Search Form
Now choose a category »

Special Interest Groups

Rating Group: The Humane Society Legislative Fund

1995-1996 Positions

State Office District Name Party Rating
Jerry Costello 50%
Paul Coverdell 50%
Christopher Cox 25%
William Coyne 100%
Larry Craig 0%
Robert Cramer 25%
Philip Crane 0%
Barbara Cubin 0%
Randall Cunningham 25%
Alfonse D'Amato 75%
Patsy Ann Danner 25%
Thomas Daschle 75%
Thomas Davis III 50%
E. Kika de la Garza 25%
Thomas DeLay 0%
Ronald Dellums 100%
Peter Deutsch 75%
Lincoln Diaz-Balart 25%
Jay Dickey 0%
Norm Dicks 25%
Julian Dixon 75%
Chris Dodd 75%
Robert Dole 20%
Pete Domenici, Jr. 25%
Calvin Dooley 25%
John Doolittle 0%
Byron Dorgan 75%
Robert Dornan 15%
David Dreier 0%
Jennifer Dunn 25%
Chet Edwards 0%
Vern Ehlers 33%
Bob Ehrlich, Jr. 0%
Bill Emerson 0%
Philip English 25%
John Ensign 25%
Lane Evans 75%
Terry Everett 0%
Thomas Ewing 0%
Jim Exon 70%
Duncan McLauchlin Faircloth 50%
Harris Fawell 50%
Victor Fazio 25%
Russ Feingold 75%
Cleo Fields 75%
Jack Fields, Jr. 5%
Bob Filner 100%
Floyd Flake 33%
Thomas Foglietta 100%
Mark Foley 25%
Michael Patrick Forbes 25%
Wendell Ford 50%
Tillie Fowler 25%
Jon David Fox 50%
Barney Frank 100%
Gary Franks 25%
Robert Franks 75%
William Frist 33%
Jonas Frost III 25%
Elizabeth Furse 100%
Elton Gallegly 0%
John Ganske 25%
Sam Gejdenson 100%
George Gekas 0%
Richard Andrew Gephardt 50%
Pete Geren 0%
Sam Gibbons 65%
Wayne Gilchrest 25%
Paul Gillmor 0%
Benjamin Gilman 50%
John Glenn 75%
Henry Gonzalez 25%
William Goodling 0%
Bart Gordon 25%
Slade Gorton 0%
Porter Goss 50%
Daniel Graham 75%
William Phillip Gramm 50%
Rodney Grams 75%
James Greenwood 25%
Judd Gregg 100%
Steven Gunderson 35%
Gilbert Gutknecht 25%
Tony Hall 75%
Lee Hamilton 0%
Melton Hancock 0%
James Hansen 0%
Jane Harman 50%
J. Dennis Hastert 0%
Mark Hatfield 40%
J.D. Hayworth, Jr. 25%
Joel Hefley 0%
W.G. Hefner 0%
Jesse Helms 75%
Wally Herger, Jr. 0%
Van Hilleary 25%
Earl Hilliard, Jr. 33%
Maurice Hinchey 100%
David Lee Hobson 25%
Pete Hoekstra 25%
Thomas Holden 0%
Ernest Hollings 75%
Stephen Horn 25%
John Nathan Hostettler 25%
Amory Houghton, Jr. 0%
Duncan Hunter 0%
Y. Tim Hutchinson 0%
Kay Hutchison 50%
Henry Hyde 25%
Bob Inglis, Sr. 33%
Daniel Inouye 75%
Ernest Istook, Jr. 25%
Jesse Jackson, Jr. 100%
Andrew Jacobs, Jr. 80%
William Jefferson 75%
James Merrill Jeffords 100%
Nancy Johnson 25%
Harry Johnston 90%
J. Bennett Johnston 50%
Paul Kanjorski 50%
Nancy Landon Kassebaum 50%
Sue Kelly 50%
Dirk Kempthorne 0%
Edward Kennedy, Sr. 100%
Joseph Kennedy II 100%
Patrick Kennedy 100%
Barbara Bailey Kennelly 50%
Bob Kerrey 100%
Dale Kildee 75%
Jay Kim 0%
Gerald Kleczka 50%
Ronald Klink 75%
Scott Klug 25%
Joseph Knollenberg 0%
Herb Kohl 75%
James Kolbe 0%
Jon Kyl 50%
John LaFalce 75%
Ray LaHood 0%
Tom Lantos 100%
Stephen Largent 25%
Steve LaTourette 25%
Greg Laughlin 0%
Frank Lautenberg 100%
Rick Lazio 25%
James Leach 50%
Jerry Lewis 0%
Ron Lewis 0%
Joe Lieberman 75%
Jim Lightfoot 0%
Blanche Lincoln 35%
John Linder 25%
William Lipinski 100%
Robert Livingston 0%
Trent Lott, Sr. 25%
Dick Lugar 50%
William Luther 50%
Connie Mack 50%
Thomas Manton 25%
Don Manzullo 50%
Matthew Martinez 0%
Frank Mascara 25%
Robert Matsui 50%
Karen McCarthy 75%
Bill McCollum 25%
James McCrery III 0%
Joseph McDade 50%
Paul McHale 75%
John McHugh 0%
Scott McInnis 25%
David McIntosh 0%
Cynthia Ann McKinney 100%
Michael McNulty 100%
Martin Meehan 100%
Carrie Meek 50%
Jack Metcalf 0%
Jan Meyers 45%
Juanita Millender-McDonald 100%
Dan Miller 50%
David Minge 25%
Patsy Takemoto Mink 75%
John Moakley 100%
Susan Molinari 25%
Alan Mollohan 0%
G.V. Montgomery 35%
Carlos Moorhead 15%
Constance Morella 75%
Carol Moseley Braun 75%
Patrick Moynihan 75%
Frank Murkowski 33%
Jack Murtha 50%
Sue Myrick 25%
George Nethercutt, Jr. 0%
Mark Neumann 75%
Robert William Ney 25%
Don Nickles 75%
Charles Norwood, Jr. 25%
Sam Nunn 70%
James Nussle 0%
Jim Oberstar 25%

How to Interpret these Evaluations

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.

Skip to top
Back to top