NRLC CONGRESSIONAL SCORECARD

U.S. Congress 1999 Roll Call Votes on Abortion and Other Right-to-Life Issues

Published by the National Right to Life Committee, January 2000

www.nrlc.org Legfederal@aol.com (202) 626-8820

This is a compilation of the most significant congressional votes on abortion, assisted suicide, and other right-to-life issues that occurred in Congress during 1999.

1999 was the first year of the 106th Congress, which will continue until the fall of 2000. On November 7, 2000, American voters will elect the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate for the 107th Congress, as well as a new president.

This scorecard includes specific information on how each lawmaker voted during 1999 on the issues of key importance to the pro-life movement - - a total of 13 roll call votes in the House of Representatives and eight in the Senate.

Each member of the House has received a "score" for 1999, which is the percentage of times that he or she voted in accord with the position of the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) on these issues (counting all of the pertinent roll calls votes for which the lawmaker was present).

For 1999, no "score" has been assigned to members of the Senate, because the Senate voted on too few pro-life issues during the year to allow calculation of a fair score--but it is anticipated that senators will receive NRLC scores at the end of the 106th Congress, in the fall of 2000.

Overview of 1999

During 1999, as in the years immediately preceding, the pro-life forces were the strongest in the House of Representatives. Of the 13 House roll calls compiled here, the position supported by NRLC prevailed on 11.

The greatest asset of pro-abortion groups was the White House, where President Bill Clinton and Vice-president Al Gore remained strongly opposed to pro-life legislation. The positions of the Clinton-Gore Administration on specific issues are noted in the explanatory material on specific votes.

The Senate was a battleground, where each side won some important votes. By a narrow margin of 51-47, the Senate approved a non-binding resolution endorsing Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion on demand. But on the same day the Senate approved the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, a measure vehemently opposed by pro-abortion groups, by nearly a two-thirds margin.

By the year's end, the House had passed three major bills backed by the National Right to Life Committee--the Child Custody Protection Act, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, and the Pain Relief Promotion Act. The Senate delayed action on these measures until 2000.

Pro-life forces also enjoyed a measure of success on appropriations bills during 1999. As discussed below, pro-life lawmakers won enactment of language to place substantial restrictions on U.S. funding of groups that promote abortion in foreign nations. However, several other important measures, including a House-approved amendment to prevent the Food and Drug Administration from approving the abortion drug RU 486, failed due to strong opposition from the Clinton-Gore White House and lack of sufficient support in the Senate.

Party Control

The general tenor of any Congress is determined in large part by which party holds majority control. During 1999, both houses of Congress were under Republican majority control. At year's end, the Republican-Democrat ratios were 55-45 in the Senate and 223-212 in the House.

The leaders of the majority party play the dominant role in setting the congressional agenda. In 1999, the top leaders elected by congressional Republicans were all pro-life, including House Speaker Dennis Hastert (Il.), House Majority Leader Dick Armey (Tx.), House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (Tx.), Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (Ms.), and Senate Assistant Majority Leader Don Nickles (Ok.). The top leaders elected by congressional Democrats, House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt (Mo.) and Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (SD), were pro-abortion.

Members of the majority party occupy the chairs of congressional committees. In 1999, the Republican chairmen of most (but not all) key committees and subcommittees were pro-life.

A large majority of congressional Republicans vote consistently pro-life, while a large majority of congressional Democrats vote consistently pro-abortion. On most abortion-related votes in the House, over 85% of Republican lawmakers voted pro-life, while among Democrats, the percentage fluctuated between 14% and 31%.

In the Senate, the disparity between the parties was even sharper, as demonstrated by the roll call on the Harkin Amendment to endorse Roe v. Wade. On that roll call (Senate Vote No. 6 in this scorecard), 85% of Republicans voted pro-life, while only 4% of Democrats did.

However, lawmakers who vote contrary to the majority of their party can determine the outcome on many key pro-life issues. For example, while the great majority of House Democrats are pro-abortion, the votes of pro-life Democrats have been critical to pro-life successes in the House, because on most issues they more than exceed the number of pro-abortion Republican lawmakers who would otherwise be able to derail pro-life legislation.

On November 7, 2000, American voters will select a new president. In addition, the entire House of Representatives will stand for election, as will one-third of the Senate. The Democrats would gain control of the House if they achieve a net gain of six seats. In the Senate, it would require a net shift of either five or six seats (depending on who is elected vice-president, the presiding officer of the Senate) to switch party control to the Democrats.

How to Interpret this Scorecard

This scorecard can be an important tool in helping you evaluate how your representatives in Congress are voting on some of the right-to-life issues that are important to you and to NRLC. However, it has limitations that you should keep in mind.

First, while roll call votes on the House and Senate floors determine the outcome of many important pro-life issues, they provide only a "snapshot" of how a lawmaker responded on the limited range of right-to-life issues that came before him for a recorded vote during one given year. For a more complete picture, you should also refer to reliable information regarding the lawmaker's positions on a broader range of pro-life issues--for example, NRLC scorecards for earlier years, and reports on recent pro-life events in Congress that appear in most editions of the National Right to Life News.

Second, while a lawmaker's percentage "score" for a year provides a useful reading of the representative's overall sympathy for pro-life legislation, it should not be stretched too far. The "score" is a simple calculation of how often the lawmaker voted in accord with NRLC's position on the roll calls for which he or she was present. Thus, each amendment or bill included in the scorecard is given the same weight in calculating the score. But in reality, some roll calls are on issues that are considerably more important than others. Thus, particularly with regard to lawmakers with "mixed" voting records, it is important to study the explanatory material in order to properly assess their overall degree of support for the pro-life cause.

Third, in order to accurately assess a lawmaker's performance, it is necessary to study the full pattern of his votes on any particular issue. In order to actually win passage of a pro-life bill, it is often necessary for pro-life forces to first defeat hostile procedural motions and/or a "substitute amendment" put forward by opponents of the bill. (A "substitute amendment" is an alternative proposal that, if it wins a majority vote, wipes out the entire original bill.) Sometimes, a lawmaker who is not truly supportive of a pro-life measure will join opponents in voting for hostile procedural motions or substitute amendments--but, if these attacks fail, will then vote for passage of the pro-life bill.

For example, on the Child Custody Protection Act, nine House members voted for a motion/amendment that would have destroyed the bill, but when that motion failed, they turned around and voted to pass the bill.

Thus, roll calls on procedural questions and substitute amendments are included in this scorecard when they really amounted to votes on the basic content or fate of legislation. Such votes--as well as those on final passage of bills--should be examined closely to determine how supportive individual lawmakers really were in advancing pro-life legislation.

1999 VOTES IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FDA Approval of Abortion-Inducing Drugs
House Vote No. 1

1. On June 8, 1999, during consideration of the Fiscal Year 2000 Agriculture Appropriations bill (HR 1906), pro-life Congressman Tom Coburn (R-Ok.) offered an amendment to prohibit the Food and Drug Administration from using federal funds "for the testing, development, or approval . . . of any drug for the chemical inducement of abortion" (such as the RU 486 abortion pill). The Coburn Amendment passed, 217-214, shown here as Vote No. 1 (official House roll call 173). This was a pro-life win. However, the Clinton-Gore White House declared that the amendment was "unacceptable," and it lacked sufficient support in the Senate, so it was dropped in a House-Senate conference committee.

Abortion on Military Bases
House Vote No. 2

2. Vote No. 2 concerned the issue of whether U.S. military medical facilities should provide abortions. In 1996, Congress (over President Clinton's objections) enacted a ban on the performance of abortions at U.S. military medical facilities (except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest), even if the direct costs were paid by the clients. On June 9, 1999, pro-abortion Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Ca.) offered an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill (HR 1401) to repeal the pro-life policy, and thereby require military facilities to provide abortion on request to military personnel and dependents, with clients paying the direct costs. The Sanchez Amendment failed, 203-225, shown here as Vote No. 2 (House roll call 184). The Senate also rejected an attempt to repeal the pro-life policy (see Senate Vote No. 1 in this scorecard), so it remains in effect.

Transportation of Minors for Abortions Without Parental Knowledge (Child Custody Protection Act)
House Votes No. 3-4

3-4. The Child Custody Protection Act (HR 1218), sponsored by Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fl.), would make it a federal crime to transport a minor across a state line for an abortion, if this circumvents a state law requiring parental or judicial involvement in the minor's abortion decision. The bill would protect the effectiveness of the parental involvement laws of more than 20 states.

When HR 1218 came before the House on June 30, 1999, pro-abortion Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Tx.) offered what is called a "motion to recommit" the bill. If successful, this motion would have gutted the bill, replacing it with an alternative proposal under which adult brothers and sisters, grandparents, and any "religious leader of the minor" would be exempt from the law. Fortunately, the Jackson-Lee motion failed, 164-268, shown here as Vote No. 3 (House roll call 260).

The House then passed the Child Custody Protection Act on a vote of 270-159, shown here as Vote No. 4 (House roll call 261).

The Senate is expected to take up the bill in 2000. Senator Spencer Abraham (R-Mi.) has introduced a companion bill (S. 661). The Clinton-Gore Administration opposes the bill.

Abortion Insurance for Federal Employees
House Vote No. 5

5. On July 15, 1999, the House took up the Fiscal Year 2000 appropriations bill for the Treasury Department and certain other federal agencies (HR 2490). The bill includes funding for the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) program. Pro-abortion Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Ct.) offered an amendment to remove a provision that continued a ban on coverage of abortions (except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest) under federal employees' health insurance plans. The federal government provides, on average, 72% of the cost of federal employees' health plans.

The DeLauro Amendment failed, 188-230, shown here as Vote No. 5 (House roll call 301) - - a pro-life win.

The Senate had already voted to renew the pro-life policy, on July 1, by a vote of 51-47 (see Senate Vote No. 2 in this scorecard). Having been reaffirmed by both houses, the pro-life policy was continued.

United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)
House Vote No. 6

6. During budget negotiations in October 1998, pro-life lawmakers were able to cut off U.S. funds for 1999 to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). The UNFPA participates in China's coercive population-control program and has promoted abortion in a variety of other ways.
However, on July 20, 1999, pro-abortion Congressman Tom Campbell (R-Ca.) offered an amendment to the State Department reauthorization bill (HR 2415) to authorize resumption of funding of up to $25 million to the UNFPA in 2000 under certain conditions, including that the money not be spent in China. NRLC opposed the Campbell Amendment, but it was adopted 221-198, a pro-life loss shown here as Vote No. 6 (House roll call 312). This funding was part of the final bill that was signed into law by President Clinton in November 1999.

Foreign Aid for Abortion-Promoting Organizations
House Vote No. 7

7. In a significant win for pro-life forces, for the first time in his seven years in the White House, in November 1999 President Clinton was forced to accept restrictions on U.S. funding of groups that promote abortion in foreign nations. In end-of-year budget negotiations with congressional Republican leaders, Clinton reluctantly agreed to language under which 96% of U.S. funds for population control may go only to groups that agree not to perform abortions or campaign to legalize abortion in foreign nations.

Clinton accepted the pro-life language in return for nearly $1 billion in disputed "arrearages" (back dues) for the United Nations--a top Administration foreign policy priority. The deal was part of a massive, $385 billion budget bill that was negotiated between the White House and congressional leaders, which Clinton signed into law on November 29, 1999.

The outcome was a triumph for Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ), who chairs the House International Relations Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, and co-chairs the House Pro-Life Caucus. For years, Smith has worked tirelessly to curb the Clinton-Gore Administration's aggressive promotion of abortion through the U.S. foreign aid program.

Smith received strong backing from House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Il.) and other top Republican leaders in the House and the Senate, who for more than a year refused to approve the U.N. assessments unless the White House agreed to pro-life restrictions on foreign aid.

At the center of the controversy is the U.S. "population assistance" program, which provides funding to groups to run population-control programs in less-developed countries. Much of the U.S. "population assistance" money goes to private organizations that operate in nations in which the laws protect unborn children, allowing abortion in only very rare circumstances. This applies, for example, to nearly all nations in Latin America and to many nations in Africa.

Under the so-called "Mexico City Policy" adopted by Presidents Reagan and Bush, no U.S. "population assistance" could go to any organization that performed abortion or promoted abortion in foreign nations. Under this policy, the London headquarters of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and the overseas division of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) did not receive U.S. funding. However, President Clinton abolished the pro-life policy on his third day in office in 1993. Since then, the Administration has given many millions of dollars to IPPF and other groups that aggressively promote legalized abortion.

The new law, although a significant pro-life gain, is weaker than the Reagan-Bush policy, because it contains a clause that allows Clinton to waive the restrictions to allow up to $15 million in funding to groups that perform or lobby for abortion. Predictably, President Clinton invoked this waiver authority on November 30, 1999. However, even under this waiver, 96% of the total budget for "population assistance" will be governed by pro-life restrictions during Fiscal Year 2000.

In addition, under the terms of the law, the president's use of the waiver authority resulted in an automatic shift of $12.5 million out of population control and into child disease prevention programs.

An essential predicate to this pro-life victory was a roll call that occurred in the House of Representatives on July 29, 1999, shown here as Vote No. 7 (House roll call no. 349). The House approved, 228-200, an NRLC-backed amendment offered by Smith and Rep. James Barcia (D-Mi.) to the foreign operations appropriations bill (HR 2606) to cut off U.S. population-control assistance to any private organization that works to weaken foreign abortion laws.

[Unfortunately, the House also passed a separate, inconsistent amendment offered by pro-abortion champion Rep. Jim Greenwood (R-Pa.), under which the U.S. would continue to subsidize private organizations that work to change foreign abortion laws, so long as they do not actually violate foreign laws. The roll call on the Greenwood Amendment is not shown here.]

Funding of Abortion by Bureau of Prisons
House Vote No. 8

8. On August 4, 1999, the House considered an appropriations bill (HR 2670) that contained a provision to extend a ban on funding of abortions by the federal Bureau of Prisons, except where the life of the mother is endangered or in cases of rape. On Vote No. 8 (House roll call 373), the House rejected an amendment by pro-abortion Congresswoman Diana DeGette (D-Co.), to remove the pro-life provision, 160-268. Thus, the pro-life policy was continued.

Pro-Life Free Speech About Federal Politicians
(Shays-Meehan "Campaign Finance Reform" Bill )
House Vote No. 9

9. Vote No. 9 is the roll call by which the House passed the Shays-Meehan "campaign reform" bill (HR 417) on September 14, 1999, by a vote of 252-177 (House roll call 422).

NRLC strongly opposes the Shays-Meehan bill, because it would place sweeping restrictions on the right of citizen groups (such as NRLC and NRLC affiliates) to communicate with the public regarding the positions and votes of members of Congress and other federal politicians on pro-life issues, and regarding upcoming votes in Congress. The bill is also opposed by many other groups, including the Christian Coalition, Concerned Women for America, the National Rifle Association, the ACLU, and many major business groups.

[For additional information about the provisions of the Shays-Meehan bill that would adversely affect NRLC and other pro-life groups, see the NRLC website, www.nrlc.org, under "Campaign Finance Reform and Free Speech."]

The Shays-Meehan bill is strongly supported by President Clinton and Vice-president Gore. The prime sponsors of the bill are pro-abortion Reps. Chris Shays (R-Ct.) and Martin Meehan (D-Mass.). The bill was supported by 54 Republicans and 197 Democrats. It was opposed by 164 Republicans and 13 Democrats.

Of the 13 Democrats who opposed the bill, 10 generally vote pro-life. They were: Jim Barcia (Mi.), Virgil Goode (Va.), Ralph Hall (Tx.), Chris John (La.), Alan Mollohan (WV), John Murtha (Pa.), Collin Peterson (Mn.), Nick Rahall (WV), Bart Stupak (Mi.), and James Traficant (Ohio).

[In October, 1999, an attempt to move the Shays-Meehan bill and another speech-restrictive bill through the Senate failed when supporters failed to achieve the 60 votes necessary to "invoke cloture" and overcome procedural obstacles erected by defenders of free speech, led by pro-life Senators Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Trent Lott (R-Ms.). See Senate votes no. 3-4 in this scorecard. However, leading Senate advocates of such restrictions, such as Senator John McCain (R-Az.) and Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD), vowed to try again in 2000.]

Unborn Victims of Violence Act
House Votes No. 10-11

10-11. The Unborn Victims of Violence Act (HR 2436) would establish punishments for persons who injure or kill an unborn child while committing any of 70 already-established federal crimes of violence. NRLC was consulted in the drafting of the bill, which was introduced by Rep. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

[For more information on the bill, see "Key Points on the Unborn Victims of Violence Act" at the NRLC website, www.nrlc.org. The full text of the bill also appears there.]

When the House took up the bill on September 30, 1999, opponents offered an alternative proposal, called a "substitute amendment," offered by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Ca.). The Lofgren Amendment would have provided punishments for persons who, while committing violent crimes, cause "interruption to the normal course of the pregnancy" --but without recognizing the unborn child as a victim of the crime.

In a letter to House members, NRLC strongly opposed the Lofgren Amendment because it "would codify the fiction that when a criminal assailant injures a mother and kills her unborn child, there has been only a compound injury to the mother, but no loss of any human life."

The Lofgren Amendment failed on a vote of 201-224, shown here as Vote No. 10 (House roll call 464).

The House then passed the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (HR 2436) by a vote of 254-172, shown as Vote No. 11 (House roll call 465).

The bill was supported by 198 Republicans and 56 Democrats. It was opposed by 21 Republicans, 150 Democrats, and one Independent.

The Senate is expected to take up this legislation in 2000. A companion bill (S. 1673) has been introduced by Senator Mike DeWine (R-Ohio). The Clinton-Gore Administration opposes the bill.

Pain Relief Promotion Act
House Votes No. 12-13

12-13. Votes No. 12-13 dealt with the Pain Relief Promotion Act (HR 2260), a bill to prevent the prescription of federally controlled drugs for assisted suicide or euthanasia, while fostering their use to alleviate pain.

This bill was made necessary by two events. First, the state of Oregon legalized physician-assisted suicide, a law that went into effect in November 1997. Second, U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno ruled that Oregon physicians would be allowed to use federally controlled drugs to assist suicides.

Under federal law and regulations, the use and prescription of certain narcotics and other dangerous drugs (collectively called "controlled substances") is generally prohibited, unless a doctor with a special federal "registration" to prescribe them does so for a "legitimate medical purpose." In November 1997, as the Oregon law legalizing assisting suicide came into effect, the federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) announced that since assisting

suicide is not a "legitimate medical purpose," doctors' registrations to prescribe federally controlled drugs could be revoked if they used them to kill patients. However, in June 1998, Attorney General Reno reversed this ruling, saying that federally controlled drugs could be used for assisted suicide in Oregon or other states that authorized such use by changes in state law.

In response to the Reno ruling, Congressman Henry Hyde (R-Il.), the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Mi.) introduced the Pain Relief Promotion Act (HR 2260), with the strong support of NRLC. The bill would in effect restore the original DEA ruling barring the use of federally controlled drugs for assisted suicide or euthanasia, while clearly affirming that physicians may vigorously employ these drugs to control pain, even if this entails the secondary risk of shortening a patient's life.

When the House took up the bill on October 27, 1999, Congresswoman Nancy Johnson (R-Ct.) offered a "killer substitute" amendment--that is, an amendment to wipe out the bill and replace it with an entirely different measure, which would have removed the provisions to prevent the prescription of federally controlled drugs for assisted suicide or euthanasia. NRLC opposed the Johnson substitute, which failed, 188-239, shown here as Vote No. 12 (House roll call 543).

The House then passed HR 2260 on a vote of 271 to 156, shown here as Vote No. 13 (House roll call 544). The bill was supported by 200 Republicans and 71 Democrats. It was opposed by 20 Republicans, 135 Democrats, and one Independent.

The Clinton Administration Justice Department opposed House passage of HR 2260.

The Senate is expected to take up the Pain Relief Promotion Act in 2000. Senator Don Nickles (R-Ok.) has introduced a companion bill, S. 1272.

Thumbnail Descriptions of House Votes

Here are thumbnail descriptions of the basic issue for each roll call vote in the House of Representatives recorded in this scorecard. For more complete descriptions, please see the explanatory material above.

Vote 1: Should the Food and Drug Administration be prohibited from testing, developing, or approving drugs for chemically induced abortion?

Vote 2: Should U.S. military medical facilities be prohibited from performing abortions, except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest?

Votes 3-4: Should it be a federal crime for a non-parent to take a minor girl across state lines for an abortion, if this circumvents a state law that says her parents (or a judge) have a right to be involved in her abortion decision?

Vote 5: Should federal employees' health insurance plans be prohibited from covering abortions (except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest)?

Vote 6: Should the U.S. contribute to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), despite its support for China's coercive population-control program?

Vote 7: Should the U.S. foreign aid program for "population assistance" be prohibited from giving money to private organizations that perform abortions or that campaign to legalize abortion in foreign nations?

Vote 8: Should the federal Bureau of Prisons be prohibited from paying for abortions, except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape?

Vote 9:Should federal law restrict the right of citizen groups to freely criticize or praise the positions or voting records of members of Congress or other federal politicians in communications to the public?

Votes 10-11: When an unborn child is injured or killed during the commission of a violent federal crime, should that unborn child be legally recognized as a victim of a crime?

Votes 12-13: Should a state be permitted to authorize the use of federally controlled drugs for assisted suicide or euthanasia?

Key to House Vote Symbols

X Vote for pro-life policy (supported NRLC position)

0 Vote for anti-life policy (opposed NRLC position)

? Absent or not voting

S Speaker (usually exercises option not to vote)

I Not a House member at the time of the vote

1. Chemical Abortion
2. Military Abortion
3-4 Child Custody Protection Act
5. Employee Abortion
6. UNFPA
7. Foreign Aid Abortion
8. Prison Abortion
9. Free Speech
Relief Promotion
10.-11. Unborn Victims of Violence Act
12.-13. Assisted Suicide/Pain
1999 Score

Alabama
1 Callahan (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Everett (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
3 Riley (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
4 Aderholt (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Cramer (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 X X 0 X 46%
6 Bachus, S. (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
7 Hilliard (D) 0 0 0 X ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8%

Alaska
Young, D. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%

Arizona
1 Salmon (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Pastor (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
3 Stump (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X 0 92%
4 Shadegg (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Kolbe (R) 0 0 X X X 0 0 X X 0 0 0 0 38%
6 Hayworth (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%

Arkansas
1 Berry (D) X X X X X 0 X X 0 X X X X 84%
2 Snyder (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 23%
3 Hutchinson, A. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
4 Dickey (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%

California
1 Thompson, M. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
2 Herger (R) X X X X X X X X X ? X X X 100%
3 Ose (R) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 X X 38%
4 Doolittle (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Matsui (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
6 Woolsey(D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
7 Miller, George (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
8 Pelosi (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
9 Lee (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
10 Tauscher (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
11 Pombo (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
12 Lantos (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0%
13 Stark (D) 0 ? 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
14 Eshoo (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
15 Campbell, T. (R) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
16 Lofgren (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
17 Farr (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
18 Condit (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15%
19 Radanovich (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
20 Dooley (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
21 Thomas, B. (R) 0 0 X X X 0 X X X 0 X 0 X 61%
22 Capps (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
23 Gallegly (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
24 Sherman (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
25 McKeon (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
26 Berman (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
27 Rogan (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
28 Dreier (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
29 Waxman (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
30 Becerra (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
31 Martinez (D) 0 0 ? ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X X 18%
32 Dixon (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
33 Roybal-Allard (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
34 Napolitano (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
35 Waters (D) ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
36 Kuykendall (R) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 23%
37 M.-McDonald (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
38 Horn (R) 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7%
39 Royce (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
40 Lewis, Jerry (R) X X X ? X 0 0 X X X X X X 83%
41 Miller, Gary (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
42 Baca (D) I I I I I I I I I I I I I new
43 Calvert (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
44 Bono (R) X 0 X X X X X X X 0 0 X X 76%
45 Rohrabacher (R) X X X X X X X X X X X 0 0 84%
46 Sanchez (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
47 Cox (R) X X X X ? X X X X X X X X 100%
48 Packard (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
49 Bilbray (R) 0 X X X X 0 0 ? 0 0 X X X 58%
50 Filner (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
51 Cunningham (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
52 Hunter (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%

Colorado
1 DeGette (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
2 Udall, M. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
3 McInnis (R) X X X X X X X X X 0 X X X 92%
4 Schaffer (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Hefley (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
6 Tancredo (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%

Connecticut
1 Larson (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
2 Gejdenson (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
3 DeLauro (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
4 Shays (R) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
5 Maloney, J. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7%
6 Johnson, N. (R) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%

Delaware
Castle (R) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 X 0 0 15%

Florida
1 Scarborough (R) X X X X X X X X X ? ? ? ? 100%
2 Boyd (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 23%
3 Brown, C. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
4 Fowler (R) 0 0 X X X 0 X X X X X X X 76%
5 Thurman, K. (D) 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 8%
6 Stearns (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
7 Mica (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
8 McCollum (R) ? X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
9 Bilirakis (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
10 Young, C.W. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
11 Davis, J. (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X X 30%
12 Canady (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
13 Miller, D. (R) 0 0 X X 0 0 X X X X X X X 69%
14 Goss (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
15 Weldon, D. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
16 Foley (R) 0 0 X X 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X X 46%
17 Meek, C. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
18 Ros-Lehtinen (R) X X X X X X X X ? X X X X 100%
19 Wexler (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
20 Deutsch (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
21 Diaz-Balart (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
22 Shaw (R) X 0 X X X 0 X X ? X X 0 X 75%
23 Hastings, A. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0%

Georgia
1 Kingston (R) X X X X X X X X ? X X X X 100%
2 Bishop (D) 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 X 23%
3 Collins, M. (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
4 McKinney (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
5 Lewis, John (D) 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
6 Isakson (R) 0 0 X X X 0 0 X X X X X X 69%
7 Barr (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
8 Chambliss (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
9 Deal (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
10 Norwood (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
11 Linder (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%

Hawaii
1 Abercrombie (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
2 Mink (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 7%

Idaho
1 Chenoweth-Hage (R) ? X X X ? X ? X X ? ? X X 100%
2 Simpson (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%

Illinois
1 Rush (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? ? 0%
2 Jackson, J. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
3 Lipinski (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
4 Gutierrez (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
5 Blagojevich (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
6 Hyde (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
7 Davis, D. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
8 Crane (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
9 Schakowsky (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X X 15%
10 Porter (R) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
11 Weller (R) X X X X X X X X X ? X X X 100%
12 Costello (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
13 Biggert (R) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 7%
14 Hastert (R) X S S S S S X S X S S S S 100%
15 Ewing (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
16 Manzullo (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
17 Evans (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
18 LaHood (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
19 Phelps (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
20 Shimkus (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%

Indiana
1 Visclosky (D) 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 X 0 0 X 25%
2 McIntosh (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
3 Roemer (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
4 Souder (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Buyer (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
6 Burton (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
7 Pease (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
8 Hostettler (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
9 Hill, B. (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 0 X X X 46%
10 Carson (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%

Iowa
1 Leach (R) 0 0 X X X 0 0 X 0 0 X X X 53%
2 Nussle (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
3 Boswell (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X X 30%
4 Ganske (R) 0 X X X X 0 X X 0 X X X X 76%
5 Latham (R) X X X X ? X X X X X X X X 100%

Kansas
1 Moran, Jerry (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Ryun, J. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
3 Moore (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 X 15%
4 Tiahrt (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%

Kentucky
1 Whitfield (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Lewis, R. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
3 Northup (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
4 Lucas, K. (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
5 Rogers (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
6 Fletcher (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%

Louisiana
1 Vitter (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Jefferson (D) 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 X 0 ? ? 0 X 20%
3 Tauzin (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
4 McCrery (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Cooksey (R) X X X X ? 0 X X X X X 0 0 75%
6 Baker (R) X X X X X ? X X X X X X X 100%
7 John (D) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%

Maine
1 Allen (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
2 Baldacci (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7%

Maryland
1 Gilchrest (R) 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 8%
2 Ehrlich (R) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X X X X 0 0 46%
3 Cardin (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
4 Wynn (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7%
5 Hoyer (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7%
6 Bartlett (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
7 Cummings (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
8 Morella (R) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%

Massachusetts
1 Olver (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
2 Neal (D) 0 0 X X X 0 0 X 0 X X 0 X 53%
3 McGovern (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
4 Frank, Barney (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
5 Meehan (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
6 Tierney (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
7 Markey (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
8 Capuano (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
9 Moakley (D) 0 X X X X 0 X X 0 X X 0 X 69%
10 Delahunt (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? ? 0%

Michigan
1 Stupak (D) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Hoekstra (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
3 Ehlers (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
4 Camp (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Barcia (D) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
6 Upton (R) 0 X X X X 0 X X 0 0 X X X 69%
7 Smith, Nick (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
8 Stabenow (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
9 Kildee (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
10 Bonior (D) 0 0 X X X 0 X X 0 0 X 0 0 46%
11 Knollenberg (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
12 Levin, S. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
13 Rivers (D) 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7%
14 Conyers (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
15 Kilpatrick (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
16 Dingell (D) 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 X 0 0 X X 0 30%

Minnesota
1 Gutknecht (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Minge (D) 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 15%
3 Ramstad (R) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 0 X X X 46%
4 Vento (D) 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7%
5 Sabo (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
6 Luther (D) 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 8%
7 Peterson, C. (D) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
8 Oberstar (D) X X X X X 0 X X 0 X X X X 84%

Mississippi
1 Wicker (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Thompson, B. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
3 Pickering (R) X X X X X X X X X X X ? X 100%
4 Shows (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
5 Taylor, G. (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%

Missouri
1 Clay (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
2 Talent (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
3 Gephardt (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
4 Skelton (D) X X X X X X ? X 0 X X X X 91%
5 McCarthy, K. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
6 Danner (D) 0 X X X X X X X 0 0 X X X 76%
7 Blunt (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
8 Emerson (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
9 Hulshof (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%

Montana
Hill, R. (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%

Nebraska
1 Bereuter (R) X X X X X 0 X X 0 X X X X 84%
2 Terry (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
3 Barrett, B. (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%

Nevada
1 Berkley (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
2 Gibbons (R) 0 X X X X 0 X X X 0 X X X 76%

New Hampshire
1 Sununu (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Bass (R) 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 15%
New Jersey
1 Andrews (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7%
2 LoBiondo (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
3 Saxton (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
4 Smith, C. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Roukema (R) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 X X 38%
6 Pallone (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
7 Franks, Bob (R) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 X X X X 53%
8 Pascrell (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 X 30%
9 Rothman (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
10 Payne (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
11 Frelinghuysen (R) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 23%
12 Holt (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
13 Menendez (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%

New Mexico
1 Wilson (R) 0 X X X X 0 X X X X X X X 84%
2 Skeen (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
3 Udall, T. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 7%

New York
1 Forbes (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
2 Lazio (R) 0 X X X 0 0 0 X 0 0 X X X 53%
3 King, P. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
4 McCarthy, C. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7%
5 Ackerman (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
6 Meeks, G. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? ? 0 0 0%
7 Crowley (D) X X 0 0 X 0 X X 0 0 X 0 X 53%
8 Nadler (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
9 Weiner (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
10 Towns (D) 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
11 Owens (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
12 Velazquez (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
13 Fossella (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
14 Maloney, C. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
15 Rangel (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
16 Serrano (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
17 Engel (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
18 Lowey (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
19 Kelly (R) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X X 30%
20 Gilman (R) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7%
21 McNulty (D) X X X X ? 0 0 X 0 0 X X X 66%
22 Sweeney (R) 0 X X X 0 0 X X X 0 X X X 69%
23 Boehlert (R) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7%
24 McHugh (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
25 Walsh (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
26 Hinchey (D) 0 ? 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
27 Reynolds (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
28 Slaughter (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
29 LaFalce (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
30 Quinn (R) X X X X ? X X X 0 X X X X 91%
31 Houghton (R) 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 15%

North Carolina
1 Clayton (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
2 Etheridge (D) 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 X 23%
3 Jones, W. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
4 Price, D. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
5 Burr (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
6 Coble (R) X X X X ? ? X X X X X X X 100%
7 McIntyre (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
8 Hayes (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
9 Myrick (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
10 Ballenger (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
11 Taylor, C. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
12 Watt, M. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 7%

North Dakota
Pomeroy (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 0 X X X 46%

Ohio
1 Chabot (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Portman (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
3 Hall, T. (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
4 Oxley (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Gillmor (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
6 Strickland (D) 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 15%
7 Hobson (R) X X X X X 0 0 X X 0 X X X 76%
8 Boehner (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
9 Kaptur (D) 0 X X 0 X 0 X X 0 0 X 0 0 46%
10 Kucinich (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
11 Jones, S. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
12 Kasich (R) X ? X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
13 Brown, S. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
14 Sawyer (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
15 Pryce, D. (R) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X ? 0 X X X 50%
16 Regula (R) X X X X X 0 X X 0 X X X X 84%
17 Traficant (D) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
18 Ney (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
19 LaTourette (R) X X X X X 0 X X 0 X X X X 84%

Oklahoma
1 Largent (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Coburn (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
3 Watkins (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
4 Watts, J.C. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Istook (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
6 Lucas, F. (R) X X X ? X X X X X X X X X 100%

Oregon
1 Wu (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? ? 0 0 0%
2 Walden (R) X 0 X X X X X X X X X 0 0 76%
3 Blumenauer (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
4 DeFazio (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
5 Hooley (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? ? 0 0 0%

Pennsylvania
1 Brady, R. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7%
2 Fattah (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
3 Borski (D) X X X X X 0 X X 0 X X X X 84%
4 Klink (D) X X X X X 0 X X 0 X X X X 84%
5 Peterson, J. (R) X X X X X ? ? ? X X X X X 100%
6 Holden (D) X X X X X ? X X 0 X X X X 91%
7 Weldon, C. (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
8 Greenwood (R) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7%
9 Shuster (R) X X X X X X X X X X X 0 0 84%
10 Sherwood (R) X ? X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
11 Kanjorski (D) X X X X X 0 X X 0 X X X X 84%
12 Murtha (D) X X X X X 0 X X X X X X X 92%
13 Hoeffel (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X X 15%
14 Coyne (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
15 Toomey (R) 0 X X X X X X X X X X X X 92%
16 Pitts (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
17 Gekas (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
18 Doyle (D) X X X X X 0 X X 0 X X X X 84%
19 Goodling (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
20 Mascara (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X ? ? 90%
21 English (R) X X X X X ? X X X X X X X 100%

Rhode Island
1 Kennedy, P. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0%
2 Weygand (D) X X X X X X X X 0 0 X X X 84%

South Carolina
1 Sanford (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X 0 0 76%
2 Spence (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
3 Graham, L. (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
4 DeMint (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Spratt (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 X 30%
6 Clyburn (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%

South Dakota
Thune (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%

Tennessee
1 Jenkins (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Duncan (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
3 Wamp (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
4 Hilleary (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Clement (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 X X X X 53%
6 Gordon, B. (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 0 X 0 X 38%
7 Bryant (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
8 Tanner (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 0 X 0 0 30%
9 Ford (D) 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0%

Texas
1 Sandlin (D) 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7%
2 Turner (D) 0 0 X X X 0 0 X 0 0 X X X 53%
3 Johnson, Sam (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
4 Hall, R. (D) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Sessions, P. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
6 Barton (R) X X X X ? X X X X X X X X 100%
7 Archer (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
8 Brady, K. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
9 Lampson (D) 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 X 23%
10 Doggett (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
11 Edwards, C. (D) 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 15%
12 Granger (R) 0 X X X X 0 X X X 0 X X X 76%
13 Thornberry (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
14 Paul (R) X X X 0 X X X X X X 0 0 0 69%
15 Hinojosa (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? ? 0%
16 Reyes (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 X 25%
17 Stenholm (D) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
18 Jackson-Lee, S. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
19 Combest (R) X X X X X ? X X X X X X X 100%
20 Gonzalez (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
21 Smith, Lamar (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
22 DeLay (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
23 Bonilla (R) X X X X 0 X X X X X X X X 92%
24 Frost (D) 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 8%
25 Bentsen (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
26 Armey (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
27 Ortiz (D) X X X X X ? X X 0 X X X X 91%
28 Rodriguez (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
29 Green, G. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7%
30 Johnson, E.B. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 7%

Utah
1 Hansen (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Cook (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
3 Cannon (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%

Vermont
Sanders (I) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%

Virginia
1 Bateman (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Pickett (D) 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 X 0 X 0 23%
3 Scott (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X X 0 0 0 15%
4 Sisisky (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7%
5 Goode (D) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
6 Goodlatte (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
7 Bliley (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
8 Moran, James (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
9 Boucher (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
10 Wolf (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
11 Davis, T. (R) 0 X X X 0 0 0 X X 0 X 0 X 53%

Washington
1 Inslee (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
2 Metcalf (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X 0 0 76%
3 Baird (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
4 Hastings, D. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
5 Nethercutt (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
6 Dicks (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
7 McDermott (D) 0 0 0 0 ? ? ? ? 0 X 0 0 0 11%
8 Dunn (R) X 0 X X X X X X X 0 X X X 84%
9 Smith, Adam (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%

West Virginia
1 Mollohan (D) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Wise (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7%
3 Rahall (D) X X X X X X ? X X X X X X 100%

Wisconsin
1 Ryan, P. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
2 Baldwin (D) 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
3 Kind, R. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 7%
4 Kleczka (D) 0 0 X X X 0 0 X 0 0 X X X 53%
5 Barrett, T. (D) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
6 Petri (R) X X X X X X X X 0 X X X X 92%
7 Obey (D) 0 0 X X 0 0 0 X 0 0 X 0 0 30%
8 Green, M. (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%
9 Sensenbrenner (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%

Wyoming
Cubin (R) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100%