Like other non battleground states, Arkansas is receiving minimal attention as a factor in the presidential campaign.

While the national focus is understandably on the tight presidential race, there are other elements of next month’s elections that merit attention - congressional and state legislative races in particular.

It is entirely possible that regardless of who is elected president, neither party is likely to have a significant advantage in Congress. The result could be more of the gridlock that has characterized recent years in Washington. It is possible that the winning presidential candidate might have coattails suff cient to insure a majority in both house of Congress. But even that unlikely development would not assure a smooth legislative path in Washington, particularly because of the way things work in the Senate. These days almost any substantive legislation requires 60 votes, a number neither party is likely to attain.

The current makeup of the Senate is 51 Democrats, 47 Republicans, and 2 Independents (who generally vote with the Democrats). At one point it was thought that the Republicans might win a majority in the Senate, although a narrow one.

While that is still possible, prospects for a GOP Senate majority are slim at best, and neither party seems likely to approach the 60 seats need to be “filibuster proof.”

Some analysts have argued that President Obama had a substantial majority in Congress during his fi rst two years,but the reality is a little different. There were only two brief periods, totaling less than five months, when Democrats might have had the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster. Even then, illnesses and other factors further limited the majority.

Twenty-three of the 33 Senate seats up for election are currently held by Democrats. Right now, best estimates are that 17 of the 33 are likely or leaning Democrat, with 6 likely or leaning Republican and 10 considered toss-ups. Even in the improbable event that Republicans won all the toss-ups, they would have 53 seats, a majority, but certainly not enough to thwart a fi libuster.

Arkansas is not one of the 33 states with Senate elections this year.

However, neighboring Missouri has a hotly contested race involving controversial Republican Todd Akin. Incumbent Democrat Claire McCaskill was originally thought to be highly vulnerable in a state where Obama is running way behind. But Akin’s ill-informed and insensitive comments about “legitimate rape” set oft a firestorm. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has subsequently kept his distance from Akin. However, some other prominent Republicans are actively backing Akin with the rationale that the highest priority is getting a party majority in the Senate.

Polls and political analysts have McCaskill running ahead, but an Akin victory can’t be ruled out.

Although Republican Senate hopes have been dimmed somewhat by the Akin flap and several other candidates who have faltered or face stronger-than-expected Democrats, Republicans will almost certainly retain control of the U.S. House - barring a tectonic shift in political sentiment. The current breakdown is 242 Republicans, 193 Democrats.

Democrats would have topick up at least 25 seats to gain a majority. Even if Obama is re-elected, not since Ulysses S. Grant’s re-election in 1872 has a president won a second term and seen his party gain 25 or more House seats.

Republicans are expected to pick up one seat in Arkansas, with Tom Cotton favored to replace retiring Democrat Mike Ross in the 4th District, giving the GOP all four of the state’s House seats.

Republicans also expect to do well in races for the Arkansas General Assembly, aspiring to win a majority of legislative seats. Democrats now have a slim majority: 53 of 100 House seats and20 of 35 Senate seats. A GOP majority in either or both chambers is certainly conceivable. However, several of the Arkansas Republican candidates have stirred controversy with revelations about their racially charged or bigoted statements or writings.

In turn, Republican state leaders have said they will no longer contribute to the campaigns of those candidates.

Meanwhile, several national organizations, including Americans for Prosperity, the conservative group backed by billionaires Charles and David Koch, are spending heavily in the state,supporting Republican state legislative candidates.

AFP is reportedly spending $500,000 this year and $1 million over two years to boost Republicans.

It is entirely possible such groups are making this unprecedented eft ort at the state level because of the likelihood of continued gridlock in Washington and the ability to have more success in pushing their agenda in state legislatures.

Much remains uncertain about election outcomes, but unlocking gridlock won’t come easily.

HOYT PURVIS IS A JOURNALISM AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS PROFESSOR.

Opinion, Pages 13 on 10/14/2012