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. Jim Matheson (D-Utah)

District: 4th District
Political Highlights: no previous office, ; U.S. House of Representatives, 2001-15
Born: March 21, 1960; Salt Lake City, Utah
Residence: Salt Lake City
Religion: Mormon
Family: Wife, Amy Matheson; two children
Education: Harvard U., A.B. 1982; U. of California, Los Angeles, M.B.A. 1987
Military Service: None
Start of Service: Elected: 2000 (7th term)
Committee Assignments: Energy & Commerce (Commerce, Manufacturing & Trade; Communications & Technology; Health)

Election History
2012generalJim Matheson (D) 119,80348.8
Mia Love (R) 119,03548.5
Jim Vein (LIBERT) 6,4392.6
2010generalJim Matheson (D) 127,15150.5
Morgan Philpot (R) 116,00146.1
Randall Hinton (CNSTP) 4,5781.8
Dave Glissmeyer (UNA) 2,3910.9
Wayne Hill (UNA) 1,7260.7
2008generalJim Matheson (D) 220,66663.4
Bill Dew (R) 120,08334.5
Matthew Arndt (LIBERT) 4,5761.3
Dennis Emery (CNSTP) 3,0000.9
2006generalJim Matheson (D) 133,23159.0
LaVar Christensen (R) 84,23437.3
W. Perry (CNSTP) 3,3951.5
Bob Brister (GREEN) 3,3381.5
Austin Lett (LIBERT) 1,6200.7
2004generalJim Matheson (D) 187,25054.8
John Swallow (R) 147,77843.2
Jeremy Petersen (C) 3,5411.0
Patrick Diehl (GREEN) 2,1890.6
Ronald Amos (PC) 1,2100.4
2002generalJim Matheson (D) 110,76449.4
John Swallow (R) 109,12348.7
Patrick Diehl (GREEN) 2,5891.2
Ron Copier (LIBERT) 1,6220.7
2000generalJim Matheson (D) 145,02155.9
Derek Smith (R) 107,11441.3
Bruce Bangerter (IA) 4,7041.8
Peter Pixton (LIBERT) 2,1650.8
Steven Voris (X) 5970.2
Roll Call Vitals


Utah is 46th 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.