On Artificial Intelligence: In Competitive States and Districts, Large Bipartisan Majorities Agree on Proposals for Regulation

News provided by

Jul 20, 2026, 08:00 ET

AI First of 15 Topics in Common Ground in the Battlegrounds?
Survey Series to Run Through the Midterm Elections

COLLEGE PARK, Md., July 20, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- As artificial intelligence becomes integrated into more aspects of the economy and society, new surveys in 11 competitive states and 28 competitive congressional districts reveal common ground between Democrats and Republicans on proposals to regulate artificial intelligence.

Large majorities of both Democrats and Republicans favor the federal government:

creating a federal agency devoted to monitoring and regulating AI
requiring existing and new AI programs that make critical decisions to pass a government test (e.g. health insurance claims, hiring, etc.)
requiring deepfakes be labelled as such
prohibiting political campaigns from using deepfakes

Large bipartisan majorities favor the U.S. working with other nations to create international treaties:

regulating large-scale AI programs
banning weapons that can fire on targets without a direct human command

In nearly all of the competitive states and districts surveyed, all proposals received two-thirds support among both Democrats and Republicans.

The domestic proposals tested are derived from congressional legislation, and the international ones come from international organizations, including the United Nations and Red Cross.

Steven Kull, Director of the University of Maryland's Program for Public Consultation (PPC) noted, "We're surveying to determine how much common ground there is in battleground states and districts. In this first survey, it is clear there is broad agreement among Democrats and Republicans that the federal government should play an active role in regulating artificial intelligence."

Common Ground in the Battlegrounds?
This survey release is the first 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.

Surveys on fourteen additional topics will be released on a rolling basis between now and the mid-term 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. The results for all individual states and districts can be found here.

New Federal Agency to Oversee AI
Creating a new federal agency to, "monitor new AI programs and try to anticipate potential problems, define best practices for developing and using AI programs, make policy recommendations, and enforce regulation," was favored by bipartisan majorities in all battleground states and districts surveyed. Among Democrats 76 to 89% were in favor, among Republicans 66 to 85%, and overall in the battlegrounds 75 to 83%. Nationally, 85% of Democrats were in favor, 79% of Republicans, and 80% overall.

Regulating AI Programs That Make Critical Decisions
Bipartisan majorities in all battleground states and districts surveyed favored two proposals to regulate, "AI programs that make decisions that can have significant impacts on people (e.g. in health insurance claims, loan applications, hiring, etc.)," that aim to ensure they, "follow regulations, have data privacy and security protections, and do not have unintended biases."

Requiring new AI programs that will make critical decisions first pass a government-designed test was favored by 65 to 88% of Democrats, 69 to 91% of Republicans, and 71 to 85% overall across the battlegrounds. Nationally, the proposal was favored by 82% of Democrats, 78% of Republicans, and 78% overall.

Allowing the government to audit AI programs that are already being used to make critical decisions, was favored by 59 to 83% of Democrats, 59 to 80% of Republicans, and 58 to 77% overall across the battlegrounds. Nationally, the proposal was favored by 77% of Democrats, 73% of Republicans, and 74% overall.

Regulating Deepfakes
Two proposals to regulate AI-generated images, video and audio, known as deepfakes, are favored by bipartisan majorities in all battleground states and districts surveyed.

Requiring that any deepfakes, "distributed publicly – e.g. posted online or shown on TV – must have a label that states that it is not real and was generated by AI," was favored by 84 to 95% of Democrats, 80 to 93% of Republicans, and 82 to 91% overall across the battlegrounds. Nationally, the proposal was favored by 88% of Democrats, 89% of Republicans, and 86% overall.

A proposal to, "prohibit political campaigns, including PACs, from using deepfakes in their campaign advertisements," was favored by 71 to 93% of Democrats, 76 to 90% of Republicans, and 77 to 88% overall across the battlegrounds. Nationally, the proposal was favored by 83% of Democrats, 85% of Republicans, and 82% overall.

Creating an International Treaty to Regulate Large-Scale AI
The US working with other nations to "create an international treaty to regulate large-scale AI programs," was favored by bipartisan majorities in all battleground states and districts surveyed (70 to 89% of Democrats, 63 to 85% of Republicans, 70 to 84% overall across the battlegrounds). Nationally, this was favored by 82% of Democrats, 78% of Republicans, and 77% overall.

Banning Nations from Developing Fully Autonomous Weapons
Bipartisan majorities in all battleground states and districts surveyed favored the US working with other nations to, "create an international treaty that would prohibit the development and use of AI-powered weapons that can fire on targets without a direct human command" (62 to 90% of Democrats, 59 to 87% of Republicans, 69 to 84% overall across the battlegrounds). Nationally, this was favored by 82% of Democrats, 81% of Republicans, and 79% overall.

MORE INFORMATION

About the Surveys
The state and district surveys used for this analysis were fielded May 27 - June 25, 2026, to a total of 19,564 adults, including at least 600 in each of the 11 states, and at least 400 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 February 11-26, 2026 with 2,509 adults. The response rate was 7.6%. The confidence interval is +/- 2.9%, and the maximum weight is 2.5.

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, region, marital status, and home ownership to match the respective adult population. The national sample was also weighted by Census region and partisan affiliation. In the state and district samples, the distribution of partisan affiliation were within expectations, based on voter registration for non-leaners and/or Cook's Partisan Voting Index for leaners, or weighted to reflect those benchmarks.

About the Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? Project
The Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? project will conduct and release a survey series in 11 competitive states and 28 competitive U.S. House districts that will be released on a rolling basis between now and the mid-term 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.

Program for Public Consultation
The Program for Public Consultation (PPC), affiliated with the University of Maryland's School of Public Policy, develops and conducts public consultation surveys, in which respondents are informed about and deliberate on policy solutions being proposed by elected officials, and give their recommendations. It seeks to improve democratic governance by consulting representative samples of citizens on key public policy proposals, and sharing its findings with officials in government, 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, (786) 469-9422
[email protected]

SOURCE Program for Public Consultation