handle on EPA; strengthens America's renewable fuels policies for ethanol, biodiesel, and biomass; encourages responsible domestic exploration of oil and natural gas; expands clean nuclear energy; ensures America's propane industry, which is vital to rural America, remains a key priority; imposes a reasonable renewable electricity standard, with close consultation with utilities, that requires use of renewable fuels in addition to coal and natural gas; and invests in clean energy research and development that will benefit colleges and universities, non-profits, and businesses and allow the United States to become a leader in renewable energy jobs." (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. Skelton, Peterson, Emerson Introduce Bipartisan Joint Resolution To Halt Epa's Planned Regulation Of Greenhouse Gases. 25 February 2010. "Congress stands in the shoes of the American people. Executive branch agencies, like EPA, carry out the laws passed by Congress. "When Congress passed the Clean Air Act, it never gave EPA the explicit authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions for the purpose of stopping global climate change. But, that is exactly what EPA has proposed to do. "I do not agree with the EPA or the 2007 Supreme Court ruling that gave the Agency that authority. So, today, I introduced a bipartisan joint resolution to stop EPA from implementing its proposed greenhouse gas regulations that would likely be very costly to farmers, business owners, Midwestern utilities, and consumers. "The resolution of disapproval does not stop Congress from working on important energy legislation, though I do hope it will set aside cap and trade in favor of a more scaled back bipartisan bill. My resolution does, however, keep EPA from threatening Congress with its own greenhouse gas policy as we write legislation." (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. U.S. House of Representatives Has an Obligation to Move Energy Reform Bill Forward. 26 June 2009. "Madam Speaker, as a farm state representative, I have said for quite some time that any climate change legislation approved by the House must take into consideration the unique needs of rural America, including those of farmers and rural electric cooperatives. Since first being introduced, the climate change measure has improved a great deal thanks in large part to the work of House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson and his negotiations with House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman. I first approached this legislation with a great deal of skepticism, but I have since been pleased that some, though not all concerns of utilities, electric cooperatives, and farmers have been addressed in the version of the bill to be considered today. Energy reform is not just a matter of wanting to keep our air and planet clean, as worthy and as important as those goals are. It is also a matter of national security. In recent years, the Pentagon has taken a hard look at how climate change could have impact on global security and stability. There are real national and global security implications when lakes go dry or when oceans rise. As Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, this aspect of climate change worries me a great deal." (votesmart.org)
No Inferred Answer Gun Issues: Do you support restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns? View Citations

Vote Smart's Research

  • Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. 2003. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. Ike Skelton supported the interests of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 15 percent from 1991 and 2003. (votesmart.org)
  • Gun Owners of America. 2010. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. In 2010 Gun Owners of America gave Ike Skelton a grade of C. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. HR 1025. 103rd Congress. To provide for a waiting period before the purchase of a handgun, and for the establishment of a national instant criminal background check system to be contacted by firearms dealers before the transfer of any firearm. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted NO on 10 November 1993. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. HR 4296. 103rd Congress. To make unlawful the transfer or possession of assault weapons. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted NO on 5 May 1994. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. HR 6842. 111th Congress. To restore Second Amendment rights in the District of Columbia. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted YES on 17 September 2008. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. Letter to Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House and Steny Hoyer, House Majority Leader. 5 March 2009. "Today, Congressman Ike Skelton (D-MO) wrote a letter to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer expressing his concern over recent comments made by the Attorney General of the United States in support of reinstating the 1994 assault weapons ban. In his letter, Congressman Skelton, a supporter of Americans' second amendment rights, urges the Speaker and the Majority Leader not to consider divisive gun control legislation during the 111th Congress. A copy of the Congressman's letter is set forth below:... As a representative of rural Missouri and a supporter of the Constitution's Second Amendment right to bear arms, I am extremely concerned with remarks made recently by the Attorney General of the United States in support of reinstating the 1994 assault weapons ban. In small town America, responsible gun ownership is part of the fabric of society. Firearms are used for recreation, for hunting, and for defending homes and families.... I am convinced that any effort to consider gun control legislation similar to the measure endorsed by the Attorney General will unnecessarily divide the country and their elected representatives. Such a division would undercut the ability of Congress to address the economic and defense needs of America. It would also weaken the trust many rural Americans have placed in the Congress and the Administration." (votesmart.org)
No Inferred Answer Health Issues: Do you support a publicly-administered health insurance option? View Citations

Vote Smart's Research

  • American Public Health Association. 2009. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. Ike Skelton supported the interests of the American Public Health Association 78 percent in 2009. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. HR 3962. 111th Congress. To provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted NO on 7 November 2009. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. House Health Insurance Reform Proposals Not The Answer. 16 October 2009. "First, health insurance reform must not include a public option.' While access to health insurance ought to be expanded to reduce costs for everyone, the public option could have the unintended consequence of forcing private health insurance providers out of business." (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. Skelton Reaction To The House Passage Of The Health Insurance Reform Legislation. 7 November 2009. "This evening, I opposed passage of the health insurance reform legislation that was debated in the House of Representatives. After careful consideration and meetings with health care professionals and Fourth District residents, I decided the legislation did not represent the right balance for rural Missourians..."I also oppose the creation of a new government run public option and continue to have serious concerns about its potential unintended consequences for Missourians who have private insurance plans they like." (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. Issue Position: Health Insurance Reform. "First, health insurance reform must not include a "public option.' While access to health insurance ought to be expanded to reduce costs for everyone, the public option could have the unintended consequence of forcing private health insurance providers out of business." (votesmart.org)
Unknown Position Unknown Answer Immigration Issues: Do you support a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants? View Citations

Vote Smart's Research

  • Federation for American Immigration Reform. 2007-2008. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. Ike Skelton supported the interests of the Federation for American Immigration Reform 38 percent in 2007-2008. (votesmart.org)
  • National Latino Congreso. 2007-2010. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. Ike Skelton supported the interests of the National Latino Congreso 20 percent in 2007-2010. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. Bill Seeks to Improve U.S. Border Security, 10 October 2004. "Although border control and immigration authorities have worked tirelessly to prevent unlawful entry of persons and dangerous materials into the United States, more must be done to stop those who wish to do harm to our country and its citizens?The investigation found that vast areas of the southern border have no infrastructure or effective law enforcement presence to prevent illegal immigration. Over 24,000 illegal immigrants from countries other than Mexico were apprehended last year, but were released into the United States due to lack of bed space at detention facilities." (votesmart.org)
Yes Inferred Answer International Policy Issues: Do you support United States military action in Afghanistan? View Citations

Vote Smart's Research

  • Ike Skelton. HR 4899. 111th Congress. Supplemental Appropriations Act. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted NO on Limiting Afghanistan Military Funding to Withdrawal and Other Specified Purposes on 1 July 2010. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. HR 4899. 111th Congress. Supplemental Appropriations Act. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted NO on Requiring Timetable for Withdrawal from Afghanistan on 1 July 2010. (votesmart.org)
  • Peace Action West. 2009. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Ratings. Ike Skelton supported the interests of Peace Action West 46 percent in 2009. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. Issue Position: The War in Afghanistan. "Six months ago the Obama administration concluded that the only way to stop Afghanistan's slide into insecurity and prevent the reemergence of a terrorist haven was to put in place an integrated counterinsurgency strategy focused on protecting the Afghan population, building up the Afghan national security forces and improving Afghan governance. We strongly supported the president's decision and continue to believe that he was right. He also made the right decision last week when, in a meeting with congressional leaders, he ruled out withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan. The key question confronting the administration now is not whether to pursue counterinsurgency in Afghanistan but whether to provide that counterinsurgency effort with the resources it needs. We believe that providing those resources will be critical. Gen. Stanley McChrystal's assessment states that his new strategy requires additional resources and the proper execution of an integrated civilian-military counterinsurgency campaign. To this end, he has reportedly forwarded to the president a range of resource options, each with differing levels of risk to the mission. We hope that President Obama will carefully weigh these recommendations and provide his commander with the necessary forces and civilian resources he needs to properly execute a counterinsurgency campaign. Some suggest that we should send just enough forces to "hold the line" against the Taliban and prevent them from retaking the major population centers, while continuing to build up the Afghan army and police. In our view, this course would probably be a prescription for stalemate -- which, in a counterinsurgency, is a prescription for failure. Indeed, as McChrystal warned in his recent assessment, "Failure to gain the initiative and reverse insurgent momentum in the near-term (next 12 months) -- while Afghan security capacity matures -- risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible." [...] Here at home, we must stabilize public support by convincing an increasingly skeptical American people that the Afghan war is in fact winnable. This will happen when Americans begin to see the kind of visible gains that only a properly resourced counterinsurgency campaign can achieve through the use of additional troops to establish security and additional civilian resources to aid governmental reform and economic growth. On the other hand, if we send too few troops to regain the initiative from the insurgency and too few civilian resources to help cement those hard-won gains, public support will likely collapse. There should be no confusion about what is at stake in this fight. The last time they were in power, the Taliban not only brutally suppressed the human rights of their own people, they also welcomed Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda network into Afghanistan, refusing to give them up even after Sept. 11, 2001. Allowing the Taliban to return to power would represent a major victory for extremist forces throughout the world, tilt the balance of power in South Asia in their favor and further endanger America's homeland security from terrorists trained there. The president was right to call the war in Afghanistan "a war of necessity." Now it is time to treat it as such and commit the decisive force that will allow Gen. McChrystal to break the Taliban's momentum as quickly as possible." (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. Skelton Calls for Vote to Support Troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. 1 July 2010. "This evening, Congressman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) released the following statement calling for a House vote on the Senate version of the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2010, which includes $37.12 billion for our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq: "We are fighting two wars, and our forces in Afghanistan and Iraq need this additional funding to continue our efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and eventually defeat the terrorists who threaten America. "The quickest way to get a bill to the President that supports our troops in the field is for the House to vote on the Senate bill. Our troops need this support, and we must send a bill to the President without delay." (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. Skelton Applauds Success In Afghanistan Under Obama. 5 May 2010. "Today, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) released the statement below following a hearing before the Committee to examine the progress in Afghanistan under President Obama's new strategy: "I am so proud of the brave men and women in uniform who are risking their lives every day to keep our nation safe, and I was very pleased to hear the witnesses at today's hearing talk about the signs of success we have seen from our warfighters in Afghanistan under President Obama. For too many years, this conflict--which is critical to our nation's security--was the Forgotten War. It was very reassuring today to hear confirmation of the continued progress we are seeing under the President's new counterinsurgency strategy as we continue to fix the dramatic shortfalls of the previous administration. "President Obama has tripled the number of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and has given us, for the first time since the start of the war nearly a decade ago, a real strategy for success. Our military leaders and commanders on the ground have strongly endorsed the President's plan, and we continue to see an increase in gains made against the insurgency, including the most significant captures to date of Taliban leaders. "We will continue to closely monitor the progress in Afghanistan under the new counterinsurgency strategy to make sure that our troops have all of the resources they need to bring us success and return home quickly." (votesmart.org)
Yes Inferred Answer Social Issues: Should marriage only be between one man and one woman? View Citations

Vote Smart's Research

  • Ike Skelton. HR 3396. 103rd Congress. To define and protect the institution of marriage. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted YES on 12 July 1996. (votesmart.org)
  • Ike Skelton. H J Res 88. 109th Congress. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage. Project Vote Smart Summary: Ike Skelton voted YES on 18 July 2006. (votesmart.org)

Key

Candidate Answer

Official Position: Candidate had the Political Courage to address this issue directly.

Inferred Answer

Inferred Position: Candidate refused to address this issue directly, but Project Vote Smart inferred this issue position based on the candidate's public statements, voting record, and evaluations from special interest groups.

Unknown Answer

Unknown Position: Candidate refused to address this issue.

Project Vote Smart's Research: Click on this icon to reveal more information about this candidate's position.

Other or Expanded Principles & Legislative Priorities are entered exactly as the candidate has submitted it. Project Vote Smart does not edit for misspelled words, punctuation or grammar.

Skip to top
Back to top