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. Carl Levin (D-Mich.)


Political Highlights: Michigan Civil Rights Commission general counsel, 1964-67; Detroit chief appellate defender, 1968-69; Detroit City Council, 1970-77; U.S. Senate, 1979-2015
Born: June 28, 1934; Detroit, Mich.
Residence: Detroit
Religion: Jewish
Family: Wife, Barbara H. Levin; three children
Education: Swarthmore College, B.A. 1956; Harvard U., LL.B. 1959
Military Service: None
Start of Service: Elected: 1978 (6th term)
End of Service: Jan. 3, 2015
Committee Assignments: Armed Services; Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs (Federal Spending Oversight & Emergency Management; Permanent Investigations - Chairman); Small Business & Entrepreneurship

Election History
2008generalCarl Levin (D) 3,038,38662.7
Jack Hoogendyk (R) 1,641,07033.8
Scotty Boman (LIBERT) 76,3471.6
Harley Mikkelson (GREEN) 43,4400.9
Michael Nikitin (USTAX) 30,8270.6
Doug Dern (NL) 18,5500.4
2002generalCarl Levin (D) 1,896,61460.6
Rocky Raczkowski (R) 1,185,54537.9
Eric Borregard (GREEN) 23,9310.8
John Mangopoulos (REF) 12,8310.4
Doug Dern (NL) 10,3660.3
1996generalCarl Levin (D) 2,195,73858.4
Ronna Romney (R) 1,500,10639.9
Ken Proctor (LIBERT) 36,9111.0
William Roundtree (WW) 12,2350.3
Joseph Mattingly (NL) 11,3060.3
Martin McLaughlin (SE) 5,9750.2
1990generalCarl Levin (D) 1,471,75357.0
Bill Schuette (R) 1,055,69541.0
1984generalCarl Levin (D) 1,915,83152.0
Jack Lousma (R) 1,745,30247.0
1978generalCarl Levin (D) 1,484,19352.0
Roll Call Vitals


Michigan is 7th 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.