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 M. Burr (R-N.C.)

Political Highlights: Republican nominee for U.S. House, 1992; U.S. House of Representatives, 1995-2005; U.S. Senate, 2005-present
Born: Nov. 30, 1955; Charlottesville, Va.
Residence: Winston-Salem
Religion: Methodist
Family: Wife, Brooke Burr; two children
Education: Wake Forest U., B.A. 1978
Military Service: None
Start of Service: Elected: 2004 (2nd term)
Committee Assignments: Finance (Energy, Natural Resources & Infrastructure; Fiscal Responsibility & Economic Growth; Health Care); Health, Education, Labor & Pensions (Children & Families; Primary Health and Retirement Security); Select Intelligence

Election History
2010generalRichard Burr (R) 1,458,04654.8
Elaine Marshall (D) 1,145,07443.0
Mike Beitler (LIBERT) 55,6872.1
2004generalRichard Burr (R) 1,791,45051.6
Erskine Bowles (D) 1,632,52747.0
Tom Bailey (LIBERT) 47,7431.4
2002generalRichard Burr (R) 137,87970.2
David Crawford (D) 58,55829.8
2000generalRichard Burr (R) 172,48992.8
Steven LeBoeuf (LIBERT) 13,3667.2
1998generalRichard Burr (R) 119,10367.6
Mike Robinson (D) 55,80631.7
Eugene Paczelt (LIBERT) 1,3820.8
1996generalRichard Burr (R) 130,17762.1
Neil Cashion (D) 74,32035.4
Barbara Howe (LIBERT) 4,1932.0
Craig Berg (NL) 1,0080.5
1994generalRichard Burr (R) 84,74157.3
A.P. Sands (D) 63,19442.7
1992generalStephen Neal (D) 117,83552.7
Richard Burr (R) 102,08645.6
Gary Albrecht (LIBERT) 3,7581.7
Roll Call Vitals


North Carolina is 13th on Roll Call's Clout Index, which measures influence in Congress by state.


Twitter Followers (@senatorburr)

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.