More Americans used the Internet to get campaign information in 2002 than during the last midterm election four years ago. While much of this increase has come from the overall growth in the online population, a higher proportion of Internet users sought election news than did so four years ago (22% now, 15% in 1998). The Internet was a less important source for such news in 2002 than in 2000, but midterm elections typically engender less public interest than presidential contests.

Information on candidate positions on the issues was the top draw for online election news consumers. Nearly eight-in-ten (79%) said they researched where candidates stood on issues, up significantly from 69% in 2000. And more than four-in-ten election news consumers (45%) researched candidate voting records; that also represents an increase from 2000 and 1998. This is consistent with an overall increase in the number of Internet users who said they looked for information on specific issues like the environment and gun control.

The sites of major national and local news organizations continued to be the leading sources of online campaign information. Roughly half of online election news consumers (52%) said they went most often to the sites of major national media organizations such as CNN and the New York Times, while 18% cite websites of local news organizations. But specialized political and issue-oriented sites are becoming more popular. Three-in-ten online campaign news consumers said they went to such sites most often, compared with 19% in 2000.

The nationwide survey among 2,745 adults by the Pew Research Center and the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that the Internet was a principal source of campaign news for only about one-in-ten online users (11%) and just 7% of the general public. Among those who said they went online for election news, the Internet rivaled newspapers as a main source for campaign information (31% cited the former as a main source of election news, 33% the latter). But even among this group, television remained by far the leading source of election information, with half listing it as their main resource.

While the Internet has not made significant gains in recent years as a primary outlet of election news, it does serve as an important source for young people who go online. Among those under age 30 who go online, 16% said they got most of their election news from the Internet, far more than any other age group. For these young Internet users, the Web ranked with radio (15%) and slightly behind newspapers (22%) as a source of campaign information.

While the online audience for campaign news has grown over the past four years, those who went on the Internet for election news did so less frequently than in 1998 or 2000. Among the online audience for election news, 59% in 2002 said they went online at least weekly, compared with 65% in 1998 and 75% in the presidential election year of 2000.

Election News Audience: Largely Internet Veterans

The profile of online election news consumers continued to be dominated by upscale, veteran Internet users. Men more than women, whites more than minorities, highly educated more than less educated and the wealthy more than the poor went online for election news. But use by women and minorities is growing. In 1998, 61% of online election news users were men and 39% women. In 2002, that gap narrowed to 57% men and 43% women. In 1998, nine-in-ten election news consumers on the Internet were white, but that number slipped slightly to 84%. Minority representation among election news consumers rose from 9% in 1998 to 13% in 2002.

Although college graduates continued to constitute half of the online election news population, there was modest growth among the less educated, with non-college citizens representing 23% in 2002, up from 18% in 1998. A plurality of election news consumers (37%) had family incomes of $75,000 or above, a figure that increased 14 percentage points since 1998.

The age profile of online election news consumers has not changed substantially since the 1998 election. Just over a quarter (27%) were under age 30 (compared with 24% in 1998). People age 65 and older still constitute a tiny fraction of the online election news audience — 5% in 2002, 4% in 1998.

In general, Internet newcomers were less likely to go online for election news than those who have been online for several years. Just 7% of those who have been online for less than two years sought campaign news during 2002. By contrast, more than four times as many of those who have been online for at least six years (30%) went online for election news.

Convenience Remains Top Draw

Those who went online for campaign information were motivated both by the convenience of the Web and by the greater range and depth of information it provides. Nearly six-in-ten (57%) of those who got election news online said that convenience was an important reason for doing so. This is about the same percentage who cited convenience in 2000.

A sizable minority of online election news consumers (43%) said they went online because they could not get all the news and information they wanted from traditional news sources, up from 29% in the 2000 election (though lower than the 53% who said this back in 1996). Republicans were more likely than Democrats to cite this as a reason for seeking news on the Internet (50% vs. 36%).

The range of ideological perspectives on the Web is large, but very few online election news consumers said this is a major reason for them to turn to the internet. Fewer than one-in-ten (8%) said they went online for campaign news because the Web offers new sources that reflect their specific interests or values. Liberals and conservatives were no more likely than moderates to mention this as a reason to go online for election news.

State Races Draw Most Online Interest

As was the case in the midterm elections four years ago, statewide elections attracted the greatest interest from online news consumers. More than three-quarters (78%) said they got news about gubernatorial races online, and two-thirds (68%) went online for information about Senate races.

Nearly two-thirds (64%) went online to learn about House races, and 56% sought information on local races. Roughly four-in-ten election news consumers (44%) said they got information about ballot propositions. Among the online audience for election news, men and women displayed similar interest in all types of races except for local contests: women were 10 percentage points more likely than men to follow local races online.

This election year saw a sizable increase in the proportion of online election news consumers who sought information about candidates’ voting records and positions on issues. Roughly eight-in-ten (79%) looked for information about the candidates’ issue stances, and nearly half (45%) sought out information about their voting records. Both represented significant increases over 2000 (69% for issue positions and 33% for voting records).

Online polls were somewhat more popular in 2002 than in recent elections. Roughly four-in-ten election news consumers (39%) said they participated in such polls, compared with 35% in 2000 and 26% in 1998. Although just 10% of online news consumers said they participated in online discussions about politics, the rate among young people was almost twice as high (19%).

The growing number of voters seeking information about the candidates was mirrored in a sharp increase in Internet users who reported visiting websites that provide information about specific issues or policies such as the environment, gun control, abortion or health
care reform. Nearly a quarter of all Americans (24%) and 39% of Internet users said they visited such sites.

Young Internet users were more likely to seek out websites with specific policy information (45% among those 18-29), compared with those 50 and older (34%). Men and women did this in equal numbers. Better educated Internet users did this more commonly than the less educated, but even among Internet users with less education (those with a high school education or less), about a third visited a web site for this kind of information. Newcomers to the Web visited information sites at about half the rate of long-time Internet veterans.

Major News Sites Popular

Most election news consumers relied on well-known news organizations for information on the campaign. In 2002, nearly two-thirds (64%) of online election news consumers visited the sites of major media organizations like CNN and the New York Times, or local news organizations. This was a significant increase over 2000, when 55% went to these kinds of sites.

A little over half of online election news consumers (52%) went to the national news sites, while nearly 18% went to local news sites, up from 12% in 2000. These sites were even more popular during the 1998 campaign (29%).

About one-in-five (19%) election news consumers said they went most often to the news sites of AOL and other online services. That is a significant decline from recent years: in 2000 and 1998, more than a quarter of election news consumers relied mostly on these sites for campaign information (27%, 26%).

At the same time, more specialized political sites gained ground. Nearly a third of online election news consumers (32%) said they went most often to government and candidate websites or sites that specialize in politics, up from 19% in 2000. Within this category, state and local government websites are drawing more election news consumers: twice as many went to these sites as did so in 2000 (12% vs. 6%). But visits to candidate websites were up as well (11% vs. 7% in 2000), as were visits to issue-oriented sites (9% vs. 4%).

Active Consumers of Election News: A Closer Look

The most active consumers of campaign news — those who sought information on candidate positions and on how candidates voted — followed more races and went to more websites than did more casual consumers of such information. Four-in-ten election news consumers researched candidate positions and voting records in 2002, up from 30% in 2000, and their habits and interests are very different from others who got campaign news online.

Nearly three-in-ten (29%) of these “deep diggers” said they looked for information on all election races (governor, Senate, House, local races, and ballot propositions), and 79% followed at least three kinds of these races. Almost half (46%) cited the Internet as one of their most important sources of campaign information, compared with 31% of all election news consumers.

Voters who used the web to seek information about candidate voting records and positions on issues were especially likely to visit political websites. More than four-in-ten (44%) relied on these sites during the campaign, compared with 25% of those who engaged in one of those activities and 22% who did no research on issue positions or voting records. But these “deep diggers” were less likely than other election news consumers to rely on the news sites of commercial online services such as AOL (only 13% said they visited these sites).

Those who sought out candidate issue and voting information said they used the Web because they do not get all the information they want from traditional sources: 48% cited this reason. Convenience was important to these heavy users, too, but no more so than for other consumers of online election information.

Not surprisingly, active election information seekers reported very high levels of general interest in government and public affairs, apart from elections: 86% said they follow news on those subjects “most of the time,” compared with just half of the general public. In addition to getting campaign information, 68% also reported visiting websites about issues and policies of concern to them. Those who sought issue or voting information about candidates also made use of this information: twice as many who did this said the Internet helped them decide how to vote, compared with voters who were less active consumers of this kind of data (38% to 19%).

Few Party Differences, Except Online Polls

More Republicans than Democrats go online for election news (by a margin of 18% to 11%), but there are few notable differences between political partisans in what they do online. Democrats and Republicans generally look for the same kinds of information, donate money and engage in online discussions at the same rates.

But nearly half of Republicans who go online for election news (46%) said they like to register their opinions in online polls. By comparison, fewer than three-in-ten Democrats (28%) do this. With Republicans more likely to go online for election news and register their opinions in polls, the profile of those who take online surveys tilts heavily Republican. Half of those who said they like to take online polls were Republicans, while just one-in-five were Democrats.

But TV Still Dominates

The Internet remains a secondary source of campaign news for most of the public. Only 7% of Americans said they got most of their news from online sources, slightly below the 11% who said this after the presidential election in 2000. Instead, most voters still look to television as a principal source of campaign news: two-thirds did so in the 2002 elections, down only slightly from 2000, when 70% cited television. But the mix of specific television sources was different from 2000 because of the local and regional nature of the midterm elections. Over one-third (35%) cited local television as a primary source, up from 21% in 2000. By contrast, only 7% mentioned network news, down from 22% in 2000. Cable was also a less common source at 21%, down from 36% in the presidential election year.

Just a third of Americans said they got most of their news on the elections from newspapers. This was a six-point decline from 2000 (39%) and only about half the number who said they relied primarily on newspapers in 1996 (60%).

Preliminary totals show the Republicans with a 51.8%-45.2% advantage in the national House vote. This is on par with the GOP’s seven-point advantage in 1994 (52.4%-45.4%), an election that capped a 54-seat swing in the Republicans’ favor and gave the GOP a majority in that chamber for the first time in four decades.

The GOP fared very well this year, increasing its margin over the Democrats by 3.5% over the 2000 vote. That was less than half of the 6.9% change in the GOP’s favor between 1992 and 1994. The shift in the balance of power in the House in 1994 also was far greater than the rather modest shift that occurred last Tuesday.

Between 1992 and 1994, a 41-seat Democratic majority became a 13-seat Republican advantage – a 54-seat shift in the GOP’s favor. By contrast, on Nov. 5 Republicans gained just five seats (and a net gain of seven since 2000). Still, after three consecutive elections in which they lost seats, Republicans cemented their hold on the House and are now within two seats of their 1994 majority (228 now, 230 then).

Bigger Margins, Smaller Playing Field

Based on preliminary data provided by the Center for Voting and Democracy, the GOP’s lead in the popular vote served to widen the margin of victory for many GOP candidates. This data shows that the number of victorious Republican candidates who received at least 60% of the vote rose from 166 in 1998 to 186 in 2002. Among Democratic winners, landslide victories also are more common, but the increase has been smaller than among Republicans: 151 in 1998 to 161 in 2002.

Another key factor has to do with who voted and where. There were far fewer competitive House districts in 2002 than in 1994. In late October 1994, fully 73 House seats were rated as “tossups” by the Cook Political Report. In the 1998 election, Cook rated 26 seats in the tossup category. This number fell to 21 seats in 2000 and just 16 in the recently concluded election, which followed redistricting in 2001. As a result, the opportunity for either party to make major gains in seats has become more limited.

As has been the case in recent elections, the popular vote for the House of Representatives is likely to be divided about equally between Republican and Democratic candidates, almost ensuring a narrow advantage for the party that controls the next Congress. The Pew Research Center’s final nationwide survey of 1,035 likely voters (1,610 registered voters) conducted Oct. 30-Nov. 2 finds 46% intending to vote Democratic, 44% Republican, with 10% undecided. This mirrors the closeness of the actual popular vote in the past two elections: Republican candidates garnered a one-point margin in 1998 and the popular vote was virtually even in 2000.

The correspondence between a party’s share of the popular vote and the number of seats it wins is too approximate to make a projection of which party will control the House when the popular vote is likely to be this close. The current two-point margin for the Democrats is not statistically significant and is identical to the final election survey of four years ago, when the GOP managed to hold on to its slim House advantage on Election Day.

The results of the new survey also represent no change when compared with the Center’s early October poll, which showed the Democrats with a 47%-46% edge. As seen in that poll, turnout indicators are about on par with what Center surveys found four years ago. The new survey did find 14% of the voter base in the sample had cast their ballots already, either by absentee ballot or one of the early voting procedures allowed by some states. Early voters said they voted for Democratic House candidates over Republicans by a 51%-41% margin.

As in most elections, the pool of likely voters is somewhat more disposed to GOP candidates than are all registered voters, but the gap is smaller than it was in 1998. Obviously, the current poll’s results cannot account for the get-out-the-vote efforts of the two parties over the final three days of the campaign. In that regard, a third of the 1,610 registered voters questioned said that already they had been contacted by one or more partisan or interest group efforts: 20% heard from Democratic organizations and 19% from Republicans.

Voting intentions in the poll follow patterns that have been apparent in recent national elections. The GOP will likely carry the male vote, while Democrats will probably win among women. Fully 85% of non-whites say they will vote Democratic, a figure that rises to 91% among African Americans. Voters below the age of 50 years will divide their vote about equally between the two parties. Those age 50-64 lean Democratic, while voters age 65 and older split about equally. Regionally, the Democrats are likely to win the popular vote in the East and Midwest, while the GOP leads in the South and West. In general, Republicans and Democrats will be about equally loyal to their party’s candidates.

Domestic Issues, Economy Top

Despite the narrow margin in the generic ballot, most voters point to traditional Democratic issues ­ domestic concerns and the economy ­ as the key factors in determining their vote. Asked to identify the most important issues, 44% of voters volunteered domestic issues ­ notably education and health care ­ while 40% named the economy. Only about one-in-five (19%) mentioned terrorism, Iraq or other foreign policy issues.

Democrats have a huge edge among voters who cite major domestic issues. Six-in-ten voters (61%) who mention health care as the most important factor in their vote intend to vote Democratic, compared with just three-in-ten who say they will vote Republican. Democrats hold a similar advantage among those who cite Social Security, while voters who name education as the issue favor Democrats 49%-40%.

There is a parallel split among the smaller pool of voters who cite national security and foreign policy as decisive factors in their vote. Nearly two-thirds (65%) of voters who cite terrorism or generally cite foreign policy intend to vote Republican. But nearly as many of those who specifically mention Iraq as a top issue (62%) support the Democrat in the generic ballot.

But voters who mention the economy as a decisive factor tend to divide fairly evenly along partisan lines. That is consistent with Pew Research Center surveys since early September showing neither party with a clear advantage in being seen as better able to handle the economy (see “Support For Potential Military Action Slips to 55%,” Oct. 30, 2002). Democrats are favored (51%-40%) among those who point to general economic concerns or jobs, while Republicans hold a comparable edge among voters who cite taxes as the top issue.

But Local Concerns Dominate

Yet for all of the attention to broad national issues, a 38% plurality says that state and local concern will make the biggest difference in who they vote for on Nov. 5. That is unchanged from the two most recent midterm elections: in the final stages of the 1998 campaign, 39% pointed to state and local issues as making the biggest difference in their vote, while 38% said that in early November 1994.

Roughly a quarter of voters (26%) cite the traits of the individual candidates ­ their character and experience ­ as making the biggest difference, while nearly as many (23%) cite national issues. Again, this is in line with trends from recent midterm campaigns.

Lower Marks for Terrorism Effort

The public has grown somewhat more critical of the government’s efforts to combat terrorism. While 69% say the government is doing at least fairly well in this struggle (15% very well, 54% fairly well), that is a decline from 83% a year ago. And the proportion who give the government negative marks for its anti-terrorism campaign has climbed steadily ­ from 13% in early November 2001 to 27% today.

At the same time, an increasing number of Americans expect the economy to improve in the coming year. A 46% plurality believes the economy will be better off a year from now, while 31% expect it to remain the same and 17% expect economic conditions to worsen. In early October, 37% of the public said they anticipated the economy would improve, while 39% said it would stay the same and 18% thought it would get worse.

Democrats Consider Party Balance

Among those who intend vote Democratic, a 56% majority says that the issue of which party controls Congress is a factor in their vote. By comparison, party control is cited as a factor by 49% of Republican voters. The salience of this issue has grown among voters on both sides since early October, when 49% of Democratic voters and just 39% of Republican voters said they would consider the partisan balance in Congress when they voted.

Republican voters continue to say their congressional vote is a vote in support of the president ­ nearly six-in-ten (54%) say this is the case. In 1998, just a third (35%) of Democratic voters considered their midterm vote to be a vote for President Clinton.

Most Democratic voters (56%) say Bush is not a factor in their vote, while three-in-ten consider their vote to be a vote against the president. This is consistent with the 1998 midterms, when 36% of Republican voters said their vote was in opposition to Bill Clinton.

Just one-in-ten voters (11%) say this Congress has accomplished more than other recent Congresses. More than twice as many (27%) think it has underachieved, while the majority (54%) say its productivity has been about the same as in previous years. Those who say Congress has done well favor Republican candidates by nearly two-to-one (59% vs. 31% who plan to vote Democratic). Those who think Congress has performed poorly favor the Democrats by a 50% to 39% margin.

Competitive Districts

The level of voter outreach has been particularly high in competitive districts, where fully 42% of registered voters and 58% of likely voters report that they have been contacted by a candidate, campaign or other group.

Voters in competitive districts are noticing what they see as a particularly high level of negative campaigning. Fully six-in-ten voters in competitive districts say there is more mudslinging and negative campaigning this year, compared with fewer than half of voters in races where one candidate has what appears to be a secure lead.

There is no national election for Congress, of course; rather, 435 individual races determine the composition of the House. So while it might seem that the generic ballot is too broad a measure to forecast the outcome, it has proven to be an accurate predictor of the partisan distribution of the national vote.

The final forecast of the generic House vote and the actual vote totals have paralleled each other very closely for nearly a half-century in U.S. elections. The average prediction error in off-year elections since 1954 has been 1.1%. The lines plotting the actual vote against the final poll-based forecast vote by Gallup and the Pew Research Center track almost perfectly over time.

For the most part, the generic ballot presents an accurate picture of the national political environment in mid-term elections. In 1994, for example, it showed the Republicans with a majority of the popular vote for the first time in 40 years, indicating that the GOP would make major gains. Republicans ended up gaining control of the House and have held the majority ever since. Since then, the two parties have been very close in the generic ballot, and the Republicans have clung to a fairly narrow advantage in the House.

With the House closely divided, the generic ballot is incapable of predicting which party will control the House if, as is currently the case, it finds voters evenly split between Democrats and Republicans. It also is less accurate during presidential elections than in the off-years. Typically, the generic House ballot question is asked after the presidential vote question, which may influence responses to the House item (See “Generic Congressional Measures Less Accurate in Presidential Years,” Sept. 18, 1996).

Yet in mid-term elections the generic is an important barometer of national trends. Going back to 1994, a survey conducted in July by the Pew Research Center showed the Republicans running about even with Democrats among likely voters — a reversal of historic patterns and an early signal that national conditions were favoring the GOP. In 1998, the final pre-election poll showed the Democrats drawing even with Republicans, which presaged the modest gains Democrats made that year. The generic ballot also is valuable for detailing the partisan preferences of major demographic and socioeconomic groups, and showing trends there as well.

So what does this mean for this November’s election? The generic measure has been virtually deadlocked all year. The most recent Pew Research Center survey of registered voters (conducted Sept. 5-10) shows a statistical dead heat with Democrats leading 46%-44%; when the sample is narrowed to likely voters the Republicans lead 47%-46%. In the five weeks remaining in the campaign, the generic ballot will be closely monitored for signs of a national trend, however slight, pushing either party into a clear advantage.

The political trends that seem so clear in January and February often have a nasty habit of turning around by November – just ask Al Gore, who at this point in 2000, appeared destined to ride peace and prosperity to the White House.

So in assessing the 2002 election, a healthy dose of caution is in order. Aside from all the possible ramifications of the terror attacks, several variables make this election a forecaster’s nightmare – continuing economic uncertainty, the historically close margins in the House and especially the Senate, the ten-year congressional redistricting, and the shifting patterns in gubernatorial races.

In the House, where Democrats can regain control with a pickup of six seats, as few as two dozen highly contested races may hold the key. The Senate’s nearly even partisan split mirrors the close political division in the nation at large – Republicans can recapture control with the gain of a single seat. The GOP has dominated the nation’s governors’ mansions for years, but that may be starting to change. Republicans will be the incumbent party in 23 of 36 governors’ races, and the recession is wreaking havoc on state budgets.

It is never easy, nearly nine months out, to predict what will be on voters’ minds when they go to the polls. The terror attacks and the subsequent war have made public opinion even more inscrutable. How long can the extraordinary level of national unity last? How long will President Bush maintain his unprecedented popularity? Is the upbeat public mood the “new normal” or will old patterns of partisanship and dissension return before Nov. 5? Does the Enron scandal have partisan fallout?

And then there are more parochial issues and concerns, which always loom large but may be even more important this year, because of the narrow margins in the Senate and House. Can Democratic South Dakota Sen. Tim Johnson survive a GOP onslaught and a formidable opponent? Will a fierce Republican primary in New Hampshire harm the party’s chances of retaining its seat there? Will House redistricting give an advantage to either party?

Public’s Agenda Emerging

Still, the public’s priorities have become a bit clearer in recent weeks, and both parties have begun to reveal their strategies for the fall. Obviously, the top two problems on the public’s agenda are terrorism and the economy, but the latter is moving up and terrorism appears to be fading a bit as a public concern. A mid-October survey by Gallup found that, by more than two-to-one, the public cited terrorism as the top concern. By January, there were more mentions of the economy than terrorism as the top problem facing the country.

The political implications of this shift are already being felt. In his Jan. 29 State of the Union address, President Bush bluntly described how much the United States still needs to do to defeat terrorism – indeed, well more than half his speech was devoted to antiterrorism efforts abroad and at home. Yet he also vowed to get the economy moving, summing up his approach with a single word – “jobs.”

Bush’s speech served to remind Americans, if any needed reminding, of the continuing threat of future terrorism – an issue on which the GOP holds a huge lead over Democrats. At the same time, he demonstrated his intention not to ignore the economy, where the GOP’s advantage is less pronounced and Democrats perceive some vulnerability.

Barring another terrorist attack, it is hard to imagine anything other than fixing the economy as this year’s number one issue. While the recent economic news has been fairly positive, public opinion on the economy is usually a lagging indicator. In some polls, it even took until 1996 for the public to be convinced that the nation was out of recession.

While expressing unqualified support of Bush on the war, Democrats have sought to play to their traditional strengths – healthcare, retirement programs and the environment. But many of those issues, which rated near the top of the public’s agenda a year ago, have slipped into the political ether since Sept. 11. Pew found that the proportion of the public rating Medicare prescription drug benefits as a top priority has tumbled 19 points since last January; strengthening Medicare has fallen 16 points as a top priority; and HMO reform also has dropped 16 points.

Consequently, Republicans currently are faring much better than Democrats in this battle of competing agendas. They have the edge on the most important public priorities, and Bush’s popularity has helped the GOP in areas in which they had been weak – such as education. Yet if the public’s interest in healthcare and entitlements likely has been suspended, it has not been abolished. If peace persists and the economy comes back slowly, these issues could well come roaring back by fall.

National or Local?

Presidential advisor Karl Rove recently made headlines by suggesting that GOP candidates could slipstream on Bush’s popularity by campaigning on the president’s successes in waging the war on terrorism. Not surprisingly, Rove’s approach enraged Democrats, but the idea of tapping into the president’s 80% approval ratings seems obvious from a political standpoint.

Yet this strategy entails significant risks. First, the public may turn against attempts to “politicize” the war. Perhaps more important, while Bush has boosted the GOP’s ratings on issues, he has had less of a positive impact for Republicans in the generic congressional ballot. Indeed, recent polls show neither party holding a clear edge.

History is replete with cases of wartime presidents who were unable convert their victories abroad into electoral triumphs for their parties. As in the past, local concerns – farmers’ woes in South Dakota, the budget crisis in Florida – may be more decisive factors than the ease with which US forces dispatched the Taliban. In a mid-January NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, 43% cited a congressional candidate’s record as an important factor in deciding their vote, against 20% who mentioned Bush’s endorsement.

The lessons of the past two midterm elections are also instructive. In both cases, it took voter anger to nationalize the elections. Republicans triggered a backlash in 1998 when they pushed for Clinton’s impeachment. Four years earlier, Democrats only belatedly saw the public anger that was building against Congress and government – and paid by losing their 40-year control of Capitol Hill.

The mood this year is completely different – the public feels better about its leaders, and members of both parties, than it has in years. It wants, rather it expects, the wartime spirit of bipartisan cooperation that prevailed in the wake of the attacks to carry over to this year’s debates over the economy and health care. That will not happen – the level of partisan tension seems to increase by the week – but it is in neither party’s interest to be perceived as too aggressive, or as overplaying their political hands.