Isn't this reason-enough to fear a Republican Senate?

Republicans in the Senate for the past 40 years has generally meant a decrease in the amount of money available to Welfare recipients and less money given out in food stamps and the Republicans tend to end the federal extensions on unemployment insurance so some people are forced to get a job that would likely stay on the dole if the Senate was controlled by the Democrats. As a functional Libertarian I have many issues with Senate Republicans, but I do like the fact that they force the lazy to work. And I do understand food stamps and unemployment insurance are needed but they are taken advantage of and the taking advantage of them is the problem I have with them.

The Senate has no direct effect on how many jobs there are. One problem with this kind of correlation is that when the economy swings, it takes time for people to be laid off in the downturns and time for them to be hired in an upturn. It's not necessarily due to whoever is in office at that moment. For example, the crash happened in 2008. The lay offs occurred over the next two years. Obama was president but the actual crash happened under Bush. Who gets the blame or the credit? In fact, the crash was due to some long term lifting of regulations on Wall St. that allowed them to indulge in risky behavior. So the actual blame probably has to be shared across the Clinton and Bush administrations, during which time there were both Republican and Democratic majorities in Congress.

Kendall tau requires both variables be ordinal. How exactly did you rank Republican senate against Democrat senate.

And for reasons of comparison why did you not perform a similar hypothesis test for a Republican House against a Democrat House?

Not only that but if you look at our national debt ...70% has been incurred when Democrats held the Senate