Early voting jumps as millions more Americans vote ahead of midterms

Early voting lets eligible voters cast ballots before Election Day. The article includes both ballots returned by mail and votes cast in person during an advance period. Election Day voting happens on the officially designated day, while early voting spreads participation across earlier dates. This matters because it changes when campaigns and election officials see voters participating.

Texas shows how this works. Its two-week early in-person voting period ends Friday, and more than 6.3 million Texans had voted by Wednesday. Those voters did not wait for Election Day. Some states also count returned mail ballots in their early-voting totals, so the national figure combines different advance methods.

More than 43 million people had voted early across 47 states and Washington, D.C. That total was nearly 10 million higher than at the same point in 2022. It shows strong advance participation, but the election still continues until all eligible voters have their opportunity to vote.

The national early-voting total had passed 43 million people five days before Election Day. It includes Americans who voted early in person or returned mail ballots. Compared with the same point in 2022, the count was nearly 10 million higher. That makes the increase large in both absolute and political terms.

The AP analysis covered 47 states and Washington, D.C. The comparison involved 48 states and the nation’s capital four years earlier. Because the coverage was not identical, the figures provide a strong snapshot but not a perfectly matching national count. They still show advance voting running well ahead of the last midterm election.

The increase does not identify the final turnout or election results. People who vote early are already counted, but others may still vote on Election Day. The early total therefore signals unusually strong participation before the deadline, while the full electorate remains unknown until voting ends and ballots are counted.

The biggest increases appeared in states where Senate contests could be especially consequential. Texas early voting was up 50 percent from the same point four years earlier. Maine, Michigan, North Carolina and Kansas each recorded increases above 30 percent. South Carolina had the largest listed jump, at 83 percent.

These states share a competitive Senate race, according to the article. Texas also has closely watched House and governor’s contests. More than 6.3 million Texans had voted early by Wednesday, compared with 4.2 million at the same point four years ago. In South Carolina, voters were choosing a successor to the late Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham.

The pattern matters because early participation is rising most sharply where control of the Senate is being contested. It does not reveal which party will win or which candidates early voters supported. It does show that voters in several high-profile states are participating well before Election Day, increasing attention on the final turnout.

Party-based early-voting totals describe participation patterns, not ballot choices. They count voters associated with a party in states that provide affiliation information. That information can show whether more Democrats or Republicans have voted early, but it cannot prove which candidates those voters selected. Ballots are not translated into candidate totals by the affiliation data.

The article reports about 6.8 million Democrats and 5.2 million Republicans among early voters in states providing this information. A Democratic-affiliated voter could support a Republican candidate, choose a third-party candidate, or leave a contest blank. A Republican-affiliated voter could make the opposite choices. Party labels and selections are separate pieces of information.

The figures also exclude some early voters nationwide because not every state provides party-affiliation data. They therefore offer an incomplete participation snapshot. They can help campaigns understand who is voting early, but only counted ballots can show candidate results after voting ends and election officials complete the count.

Control of the House and Senate determines which party leads the national legislature. The majority party generally controls chamber leadership, committee organization and the schedule for considering bills. It has more influence over which proposals receive hearings and votes. The article identifies this control as a central outcome of the election.

Republicans currently hold both chambers, while voters are deciding whether that arrangement continues two years into Donald Trump’s second term. Senate contests are drawing particular attention in states such as Texas, Michigan, North Carolina, Kansas, Maine and South Carolina. Early-voting increases show intense participation before voters finish deciding the balance.

The consequences extend beyond early-voting totals. A party that wins a chamber gains greater power to shape legislation and oversee government, though passing laws can still require agreement across institutions. The article does not predict a winner. It shows that millions have already voted in an election that will determine control of Congress and other key contests.

Early-voting totals measure timing as well as participation. When the numbers rise, some additional people may be voting who otherwise would not have participated. But some voters may simply move their ballots from Election Day into an earlier period. The early count alone cannot distinguish those two effects.

The article reports more than 43 million early votes, nearly 10 million above the comparable 2022 figure. That is a major increase in advance participation. It does not establish that final turnout will rise by nearly 10 million, because Election Day voters have not yet been added and some early voters may have changed only when they voted.

The final picture will emerge after the election. Officials will need to combine early in-person votes, returned mail ballots and Election Day ballots. Until then, the surge shows that more people are voting earlier, not necessarily that the same number of people will vote overall. The article presents participation momentum, not a final turnout forecast.

House and Senate control is built from separate races. Voters choose a House representative in an individual congressional district and choose a senator in a statewide Senate contest. After those races are decided, the seats won by each party are added within each chamber. The party with more seats generally becomes the majority.

This structure explains why state-level races matter nationally. A competitive Senate contest in Texas, Michigan or North Carolina can change the Senate balance even though the vote occurs in one state. House races work differently because each district contributes one seat. The article highlights Senate, House and governor’s contests in Texas, showing how several local races can matter at once.

The party that wins more House or Senate seats gains control of that chamber. It then has greater influence over leadership, committees and the legislative agenda. Republicans currently hold both chambers, and this election will determine whether they keep that position. Early-voting totals show participation, but seat control depends on the results of individual races.