←2014 2018→

2016 U.S. Senate Elections

Election Date November 8, 2016

U.S. Senate Elections by State

Battlegrounds •Primaries

Alabama •Alaska •Arizona •Arkansas •California •Colorado •Connecticut •Florida •Georgia •Hawaii •Idaho •Illinois •Indiana •Iowa •Kansas •Kentucky •Louisiana •Maryland •Missouri •Nevada •New Hampshire •New York •North Carolina •North Dakota •Ohio •Oklahoma •Oregon •Pennsylvania •South Carolina •South Dakota •Utah •Vermont •Washington •Wisconsin

U.S. House Elections by State

Battlegrounds •Primaries

Alabama •Alaska •Arizona •Arkansas •California •Colorado •Connecticut •Delaware •Florida •Georgia •Hawaii •Idaho •Illinois •Indiana •Iowa •Kansas •Kentucky •Louisiana •Maine •Maryland •Massachusetts •Michigan •Minnesota •Mississippi •Missouri •Montana •Nebraska •Nevada •New Hampshire •New Jersey •New Mexico •New York •North Carolina •North Dakota •Ohio •Oklahoma •Oregon •Pennsylvania •Rhode Island •South Carolina •South Dakota •Tennessee •Texas •Utah •Vermont •Virginia •Washington •West Virginia •Wisconsin •Wyoming

Elections were held for 34 of the 100 U.S. Senate seats in 2016. However, in most of those races, the party of the winning candidate was all but decided before anyone even filed to run. Ballotpedia predicted that onlynine of those 34 races would be competitive in the general election. Yet, despite the usual lack of competitiveness in congressional elections, 2016 was predicted to be a very volatile year for the U.S. Senate. However, the Republican majority proved to be a lot more stable than anticipated, resulting in a loss of only two red seats. The following were the primary factors contributing to that prediction.

• Republicans held 24 of the 34 seats up for election.The fact that the Republican Party had so many more seats to defend made it much more vulnerable to losing seats than the Democratic Party, regardless of political climate.

• Freshmen Republicans held 6 of the 9 most competitive seats in the country. Those Republicans were first elected in the tea party wave of 2010 and faced their first re-election bid in 2016.

• This year's Senate election coincided with a presidential election. The higher voter interest and turnout made re-election more difficult for those freshmen members of the GOP, who were elected in the midterm election of 2010, a very favorable political landscape for Republicans.

Because of these factors, control of the Senate was up for grabs in 2016. Heading into the election, Republicans held a tenuous 54-seat majority in the chamber, and Democrats needed to gain 5 seats in 2016 in order to retake control of the Senate. In the end Democrats fell short of that goal, picking up only two Senate seats. As a result of the elections, the Republican Party gained control of the entire federal government. Both parties poured a ton of money into the competitive Senate races in order to try and win the chamber. This page served to highlight those competitive races, which received so much attention in 2016.

The unexpected death ofSupreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia on February 13, 2016, placed even greater importance on the 2016 Senate elections.Confirmation of a new Supreme Court justice requires 60 votes in the Senate, giving theRepublican-controlled Senate the ability to deny any nominee chosen by PresidentBarack Obama.Several Republican senators, including Majority LeaderMitch McConnell, declared that the next president should have the responsibility of appointing the new justice. McConnell said in a statement, "The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President."^[1]

Appointment and confirmation of the replacement justice will be left to the newly elected president and Senate in 2017. This put increased pressure on both parties to win the Senate in 2016, as the chamber has the ability to confirm or deny the next president's nominees. This also raised the issue of Republican obstructionism in somebattleground states. Sen.Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said of the issue, "I believe that many of the mainstream Republicans, when the president nominates a mainstream nominee, will not want to follow Mitch McConnell over the cliff. The American people don't like this obstruction. When you go right off the bat and say, 'I don't care who he nominates, I am going to oppose him,' that's not going to fly."^[1][2]

The following map displays which Senate seats were up for election in 2016 and our competitiveness rating for each state.

Criteria

The following criteria were examined to determine whether a race was likely competitive or not. No specific number of criteria had to be met to label a state competitive, but all of the following were considered in each race.

1. Margin of victory (MOV) in the past two Senate elections (2010 and either 2012 or 2014):

The MOV of the incumbent in his or her previous election combined with the MOV from the intermediate Senate election in either 2012 or 2014 was the baseline metric used for determining competitiveness.

Example:Nevada had low margins of victory in the past two senate elections.Harry Reid (D) won re-election to his seat by 5.7 percent in 2010, whileDean Heller (R) won re-election to his seat by 1.2 percent in 2012.

2. Margin of victory in the past two presidential elections (2012 and 2008):

Presidential elections play a huge role in all races on the ballot. Voter turnout is always higher in presidential elections. A strong presidential candidate can also provide a boon to all candidates from his or her party on the ballot. Since 2016 was a presidential election year, these figures are often more telling than Senate results from either 2010 or 2014, because midterms are very different from presidential elections.

Example: PresidentBarack Obama (D) had a very low margin of victory inFlorida in both 2012 and 2008. Another close presidential race in 2016 was expected to result in a close Senate race as well.

3. Open seats:

Incumbents have very high re-election rates. In 2014,94.4 percent of congressional incumbents who sought re-election won. An open seat is traditionally far more vulnerable than one in which the incumbent is seeking re-election, even if the incumbent is unpopular.

Example: BothNevada andFlorida were open seats in 2016, making them especially vulnerable.

4. Time spent in office:

The number of terms a senator has spent in office has an impact on how vulnerable they may be. Those freshmen Republican incumbents who were elected in the GOP wave of 2010 were more vulnerable than those who had served multiple terms in the Senate.

Example:Illinois,New Hampshire,Pennsylvania andWisconsin all featured freshmen Republican senators defending their seats in 2016.

5. Outside race ratings:

Race ratings fromCook Political Report,Sabato's Crystal Ball, and theRothenberg & Gonzalez Political Report were considered when making our initial list of battlegrounds.

Example:New Hampshire,Pennsylvania, andWisconsin were all rated as Toss-ups byCook Political Report.

6. Special highlights:

Special highlights could include anything from a rematch of the 2010 Senate race to an incumbent made vulnerable due to a campaign finance controversy. Any special circumstances were taken into account here.

Example: InWisconsin, incumbentRon Johnson (R) faced a rematch with former SenatorRuss Feingold (D). Johnson ousted Feingold in a close race in 2010.

Battlegrounds

The following table displays the results of the election in each battleground district.

United States Senate Battleground Results
State	Incumbent	Winner	Partisan switch?	Margin of victory
Florida	Marco Rubio	Marco Rubio	No	7.7%
Illinois	Mark Kirk	Tammy Duckworth	Yes	15.1%
Indiana	Dan Coats	Todd Young	No	9.7%
Missouri	Roy Blunt	Roy Blunt	No	2.8%
Nevada	Harry Reid	Catherine Cortez Masto	No	2.4%
New Hampshire	Kelly Ayotte	Maggie Hassan	Yes	0.1%
North Carolina	Richard Burr	Richard Burr	No	5.7%
Pennsylvania	Pat Toomey	Pat Toomey	No	1.4%
Wisconsin	Ron Johnson	Ron Johnson	No	3.4%

This table displays the criteria used to determine competitiveness in more specific detail. It gives ranges for each criterion and the competitiveness associated with each. Each state was analyzed using this as a baseline to determine competitiveness.

The following races are those that were expected to be the closest in 2016.

• Both the 2012 and 2008 presidential MOV have either "✓" or "-" before the number. The "✓" indicates the state went in favor of the winner, in both years this was President Obama. The "-" indicates the state favored the Republican who lost in each election, Romney in 2012 and McCain in 2008.
  
  

The following races were all expected to be at least somewhat close, but they were not considered among the most competitive races.

• Both the 2012 and 2008 presidential MOV have either "✓" or "-" before the number. The "✓" indicates the state went in favor of the winner, in both years this was President Obama. The "-" indicates the state favored the Republican who lost in each election, Romney in 2012 and McCain in 2008.

Presidential impact

Presidential elections have a significant impact on congressional elections, the most obvious of which is increased voter interest and participation. In the last two decades, presidential elections have led to roughly 15 to 20 percent higher turnout rates than in the corresponding midterm elections.^[3] The following chart shows the disparity between voter turnout in presidential elections and midterms.

In the past decade, presidential elections have benefited the Democratic Party, while midterms have helped Republicans. The Democratic Party gained an average of 5 Senate seats in the last two presidential elections, and the Republican Party picked up an average of 7.5 seats in the last two midterms.^[4] The fact that 2016 was a presidential election cycle was a cause of increased Republican vulnerability in the Senate.

Presidential coattails

Of the states that had Republican senators up for election, the senators’ average win was 3.2 percent higher than President-electDonald Trump’s average win, according to preliminary vote totals.^[6] Trump's average win was 55.4 percent, while Republican senators' average win was 58.6 percent.

In Ballotpedia’sbattleground races and races to watch, Republican SenatorsJohn McCain (Ariz.),Marco Rubio (Fla.),Richard Burr (N.C.),Pat Toomey (Pa.), andRon Johnson (Wis.) ran ahead of Trump. Trump ran ahead of Senator-electTodd Young (Ind.) and SenatorRoy Blunt (Mo.).

Trump lost Illinois, Nevada, and New Hampshire, and the Republican candidates also lost their races in those states. SenatorMark Kirk ran ahead of Trump in Illinois, Trump ran ahead of Rep.Joe Heck in Nevada, and Sen.Kelly Ayotte ran ahead of Trump in New Hampshire.

Missouri SenatorRoy Blunt saw the biggest coattails effect from Trump. Trump won 57.1 percent of the vote, while Blunt won 49.4 percent. In Ohio, Trump saw the largest reverse coattails from SenatorRob Portman, who won the state with 58.3 percent of the vote. Trump earned 52.1 percent of the vote in Ohio.

A full breakdown of the presidential and Senate races appears below.

*Ballotpedia identified the highlighted races asbattleground races and races to watch. The vote percentages are fromCNN and will be updated after the final results are released.

2016 Republican Presidential and Senate election results
State	Presidential candidate vote %	Senate candidate vote %	Vote % Difference
Alabama	Donald Trump	IncumbentRichard Shelby
Totals	62.9%a	64.2%a	Shelby +1.3%
Alaska	Donald Trump	IncumbentLisa Murkowski
Totals	53.3%a	43.8%a	Trump +9.5%
Arizona	Donald Trump	IncumbentJohn McCain
Totals	49.5%a	53.4%a	McCain +3.9%
Arkansas	Donald Trump	IncumbentJohn Boozman
Totals	60.4%a	59.8%a	Trump +0.6%
Florida	Donald Trump	IncumbentMarco Rubio
Totals	49.1%a	52.1%a	Rubio +3.0%
Georgia	Donald Trump	IncumbentJohnny Isakson
Totals	51.4%a	55.1%a	Isakson +3.7%
Idaho	Donald Trump	IncumbentMike Crapo
Totals	59.0%a	66.0%a	Crapo +7.0%
Indiana	Donald Trump	Todd Young
Totals	57.2%a	52.2%a	Trump + 5.0%
Iowa	Donald Trump	IncumbentChuck Grassley
Totals	51.7%a	60.1%a	Grassley +8.4%
Kansas	Donald Trump	IncumbentJerry Moran
Totals	57.2%a	62.4%a	Moran +5.2%
Kentucky	Donald Trump	IncumbentRand Paul
Totals	62.5%a	+57.3%a	Trump +5.2%
Louisiana	Donald Trump	Multiple Republican candidates
Totals	58.1%a	(Race not called)	-
Missouri	Donald Trump	IncumbentRoy Blunt
Totals	57.1%a	49.4%a	Trump +7.7%
North Carolina	Donald Trump	IncumbentRichard Burr
Totals	50.5%a	51.1%a	Burr +0.6%
North Dakota	Donald Trump	IncumbentJohn Hoeven
Totals	64.1%a	78.6%a	Hoeven +14.5%
Ohio	Donald Trump	IncumbentRob Portman
Totals	52.1%a	58.3%a	Portman +6.2%
Oklahoma	Donald Trump	IncumbentJames Lankford
Totals	65.3%a	67.7%a	Lankford +2.4%
Pennsylvania	Donald Trump	IncumbentPat Toomey
Totals	48.8%a	48.9%a	Toomey +0.1%
South Carolina	Donald Trump	IncumbentTim Scott
Totals	55.6%a	61.2%a	Scott +5.6%
South Dakota	Donald Trump	IncumbentJohn Thune
Totals	61.5%a	71.8%a	Thune +10.3%
Utah	Donald Trump	Incumbent Mike Lee
Totals	45.5%a	67.4%a	Lee +21.9%
Wisconsin	Donald Trump	IncumbentRon Johnson
Totals	47.9%a	50.2%a	Johnson +2.3%
California	Donald Trump	No Republican on the ballot
Totals	33.3%d	No Republican on the ballot	-
Colorado	Donald Trump	Darryl Glenn
Totals	44.8%d	45.8%d	Glenn +1.0%
Connecticut	Donald Trump	Dan Carter
Totals	41.6%d	35.3%d	Trump +6.3%
Hawaii	Donald Trump	John Carroll
Totals	30.1%d	22.2%d	Trump +7.9%
Illinois	Donald Trump	IncumbentMark Kirk
Totals	39.4%d	40.2%d	Kirk +0.8%
Maryland	Donald Trump	Kathy Szeliga
Totals	35.3%d	36.4%d	Szeliga +1.1%
Nevada	Donald Trump	Joe Heck
Totals	45.5%d	44.7%d	Trump +0.8%
New Hampshire	Donald Trump	IncumbentKelly Ayotte
Totals	47.2%d	47.9%d	Ayotte +0.7%
New York	Donald Trump	Wendy Long
Totals	37.5%d	27.5%d	Trump +10.0%
Oregon	Donald Trump	Mark Callahan
Totals	41.3%d	33.9%d	Trump +7.4%
Vermont	Donald Trump	Scott Milne
Totals	32.6%d	33.0%d	Milne +0.4%
Washington	Donald Trump	Chris Vance
Totals	37.7%d	39.2%d	Vance +1.5%
Totals	Trump's average win: 55.4%	Republican senators' average win: 58.6%	Republican senators +3.2%

Race summaries

Florida

See also:United States Senate election in Florida, 2016

IncumbentMarco Rubio won re-election following his unsuccessful2016 presidential run. His entry into the race on June 22, 2016, came just days before the state's filing deadline.

The seat was held by a Republican, but the state backedPresident Obama by a narrow margin in both 2012 and 2008. Additionally, voters re-elected DemocratBill Nelson by 13 points in 2012. Due to these factors, the state was labeled a battleground in 2016.

Illinois

See also:United States Senate election in Illinois, 2016

Illinois' U.S. Senate seat was held by incumbentMark Kirk (R). Kirk was one of two Republican losses in the Senate in 2016. Kirk was a freshman Republican senator who won election in 2010 by a slim 1.6 percent margin in a state that has a Democratic lean. Kirk sought re-election in 2016 and was defeated by U.S. Rep.Tammy Duckworth in the general election. Heading into the election, Duckworth led the incumbent in total fundraising and cash on hand.

Illinois overwhelmingly backed President Obama in the 2012 and 2008 presidential elections. Additionally, voters re-elected DemocratDick Durbin by 10.8 percent in 2014, a strong year for Republicans. These factors made Kirk one of the most vulnerable senators in 2016.

Indiana

See also:United States Senate election in Indiana, 2016

Indiana's U.S. Senate seat was held by incumbentDan Coats (R). Coats first won election in 2010 and did not seek re-election to a second term in 2016. Rep.Todd Young was the Republican nominee. He comfortably defeated former Sen.Evan Bayh (D) in the general election. Bayh entered the race on July 11, 2016, after the original Democratic nominee,Baron Hill, dropped out of the race. Bayh's entry into the race prompted it to be classified as a battleground. Bayh had high name recognition and previously served in the Senate from 1999 to 2011. He also previously served asGovernor andSecretary of State of Indiana.

Missouri

See also:United States Senate election in Missouri, 2016

Missouri's U.S. Senate race was the most recent addition to our battleground races. IncumbentRoy Blunt (R) won re-election, defeating Missouri Secretary of StateJason Kander (D) in the general election. While the race was initially expected to be noncompetitive, polling showed a much closer race than anticipated. As a result, both theDemocratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and theSenate Leadership Fund poured money into the race. Missouri supported the Republican nominee in the last two presidential elections, so it was still expected to be an uphill battle for Kander.

Nevada

See also:United States Senate election in Nevada, 2016

Nevada's U.S. Senate seat was the only seat that was held by a Democrat to make it onto our list of battlegrounds. The seat was open following the retirement of Senate Minority LeaderHarry Reid. Former Attorney GeneralCatherine Cortez Masto (D) defeated U.S. Rep.Joe Heck (R) and a number of third-party candidates in the general election.

In both 2012 and 2010, Nevada's Senate race was close. Reid won re-election in 2010 by 5.7 percent, while Republican incumbentDean Heller won re-election in 2012 by a narrow 1.2 percent. PresidentBarack Obama won the state in both 2012 and 2008, but he won by a small 6.68 percent in 2012.

New Hampshire

See also:United States Senate election in New Hampshire, 2016

In New Hampshire, incumbentKelly Ayotte (R) lost her re-election bid toGovernorMaggie Hassan (D). This was the closest Senate race in the country, being decided by 0.1 percent of the vote. While Ayotte did win election handily in 2010 by a margin of 23.5 percent, she had a much more difficult re-election bid in 2016. Polling showed the candidates to be roughly tied heading into the election.

Barack Obama won New Hampshire by 9.61 percent in 2008 and 5.58 percent in 2012. Additionally, incumbentJeanne Shaheen (D) won re-election to the Senate by 3.3 percent in 2014.

North Carolina

See also:United States Senate election in North Carolina, 2016

IncumbentRichard Burr (R) won re-election to his third term in 2016. Burr defeated former state Rep.Deborah Ross (D) in the general election. While formerly designated as only a race to watch, polling in early August 2016 showed Burr to only have a slight lead over Ross, prompting a reclassification to battleground status. Burr had a sizable lead over the challenger in total contributions this cycle, although Ross did out-raise Burr in the later half of the cycle.

North Carolina has featured a very tight presidential race in the last two election cycles. PresidentBarack Obama won the state by 0.33 percent in 2008, whileMitt Romney took the state by 2.04 percent of the vote in 2012.

Pennsylvania

See also:United States Senate election in Pennsylvania, 2016

In Pennsylvania, incumbentPat Toomey (R) won re-election to his second term. Toomey won election in 2010 by a slim 2 percent margin. He defeatedKatie McGinty (D) in the general election on November 8, 2016.

Pennsylvania was won by PresidentBarack Obama in both 2012 and 2008. Additionally, Democratic incumbentBob Casey Jr. won re-election to the Senate in 2012 by a margin of 9.1 percent.

Wisconsin

See also:United States Senate election in Wisconsin, 2016

In Wisconsin, incumbentRon Johnson (R) won re-election to his second term in 2016. He defeated former SenatorRuss Feingold (D) in a rematch. Feingold represented Wisconsin in the U.S. Senate from 1993 to 2011 and was ousted by Johnson in the 2010 election.

Barack Obama won Wisconsin by 13.9 percent in 2008 and 6.94 percent in 2012. Additionally, Johnson beat Feingold by just under 5 points in 2010, andTammy Baldwin (D) won election to the Senate in 2012 by a margin of 5.6 percent. These factors made Johnson one of the most vulnerable incumbents in the country in 2016.

Battlegrounds timeline

Battleground races shifted a number of times as candidates jumped into races and polling data became readily available. Ballotpedia's team carefully monitored for factors that significantly changed the outlook of races. The changes are detailed below.

Heading into the election, Ballotpedia had nine races designated as battlegrounds and two other races rated as competitive.

October 2016

• Missouri: Missouri was upgraded from a race to watch to a battleground after polling showed a much closer race than anticipated, and outside groups began investing millions into the race.

September 2016

• Colorado: Colorado was moved from a race to watch to safely Democratic after polling and fundraising totals showed a significant lead for the incumbent.

• Ohio: Ohio was downgraded from a battleground to a race to watch. Polling showed incumbentRob Portman (R) to have a significant lead over challengerTed Strickland (D). TheDSCC also cancelled millions of dollars of ad reservations in Ohio in October and November.

August 2016

• North Carolina: North Carolina was bumped up to a battleground from a race to watch after multiple polls showed a tight race between incumbentRichard Burr (R) and challengerDeborah Ross (D).

July 2016

In July we completed our first major overhaul of battleground races since the original classification in March. As a result, there were several changes in battleground ratings.

• Arizona: Arizona was added to the list of races to watch. IncumbentJohn McCain (R) faced a credible challenger in Rep.Ann Kirkpatrick. However, McCain was still a clear favorite in the race.

• Indiana: Indiana was added to the list of battleground races after Democratic nomineeBaron Hill dropped out of the race and was replaced by former Sen.Evan Bayh. Bayh entered the race with high name recognition, as he previously served in the positions of Secretary of State, Governor, and U.S. Senator.

• Ohio: Ohio was reclassified from a race to watch to a battleground. Polling had shown a tighter race between the incumbentRob Portman and former Gov.Ted Strickland than we initially anticipated.

Outside race ratings

The following table compares Ballotpedia's battleground ratings with the most recent race ratings fromThe Cook Political Report,Sabato's Crystal Ball, andThe Rothenberg and Gonzales Political Report.

See also

Suggest a link

• United States Congress elections, 2016
• United States Senate elections, 2016
• Presidential election, 2016
• United States Senate

Footnotes

v • e 2015-2016 Elections to theUnited States Congress Senate by State Alabama •Alaska •Arizona •Arkansas •California •Colorado •Connecticut •Florida •Georgia •Hawaii •Idaho •Illinois •Indiana •Iowa •Kansas •Kentucky •Louisiana •Maryland •Missouri •Nevada •New Hampshire •New York •North Carolina •North Dakota •Ohio •Oklahoma •Oregon •Pennsylvania •South Carolina •South Dakota •Utah •Vermont •Washington •Wisconsin House by State Alabama •Alaska •Arizona •Arkansas •California •Colorado •Connecticut •Delaware •Florida •Georgia •Hawaii •Idaho •Illinois •Indiana •Iowa •Kansas •Kentucky •Louisiana •Maine •Maryland •Massachusetts •Michigan •Minnesota •Mississippi •Missouri •Montana •Nebraska •Nevada •New Hampshire •New Jersey •New Mexico •New York •North Carolina •North Dakota •Ohio •Oklahoma •Oregon •Pennsylvania •Rhode Island •South Carolina •South Dakota •Tennessee •Texas •Utah •Vermont •Virginia •Washington •West Virginia •Wisconsin •Wyoming Election information Ballot access for major and minor party candidates •List of candidates running for election •List of congressional challengers •Congressional incumbents not running for re-election •Newly elected members of Congress Super PACs/Organizations American Bridge 21st Century •American Crossroads •American Unity PAC •Campaign for Primary Accountability •Club for Growth Action •Congressional Leadership Fund •Cooperative of American Physicians IE Committee•Crossroads Generation •Ending Spending Action Fund •Endorse Liberty •Fair Share Action •FreedomWorks for America •Government Integrity Fund •House Majority PAC •Independence USA Fund •League of Conservation Voters •Liberty for All PAC •Majority PAC •National Association of Realtors •NEA Advocacy Fund •Now or Never PAC •Planned Parenthood Votes •Ready for Hillary •Republicans for a Prosperous America •Restore America's Voice PAC •SEIU Pea-Federal •Women Vote!

For information about public policy issues in the 2016 elections, see:Public policy in the 2016 elections!

v • e United States Congress Background United States Senate •United States House of Representatives •United States Constitution •Congressional Budget Office •Federal Election Commission •Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee •National Republican Congressional Committee •Lifetime voting records •Net Worth of United States Senators and Representatives •Staff salaries of United States Senators and Representatives •Filing requirements for congressional candidates •Filling vacancies in the U.S. Senate •Classes of United States Senators •President Pro Tempore of the Senate •United States Speaker of the House •Filibuster States' delegations Alabama •Alaska •Arizona •Arkansas •California •Colorado •Connecticut •Delaware •Florida •Georgia •Hawaii •Idaho •Illinois •Indiana •Iowa •Kansas •Kentucky •Louisiana •Maine •Maryland •Massachusetts •Michigan •Minnesota •Mississippi •Missouri •Montana •Nebraska •Nevada •New Hampshire •New Jersey •New Mexico •New York •North Carolina •North Dakota •Ohio •Oklahoma •Oregon •Pennsylvania •Rhode Island •South Carolina •South Dakota •Tennessee •Texas •Utah •Vermont •Virginia •Washington •West Virginia •Wisconsin •Wyoming •Non-voting members Special elections 2025-2026 •2023-2024 •2021-2022 •2019-2020 •2017-2018 •2015-2016 •2013-2014 2026 Congress Elections •Senate Elections •House Elections •Candidates running for Congress 2024 Congress Elections •Senate Elections •House Elections •Candidates who ran for Congress 2022 Congress Elections •Senate Elections •House Elections •Candidates who ran for Congress 2020 Congress Elections •Senate Elections •House Elections •Candidates who ran for Congress 2018 Congress Elections •Senate Elections •House Elections •Candidates who ran for Congress 2016 Congress Elections •Senate Elections •House Elections •Candidates who ran for Congress 2014 Congress Elections •Senate Elections •House Elections •Candidates who ran for Congress Sessions 119th United States Congress •118th United States Congress •117th United States Congress •116th United States Congress •115th United States Congress •114th United States Congress •113th United States Congress •112th United States Congress •111th United States Congress •110th United States Congress Joint Congressional committees Deficit Reduction •Printing •Taxation •Library •Economic U.S. Senate Committees Aging •Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry •Appropriations •Armed Services •Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs •Budget •Commerce, Science and Transportation •Energy and Natural Resources •Environment and Public Works •Ethics (Select) •Finance •Foreign Relations •Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions •Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs •Indian Affairs •Intelligence (Select) •Judiciary •Rules and Administration •Small Business and Entrepreneurship •Veterans' Affairs U.S. House Committees Agriculture •Appropriations •Armed Services •Budget •Education and the Workforce •Energy and Commerce •Ethics •Financial Services •Foreign Affairs •Homeland Security •House Administration •Intelligence (Permanent Select) •Judiciary •Natural Resources •United States House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform •Rules •Science, Space, and Technology •Small Business •Transportation and Infrastructure •Veterans' Affairs •Ways and Means Super PACs American Bridge 21st Century •American Crossroads •American Unity PAC •Campaign for Primary Accountability •Club for Growth Action •Congressional Leadership Fund •Cooperative of American Physicians IE Committee•Crossroads Generation •Ending Spending Action Fund •Endorse Liberty •Fair Share Action •FreedomWorks for America •Government Integrity Fund •House Majority PAC •Independence USA Fund •League of Conservation Voters •Liberty for All PAC •Senate Majority PAC •National Association of Realtors •NEA Advocacy Fund •NextGen Climate Action •Now or Never PAC •Planned Parenthood Votes •Ready for Hillary •Republican Jewish Coalition Victory Fund •Restore America's Voice PAC •SEIU Pea-Federal •Women Vote! Personal Gain Index Changes in Net Worth of U.S. Senators and Representatives •The Donation Concentration Metric