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.

Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.)


Political Highlights: Republican nominee for U.S. House, 1968; Mo. auditor, 1971-73; governor, 1973-77; defeated for re-election as governor, 1976; governor, 1981-85; U.S. Senate, 1987-2011
Born: March 6, 1939; St. Louis, Mo.
Residence: Mexico
Religion: Presbyterian
Family: Wife, Linda Bond; one child
Education: Princeton U., A.B. 1960; U. of Virginia, LL.B. 1963
Military Service: None
Start of Service: Elected: 1986 (4th term)
End of Service: Jan. 3, 2011
Committee Assignments: Appropriations (Agriculture; Defense; Energy-Water; Financial Services; State-Foreign Operations; Transportation-HUD - Ranking Member); Environment & Public Works (Clean Air & Nuclear Safety; Green Jobs & the New Economy - Ranking Member; Superfund, Toxics & Environmental Health); Small Business & Entrepreneurship; Select Intelligence

Election History
2004generalChristopher Bond (R) 1,518,08956.1
Nancy Farmer (D) 1,158,26142.8
Kevin Tull (LIBERT) 19,6480.7
Don Griffin (CNSTP) 10,4040.4
1998generalChristopher Bond (R) 830,62552.7
Jay Nixon (D) 690,20843.8
Tamara Millay (LIBERT) 31,8762.0
Curt Frazier (USTAX) 15,3681.0
James Newport (REF) 8,7800.6
1992generalChristopher Bond (R) 1,221,90151.9
Geri Rothman-Serot (D) 1,057,96744.9
Jeanne Bojarski (LIBERT) 75,0483.2
1986generalChristopher Bond (R) 777,61253.0
Harriett Woods (D) 699,62447.0
Roll Call Vitals


Missouri is 30th on Roll Call's Clout Index, which measures influence in Congress by state.

Sen. Christopher S. Bond 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.