Which Republican members of Congress have been targeted by the Club for Growth's 'RINO Watch' or similar lists?
Executive summary
The Club for Growth launched a "RINO Watch" project to single out Republican officeholders it says have advanced "anti-growth, anti-freedom or anti-free market policies" and has used that label to help promote primary challenges and public pressure campaigns; news coverage shows organized targeting efforts (including a 2016 push naming nine House Republicans) but the public record in the supplied reporting does not contain a comprehensive, single roster of every lawmaker so labeled [1] [2] [3].
1. How the "RINO Watch" operates and what it means
The Club for Growth — a fiscally conservative 501(c) and affiliated super-PAC that publishes scorecards and promotes pro-growth primary challengers — created the "RINO Watch" to monitor Republicans it deems insufficiently conservative on economic issues and to encourage voters to suggest primary opponents for those members, a tactic the organization has used repeatedly to apply pressure inside the GOP [1] [2] [3] [4].
2. Documented targets in reporting: some high-profile examples
Reporting and advocacy-tracking show specific lawmakers who have been the focus of Club for Growth activity or ire: for example, Club for Growth and allied groups spent to oppose Rep. Mike Simpson in a well-documented campaign and have been active in efforts connected to Rep. Justin Amash’s races, according to OpenSecrets’ coverage of Tea Party and Club for Growth spending aimed at so-called RINOs [5]. Separate reporting in The Hill describes a 2016 Club for Growth initiative that publicly identified nine House Republicans as targets for primary challenges, though the Hill pieces in the provided set describe the campaign rather than enumerating names in the excerpts provided here [2] [3].
3. Broader pattern: not just names, a long-term strategy
Beyond individual races, the Club for Growth’s strategy has been institutional: publishing scorecards, naming and shaming perceived moderates or defectors, and recruiting or funding challengers in primaries — a pattern documented by Ballotpedia and by accounts of the group’s endorsements and expenditures in multiple cycles [4] [6]. That pattern means the list of "targeted" Republicans shifts over time and across congressional sessions as the group grades votes and pursues strategic races [4].
4. Who else makes "RINO" lists and why that matters
The "RINO" label has been propagated by multiple conservative organizations and activists, not solely by the Club for Growth, and the term has been used against establishment figures and critics of Trump alike; sources note other groups like FreedomWorks and Senate Conservatives Fund have joined such efforts, and platforms from the Tea Party era through the Trump years have broadened who gets labeled, from governors to senators and House members [1] [7] [5]. This multiplicity of actors explains overlapping but not identical lists and competing incentives — some groups focus purely on fiscal votes while others emphasize loyalty to party leadership or to Donald Trump.
5. Limits of the available reporting and alternative viewpoints
The supplied sources confirm the Club for Growth’s creation of a RINO Watch and its use of primary threats and spending to discipline Republicans [1] [2] [3] [4], and OpenSecrets documents specific spending against figures such as Mike Simpson and involvement in contests linked to Justin Amash [5], while RationalWiki highlights that figures like Senator Shelley Moore Capito have previously attracted the organization’s criticism [7]. However, the reporting provided here does not offer a complete, contemporaneous roster of every member targeted under the "RINO Watch" label; compiling an exhaustive list would require cross-referencing Club for Growth’s own archives and cycle-by-cycle news and expenditure records beyond the excerpts supplied [1] [2] [3] [5] [4].