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.

Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.)

Political Highlights: Indianapolis School Board, 1964-67; mayor of Indianapolis, 1968-75; Republican nominee for U.S. Senate, 1974; U.S. Senate, 1977-2013; sought Republican nomination for president, 1996
Born: April 4, 1932; Indianapolis, Ind.
Residence: Indianapolis
Religion: Methodist
Family: Wife, Charlene Lugar; four children
Education: Denison U., B.A. 1954; Oxford U., M.A. 1956
Military Service: Navy, 1957-60
Start of Service: Elected: 1976 (6th term)
Committee Assignments: Agriculture, Nutrition & Forestry (Conservation, Forestry & Natural Resources; Nutrition, Specialty Crops, & Agricultural Research - Ranking Member; Rural Development & Energy); Foreign Relations

Election History
2006generalRichard Lugar (R) 1,171,55387.4
Steve Osborne (LIBERT) 168,82012.6
2000generalRichard Lugar (R) 1,427,94466.6
David Johnson (D) 683,27331.9
Paul Hager (LIBERT) 33,9921.6
1994generalRichard Lugar (R) 1,039,62567.4
Jim Jontz (D) 470,79930.5
Barbara Bourland (LIBERT) 17,3431.1
Mary Barton (NA) 15,8011.0
1988generalRichard Lugar (R) 1,430,52568.1
Jack Wickes (D) 668,77831.9
1982generalRichard Lugar (R) 978,30153.8
Floyd Fithian (D) 828,40045.6
1976generalRichard Lugar (R) 1,275,83358.8
Richard Lugar (R) 814,11746.4
Roll Call Vitals


Indiana is 42nd on Roll Call's Clout Index, which measures influence in Congress by state.


Twitter Followers (@SenDonnelly)

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.