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. Steven R. Rothman (D-N.J.)

District: 9th District
Political Highlights: mayor of Englewood, 1983-89; Democratic nominee for Bergen County Board of Freeholders, 1989; Bergen County Surrogate Court judge, 1993-96
Born: Oct. 14, 1952; Englewood, N.J.
Residence: Fair Lawn
Religion: Jewish
Family: Divorced; two children
Education: Syracuse U., B.A. 1974; Washington U., J.D. 1977
Military Service: None
Start of Service: Elected: 1996 (8th term)
Committee Assignments: Appropriations (Defense; State-Foreign Operations)

Election History
2010generalSteven Rothman (D) 83,56460.7
Michael Agosta (R) 52,08237.8
Patricia Alessandrini (GREEN) 1,9801.4
2008generalSteven Rothman (D) 151,18267.5
Vincent Micco (R) 69,50331.0
Michael Perrone (PRO) 3,2001.4
2006generalSteven Rothman (D) 105,85371.5
Vincent Micco (R) 40,87927.6
Michael Jarvis (MC) 1,3630.9
2004generalSteven Rothman (D) 146,03867.5
Edward Trawinski (R) 68,56431.7
Dave Daly (LIBERT) 1,6490.8
2002generalSteven Rothman (D) 97,10869.8
Joseph Glass (R) 42,08830.2
2000generalSteven Rothman (D) 140,46267.9
Joseph Tedeschi (R) 61,98430.0
Lewis Pell (I) 2,2731.1
Michael Perrone (I) 1,0720.5
Robert Corriston (I) 9800.5
1998generalSteven Rothman (D) 91,33064.6
Steve Lonegan (R) 47,81733.8
Michael Perrone (PRO) 1,3491.0
Michael Koontz (NJC) 6860.5
Kenneth Ebel (NL) 2770.2
1996generalSteven Rothman (D) 117,64655.8
Kathleen Donovan (R) 89,00542.2
Arthur Rosen (NJI) 2,7301.3
Leon Myerson (LIBERT) 1,5490.7
Roll Call Vitals


New Jersey is 8th 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.