The Electoral Risks of Senate Majority Leadership, or How Tom Daschle Lost and Harry Reid Won
-
Andrea C. Hatcher
Senate majority leaders risk electoral defeat despite advantages of incumbency. In 2010, according to conventional wisdom, Harry Reid seemed likely to lose re-election, as had his predecessor. Nevertheless, he won a decisive victory. This paper seeks to answer the basic question—how did Reid escape electoral defeat?—as a means of elucidating the conditions under which Senate majority leaders lose re-elections. This research can be couched in a broader study of Senate majority leadership that understands the role as one that balances the constraints of multiple constituencies of state, party, Senate, and president. In these terms, and based on the cases of Tom Daschle and Harry Reid, I hypothesize that Reid’s electoral victory was no surprise in light of his state’s ideological position and support of President Barack Obama. As a rule, a Senate majority leader faces an electoral threat when he opposes a president that his state has supported, but gains electoral security when he serves a president his state has supported.
©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Introduction
- Governing through the Senate
- Article
- On Being Second: The U. S. Senate in the Separated System
- Through the Looking Glass, Darkly: What has Become of the Senate?
- Making Laws and Making Points: Senate Governance in an Era of Uncertain Majorities
- Polarization, Obstruction, and Governing in the Senate
- Legislative Coalitions, Polarization, and the U.S. Senate
- Hanging With the Filibuster Pivot
- Senate Delegation Dynamics in an Age of Party Polarization
- The Electoral Risks of Senate Majority Leadership, or How Tom Daschle Lost and Harry Reid Won
- Obstructing Agenda-Setting: Examining Blue Slip Behavior in the Senate
- The Past and Future of the Supermajority Senate
- What the Filibuster Tells Us About the Senate
- Commentary
- Unified Budget Accounting in the United States Congress: The Persistence of Government Deficits and Debt, 1967-2010
- Review
- Review of The Speaker of the House: A Study of Leadership
- A Response to Joseph Cooper's Review of The Speaker of the House: A Study of Leadership
- Review of The Myth of Presidential Representation
- Review of American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us
Articles in the same Issue
- Introduction
- Governing through the Senate
- Article
- On Being Second: The U. S. Senate in the Separated System
- Through the Looking Glass, Darkly: What has Become of the Senate?
- Making Laws and Making Points: Senate Governance in an Era of Uncertain Majorities
- Polarization, Obstruction, and Governing in the Senate
- Legislative Coalitions, Polarization, and the U.S. Senate
- Hanging With the Filibuster Pivot
- Senate Delegation Dynamics in an Age of Party Polarization
- The Electoral Risks of Senate Majority Leadership, or How Tom Daschle Lost and Harry Reid Won
- Obstructing Agenda-Setting: Examining Blue Slip Behavior in the Senate
- The Past and Future of the Supermajority Senate
- What the Filibuster Tells Us About the Senate
- Commentary
- Unified Budget Accounting in the United States Congress: The Persistence of Government Deficits and Debt, 1967-2010
- Review
- Review of The Speaker of the House: A Study of Leadership
- A Response to Joseph Cooper's Review of The Speaker of the House: A Study of Leadership
- Review of The Myth of Presidential Representation
- Review of American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us
