Search for...
OnTheIssuesLogo

Chris Dodd on Foreign Policy

Democratic Sr Senator (CT)


FactCheck: No, Chinese government prosecutes slavery

Dodd unfairly accused the “Chinese government” of using slave labor, saying “When you have the Chinese government, as they just did, even make it more difficult for us to access even entertainment; here you’re still using slave labor; that’s no longer just a competitor.”

Dodd is right that slave labor exists in China. In June 2007, a group of parents in Shanxi Province discovered that owners of many of the region’s brick kilns were kidnapping and enslaving children, forcing them to work up to 18 hours per day. But Dodd is wrong to suggest that the Chinese government is sanctioning slavery. Nearly 35,000 police officers descended on Shanxi province, raiding more than 7,500 work places. And less than a month after the story garnered international headlines, Chinese courts had sentenced 28 overseers at the kiln to prison and ordered another executed.

We agree that enslaving children is reprehensible, but Dodd was wrong to suggest that the Chinese government condones the practice.

Source: FactCheck.org on 2007 Des Moines Register Democratic debate Dec 13, 2007

Stay engaged; US has been AWOL on Israel for 6 years

Q: How would you, as president, answer the complaint that the U.S., in its support of Israel, is so pro-Israeli, it can’t be an evenhanded, honest broker of matters and is anti-Muslim?

A: We’ve been basically AWOL on dealing with these nations here, and that has bred a lack of understanding and appreciation. Over these last six years, despite this effort over the last few days in Annapolis, where has this administration been on the Middle East issues here? It appears definitely here that we’re not engaged at all. Over the past years, both Republican and Democratic administrations have made it a part of their agenda to stay engaged, to make it clear that we’re an honest broker trying to resolve the issue of Israel’s security as well as the legitimate issue of Palestinians seeking an independent state. We’ve walked away from that.

Source: 2007 Des Moines Register Democratic debate Dec 13, 2007

Human rights and security are not opposing interests

Too often people think that human rights and security are opposing interests. Our job, of course, is to advance the security of you are country. We do it in no stronger fashion than talking about the rights we embrace. Not some ad hoc basis where we apply it one place and not another. It needs to be understood from the very beginning that if you’re going to do business with the US, human rights is fundamentally important. One way to enhance our reputation, restore our footing on the moral authority.
Source: 2007 Des Moines Register Democratic Debate Dec 13, 2007

Gold medal to Tibetan Dalai Lama sends strong message

Q: Many talk tough about China and its human rights record in the past but, in the end, favor securing our economic interest rather than risk upsetting China. How would you balance human rights and trade with China?

A: Well, I think there’s an ongoing situation. I want to commend the people in Congress who just recently, when the Dalai Lama was here, presented him with a gold medal. We’ve raised the issue--not often enough--on Tibet and what’s happened with the almost genocidal behavior, when dealing with this remarkable culture that’s been under assault. And the idea that we’d recognize him and welcome him here as a religious leader in the world is exactly the kind of symbols we need to send--to make them recognize that the Dalai Lama is an international religious leader who’s worthy of recognition. And if they, as they apparently did, threaten to deny some ships to able to move in waters off China over that, they need to understand this isn’t going to change in a Democratic administration.

Source: 2007 Democratic radio debate on NPR Dec 4, 2007

Ideal goal is Israeli security plus a Palestinian state

Q: Pres. Bush says, “Absolutely, we will support our ally Israel if attacked by Iran.” Do you agree?

A: We’re jumping ahead of ourselves here. I hope this Annapolis meeting works. Nothing would please me more than to have a two-state solution here. Israel would get the security it deserves and needs, and the Palestinians get a state, an independent state. That’s the ideal goal here. Why did it take this long, six or seven years? Walking away from the Middle East over the last 6 or 7 years has exactly contributed to the kind of problems we’re seeing today, in my view, with Iran. Had we been engaged more consistently over the years, I think we would have had a lot more success. They’ll re-engage now, utilizing the Annapolis meeting, which brought together Syria, the Arab League, all the other major parties in the region were there, except the Iranians and Hamas, which should have been excluded. So, talking about military action in Iran I think is premature.

Source: CNN Late Edition: 2007 presidential series with Wolf Blitzer Dec 2, 2007

Accommodating with Cuba, Sandanistas, & Hugo Chavez

On foreign policy, Dodd has been known for his keen interest in Latin America, first developed during his Peace Corps tears in the Dominican Republic. He has advocated a path of more accommodation with Cuba, opposed support for the military junta in El Salvador and the Contras in Nicaragua, and argued that Sandanistas were a legitimate democratic government. He met with Hugo Chavez in 2005 and called for an easing of tensions between the US and Venezuela.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.172 Nov 11, 2007

Condemned Musharraf declaring state of emergency in Pakistan

Q: If you were president right now, what would you do about the crisis involving Pakistan?

A: Obviously, we’ve got to keep working with Musharraf. I joined others who are condemning his declaring a state of emergency and suspending the constitution. But this is a problem that was created by this administration. This was loading up Musharraf with too much for him to probably carry as a result of our not putting the kind of emphasis on Afghanistan after 9/11 that we should have.

Q: Would you start putting some pressure on President Musharraf, for example, by reducing US military and/or economic assistance?

A: That is something you should consider. Obviously, at this point, you need to make sure that the country is not going to fall apart. And so, working with him to find out how we can move from the position he has put himself in today to a more open process here that allows for possibly a coalition government to emerge here. But we need a stable and strong Pakistan here.

Source: CNN Late Edition: 2007 presidential series with Wolf Blitzer Nov 4, 2007

Pakistan is a more immediate problem than Iran

Q: Would you pledge that Iran will not develop a nuclear bomb while you are president?

A: Here’s a deeper question here, because not only the pledge you make, but this audience and others here make a determination which of us here have the experience, the background here to manage the situation. It’s a critical question. The problem’s not only the Middle East. What’s going on in the Far East, and in Latin America and elsewhere. The more immediate problem is Pakistan, the one that needs to be addressed

Source: 2007 Democratic debate at Drexel University Oct 30, 2007

Iran: focus on sanctions & diplomacy, not military

Q: The president just announced that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is a foreign terrorist organization and imposed sanctions on Iran. Do you support the sanctions?

A: Absolutely. I think it’s the right way to go. The best way to approach that is through the sanctions, the diplomatic approach. What is not the right way to go, in my view, is the resolution adopted several weeks ago in the Senate, which almost exclusively focused on the military option in Iran.

Q: But back in March, you co-sponsored a resolution that said this: “The [US} should designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a foreign terrorist organization.” What’s the difference?

A: Well, a huge difference. [The March resolution] was exclusively focused on diplomacy and sanctions and specifically said no military action should be taken in Iran without the prior approval of the Congress. Very, very different approaches than the recent resolution, in which the language on diplomacy and sanctions was removed.

Source: Meet the Press: 2007 “Meet the Candidates” series Oct 28, 2007

We spend $500B in Iraq; add some to $1.6B in Latin America

I’ve chaired the Senate committee dealing with Latin America. I understand the issues. We’re allowing Hugo Chavez to win a public relations battle in Latin America, because we don’t invest enough and care enough about people who are suffering in this part of the world. We have $1.6 billion for all of Latin America; we’ll spend $500 billion in Iraq--a fraction of that could make a difference in Latin America. That’s the underlying cost that we need to be dealing with on these issues.
Source: 2007 Democratic primary debate on Univision in Spanish Sep 9, 2007

Expand the Peace Corps

We need to engage with the hopes & aspirations of people in Latin America. The Good Neighbor Policy of FDR, the Alliance for Progress policy of JFK, reconnect again with the hopes and aspirations of people in this part of the world. Expand the Peace Corps. I was a Peace Corps volunteer in the Dominican Republic back in the 1960s. What a difference it makes. It’s a fraction of itself today. Sending young people, senior volunteers to once again reconnect with the people of this part of the world.
Source: 2007 Democratic primary debate on Univision in Spanish Sep 9, 2007

We’ve neglected Latin America; need to re-engage

Q: What would you do about the increasing anti-American sentiment in Latin America?

A: We have neglected Latin America for these last six years here. I’m old enough to remember when Richard Nixon’s car was stoned in Caracas, Venezuela, in the late 1950s. And then, two years later, we elected an American president whose photograph still hangs in many huts and hovels from the Rio Grande to Tierra del Fuego. We need to re-engage once again here. We’re spending $1.6 billion for all of Latin America in terms of aid and assistance, a fraction of what we’re spending in Iraq, the $500 billion we’ve spent there. We need to engage with the hopes and aspirations of people in this part of the world.

Source: 2007 Democratic primary debate on Univision in Spanish Sep 9, 2007

Cuba embargo hasn’t worked for 50 years; unravel the embargo

Q: What do you think would happen in Cuba without Fidel Castro? And what role would the US play in that transition?

A: Well, a very important one, and the transition is already occurring. You don’t have to wait for it to happen. The question is whether or not we’re going to sit on the sidelines or be a part of this transition here. Certainly what we’ve done over the last 50 years I don’t think has worked. Fifty years of this policy, of the embargo has basically left the same man in power, the same repressive politics, an economy that’s been failing in the country. He has been using that as an excuse for his own failures. As president, I would begin to unravel that embargo. I would lift travel restrictions, so Cuban Americans can go visit their families. I would be lifting the restrictions on remissions. We need to understand that the hopes and aspirations of the Cuban people are as important as anything to us. We need safety and security; we need not fear Fidel Castro.

Source: 2007 Democratic primary debate on Univision in Spanish Sep 9, 2007

No time to get new Pres. ready; need experience in advance

Q: [to Dodd]: You’ve called Sen. Obama’s views “confusing and confused, dangerous and irresponsible.” Do you think he’s ready to be president?

DODD: When I disagreed with my colleague from Illinois, was about the issue of whether or not a prepared speech should suggest a hypothetical situation and a hypothetical solution, that raised serious issues within Pakistan. The only person that separates us from a jihadist government in Pakistan with nuclear weapons is President Musharraf. And, therefore, I thought it was irresponsible to engage in that kind of a suggestion. That’s dangerous. Words mean something in campaigns. You’re not going to have time in Jan. 2009 to get ready for this job. You’ve got to be ready immediately for it and bringing back the experience over the years to deal with these issues, as I have.

OBAMA: We shouldn’t have strategic ambiguity with the American people when it comes to describing how we’re going to deal with the most serious national security issues that we face.

Source: 2007 Democratic primary debate on “This Week” Aug 19, 2007

Pakistan’s dictator is only thing preventing fundamentalism

Q: [to Dodd]: You said that Sen. Obama’s “assertions about military affairs have been confused.” You added, “He should not be making unwise categorical statements about military options.” What in your opinion has been confused?

DODD: Words mean things. We’ve got to be very careful about language that’s used in terms of the harm it can do to our nation. When you raise issues about Pakistan, while General Musharraf is no Thomas Jefferson, he may be the only thing that stands between us and having an Islamic fundamentalist state in that country. The alternative could be a lot worse for our country. I think it’s highly irresponsible to suggest we may be willing unilaterally to invade a nation who we’re trying to get to be more cooperative with us in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

OBAMA: Sen. Dodd obviously didn’t read my speech. Because I said we have to refocus, get out of Iraq, make certain that we are helping Pakistan deal with the problem of al Qaeda in the hills between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Source: 2007 AFL-CIO Democratic primary forum Aug 8, 2007

China is a competitor, but getting close to adversary

Q: Is China an ally or an adversary?

A: Last week, I passed legislation out of the committee to deal with the Chinese currency situation. It’s a massive subsidy for them in terms of disadvantaging our manufacturers here. And I would say they’re a competitor, but be careful. It’s getting close to adversary. Let’s not have any illusions here. China’s investing a great deal of its resources in building up a military capacity. And in the 21st century, we’d better recognize here, while they’re competitors today, if we’re not careful here, then we could face some serious problems with China in the latter part of this century. We need to be insisting that for every product in our shelves here, we need to be insisting that we have access to their shelves, to their marketplaces. That’s not happening, and it needs to stop.

Source: 2007 AFL-CIO Democratic primary forum Aug 8, 2007

Iraq lost US moral leadership to deal with Darfur

Iraq is related to Darfur. It’s because we’re bogged down in Iraq at $10 billion a month, we’ve lost our moral leadership in the world. No one listens to us when it comes to foreign policy. That has to change in this country.
Source: 2007 YouTube Democratic Primary debate, Charleston SC Jul 23, 2007

We neglect the Caribbean; I will pay attention

Q: What would you do to address the need for more aid and health care to go out to Africa and the Caribbean?

A: I was a Peace Corps volunteer in the Caribbean back some 40 years ago and care deeply about what happens because too often we neglect what happens in these small island countries that are so close to our own nation. And so I will pay particular attention, where the incidence of HIV/AIDS can be higher as a percentage of the population in some of these small countries that exist elsewhere.

Source: 2007 NAACP Presidential Primary Forum Jul 12, 2007

US unilateral action to end Darfur genocide

Q: Darfur is the second time that our nation has had a chance to do something about genocide in Africa. The first came in Rwanda in 1994, when we did nothing.

A: We’ve unfortunately, as a result of our conflict in Iraq, have lost our moral authority. And as a result of that, our ability to mobilize the world on issues like Darfur has been severely damaged. But the United States should be able to take some unilateral action here in providing the kind of protection where people are being slaughtered in that country; and in the meantime, get our military out of Iraq, as I’ve planned and offered to do, and thus regain that stature, which we need to be doing as a nation in this world and be able to build those coalitions that will respond to an issue like Darfur. But in the meantime, the United States ought to act.

Source: 2007 Democratic Primary Debate at Howard University Jun 28, 2007

Constructive engagement to rebuild international relations

I believe we need new structures and new architectures. It’s not only important that we talk about what needs to be done to get out of Iraq, but what do we do in the post-Iraq period. That’s one of the reasons that I’m emphasizing the surge in diplomacy. I want to see an era of constructive bold engagement by the US, where we rebuild the relationships with the US seen once again as a source of good: where we condemn torture, not condone it; where we end wars, not start them; where we engage the world to be part of smart decisions to allow all of us to live in better opportunity, better hope and prosperity for all people. So, one of the reasons why I’m so strongly opposed to the military commissions act, why I’ve introduced legislation to overturn that decision which gets rid of habeas corpus, condones torture, and moves us away from the Geneva Conventions. Those are very dangerous moves, and we ought to be doing everything we can to reassert the role of the United States in a very positive way.
Source: Virtual Town Hall on Iraq, sponsored by MoveOn.org Apr 10, 2007

1994: Supported $25B Mexico bailout

We asked the Congress to approve $25 billion in loans to allow Mexico to pay its debt on schedule and retain the confidence of creditors & investors, in return for Mexico's commitment to financial reforms & more timely reporting on its financial condition, in order to prevent this from happening again.

The risks were considerable, but I had confidence in Mexico's new president, Ernesto Zedillo. Besides, we simply couldn't let Mexico fall without trying to help. In addition to the economic problems it would cause both for us and for the Mexicans, we would be sending a terrible signal of selfishness and shortsightedness throughout Latin America.

I called the congressional leaders to the White House, explained the situation, and asked for their support. All of them pledged it, including Senator Chris Dodd.

Congress would not pass the bill so we ended up providing the money to Mexico out of the Exchange Stabilization Fund.

Source: My Life, by Bill Clinton, p.642-643 Jun 21, 2004

Voted YES on cooperating with India as a nuclear power.

Congressional Summary:US-India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Nonproliferation Enhancement Act:

Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. HOWARD BERMAN (D, CA-28): Integrating India into a global nonproliferation regime is a positive step. Before anyone gets too sanctimonious about India's nuclear weapons program, we should acknowledge that the five recognized nuclear weapons states have not done nearly enough to fulfill their commitments under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, including making serious reductions in their own arsenals, nor in the case of the US in ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. BARBARA LEE (D, CA-9): In withholding my approval, I seek not to penalize the people of India but, rather, to affirm the principle of nuclear nonproliferation. Jettisoning adherence to the international nuclear nonproliferation framework that has served the world so well for more than 30 years, as approval of the agreement before us would do, is just simply unwise. It is also reckless.

Approval of this agreement undermines our efforts to dissuade countries like Iran and North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. By approving this agreement, all we are doing is creating incentives for other countries to withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Reference: US-India Nuclear Agreement; Bill HR.7081 ; vote number 2008-S211 on Oct 1, 2008

Voted YES on enlarging NATO to include Eastern Europe.

H.R. 3167; Gerald B. H. Solomon Freedom Consolidation Act of 2001, To endorse the vision of further enlargement of the NATO Alliance. Vote to pass a bill that would support further expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, authorize military assistance to several eastern European countries and lift assistance restrictions on Slovakia.
Reference: Bill HR.3167 ; vote number 2002-116 on May 17, 2002

Voted YES on killing a bill for trade sanctions if China sells weapons.

Vote to table [kill] an amendment that would require sanctions against China or other countries if they were found to be selling illicit weapons of mass destruction.
Reference: Bill HR.4444 ; vote number 2000-242 on Sep 13, 2000

Voted NO on cap foreign aid at only $12.7 billion.

Adoption of the conference report on the 2000 Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill provided $12.7 billion for foreign aid programs in 2000.
Status: Conf Rpt Agreed to Y)51; N)49
Reference: H.R. 2606 Conference Report; Bill H.R. 2606 ; vote number 1999-312 on Oct 6, 1999

Voted NO on limiting the President's power to impose economic sanctions.

To kill a proposal limiting President Clinton's ability to impose economic sanctions on foreign nations.
Status: Motion to Table Agreed to Y)53; N)46; NV)1
Reference: Motion to table the Lugar Amdt #3156.; Bill S. 2159 ; vote number 1998-201 on Jul 15, 1998

Voted NO on limiting NATO expansion to only Poland, Hungary & Czech.

This amendment would have limited NATO Expansion to only include Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic.
Status: Amdt Rejected Y)41; N)59
Reference: NATO Expansion limit-Warner Amdt. #2322; Bill NATO Expansion Treaty #105-36 ; vote number 1998-112 on Apr 30, 1998

Voted YES on $17.9 billion to IMF.

Would provide $17.9 billion for the International Monetary Fund.
Status: Amdt Agreed to Y)84; N)16
Reference: McConnell Amdt #2100; Bill S. 1768 ; vote number 1998-44 on Mar 26, 1998

Voted NO on Strengthening of the trade embargo against Cuba.

Strengthening of the trade embargo against Cuba.
Status: Conf Rpt Agreed to Y)74; N)22; NV)4
Reference: Conference Report on H.R. 927; Bill H.R. 927 ; vote number 1996-22 on Mar 5, 1996

Voted YES on ending Vietnam embargo.

Ending U.S. trade embargos on the country of Vietnam.
Status: Amdt Agreed to Y)62; N)38
Reference: For. Reltns. Auth. Act FY 94 & 95; Bill S. 1281 ; vote number 1994-5 on Jan 27, 1994

Impose sanctions and an import ban on Burma.

Dodd co-sponsored imposing sanctions and an import ban on Burma

A bill to impose sanctions on officials of the State Peace and Development Council in Burma, to prohibit the importation of gemstones and hardwoods from Burma, & to promote a coordinated international effort to restore civilian democratic rule to Burma.

(The two Senate versions currently differ in wording). The Saffron Revolution Support Act states that it is U.S. policy to:

  1. support the democratic aspirations of Burma's people;
  2. condemn the repression carried out by the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC); and
  3. hold accountable individuals responsible for the repression of peaceful political activity in Burma.
Directs the President to submit to the appropriate congressional committees a list of:
  1. SPDC officials who play or have played a substantial role in political repression in Burma or in the commission of human rights abuses;
  2. Subjects persons so identified to U.S. entry prohibition and financial sanctions.
  3. Amends the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003 to prohibit the importation into the US of Burmese gems, teak, or other hardwood timber.
  4. Prohibits any U.S. person or corporation from investing in Burma.

Introductory statement by Sponsor:

Sen. McCAIN. The world has reacted with horror and revulsion at the Burmese junta's recent brutal crackdown against peaceful demonstrators. In crushing the Saffron Revolution, killing hundreds and jailing thousands, including countless Buddhist monks, the junta has left no doubt about its blatant disregard for basic human decency. We, as Americans, stand on the side of freedom, not fear; of peace, not violence; and of the millions in Burma who aspire to a better life, not those who would keep them isolated and oppressed. Our response must go beyond statements of condemnation, and the time to act is now. This legislation imposes meaningful and effective punitive action against the cruel, thuggish, and illegitimate Burmese government.

Source: Burma Democracy Promotion Act (S.2257 & S.2172) 07-S2257 on Oct 29, 2007

Acknowledge the Armenian Genocide of the early 1900s.

Dodd co-sponsored acknowledging the Armenian Genocide of the early 1900s

Sen. DURBIN: The definition of "genocide" is "the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group." Scholars agree that what the Armenian people suffered in 1915 to 1917 fits the definition of genocide. To date, 19 countries and 37 US states recognize the Armenian Genocide. Genocide is wrong. It is evil. It is evil whether its victims are Armenians, Sudanese, Rwandan Tutsis, Cambodians or European Jews. Not to acknowledge genocide for what it is denigrates the memory of its victims. Recognition of genocide is part of the healing process. Official recognition will reaffirm our tradition of protecting the vulnerable and inspire us to not stand by and watch as genocide occurs in our time.
Source: Armenian Genocide Resolution (S.RES.106/H.RES.106) 2007-SR106 on Mar 14, 2007

Urge Venezuela to re-open dissident radio & TV stations.

Dodd co-sponsored urging Venezuela to re-open dissident radio & TV stations

Source: Radio Caracas Resolution (S.RES.211) 2007-SR211 on May 21, 2007

Develop a strategy to protect civilians in Darfur.

Dodd co-sponsored developing a strategy to protect civilians in Darfur

A resolution calling on the United States Government and the international community to promptly develop, fund, and implement a comprehensive regional strategy in Africa to protect civilians, facilitate humanitarian operations, contain and reduce violence, and contribute to conditions for sustainable peace in eastern Chad, northern Central African Republic, and Darfur, Sudan.

Source: Darfur Resolution (S.RES.76) 2007-SR76 on Feb 8, 2007

Allow travel between the United States and Cuba.

Dodd signed Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act

Prohibits the President from regulating or prohibiting travel to or from Cuba by U.S. citizens or legal residents or any of the transactions ordinarily incident to such travel, except in time of war or armed hostilities between the United States and Cuba, or of imminent danger to the public health or the physical safety of U.S. travelers.

Source: S.428&HR.874 2009-S428 on Feb 12, 2009

Other candidates on Foreign Policy: Chris Dodd on other issues:
CT Gubernatorial:
Jodi Rell
CT Senatorial:
Linda McMahon
Richard Blumenthal
Rob Simmons

Newly appointed in 2009;
special election in 2010:

DE:Kaufman (D)
CO:Bennet (D)
IL:Burris (D)
MA:Brown (R)
NY:Gillibrand (D)

Announced retirement as of 2010:
CT:Dodd(D)
DE:Kaufman(D)
FL:Martinez (R)
FL:LeMieux(R)
IL:Burris(D)
IN:Bayh(D)
KS:Brownback(R)
KY:Bunning(R)
MO:Bond(R)
ND:Dorgan(D)
NH:Gregg(R)
OH:Voinovich(R)
PA:Specter(R)
UT:Bennett(R)
WV:Byrd(D)
WV:Goodwin(D)


Senate races in 2010:
AK:Miller(R) vs.McAdams(D) vs.Murkowski(I)
AL:Shelby(R) vs.Barnes(D)
AR:Lincoln(D) vs.Boozman(R)
AZ:McCain(R) vs.Glassman(D)
CA:Boxer(D) vs.Fiorina(R) vs.Lightfoot(L)
CO:Bennet(D) vs.Buck(R)
CT:Blumenthal(D) vs.McMahon(R)
DE:Coons(D) vs.O`Donnell(R)
FL:Rubio(R) vs.Crist(I) vs.Meek(D) vs.DeCastro(C) vs.Snitker(L)
GA:Isakson(R) vs.Thurmond(D)
HI:Inouye(D) vs.Cavasso(R)
IA:Grassley(R) vs.Conlin(D)
ID:Crapo(R) vs.Sullivan(D)
IL:Giannoulias(D) vs.Kirk(R)
IN:Ellsworth(D) vs.Coats(R)
KS:Johnston(D) vs.Moran(R) vs.Bellis(Rfm)
KY:Conway(D) vs.Paul(R)
LA:Vitter(R) vs.Melancon(D)
MD:Mikulski(D) vs.Wargotz(R)
MO:Carnahan(R) vs.Blunt(D)
NC:Burr(R) vs.Marshall(D)
ND:Potter(D) vs.Hoeven(R)
NH:Ayotte(R) vs.Hodes(D)
NV:Reid(D) vs.Angle(R)
NY6:Schumer(D) vs.Townsend(R)
NY2:Gillibrand(D) vs.DioGuardi(R)
OH:Fisher(R) vs.Portman(D) vs.Deaton(C)
OK:Coburn(R) vs.Myles(D)
OR:Wyden(D) vs.Huffman(R)
PA:Toomey(R) vs.Sestak(D)
SC:DeMint(R) vs.Greene(D)
SD:Thune(R) unopposed
UT:Lee(R) vs.Granato(D)
VT:Leahy(D) vs.Britton(R) vs.Freilich(I)
WA:Murray(D) vs.Rossi(R)
WI:Feingold(D) vs.Johnson(D)
WV:Manchin(D) vs.Raese(R)
Abortion
Budget/Economy
Civil Rights
Corporations
Crime
Drugs
Education
Energy/Oil
Environment
Families
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Immigration
Jobs
Principles
Social Security
Tax Reform
Technology
War/Peace
Welfare

Other Senators
Senate Votes (analysis)
Bill Sponsorships
Affiliations
Policy Reports
Group Ratings

Page last updated: Oct 28, 2010