Rating Group: The Cato Institute
2008-2010 Spending Score
| State | Office | Name | Party | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AR | Governor | Mike Beebe | D | 31% |
| AZ | Governor | Jan Brewer | R | 54% |
| DE | Governor | Jack Markell | D | 56% |
| ID | Governor | Butch Otter | R | 62% |
| IL | Governor | Pat Quinn | D | 33% |
| KY | Governor | Steve Beshear | D | 45% |
| LA | Governor | Bobby Jindal | R | 74% |
| MA | Governor | Deval Patrick | D | 59% |
| MD | Governor | Martin O'Malley | D | 46% |
| MO | Governor | Jay Nixon | D | 55% |
| ND | U.S. Senate-Sr | John Hoeven | R | 6% |
| NE | Governor | Dave Heineman | R | 21% |
| SC | U.S. House-1 | Mark Sanford, Jr. | R | 96% |
| TX | Governor | Rick Perry | R | 64% |
| WV | U.S. Senate-Jr | Joe Manchin III | D | 58% |
| John Baldacci | Other | 57% | ||
| Haley Barbour | Other | 58% | ||
| Phil Bredesen | Other | 57% | ||
| Don Carcieri | Other | 61% | ||
| Charlie Crist, Jr. | Other | 64% | ||
| Chet Culver | Other | 31% | ||
| Mitch Daniels, Jr. | Other | 25% | ||
| Jim Douglas | Other | 44% | ||
| Jim Doyle III | Other | 31% | ||
| Dave Freudenthal | Other | 72% | ||
| Jim Gibbons | Other | 55% | ||
| Jennifer Granholm | Other | 66% | ||
| Chris Gregoire | Other | 20% | ||
| Brad Henry | Other | 79% | ||
| Ted Kulongoski | Other | 33% | ||
| Linda Lingle | Other | 43% | ||
| John Lynch | Other | 34% | ||
| David Paterson | Other | 29% | ||
| Tim Pawlenty | Other | 65% | ||
| Bev Perdue | Other | 45% | ||
| Sonny Perdue | Other | 67% | ||
| Jodi Rell | Other | 17% | ||
| Ed Rendell | Other | 41% | ||
| Bill Richardson | Other | 57% | ||
| Bob Riley | Other | 79% | ||
| Bill Ritter, Jr. | Other | 42% | ||
| Mike Rounds | Other | 41% | ||
| Arnold Schwarzenegger | Other | 69% | ||
| Brian Schweitzer | Other | 72% | ||
| Ted Strickland | Other | 38% |
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.