Trends in Recent United States Senate Elections: Incumbency, Finance, Gender and Race

Abstract

Though Senate elections are less studied than their House equivalency, there is still significant evidence that explains various trends occurring in the upper chamber of Congress in the past several decades. The Senate, like the House, falls victim to various biases including gender and race. In addition, there is an incumbency advantage in the Senate that proves almost as significant as in House competitions. Despite these similarities, there are noteworthy disparities between House and Senate elections, many of which stem from the differences in term lengths and magnitude of constituencies. However, there are political scientists who believe the electoral outcomes are quite similar, despite these fundamental differences. One of the main contentions is the significance of House and Senate races as a referendum on the president. While it may be more noteworthy in House competitions, it certainly is influential in the Senate. A significant facet of Senate elections studied extensively is the amount of funds needed to win the race. It should be no surprise that a significant majority of winners in the 20 I 0 Senate race far outspent their competitors. There are several elections, however, where this proved false and the candidate with lesser funds defeated his Or her competitor.