League of Conservation Voters

The League of Conservation Voters was founded by Marion Edey, then a young congressional staffer, who proposed a non-partisan, national pressure group for environmentalists "analogous to a political party" but endorsing Democrats and Republicans in a 1969 letter to David Brower, soon after he resigned from the Sierra Club. Brower strongly endorsed Edey's idea and came up with the name League of Conservation Voters, insisting that Edey run the new organization. The plan to form LCV as an arm of Brower's new environmental organization, Friends of the Earth, was announced in September 1969.{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1969/09/17/archives/naturalists-get-a-political-arm-exsierra-club-chief-gives-details.html|title=NATURALISTS GET A POLITICAL ARM; Ex-Sierra Club Chief Gives Details on Voters League|work=The New York Times|date=September 17, 1969|last=Davies|first=Lawrence E.}} However, as it would have violated the Federal Corrupt Practices Act for LCV to be a subsidiary of a non-profit corporation like Friends of the Earth, Edey launched the organization as an independent political committee in 1970.

That fall, she hired as her first employee Research Director James Rathlesberger to cover presidential politics beginning in 1971 while she concentrated on congressional. In 1972, they published environmental policy profiles of the leading presidential candidates and Rathlesberger edited an LCV Report, Nixon and the Environment (Village Voice Books, 1972).{{Cite book |last=Rathlesberger |first=James |title=Nixon and the Environment |date=1972 |publisher=Village Voice Books |isbn=0-394-70790 |location=New York, NY}} The profiles were widely covered in the news as was the book by reviews, raising the level of these issues in presidential politics. Not a factor given the controversies of the 1972 campaign, they were by 1976 with Jimmy Carter’s rise.

As of 2012, Green Tech Action Fund and the Advocacy Fund were among LCV's donors. In 2024, the group's top donors included former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Reuben Munger, Giovanna Randall, T. A. Barron, and Adam Lewis.

In September 2024, longtime LCV president Gene Karpinski announced that he would step down from the organization in 2025 upon the appointment of a successor.{{cite news |last1=Cama |first1=Timothy |title=Longtime LCV President Karpinski to step down |url=https://www.eenews.net/articles/longtime-lcv-president-karpinski-to-step-down/ |access-date=24 March 2025 |work=E&E News by POLITICO |date=17 September 2024}}

The LCV was the 20th largest donor in the 2024 campaign, spending $42.5 million in support of Democratic candidates.{{cite news |title=Meet the megadonors pumping over $2.5 billion into the election |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/interactive/2024/biggest-campaign-donors-election-2024/ |access-date=24 March 2025 |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=October 28, 2024}} That same year, LCV was part of a $55 million advertising campaign running climate related advertisements in six swing states on behalf of Kamala Harris.{{cite news |last1=Astor |first1=Maggie |title=Climate Groups Begin $55 Million Ad Campaign for Kamala Harris |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/19/us/politics/climate-ads-kamala-harris.html |access-date=24 March 2025 |work=The New York Times |date=19 August 2024 |language=en}}

The organization's main activities include voter education, voter mobilization, tracking voting records, endorsing or opposing candidates for political office, and financially contributing to political campaigns.{{Cite news|url=https://www.lcv.org/2018-plan-action/|title=2018 Plan of Action - League of Conservation Voters|work=League of Conservation Voters|access-date=2018-04-16|language=en-US}}

The related League of Conservation Voters Action Fund (LCVAF) financially supports political candidates, most of whom are members of the Democratic Party.{{cite news|url=http://www.publicintegrity.org/2012/10/03/11076/nonprofit-profile-league-conservation-voters-inc|title=Nonprofit profile: League of Conservation Voters Inc.|last1=O'Brien|first1=Reity|date=October 3, 2012|access-date=17 March 2015|publisher=Center for Public Integrity}} According to OpenSecrets, LCVAF was the top-spending, non-disclosing liberal group in the 2012 election cycle, investing about $11 million in political advertisements.{{cite web|url=https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00252940|title=League of Conservation Voters|website=OpenSecrets.org|publisher=OpenSecrets |access-date=17 March 2015}} LCV spent a total of $36 million in 2012.{{cite news|url=http://www.publicintegrity.org/2013/11/22/13801/league-conservation-voters-becoming-dark-money-heavyweight|title=League of Conservation Voters becoming 'dark money' heavyweight|last1=Beckel|first1=Michael|date=November 22, 2013|access-date=17 March 2015|publisher=Center for Public Integrity}}

LCV annually names a "Dirty Dozen", a list of politicians whom the group aims to defeat because of their voting records on conservation issues. The original "Dirty Dozen" list was developed in partnership with Environmental Action in 1970.{{cite news|url=https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=dvENAAAAIBAJ&pg=6164,5639596&hl=en|title=Two big political issues of Election '70|last1=Alligood|first1=Arlene|date=October 29, 1970|access-date=17 March 2015|publisher=St. Petersburg Times|agency=Congressional Quarterly}}{{deadlink|date=November 2021}}

LCV strongly opposed many of President George W. Bush's environmental policies.{{cite web|url=http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2003/2003-06-24-10.html|title=League of Conservation Voters Slams Bush Record|last=Pegg|first=J.R.|publisher=Environment News Service|access-date=14 March 2012}}

In 2014, LCV and the Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund launched LeadingGreen, a joint initiative to address climate change. In 2015, LeadingGreen was added to the Democracy Alliance's funding portfolio.{{cite news|url=http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/tom-steyer-liberal-donors-democracy-alliance-116935.html|title=Tom Steyer stars as liberal donors gather|last1=Vogel|first1=Kenneth|date=April 13, 2015|access-date=20 April 2015|publisher=Politico|last2=Restuccia|first2=Andrew}}

LCV strongly opposed the administration of President Donald J. Trump and its environmental policies.{{Cite news|url=https://www.lcv.org/plan-of-action/|title=2017 Plan of Action - League of Conservation Voters|work=League of Conservation Voters|access-date=2018-04-16|language=en-US}} In September 2018, the pac pledged $60 million to help green candidates.{{Citation | title = Environmental group pledges $60M to help green candidates | journal = The Hill | date =Sep 13, 2018 | url =https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/406526-environmental-political-group-pledges-60-million-to-help-green }} Ultimately, in the mid-term elections of 2018, the pac spent $80 million to support "green" candidates through its Victory Fund.{{Citation | title ='A Green Wave': Signs Point to Voters Demanding Action on Climate Change | journal = NECN | date = Dec 28, 2018 | url = https://www.necn.com/news/green/A-Green-Wave-Signs-Point-to-Voters-Demanding-Action-on-Climate-Change-502796391.html }} They "had enormous success electing its endorsed candidates in suburban districts last fall," wrote The Atlantic on January 3, 2019.{{Citation | title = Why the New Democratic Majority Could Work Better Than the Last | journal = The Atlantic | date = Jan 3, 2019 | url = https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/01/nancy-pelosi-and-new-house-democratic-majority/579358/ }}

File:Kamala Harris with LCV 2017.jpg meeting with the LCV in 2017. As of 2019, Harris has a 100% rating.]]

LCV tracks the voting records of members of Congress on environmental issues in its National Environmental Scorecard, a legislative scorecard.{{cite news |publisher=HuffPost |date=February 21, 2013 |title=2012 National Environmental Scorecard Ranks Members Of Congress On Green Issues |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/21/2012-national-environmental-scorecard_n_2733383.html |access-date=October 3, 2017}}

The average scores for members of the Democratic Party are historically higher than the scores for members of the Republican Party.{{cite news |newspaper=The New York Times |author-link=Philip Shabecoff |first=Philip |last=Shabecoff |title=Quayle is Rated on Environment |date=October 7, 1988 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1988/10/07/us/quayle-is-rated-on-environment.html |access-date=October 4, 2017}}{{cite news |title=A Plan to Defend against the War on Science |first=Shawn |last=Otto |date=October 9, 2016 |access-date=October 3, 2017 |magazine=Scientific American |url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-plan-to-defend-against-the-war-on-science/}} According to ThinkProgress, a very low score on the Scorecard means a member of Congress has not "used their time in Congress to vote with the environment in mind."{{cite web |publisher=ThinkProgress |url=https://thinkprogress.org/these-4-republican-senators-are-forming-a-group-to-tackle-climate-change-dc667e9f8eb5/ |title=These 4 Republican Senators Are Forming A Group To Tackle Climate Change |first=Katie |last=Valentine |date=October 30, 2015 |access-date=October 3, 2017}} In 2002, Kimberley Strassel of The Wall Street Journal editorial board wrote that "Democratic politics...is what really drives the league's scorecard."{{cite news |author-link=Kimberley Strassel |first=Kimberley |last=Strassel |title=The League of Democratic Voters |newspaper=The Wall Street Journal |date=September 6, 2002}}

In a 2012 report, the non-profit Rachel's Network examined the Scorecard scores for male and female members of Congress in the 107th through the 111th Congresses (2001 to 2010). The group found that "women in Congress vote for legislation supporting clean air, clean water, renewable energy, climate action, and public health much more often than their male counterparts."{{cite web |url=http://whenwomenlead.rachelsnetwork.org/ |title=When Women Lead |year=2016 |publisher=Rachel's Network |access-date=October 4, 2017}}{{cite news |date=May 10, 2012 |title=This Mother's Day, Mother Earth Wants You |first=Annie |last=Spiegelman |publisher=HuffPost |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/annie-spiegelman/rachels-network-environmentalism_b_1496255.html |access-date=October 4, 2017}}{{cite news |date=August 31, 2016 |title=Happy Anniversary 19th Amendment! How Have Women Voted On Energy And Environment Issues? |first=Joan |last=Michelson |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joan-michelson/happy-anniversary-19th-am_b_11780622.html |publisher=HuffPost |access-date=October 4, 2017}} The report found that some of the difference was attributable to the fact that there were "more women Democrats in both houses of Congress than there are women Republicans," and Democrats favor more pro-environmental policies, but also found that "the difference in voting patterns still persists when gender is isolated within each political party." The report also found that "the gap between Republican men and women narrowed after the 2004 election cycle, which could be attributable to increased partisan pressures."

The Scorecard has been cited by The New York Times, The Washington Post,{{cite news |author-link=Gary Lee (journalist) |first=Gary |last=Lee |title=Environmental Groups Target Candidates; Nominees' Voting Records on Issues Appear to be Hindering some Election Attempts |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=October 29, 1996 }} Bloomberg News,{{cite news |title=Trump Turns to Hunter and Outdoorsman Zinke to Lead Interior |first=Jennifer A |last=Dlouhy |date=December 15, 2016 |access-date=October 4, 2017 |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-15/trump-turns-to-hunter-and-outdoorsman-zinke-to-lead-interior |agency=Bloomberg Politics}}{{cite news |date=October 4, 2016 |title=GOP Senators Battle to Decide Majority, Climate Direction |work=Environment and Energy Report |publisher=Bloomberg BNA |access-date=October 4, 2017 |url=https://www.bna.com/gop-senators-battle-n57982077898/ |first=Dean |last=Scott}} U.S. News & World Report,{{cite news |title=Grade F: Environmental Group Flunks House GOP |first=Alan |last=Neuhauser |date=February 11, 2014 |magazine=U.S. News & World Report |access-date=October 4, 2017 |url=https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/02/11/environmental-scorecard-flunks-house-gop-with-its-lowest-marks-on-record}} HuffPost,{{cite web |publisher=League of Conservation Voters |url=http://scorecard.lcv.org/overview |access-date=October 3, 2017 |title=Overview of the National Environmental Scorecard|date=23 November 2012 }} and Scientific American magazine.

In 1998, scholar Anne Y. Ilinitch and collaborators used the Scorecard "to identify Senators and Representatives with unsupportive environmental voting records" in evaluated corporate political contributions as a measure of corporate environmental performance.{{cite journal |first1=Anne Y |last1=Ilinitch |first2=Naomi S |last2=Soderstrom |first3=Tom E. |last3=Thomas |title=Measuring corporate environmental performance |journal=Journal of Accounting and Public Policy |volume=17 |issue=4–5 |year=1998 |pages=383–408 |issn=0278-4254 |doi=10.1016/S0278-4254(98)10012-1}} In 2004, researchers at the School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences at Auburn University averaged Scorecard scores across a state's congressional delegation as a proxy variable for the "green-ness" of constituents, and found no significant relationship with the number of Endangered Species Act listings in a state.{{cite journal |last1=Rawls |first1=R. Patrick |last2=Laband |first2=David N. |journal=Public Choice |year=2004 |volume=121 |issue=3–4 |pages=263–277 |doi=10.1007/s11127-004-9784-4 |title=A Public Choice Analysis of Endangered Species Listings |s2cid=153964650 |issn=0048-5829}} In 2012, Robert Brulle and his collaborators investigated factors affecting U.S. public concern about the threat of climate change and found that "the message sent to the public by the Republican voting record on environmental bills is very influential...This result provides strong confirmation of the role of elite cues and their influence on public concern about climate change. In an extremely partisan environment, Republican votes against environmental bills legitimate public opinion opposed to action on climate change."{{cite journal |last1=Brulle |first1=Robert J. |author-link1=Robert Brulle |first2=Jason |last2=Carmichael |first3=J. Craig |last3=Jenkins |journal=Climatic Change |year=2012 |volume=114 |issue=2 |pages=169–188 |doi=10.1007/s10584-012-0403-y |issn=0165-0009 |title=Shifting public opinion on climate change: an empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the U.S., 2002–2010|bibcode=2012ClCh..114..169B |hdl=10.1007/s10584-012-0403-y |s2cid=8220644 |hdl-access=free }}

{{Portal|Environment}}

• Sustainability
• Ecology

• {{cite news|url=http://www.factcheck.org/2014/02/league-of-conservation-voters/|title=League of Conservation Voters|access-date=17 March 2015|work=FactCheck.org|publisher=Annenberg Center for Public Policy|date=February 13, 2014}}

{{reflist|30em}}

• {{official|www.lcv.org}}
• [https://scorecard.lcv.org/ LCV National Environmental Scorecard]
• {{ProPublicaNonprofitExplorer|521733698}}
• {{ProPublicaNonprofitExplorer|521379661|League of Conservation Voters Education Fund}}

{{Consumer protection}}

{{authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:League Of Conservation Voters}}

Category:Environmental organizations based in Washington, D.C.

Category:527 organizations

Category:Organizations established in 1969

Category:Political organizations based in the United States

Category:Environmental organizations established in 1969