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

Special Interest Groups

Rating Group: Concerned Women for America

1997-1998 Positions

State Office District Name Party Rating
Donald Payne 25%
Edward Pease 75%
John Peterson 50%
Charles Pickering, Jr. 75%
Owen Pickett 25%
Richard Pombo 75%
Earl Pomeroy 50%
John Edward Porter 50%
Deborah Pryce 67%
Jack Quinn 75%
George Radanovich 50%
James Ramstad 75%
Ralph Regula 50%
Silvestre Reyes 50%
Bob Riley 75%
Lynn Nancy Rivers 25%
Charles Robb 0%
Ciro Rodriguez 25%
Timothy Roemer 50%
James Rogan 50%
William Roth, Jr. 75%
Steve Rothman 25%
Marge Roukema 50%
Jim Ryun 75%
Martin Olav Sabo 25%
Max Sandlin, Jr. 75%
Rick Santorum 75%
Paul Sarbanes 0%
Jim Saxton 25%
Joe Scarborough 75%
Robert Schaffer 75%
John Shadegg 75%
E. Clay Shaw, Jr. 25%
Christopher Shays 50%
E.G. Shuster 75%
Norman Sisisky 50%
Joseph Skeen 75%
Ike Skelton 50%
Gordon Smith 75%
Nick Smith 50%
Bob Smith 100%
Olympia Snowe 50%
Vic Snyder 25%
Mark Souder 75%
Arlen Specter 25%
Floyd Spence 50%
John Spratt, Jr. 50%
Pete Stark 25%
Cliff Stearns 75%
Charles Stenholm 75%
Ted Stevens 75%
Ted Strickland 50%
Bob Stump 75%
Bart Stupak 50%
John Sununu 50%
James Talent 75%
John Tanner 75%
Ellen Tauscher 25%
William Tauzin 75%
Charles Taylor 75%
Gene Taylor 75%
Craig Thomas 75%
William Thomas 50%
Fred Thompson 100%
Karen Thurman 25%
Strom Thurmond 100%
Todd Tiahrt 75%
Robert Torricelli 25%
Ed Towns 0%
James Traficant, Jr. 25%
James Turner 75%
Bruce Vento 25%
James Walsh 50%
Zach Wamp 75%
John Warner 75%
Wesley Watkins 75%
Mel Watt 25%
Julius Caesar Watts, Jr. 75%
David Weldon 75%
W. Curtis Weldon 75%
Gerald Weller 50%
Paul Wellstone 0%
Robert Wexler 25%
Bob Weygand 50%
Bob Wise, Jr. 25%
Lynn Woolsey 25%
Albert Wynn 25%
Bill Young 67%

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