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

Special Interest Groups

Rating Group: Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights

1995-1996 Positions

State Office District Name Party Rating
Edmond Spencer Abraham 25%
Gary Ackerman 90%
Daniel Akaka, Sr. 95%
Wayne Allard 15%
Rob Andrews 75%
Bill Archer 10%
Richard Armey 15%
John Ashcroft 10%
Henry Scott Baesler 70%
Richard Hugh Baker 10%
William Baker 21%
Cass Ballenger 10%
James Barcia 65%
Bob Barr, Jr. 10%
Bill Barrett 10%
Roscoe Bartlett 10%
Charlie Bass 10%
Herbert Bateman 10%
Max Baucus 75%
Anthony Beilenson 93%
Bob Bennett 15%
Kenneth Bentsen, Jr. 85%
Douglas Bereuter 20%
Howard Berman 100%
Tom Bevill 57%
Brian Bilbray 30%
Michael Bilirakis 15%
Jeff Bingaman 95%
Thomas Bliley, Jr. 15%
Peter Blute 36%
Sherwood Boehlert 50%
Kit Bond 20%
Henry Bonilla 25%
David Edward Bonior 100%
Sonny Bono 10%
Robert Borski, Jr. 85%
Rick Boucher 70%
Bill Bradley 100%
John Breaux 85%
Bill Brewster 36%
George Brown, Jr. 95%
Hank Brown 14%
Richard Bryan 70%
Ed Bryant 10%
John Bryant 93%
Dale Bumpers 85%
Jim Bunning 10%
Conrad Burns 10%
Dan Burton 10%
Steve Buyer 15%
Robert Byrd 75%
Herbert Callahan 10%
Ben Campbell 50%
Thomas Campbell 40%
FL Justice of the Supreme Court Charles Canady 25%
Mike Castle 30%
John Chafee 55%
Jim Chapman 79%
Helen Chenoweth-Hage 10%
Jon Lynn Christensen 15%
William Clay, Sr. 90%
Eva Clayton 100%
Robert Clement 55%
William Clinger 7%
William Cohen 36%
Ronald Coleman 79%
Barbara-Rose Collins 93%
Cardiss Collins 100%
Michael Collins 10%
Larry Combest 10%
Gary Condit 60%
Kent Conrad 85%
Jerry Costello 70%
Paul Coverdell 10%
Christopher Cox 10%
William Coyne 100%
Larry Craig 10%
Robert Cramer 55%
Philip Crane 15%
Barbara Cubin 10%
Randall Cunningham 10%
Alfonse D'Amato 40%
Patsy Ann Danner 65%
Thomas Daschle 95%
Thomas Davis III 25%
E. Kika de la Garza 57%
Thomas DeLay 10%
Ronald Dellums 100%
Peter Deutsch 75%
Lincoln Diaz-Balart 70%
Jay Dickey 5%
Norm Dicks 85%
Julian Dixon 100%
Chris Dodd 90%
Robert Dole 7%
Pete Domenici, Jr. 35%
Calvin Dooley 65%
John Doolittle 15%
Byron Dorgan 80%
Robert Dornan 14%
David Dreier 10%
Jennifer Dunn 15%
Chet Edwards 70%
Vern Ehlers 25%
Bob Ehrlich, Jr. 5%
Bill Emerson 14%
Philip English 35%
John Ensign 25%
Lane Evans 100%
Terry Everett 10%
Thomas Ewing 10%
Jim Exon 71%
Duncan McLauchlin Faircloth 15%
Harris Fawell 30%
Victor Fazio 90%
Russ Feingold 90%
Cleo Fields 93%
Jack Fields, Jr. 14%
Bob Filner 100%
Floyd Flake 90%
Thomas Foglietta 100%
Mark Foley 20%
Michael Patrick Forbes 25%
Wendell Ford 85%
Tillie Fowler 20%
Jon David Fox 50%
Barney Frank 100%
Gary Franks 21%
Robert Franks 40%
William Frist 25%
Jonas Frost III 75%
Elizabeth Furse 85%
Elton Gallegly 15%
John Ganske 20%
Sam Gejdenson 95%
George Gekas 10%
Richard Andrew Gephardt 95%
Pete Geren 43%
Sam Gibbons 86%
Wayne Gilchrest 30%
Paul Gillmor 15%
Benjamin Gilman 50%
John Glenn 85%
Henry Gonzalez 85%
William Goodling 20%
Bart Gordon 60%
Slade Gorton 25%
Porter Goss 10%
Daniel Graham 85%
William Phillip Gramm 10%
Rodney Grams 15%
James Greenwood 30%
Judd Gregg 20%
Steven Gunderson 29%
Gilbert Gutknecht 15%
Tony Hall 85%
Lee Hamilton 60%
Melton Hancock 14%
James Hansen 15%
Jane Harman 60%
J. Dennis Hastert 10%
Mark Hatfield 79%
J.D. Hayworth, Jr. 15%
Joel Hefley 10%
W.G. Hefner 65%
Jesse Helms 10%
Wally Herger, Jr. 10%
Van Hilleary 15%
Earl Hilliard, Jr. 95%
Maurice Hinchey 80%
David Lee Hobson 15%
Pete Hoekstra 15%
Martin Hoke 29%
Thomas Holden 65%
Ernest Hollings 65%
Stephen Horn 35%
John Nathan Hostettler 15%
Amory Houghton, Jr. 40%
Duncan Hunter 10%
Y. Tim Hutchinson 10%
Kay Hutchison 15%
Henry Hyde 15%
Bob Inglis, Sr. 10%
Daniel Inouye 90%
Ernest Istook, Jr. 10%
Jesse Jackson, Jr. 100%
Andrew Jacobs, Jr. 86%
William Jefferson 95%
James Merrill Jeffords 70%
Nancy Johnson 40%
Harry Johnston 79%
J. Bennett Johnston 57%
Paul Kanjorski 75%
Nancy Landon Kassebaum 50%
Sue Kelly 35%
Dirk Kempthorne 10%
Edward Kennedy, Sr. 100%
Joseph Kennedy II 95%
Patrick Kennedy 95%
Barbara Bailey Kennelly 85%

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