If you want to know where your senators and your representative really stand on the Second Amendment, you no longer have to guess. Two of the biggest names in the firearm world publish scorecards that grade every sitting member of Congress on their record. One comes from the industry itself. The other comes from a major gun-rights membership organization. Together, they give you a straightforward way to check whether the people writing the laws are on your side.
The industry trade association, NSSF, released its 2026 Congressional Report Card on September 16, grading sitting U.S. Representatives and U.S. Senators on legislation the group considers critical to the firearm industry, the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens, and the country’s hunters and recreational target shooters. This guide walks through how those grades are built, what the top marks mean, and how to use the results before you vote.
What the NSSF Report Card Measures
NSSF, which describes itself as The Firearm Industry Trade Association, grades lawmakers on how well they support what it calls firearm industry priority legislation. That covers three broad areas: defending the industry’s ability to engage in the lawful commerce of firearms and ammunition, protecting the Second Amendment rights of customers, and promoting hunting and recreational target shooting.
The grades reflect a lawmaker’s record during the 119th Congress, which covers the period between 2025 and 2026. NSSF is clear that a grade is a measure of support for its legislative priorities, not a blanket judgment of a politician’s character. The group also states plainly that the grades do not constitute an endorsement of, or opposition to, any candidate.
How the Grades Are Calculated
NSSF doesn’t base a grade on a single vote. The methodology combines several inputs. Key votes count. So does co-sponsorship of legislation NSSF supports, along with the flip side of that coin: not co-sponsoring legislation NSSF opposes. In other words, a lawmaker gets credit both for backing the right bills and for keeping their name off the wrong ones.
Beyond votes and co-sponsorships, NSSF weighs leadership on other industry-supported legislation. That includes public statements, committee activity, floor statements, amicus briefs, and letters a member led or signed in support of a key issue. The point is to capture the full picture of what a lawmaker actually does, not just how they press a button on the floor.
Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel, framed the card as a research tool for voters. He said the report “tells voters exactly where their lawmakers stand on issues including defending the firearm industry’s ability to engage in the lawful commerce of firearms and ammunition and safeguarding the Second Amendment rights of customers.” He described the effort as nonpartisan and said the grades reflect “their public voting record as well as their sponsorship and co-sponsorship of key legislation, their work on committees, letters signed to support firearm industry issues and their overall leadership in championing our industry.”
What the Top Ratings Mean
The highest honor on the NSSF card isn’t a letter grade at all. It’s a place on what NSSF calls the “Dean’s List.” To earn it, a member of Congress needs a perfect record: 100 percent on both voting and co-sponsorship. This is the group’s way of singling out the lawmakers who backed every priority without exception.
The numbers show that this level of support isn’t common. NSSF named 14 U.S. Senators and 71 U.S. Representatives to the Dean’s List. The next tier down, an “A+” rating, went to 13 Senators and 41 U.S. Representatives. Put those figures together and you get a small circle of lawmakers with the strongest possible records in the eyes of the firearm industry — a smaller circle than in 2024, when 29 Senators and 123 Representatives cleared the A+ bar.
Why Five Members Have No Grade
If you look up your representative or senator and find no grade, that doesn’t automatically mean they dodged the issue. NSSF didn’t grade five members of Congress because they arrived through special elections to fill vacancies. Those new members simply hadn’t been in office long enough to build a voting and co-sponsorship record that NSSF considered sufficient for a fair grade.
This is worth remembering when you read any scorecard. A missing grade can mean a lawmaker is new to the job, not that they’re hiding from the topic. The only reliable way to judge a newcomer is to watch what they do once they’ve had the chance to cast votes and sign onto bills.
How the NRA Grades Compare
NSSF isn’t the only group handing out report cards, and the two major systems measure slightly different things. The NRA Political Victory Fund uses a letter-grade scale that runs from A+ down to F, and it describes itself as non-partisan, judging candidates only on their record on Second Amendment issues rather than party affiliation.
The NRA-PVF definitions are detailed. An “A+” goes to a legislator with an excellent voting record who has also made a vigorous effort to promote and defend the Second Amendment. A plain “A” marks a solidly pro-gun candidate. The scale then descends through “B” for generally pro-gun, “C” for a mixed record, “D” for an anti-gun candidate who usually supports restrictive legislation, and “F” for what the NRA-PVF bluntly calls a “True enemy of gun owners’ rights.”
Two other marks are worth knowing. An “AQ” grade is based solely on a candidate’s answers to the NRA-PVF questionnaire when they have no voting record yet. A question mark means the candidate refused to answer the questionnaire or made statements inconsistent with their record. The NRA-PVF says a “?” often signals indifference, if not outright hostility, to gun owners’ and sportsmen’s rights.
The key difference between the two systems is focus. The NRA-PVF grades candidates on Second Amendment issues as a single-issue organization. NSSF grades sitting lawmakers on industry priority legislation, which folds in commerce, hunting access, and target shooting alongside core rights questions. A lawmaker could score well with one group and less well with the other depending on which bills mattered most to each.
How to Use These Grades
Start by looking up both scores for your own senators and representative. The full NSSF report, including the exact list of key legislation that made up the scores, is published by the group, so you can see which bills drove a given grade rather than taking the letter on faith. That transparency matters. A grade tells you the result; the bill list tells you why.
Read the grades as a starting point, not a final verdict. Both groups say plainly that their scores aren’t endorsements. Use the ratings to narrow your research, then dig into the specific votes and co-sponsorships behind them. NSSF’s methodology, for example, doesn’t count every bill the way every 2A voter would — some Republicans who voted for the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act still cleared A grades because NSSF didn’t weight that legislation as anti-industry. If a specific bill matters to you, look at how it was scored, not just the final letter. Pay special attention to any lawmaker carrying a question mark or no grade at all, because those cases usually call for a closer look before you decide.
Finally, keep the timing in mind. These grades cover the 119th Congress. Records change, new sessions bring new votes, and a lawmaker’s standing can rise or fall. Check the most current report card before any election, and treat the scorecard as one solid tool among several for holding the people in Washington accountable to gun owners — especially in a cycle where gun-control groups are spending big to move the map in the other direction.
