As polls began yesterday, hopes have dampened among Democrats that they will make major gains in the US Congress, even if their nominee, Hillary Clinton, wins the presidency.
Enough wind may have come out of Clinton’s sails to slow the Democrats’ Senate and House of Representatives headway because of the FBI’s startling announcement last month that reignited the controversy about her e-mail practices, Congressional aides and analysts said.
If that is the case, they said, Republicans will likely defend their House majority and may be able to retain some Senate seats long seen as vulnerable to Democratic capture.
Americans will be voting to choose Clinton or Republican Donald Trump for president, and to fill 34 of the 100 Senate seats and all 435 House seats.
Both the House and Senate are now controlled by the Republicans.
Polling website RealClearPolitics was reporting no clear trend in polling in key House and Senate races on Monday, with Republicans up in some swing states and Democrats in others.
An analysis of Senate races issued on Monday by political scientist Larry Sabato’s “Crystal Ball” project at the University of Virginia projected the election would end with Democrats and Republicans each holding 50 seats.
Continued Republican dominance in Congress could stymie any legislative agenda put forth by Clinton.
A Trump victory, along with a Republican Congress, could mean a swift end for Democratic president Barack Obama’s Obamacare health reforms.
A senior Democratic aide said the Clinton e-mails controversy, which erupted again after FBI director James Comey said on October 28 his agency would examine newly discovered e-mails that might pertain to her use of a private server while secretary of state, could reduce by at least 10 the number of House seats Democrats may capture from Republicans.
Comey told Congress on Sunday that after the latest review, he was standing by his July decision that no criminal charges were warranted against Clinton.
But coming only two days before the election, Comey’s latest announcement may have been too late for Democrats hoping to regain control of the House for the first time since 2010 and the Senate for the first time since 2014.
“It’s terribly damaging to us,” the Democratic aide said, adding Democrats could end up gaining only 12 to 16 House seats, instead of the 30 needed to win control of the chamber.
To win control of the Senate, Democrats would have to score a net gain of five seats.
Republicans currently hold 54 Senate seats to 44 Democratic seats and two independents who align with Democrats.
For months, political analysts were projecting Democrats would pick up anywhere from four to seven Senate seats.
The outcome of the presidential race is expected to have a major impact on the outcome of the congressional campaigns, with a handful of Senate races at centre stage.
One features Missouri Secretary of State Jason Kander, who is giving Republican Senator Roy Blunt a stiff challenge.
Another is former environmental official Katie McGinty’s bid to unseat Republican Senator Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania.
The Senate that will be sworn in on January 3 will face weighty issues, such as filling a vacancy on the US Supreme Court, immigration and free-trade deals with Pacific Rim countries and Europe.
Gun control-related ballot measures in four states are expected to pass, opinion polls show, after gun safety advocates poured a massive amount of money into backing the initiatives.
In Maine and Nevada, residents will vote on whether to mandate universal background checks for firearm sales, including private handgun transactions.
If those two measures pass, half of all Americans would live in states that have such expanded checks.
Eighteen states and Washington, DC, have already approved similar laws.
Voters in Washington state, meanwhile, will consider allowing judges to bar people from possessing guns if they pose a danger to themselves or to others, such as accused domestic abusers.
In California, a referendum would ban large-capacity ammunition magazines and require certain people to pass a background check to buy ammunition.
The US constitution’s second amendment protects the right to bear arms, and gun rights advocates fiercely contest any attempt to restrict that freedom.
The votes in Republican-leaning Maine and Nevada represent a key test of the gun control movement’s decision to turn to a state-by-state strategy after efforts to pass nationwide legislation failed in Congress.
Opponents in Maine and Nevada say the laws are confusingly written and would burden legal gun owners while doing nothing to stop criminals.
“We know today that the place where criminals are getting guns, the black market, they aren’t subjecting themselves to background checks,” said Ryan Hamilton, a spokesman for the National Rifle Association-backed opposition in Nevada. “It doesn’t target criminal behavior, it targets law-abiding behavior.”
But proponents say background checks are widely backed by the public and would save lives.
Jennifer Crowe, a spokeswoman for the pro-initiative campaign in Nevada, said research had shown nearly one in 11 people who purchased guns online would have been barred from doing so by a background check.
“We have this huge online marketplace that we know criminals are using to get guns,” she said.
Everytown for Gun Safety, the gun control group founded by billionaire former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, has spent tens of millions of dollars in Washington state, Nevada and Maine, while the National Rifle Association has focused much of its spending on supporting Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.
In Nevada, the most expensive contest, the background check campaign collected more than $14mn, much of it from Bloomberg.
The NRA devoted $4.8mn to fighting the measure.