The Source For News On Capitol Hill Since 1955

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. Steve Buyer (R-Ind.)

District: 4th District
Political Highlights: no previous office, ; U.S. House, 1993-2011
Born: Nov. 26, 1958; Rensselaer, Ind.
Residence: Monticello
Religion: Methodist
Family: Wife, Joni Buyer; two children
Education: The Citadel, B.S. 1980; Valparaiso U., J.D. 1984
Military Service: Army Reserve, 1980-84; Army, 1984-87; Army Reserve, 1987-present
Start of Service: Elected: 1992 (9th term)
Committee Assignments: Energy & Commerce (Communications, Technology & the Internet; Health); Veterans' Affairs

Election History
2008generalSteve Buyer (R) 192,52659.9
Nels Ackerson (D) 129,03840.1
2006generalSteve Buyer (R) 111,05762.4
David Sanders (D) 66,98637.6
2004generalSteve Buyer (R) 190,44569.5
David Sanders (D) 77,57428.3
Kevin Fleming (LIBERT) 6,1172.2
2002generalSteve Buyer (R) 112,76071.4
Bill Abbott (D) 41,31426.2
Jerry Susong (LIBERT) 3,9342.5
2000generalSteve Buyer (R) 132,05160.9
Greg Goodnight (D) 81,42737.5
Scott Benson (LIBERT) 3,5071.6
1998generalSteve Buyer (R) 101,56762.5
David Steele (D) 58,50436.0
Carl Waters (LIBERT) 2,3171.4
1996generalSteve Buyer (R) 125,19164.6
Douglas Clark (D) 63,57832.8
Tom Lehman (LIBERT) 5,0692.6
1994generalSteve Buyer (R) 111,03169.5
J.D. Beatty (D) 45,22428.3
Clayton Alfred (I) 3,4032.1
1992generalSteve Buyer (R) 112,49251.0
Jim Jontz (D) 107,97349.0
Roll Call Vitals


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

Rep. Steve Buyer has no appearances on Sunday talk shows.

Sen. Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.) has the most appearances so far this year.

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.