Bipartisan Majorities in the Battlegrounds Say if the People Had More Influence, Congress Would Find More Common Ground

News provided by

Sep 17, 2026, 09:00 ET

Say public opinion on policy should be more prominent in government decision-making and in news coverage

COLLEGE PARK, Md., Sept. 17, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Despite the steady drumbeat of assertions that Americans are highly polarized, bipartisan majorities say that if the public were to have more influence on members of Congress, they would be more likely to find common ground. This is according to new surveys conducted by the Program for Public Consultation (PPC) in 11 competitive states and 28 competitive congressional districts, and nationally.

In battleground states and districts surveyed, people believe, on average, that federally elected officials do what the majority of Americans would do just 35 percent of the time (Democrats 35 percent, Republicans 38 percent). Bipartisan majorities also say that if members of Congress were more influenced by the people, they would be more likely to serve the common good.

When news outlets cover stories about public policy, bipartisan majorities say it is very important that public opinion data be included.

Surveys by PPC and others have consistently revealed that there is more common ground among the people than in Congress. For dozens of issues on which Congress has not been able to find agreement, bipartisan majorities of the public agree on concrete policy solutions. This is true nationally, and in PPC's ongoing battleground survey series.

Steven Kull, Director of the University of Maryland's Program for Public Consultation (PPC) noted, "The American public overwhelmingly feels that if elected officials were to reflect the will of 'We the People,' they would be more likely to find common ground. And as our survey series has shown, there is clearly far more common ground among the people than in Congress."

He adds, "If the public's views were more prominent in the public discourse–in the media and in Congress–this would have a stabilizing and unifying effect."

Common Ground in the Battlegrounds?
This survey release is the ninth in the Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? survey series being conducted by the Program for Public Consultation (PPC) in the run-up to the November election in 11 competitive states and 28 competitive U.S. House districts. The results for all individual states and districts can be found HERE.

Surveys on a total of fifteen topics are being released on a rolling basis until the midterm elections, covering over 100 specific policy questions. The policies – most of which are pending in Congress – were chosen because surveys by PPC and others consistently found majority Republican and Democratic agreement nationally.

Previously released surveys: Artificial Intelligence, Housing, Healthcare, Low-Income Assistance, Families and Children, Social Security, Immigration, and Abortion and Birth Control.

Federally Elected Officials Seen as Out of Step With the People
Asked to estimate what percent of the time elected officials in the federal government make the same decisions that the majority of Americans would make, the mean estimate was less than half the time. Estimates in the battlegrounds range from 32 to 41 percent (Democrats 30 to 42 percent, Republicans 31 to 48 percent). On average across the battlegrounds, the estimate is 35 percent (Democrats 35 percent, Republicans 38 percent). Nationally, estimates were 41 percent of the time (Democrats 38 percent, Republicans 47 percent).

Congress Seen as More Likely to Find Common Ground, Serve the Common Good if They Would Listen to the People
Bipartisan majorities of over eight in ten say that if members of Congress were more influenced by the views of the people, they would be more likely to "find common ground" (Democrats 82 to 97%, Republicans 80 to 95%, overall 84 to 92%). Nationally, a large bipartisan majority said the same (Democrats 88%, Republicans 89%, overall 88%)

Even when presented the argument that polarization in Congress is just a reflection of the general public, large bipartisan majorities opted instead for the argument saying that if members of Congress were to take into account the views of the people, this would help break the logjam in government, because the people are less polarized than Congress. (Democrats 62 to 88%, Republicans 66 to 89%, overall 66 to 82%). Nationally, a large bipartisan majority says the same (Democrats 75%, Republicans 71%, overall 72%).

Overwhelming bipartisan majorities also say that if members of Congress were more influenced by the people than they are now, they would be more likely, "to serve the common good" (Democrats 77 to 94%, Republicans 79 to 94%, overall 80 to 90%). (National data is not available for this question.)

How Responsive Should Congress Be to the Majority Views of Their Constituents?
Very large bipartisan majorities say that if a clear majority of constituents agrees on what should be done about a policy, their views should have substantial influence on their members of Congress. Asked to rate how much influence it should have on a 0-10 scale, the mean response is 7.1 to 8.0 across all states and districts (Democrats 7.1 to 8.2, Republicans 7.2 to 8.2). Nationally, the mean response is 7.8 (Democrats 7.9, Republicans 8.1).

Strong Demand for Including Public Opinion in News Coverage of Policy Debates
Asked how often news pieces about a policy issue should include relevant public opinion data – when there is reliable data – large bipartisan majorities say most of the time or always (Democrats 71 to 88%, Republicans 67 to 89%, overall 67 to 81%). Nationally, a large bipartisan majority says the same (Democrats 81%, Republicans 79%, overall 78%).

Large bipartisan majorities also say that, if Congress is about to vote on a law, it is very or extremely important for news outlets to report on whether a majority of Americans favor or oppose that law (Democrats 65 to 84%, Republicans 60 to 85%, overall 64 to 77%). Nationally, a large bipartisan majority says the same (Democrats 75%, Republicans 79%, overall 75%).

MORE INFORMATION

Methodology
The state and district surveys used for this analysis were fielded May 27 - June 25, 2026, to a total of 19,564 adults, including 600-2,000 in each of the 11 states, and 400-500 in each of the 28 congressional districts. The response rates were 7.1 to 9.0%. The confidence intervals range from +/- 2.9 to 7.6%, and the maximum weights range from 1.9 to 6.9.

The national survey was fielded March 11-19, 2026, with 1,200 adults nationally. The response rate was 8.3%. The confidence interval is +/- 2.9%, and the maximum weight is 1.9.

Sample was obtained from multiple online opt-in panels, including Cint, Dynata and Prodege. Sample collection and quality control was managed by QuantifyAI under the direction of the Program for Public Consultation. The surveys were offered in both English and Spanish.

The samples were pre-stratified and weighted by age, race, ethnicity, gender, education, household income, marital status, and home ownership to match the general adult population. The national sample was further weighted by Census region. Partisan distributions in each sample were within expectations, based on voter registration or Cook's Partisan Voting Index, or weighted to reflect those benchmarks.

About the Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? Survey Series
This project is conducting and releasing a survey series in 11 competitive states and 28 competitive U.S. House districts, being released on a rolling basis through the midterm elections. Surveys will cover 15 topics and include over 100 specific policy questions. The goal of this effort is to determine where there is bipartisan common ground in competitive states and districts across the nation. Additionally, the project seeks to educate the public, policymakers and candidates about the findings; and provide journalists with independent, nonpartisan research that brings the public into the conversation about public policy.

In addition to PPC, project partners include the Civic Innovation Center at the University of Maryland (CivIC), and Voice of the People (VOP), a national nonpartisan organization seeking to give the public a greater voice in government. None of these entities advocate for policy positions or endorse candidates.

States surveyed: Alaska; Georgia; Iowa; Maine; Michigan; Minnesota; Montana; Nebraska; New Hampshire; North Carolina; Ohio; and Texas.

Congressional Districts surveyed: Arizona's 1st and 6th; Colorado's 8th; Iowa's 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th; Maine's 2nd; Michigan's 4th, 7th, 8th and 10th; Montana's 1st; Nebraska's 2nd; Nevada's 3rd; New Jersey's 7th and 9th; New Mexico's 2nd; New York's 3rd, 4th, 17th and 19th; Oregon's 5th; Pennsylvania's 1st, 7th, 8th and 10th; and Washington's 3rd.

Program for Public Consultation
The Program for Public Consultation (PPC), affiliated with the University of Maryland's School of Public Policy, seeks to improve democratic governance by consulting the public and bringing the people's views into the public discourse. It conducts surveys with representative samples on policies proposed by elected officials and shares its findings with government officials, the media, other academics, and the general public.

Civic Innovation Center
The Civic Innovation Center (CivIC) at the University of Maryland's School of Public Policy works to strengthen the foundations of civic health. It contributes to important debates about civic education, civic engagement, and needed democratic reforms in the state of Maryland and nationwide, in partnership with other BIG 10 universities. It works to build the connective tissue that brings together students, scholars and practitioners to help elevate the UMD community's contribution to our wider democracy.

Voice of the People
Voice of the People (VOP) is a nonpartisan organization working to re-anchor our democracy in its founding principles by giving 'We the People' a greater and more effective voice in government. It champions innovative methods and technology that enable the American people to play a role in the policymaking process and provide policymakers with a more accurate understanding of the views of their constituents.

Contact: Jonathan Casaverde, [email protected],(786) 469-9422

SOURCE Program for Public Consultation