Member Guide | Roll Call

Last updated Sep. 08, 2014

Sorry, you are using an old browser that can't display this interactive. Install the free Google Chrome Frame plug-in for Internet Explorer, or use a modern browser such as Google Chrome, Firefox or a mobile device, such as an iPad, to view this page.

Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.)

District: 3rd District
Political Highlights: Democratic nominee for Suffolk County Legislature, 1987; Huntington Town Board, 1993-2001; U.S. House of Representatives, 2001-present
Born: May 30, 1958; Brooklyn, N.Y.
Residence: Huntington
Religion: Jewish
Family: Separated; two children
Education: Nassau Community College, A.A. 1978; Syracuse U., attended 1978-79; George Washington U., B.A. 1982
Military Service: None
Start of Service: Elected: 2000 (8th term)
Committee Assignments: Appropriations (Defense; Interior-Environment)

Election History
2014generalSteve Israel (D) 90,03254.8
Grant Lally (R) 74,26945.2
2012generalSteve Israel (D, INDC, WFM) 157,88057.8
Stephen Labate (R, C) 113,20341.5
Michael McDermott (LIBERT) 1,6440.6
Anthony Tolda (CNSTP) 3670.1
2010generalSteve Israel (D) 94,59456.3
John Gomez (R) 72,02942.9
Anthony Tolda (CNSTP) 1,2560.7
2008generalSteve Israel (D, INDC, WFM) 161,27966.9
Frank Staltzer (R, C) 79,64133.1
2006generalSteve Israel (D, INDC, WFM) 105,27670.4
John Bugler (R, C) 44,21229.6
2004generalSteve Israel (D, INDC, WFM) 161,59366.6
Richard Hoffmann (R, C) 80,95033.4
2002generalSteve Israel (D, INDC, WFM) 85,45158.5
Joseph Finley (R, C, RTL) 59,11740.5
John Keenan (GREEN) 1,5581.1
2000generalSteve Israel (D) 90,43847.9
Joan Johnson (R) 65,88034.9
Robert Walsh (RTL) 11,2246.0
Richard Thompson (C) 10,8245.7
David Bishop (INDC, GREEN, WFM) 10,2665.4
Roll Call Vitals


New York is 5th on Roll Call's Clout Index, which measures influence in Congress by state.

Roll Call and CQ Weekly use ratings assigned by the Rothenberg Political Report, which are defined as follows: SAFE: As of today, the party indicated is all but certain to win the seat. FAVORED: One candidate has a substantial advantage, but an upset is still possible. LEAN: The party indicated has the edge, but the outcome is less certain than for races rated as favored. TILT: The outcome is effectively regarded as a tossup for each of these highly competitive seats, although the party indicated has a slight edge. TOSSUP: Neither party has an edge in these contests.