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. John Garamendi (D-Calif.)

District: 3rd District
Political Highlights: Calif. Assembly, 1974-76; Calif. Senate, 1976-90; sought Democratic nomination for governor, 1982; sought Democratic nomination for Calif. controller, 1986; Calif. insurance commissioner, 1991-95; sought Democratic nomination for governor, 1994; deputy Interior secretary, 1995-98; Calif. insurance commissioner, 2003-07; lieutenant governor, 2007-09; U.S. House of Representatives, 2009-present
Born: Jan. 24, 1945; Camp Blanding, Fla.
Residence: Walnut Grove
Religion: Christian
Family: Wife, Patricia Wilkinson Garamendi; six children
Education: U. of California, Berkeley, B.S. 1966; Harvard U., M.B.A. 1970
Military Service: None
Start of Service: Elected: 2009 (3rd full term)
Committee Assignments: Armed Services (Emerging Threats and Capabilities; Strategic Forces); Transportation & Infrastructure (Aviation; Coast Guard & Maritime Transportation - Ranking Member; Water Resources & Environment)

Election History
2014generalJohn Garamendi (D) 79,22452.7
Dan Logue (R) 71,03647.3
2012generalJohn Garamendi (D) 126,88254.2
Kim Vann (R) 107,08645.8
2010generalJohn Garamendi (D) 137,57858.8
Gary Clift (R) 88,51237.9
Jeremy Cloward (GREEN) 7,7163.3
2009specialJohn Garamendi (D) 72,81752.8
David Harmer (R) 59,01742.8
Jeremy Cloward (GREEN) 2,5151.8
Mary McIlroy (PFP) 1,8461.3
Jerry Denham (AMI) 1,5911.2
Roll Call Vitals


California is 1st 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.