http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323826704578354351814013058.htmlBut what if the more competitive chamber in 2014 is the Senate? Democrats are defending seats in seven states that Mitt Romney won in last year's presidential race: Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana, Montana, North Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia. Mr. Obama won an average of just 40.5% of the vote in these states. In addition, the retirements of longtime Sens. Tom Harkin (D., Iowa) and Carl Levin (D., Mich.) make those previously safe seats much more competitive. Factor in some freshmen Democratic senators elected from swing states in Obama's 2008 wave (the last time this batch of seats was contested), and Republicans could run competitive challenges in 10 or more Democrat-held seats. Incompetent GOP nominees could change the picture, but almost all of the seats that Republicans are defending are in solid-red states.
The historical Senate midterm dynamic isn't as clear-cut as the one in the House. The president's party has picked up Senate seats in six of 25 midterms since 1914—the first election after the 17th Amendment mandated statewide elections of senators instead of leaving it to state legislatures—but over the past century the president's party has lost an average of about four Senate seats per midterm. Republicans need to net six seats to win control in 2014—precisely the average number of seats gained, in post-World War II "sixth-year itch" elections, by the party not holding the White House.
Playing the averages sets the 2014 scene. Can Republicans match the modern average gain for the opposition party in the Senate in a president's second midterm? Can Democrats greatly exceed the historical average for the president's party in the House? It may be that neither party can meet these expectations. Yet as next year's battle for Congress begins to intensify, the odds favor the Republicans holding the House and getting yet another shot at the Senate.
