Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? 2026

Survey Topics: Demand for Public Consultation Abortion & Birth Control Immigration Social Security Families & Children Low-Income Assistance Healthcare Housing Affordability Artificial Intelligence

For Release: September 17, 2026; 9:00 AM Eastern

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

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

COLLEGE PARK, MD – 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.

For Release: September 10, 2026; 9:00 AM Eastern

Bipartisan Majorities in Battlegrounds Oppose Criminalizing Abortion Before Viability, Favor Greater Access to Birth Control

COLLEGE PARK, MD – Since the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson decision, states have been allowed to criminalize abortion before fetal viability, and over a third of states have done so.

However, new surveys of nearly 20,000 Americans in battleground states and districts find that majorities of both Democrats and Republicans oppose criminalizing abortion before fetal viability. Majorities of Democrats in all but one state also oppose criminalizing abortion after viability, while majorities of Republicans are in favor.

To reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, bipartisan majorities favor the government maintaining or increasing access to birth control. Bipartisan majorities in every competitive state and district surveyed favor proposals to:

increase funding to health care clinics so they can provide free or low-cost birth control to women who can not afford it
prohibit states from banning or restricting access to birth control
continue the federal requirement that health insurance covers birth control (with religious and moral exemptions for some employers).

These policies are derived from federal legislation.

Steven Kull, Director of the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation (PPC) noted, “While many Americans disagree on the morality of abortion, bipartisan majorities in battleground states and districts agree that abortion should not be made a crime, at least not before fetal viability, consistent with the Roe v. Wade standard.”

Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? Survey Series

This release is the eighth in the Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? survey series being conducted by PPC in 11 competitive states and 28 competitive U.S. House districts in advance of the midterm elections.

Surveys on fifteen topics are being released on a rolling basis, covering over 100 specific policy questions. The policies – most of which are pending legislative proposals in Congress – have elicited bipartisan agreement nationally. PPC is exploring whether the same bipartisan common ground found at the national level exists in the battlegrounds. The results for all individual states and districts surveyed can be found here. Previously released surveys: Artificial Intelligence, Housing, Healthcare, Low-Income Assistance, Families and Children, Social Security, and Immigration.

Criminalizing Abortion

Respondents were asked whether it should be a crime to provide an abortion, punishable with prison time or major fines for the doctor. Three options were presented:

make abortion a crime at any point during the pregnancy (selected by 1 to 17% of Democrats, 9 to 34% of Republicans, 6 to 21% overall)
make it a crime only after the fetus is viable (22–24 weeks), meaning it can likely survive outside the womb (selected by 16 to 40% of Democrats, 39 to 60% of Republicans, 28 to 49% overall)
do not make it a crime (selected by 42 to 82% of Democrats, 17 to 39% of Republicans, 30 to 58% overall)

Thus, combining the second and third positions reveals that bipartisan majorities oppose making abortion a crime before fetal viability. This includes 82 to 99% of Democrats, 63 to 91% of Republicans, and 77 to 94% overall. Nationally, nine in ten Democrats (91%) and three in four Republicans (74%) say the same, and 84% overall.

Majorities of Democrats in all but one competitive state surveyed go further, and oppose making abortion a crime at all: 51 to 82%, with Alaska being the exception at 42%.

Proposals to criminalize abortion at earlier stages of pregnancy have also been put forward. A 2024 PPC survey asked the same question as in the current survey, but included an additional option to criminalize abortion after 15 weeks. Even with that option included, bipartisan majorities nationally and in six swing states still supported not making abortion a crime before fetal viability (National: Democrats 90%, Republicans 61%; Six swing states: Democrats 83 to 93%, Republicans 57 to 70%).

Views in States with Abortion Bans Before Fetal Viability

Since the Dobbs v. Jackson decision, 20 states have made abortion a crime at stages before fetal viability, or at all stages, including several states that were surveyed. In Texas, providing an abortion is a crime at all stages of pregnancy. In Iowa and Georgia, it is criminalized after 6 weeks of pregnancy. And in Nebraska and North Carolina, it is criminalized after 12 weeks.

Contrary to their state’s law, large bipartisan majorities in each of those states oppose criminalizing abortion before fetal viability.

Texas: Democrats 91%, Republicans 66%, overall 77%
Iowa: Democrats 97%, Republicans 72%, overall 84%
Georgia: Democrats 86%, Republicans 72%, overall 80%
Nebraska: Democrats 94%, Republicans 63%, overall 79%
North Carolina: Democrats 90%, Republicans 70%, overall 82%

Access to Birth Control

Three proposals to maintain or increase access to birth control get robust bipartisan support in every competitive state and district surveyed.

Bipartisan majorities favor the government increasing funding to health care clinics so they can provide long-term birth control for free or at low-cost to women who can not afford it (Democrats 83 to 96%, Republicans 59 to 87%, overall 72 to 88%). Nationally, 91% of Democrats and 72% of Republicans are in favor, and 81% overall.

Ensuring a nationwide legal right to purchase birth control, by prohibiting states from banning or restricting access to it, is favored by bipartisan majorities (Democrats 78 to 95%, Republicans 57 to 83%, overall 69 to 86%). Nationally, 86% of Democrats and 73% of Republicans are in favor, and 79% overall.

Continuing to require that health insurance cover birth control, with some religious and moral exemptions for some employers is favored by bipartisan majorities (Democrats 74 to 96%, Republicans 64 to 86%, overall 74 to 88%). Nationally, 90% of Democrats and 77% of Republicans are in favor, and 82% overall.

More Information

About the Surveys

The state and district surveys used for this analysis were fielded July 21 – August 17, 2026, to a total of 19,949 adults, including 600–2,016 in each of the 11 states, and 499–516 in each of the 28 congressional districts. The response rates were 7.1 to 8.9%. The confidence intervals range from +/- 2.9 to 8.1%, and the maximum weights range from 3.7 to 10.0.

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.

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. In some states and districts, partisan affiliation was 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

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 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.

Program for Public Consultation

Civic Innovation Center

Voice of the People

Slideshow Presented at 9/2/26 Webinar on Immigration Findings

For Release: September 2, 2026; 9:00 AM Eastern

Bipartisan Majorities in the Battlegrounds Agree on Proposals to Give Most Undocumented Immigrants Path to Legal Status, Deter Illegal Immigration

COLLEGE PARK, MD – While immigration is a highly divisive issue in Washington, DC, new surveys in 11 competitive states and 28 congressional districts across the country reveal substantial bipartisan common ground among the public on proposals to address the millions of undocumented people living in the US.

For the vast majority of undocumented immigrants – people who have been in the US for years and have no criminal record – majorities of both Democrats and Republicans favor offering them a pathway to become legal residents, if they pay a penalty and any owed taxes. For people brought to the US illegally as children, bipartisan majorities favor offering them a pathway to citizenship. These proposals have bipartisan support in every state and district surveyed.

For undocumented immigrants who have been convicted of a crime, deportation is favored by bipartisan majorities.

To deter immigrants from coming to the US illegally for work – the primary motivator for most immigrants – and steer them into a legal pathway, bipartisan majorities in every competitive state and district surveyed favor a proposal to:

require employers to verify new employees’ legal status using E-Verify, and
increase the number of work visas in line with the demand for labor

To reduce the amount of time that asylum-seekers wait in the US for their court hearing, which is often years, bipartisan majorities favor hiring more immigration court judges to speed up asylum cases.

All proposals presented were derived from Congressional legislation.

Steven Kull, Director of the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation (PPC) noted, “Bipartisan majorities favor reforms that would reduce the number of immigrants living in the US without legal status, but not through mass deportation. Rather, Americans want to allow the millions who have been here for years and not committed any serious crimes to come out of the shadows and be able to live and work here legally.”

Common Ground in the Battlegrounds?

This survey release is the seventh 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 a total of fifteen topics will be 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. The results for all individual states and districts can be found here. Previously released surveys: Artificial Intelligence, Housing, Healthcare, Low-Income Assistance, Families and Children, and Social Security.

Addressing Undocumented Immigrants in the U.S.

For undocumented immigrants who have been convicted of a crime, large bipartisan majorities favor the government deporting them (Democrats 70 to 91%, Republicans 85 to 98%, overall 80 to 90%). Nationally, a bipartisan majority is in favor (Democrats 79%, Republicans 94%, overall 85%).

For undocumented immigrants who have been in the US for years, and have not committed a crime, bipartisan majorities favor offering them legal status if they pay a penalty and any taxes they owe (Democrats 75 to 89%, Republicans 55 to 78%, overall 65 to 84%). Nationally, a bipartisan majority is in favor (Democrats 84%, Republicans 69%, overall 77%).

For undocumented immigrants who were brought to the US illegally as children, and have not committed a serious crime, large bipartisan majorities favor offering them a path to citizenship (Democrats 80 to 95%, Republicans 60 to 82%, overall 70 to 86%). Nationally, a bipartisan majority is in favor (Democrats 89%, Republicans 76%, overall 83%).

Reducing Illegal Immigration

To reduce the number of immigrants coming to the US illegally for work, which is the main reason they do so, and steer them into a legal pathway, a two-part proposal is favored by bipartisan majorities:

require employers to verify the legal status of their workers using the E-Verify system, and
increase the number of work visas in line with the demand for workers.

Over two-thirds of Democrats (75 to 90%) and Republicans (67 to 89%) are in favor, and overall (76 to 85%). Nationally, a bipartisan majority is in favor (Democrats 84%, Republicans 82%, overall 83%).

Reducing Wait Times in the U.S. for Asylum Seekers

To reduce the amount of time that asylum seekers wait in the US for their court hearing, which can be several years, bipartisan majorities favor hiring several hundred more asylum judges and staff to significantly speed up the process of evaluating claims (Democrats 72 to 87%, Republicans 66 to 83%, overall 71 to 83%). Nationally, a bipartisan majority is in favor (Democrats 83%, Republicans 73%, overall 76%).

More Information

About the Surveys

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.

About the Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? Survey Series

The Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? 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.

Program for Public Consultation

Civic Innovation Center

Voice of the People

For Release: August 20, 2026; 9:00 AM Eastern

Bipartisan Majorities in the Battlegrounds Agree on How to Prevent Social Security’s Insolvency and Preserve Benefits

COLLEGE PARK, MD – While Congress has been unable to agree on solutions to prevent Social Security’s pending insolvency, new surveys of nearly 20,000 Americans in 11 competitive states and 28 competitive congressional districts reveal how Americans across party lines would tackle the budget shortfall and prevent benefit cuts.

Proposals to increase revenue and reduce spending, which together would eliminate Social Security’s budget shortfall, are favored by majorities of Democrats and Republicans across the battlegrounds. They would:

subject income over $400,000 to the payroll tax
gradually increase the payroll tax
reduce benefits for top lifetime earners
gradually increase the full retirement age

Proposals to increase benefits, that would slightly increase Social Security’s budget shortfall, are also favored by bipartisan majorities. They would:

raise the minimum monthly benefit
change cost-of-living adjustments, tying them to what older adults tend to buy, which would slightly increase benefits

These measures are derived from federal legislation, and proposals by the Congressional Budget Office, and the Social Security Administration.

Steven Kull, Director of the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation (PPC) noted, “For decades Social Security has been considered an untouchable third rail in Congress, yet majorities of Americans from both parties agree on taking steps that would solve the problem and extend Social Security’s full benefits for decades.”

Common Ground in the Battlegrounds?

This survey release is the sixth 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.

Solving Social Security’s Budget Shortfall

Respondents were told they would be evaluating “options that would reduce the budget shortfall of the Social Security program and thus extend the amount of time that the program can provide full benefits.” Four options were presented along with the amount that each would reduce the program’s budget shortfall.

Bipartisan majorities in most of the competitive states and districts surveyed favor options that would completely eliminate the budget shortfall and solve Social Security’s long-term insolvency.

Increasing Revenue

Subjecting wages over $400,000 to the payroll tax – which currently does not apply to income over $185,000 – is favored by at least two-thirds of Democrats (73 to 89%) and Republicans (66 to 84%) in all states and districts surveyed, and overall (70 to 85%). Nationally, 83% of Democrats and 77% of Republicans are in favor (overall 79%). This proposal would reduce the budget shortfall by 61 percent.

Gradually increasing the payroll tax from 6.2 to 6.5 percent is favored by majorities of Democrats in all states and districts (55 to 81%). Among Republicans, majorities are in favor in 37 of the 39 competitive states and districts surveyed, with support ranging from 46 to 74%. Overall, majorities are in favor across the battlegrounds (56 to 72%). Nationally, a bipartisan majority is in favor (Democrats 66%, Republicans 61%, overall 62%). This proposal would reduce the budget shortfall by 15 percent.

Reducing Benefits

Reducing benefits for the top 20 percent of lifetime earners is favored by majorities of Republicans in all competitive states and districts surveyed (53 to 74%). Among Democrats, majorities are in favor in 38 of the 39 states and districts surveyed and divided in one (50 to 79%). Overall, majorities are in favor across the battlegrounds (56 to 73%). Nationally, a large bipartisan majority is in favor (Democrats 69%, Republicans 62%, overall 65%). This would reduce the budget shortfall by 11 percent.

Gradually increasing the full retirement age from age 67 to 68 by 2033 is favored by majorities of Democrats in 29 of the 39 competitive states and districts, with support ranging from 39 to 71%. Among Republicans, majorities are in favor in 36 states and districts, with support ranging from 46 to 72%. Overall, majorities are in favor in 32 states and districts surveyed (47 to 66%). Nationally, a bipartisan majority is in favor (Democrats 55%, Republicans 58%, overall 56%). This would reduce the budget shortfall by 15 percent.

Majorities are opposed to raising the retirement age in one state (Ohio 51%) and two districts (MI-7 52%, MI-10 51%). However, in none of these cases is there a majority of both Democrats and Republicans opposed.

Increasing Social Security Benefits

Respondents were also presented two options for increasing Social Security benefits, along with the amount that each would increase the shortfall.

Raising the minimum monthly benefit from $1,125 to $1,630 (i.e. equal to 125% of the federal poverty line) is favored by over two-thirds of both Democrats (72 to 84%) and Republicans (68 to 83%), and overall in all states and districts (72 to 82%). Nationally, 81% of Democrats and 76% of Republicans are in favor (78% overall). This would increase the budget shortfall by 8%.

Large bipartisan majorities favor changing the formula used to calculate annual increases in Social Security benefits, by tying them to the goods and services that older adults tend to buy, which would slightly increase benefits for all (Democrats 62 to 77%, Republicans 60 to 84%, overall 64 to 73%). Nationally, a large bipartisan majority is in favor (Democrats 73%, Republicans 70%, overall 70%). This would increase the budget shortfall by 12%.

More Information

About the Surveys

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.

About the Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? Survey Series

The Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? project is running 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 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.

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

Voice of the People

For Release: August 13, 2026; 9:00 AM Eastern

Large Bipartisan Majorities in the Battlegrounds Favor More Federal Support for Childcare, Universal Preschool, Paid Family Leave, and Higher Child Tax Credit

COLLEGE PARK, MD – As the cost of raising a child continues to be a major concern, new surveys of nearly 20,000 Americans in 11 competitive states and 28 congressional districts reveal extensive bipartisan common ground in support of wide-ranging federal assistance for families.

Large majorities of both Democrats and Republicans in competitive states and districts surveyed favor:

increasing federal funding to establish free universal preschools
subsidizing childcare for low- and middle-income parents
increasing the Child Tax Credit, back to the level it was temporarily raised to during the Covid era
establishing a national paid leave program to allow workers to take 12 weeks off to care for a new child, an ill family member, or themselves

The policy questions included in the surveys were derived from federal legislative proposals.

Steven Kull, Director of the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation (PPC) noted, “Raising a child has never been more expensive, and families across the country are feeling that. Bipartisan majorities in the battleground states and districts favor multiple proposals in Congress that ease those financial burdens, including raising the Child Tax Credit, and subsidizing childcare.”

Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? Survey Series

This release is the fifth in the Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? survey series being conducted by PPC in 11 competitive states and 28 competitive U.S. House districts in advance of the midterm elections.

Reducing the Cost of Preschool and Childcare

Bipartisan majorities support the federal government providing $25 billion to states or cities that want it, to help them create or expand preschool programs for 3- and 4-year-olds that would be available to all families free of cost. Over three quarters of Democrats (75 to 92%) and over half of Republicans (56 to 84%) are in favor. Nationally, 89% of Democrats and 69% of Republicans are in favor.

The federal government providing states with funds to subsidize childcare, so that low and middle income families spend no more than 7% of their income on childcare, is favored by bipartisan majorities (Democrats 79 to 93%, Republicans 56 to 84%). Nationally, 89% of Democrats and 77% of Republicans are in favor.

Increasing the Child Tax Credit

Increasing the Child Tax Credit from $2,000 up to $3,600, and making it fully refundable (meaning people who owe little or no federal taxes can get the credit as cash), is favored by large majorities of Democrats (73 to 91%) and Republicans (61 to 86%). Nationally, 84% of Democrats and 74% of Republicans are in favor. This is the amount the tax credit was increased to during the Covid-era, but that increase was temporary and expired in 2022.

Creating a National Paid Family and Medical Leave Program

Large majorities of Democrats (72 to 96%) and Republicans (57 to 80%) favor a proposal to allow all workers to take up to 12 weeks of paid leave, to care for a newborn or a family member with a health condition, or to recover from a serious illness. During that time they would receive two-thirds of their wages, up to $4,000 a month, which would be funded by a new 0.2% payroll tax on both employers and employees. Nationally, 84% of Democrats and 68% of Republicans are in favor.

More Information

About the Surveys

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.

About the Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? Survey Series

Program for Public Consultation

Civic Innovation Center

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.

For Release: August 6, 2026

Bipartisan Majorities in the Battlegrounds Agree: SNAP Benefits, Medicaid, EITC, Minimum Wage Should Be Increased

Amid ongoing political debates about spending on low-income assistance programs, new surveys in 11 competitive states and 28 competitive congressional districts reveal bipartisan common ground in favor of the federal government providing more assistance to low-income households.

When given the option to increase, decrease or maintain current levels, majorities of both Democrats and Republicans favored:

Increasing Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, also known as food stamps
Increasing federal spending on Medicaid, to provide health insurance to more low-income people
Raising the federal minimum wage

Proposals to increase the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) for low-income workers without children, and expand eligibility, are also favored by majorities of both Democrats and Republicans.

Steven Kull, Director of the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation (PPC), noted, “To help low-income families afford healthcare and groceries, majorities of Americans across parties and all income levels favor more government assistance.”

Common Ground in the Battlegrounds?

This survey release is the fourth 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 eleven additional topics will be released on a rolling basis between now and 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. The results for all individual states and districts can be found here. Previously released surveys include: Artificial Intelligence, Housing and Healthcare.

SNAP Benefits

Majorities of Democrats (71 to 93%) and Republicans (58 to 87%) say monthly benefits for individuals living alone should be higher than the current average of $170. Nationally, 88% of Democrats and 70% of Republicans say benefits should be higher.

Across the battleground states and districts surveyed, as a whole, the median Democrat says SNAP benefits for individuals living alone should be $250, and the median Republican $230. Nationally, the median Democrat proposes $250 and the median Republican $200.

For monthly SNAP benefits to single mothers, majorities of Democrats (58 to 80%) say it should be higher than the current average of $530. Among Republicans in ten states and 19 districts, majorities say the benefit should be higher (51 to 73%). In one state and nine districts, a majority of Republicans do not support an increase, but in no cases do a majority favor reductions. Nationally, 67% of Democrats and 52% of Republicans say benefits should be higher.

Across the battleground states and districts surveyed as a whole, the median Democrat says monthly SNAP benefits for single mothers should be $600, and the median Republican $554. Nationally, the median Democrat proposes $600 and the median Republican $550.

The government providing discounts on fruit and vegetables bought with SNAP benefits is favored by over two-thirds of both Democrats (78 to 97%) and Republicans (68 to 93%). Nationally, 93% of Democrats and 90% of Republicans are in favor.

Spending on Medicaid

Given the option to increase federal spending on Medicaid and cover more people, keep it the same, or decrease it and cover fewer people, majorities of Democrats (74 to 91%) and Republicans (51 to 83%) say it should be increased. Nationally, 83% of Democrats and 59% of Republicans choose to increase spending. (This survey finding was previously released on July 30.)

The Federal Minimum Wage

Told that the federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour and asked to specify how much they think it should be, overwhelming majorities of Democrats (90 to 99%) and Republicans (80 to 96%) chose a higher wage. Nationally, 97% of Democrats and 90% of Republicans chose to raise it.

Across the battleground states and districts as a whole, the median Democrat says it should be $15 an hour, and the median Republican $12. Nationally, the median Democrat also proposes $15 and the median Republican $11.

Tax Credits for Low-Income Workers Without Children

Bipartisan majorities favor several proposals to expand and increase the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), specifically for low-income workers without children (who receive substantially less benefits than workers with children).

Raising the limit on the maximum amount of the EITC credit from $630 to $1,300 a year is favored by large majorities of Democrats (79 to 90%) and Republicans (64 to 85%). Nationally, 82% of Democrats and 73% of Republicans are in favor.

Raising the limit on the amount of savings people can have and still get the EITC credit (for individuals from $18,500 to $24,000; for married couples from $25,500 to $33,000) is favored by over two-thirds of Democrats (76 to 89%) and Republicans (68 to 86%). Nationally, 87% of Democrats and 77% of Republicans are in favor.

Lowering the age of eligibility from 25 to 21 is favored by majorities of Democrats (62 to 84%) and Republicans (52 to 71%). Nationally, 76% of Democrats and 63% of Republicans are in favor.

Support by Income Level

A separate analysis was conducted on the aggregate sample of all states and districts to determine the views of each of these policies by household income. Large majorities of people of all income levels – from under $30,000 to over $150,000 – support increasing SNAP benefits, spending on Medicaid, the EITC, and the minimum wage.

More Information

About the Surveys

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 2.51.

About the Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? Survey Series

This series will include surveys in 11 competitive states and 28 competitive U.S. House districts and 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 reveal the public’s views – in competitive states and districts – focusing on policy questions that have elicited bipartisan agreement nationally. 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.

Project partners include the Program for Public Consultation (PPC), the Civic Innovation Center at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy (CivIC), and Voice of the People (VOP). None of these entities advocate for policy positions or endorse candidates.

Program for Public Consultation

Civic Innovation Center

Voice of the People

For Release: July 30, 2026; 9:00 AM Eastern

On Healthcare Costs: In Battleground States and Districts, Republicans and Democrats Agree On Proposals to Lower Prices, Expand Coverage

COLLEGE PARK, MD – With healthcare costs continuing to rank among Americans’ top concerns, new surveys conducted in 11 competitive states and 28 congressional districts reveal common ground between Democrats and Republicans on proposals to reduce costs and increase access to health insurance.

Proposals for making drugs more affordable are supported by large majorities of Democrats and Republicans, including:

capping the price of prescription drugs to the price they are sold for in other developed countries
reforming patent laws to bring more generic drugs on to the market

To increase access to health insurance, large bipartisan majorities favor restoring the recently expired enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies, which will lower the cost of insurance.

While Congress has scheduled reductions in future Medicaid spending, the surveys find little public support for this – less than one in four Democrats or Republicans. Instead, large bipartisan majorities favor actually increasing spending on Medicaid to provide coverage to more low-income households.

The surveys find strong bipartisan majority support – at least two-thirds of Democrats and Republicans – for expanding government insurance options, including:

allowing people 55-64 to purchase a Medicare plan
creating a government-run health insurance plan that anyone can buy into (i.e., a public option)

For treatment of substance use disorder, bipartisan majorities favor the government investing billions of dollars more to help ensure access for all who need and want it.

These policies are derived from recent or existing Congressional legislation or White House proposals.

Steven Kull, Director of the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation (PPC), noted, “Americans are supportive of the federal government using many more tools to ensure access to healthcare. While political debate often emphasizes partisan disagreement, these surveys reveal substantial agreement on a number of specific policy solutions.”

Common Ground in the Battlegrounds?

This survey release is the third 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.

Reducing the Cost of Drugs

Overwhelming bipartisan majorities favor the government setting maximum prices for drugs sold in the US, based on what the drugs are sold for in other developed countries (which is about half the price on average). Over eight in ten Democrats (80 to 96%) and Republicans (81 to 95%) are in favor. Nationally, 86% of Democrats and 90% of Republicans are in favor, and 86% overall.

Large bipartisan majorities favor a proposal to bring more generic drugs to market by making it “illegal for drug companies – whose patent on a drug has come to an end – to pay generic drug companies to hold off making and selling that drug.” (Democrats 69 to 89%, Republicans 71 to 86%). Nationally, 77% of Democrats and 79% of Republicans are in favor, and 76% overall.

Over two-thirds favor another patent reform proposal intended to lower drug prices: allowing the federal government to override a company’s drug patent and license other companies to produce that drug, if the government determines the price is unaffordable, and the drug was developed with federal funding. (Democrats 70 to 87%, Republicans 68 to 90%). Nationally, 78% of Democrats and 83% of Republicans are in favor, and 79% overall.

Reinstating Enhanced ACA Subsidies

Reducing premiums and deductibles for health insurance bought on the Affordable Care Act marketplace, by reinstating the enhanced subsidies that expired this year, is favored by 83 to 94% of Democrats and 65 to 85% of Republicans. Nationally, 90% of Democrats and 73% of Republicans are in favor.

Spending on Medicaid

Expanding Government Health Insurance

Allowing people aged 55 years or older to purchase a Medicare plan is favored by 74 to 92% of Democrats and 66 to 87% of Republicans. Nationally, 84% of Democrats and 75% of Republicans are in favor.

Creating a “government-run public option (similar to Medicare) and allow all individuals who want to buy into it,” is favored by large majorities of Democrats (77 to 93%) and Republicans (66 to 84%). Nationally, 79% of Democrats and 76% of Republicans are in favor.

Funding for Substance Abuse Treatment

Large bipartisan majorities favor increasing federal spending on substance abuse treatment by $13 billion, “which would mean nearly all people who want and need treatment would get it” (Democrats 68 to 91%, Republicans 57 to 91%). Nationally, 93% of Democrats and 67% of Republicans are in favor.

In general, ensuring that every person who needs and wants substance use treatment can get it is seen as a high priority by overwhelming majorities (Democrats 89 to 97%, Republicans 75 to 95%). Nationally, 93% of Democrats and 86% of Republicans say the same.

More Information

About the Surveys

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.

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? Survey Series

Program for Public Consultation

Civic Innovation Center

Voice of the People

For Release: July 23, 2026; 9:00 AM Eastern

On Housing Affordability: In Competitive States and Districts, Bipartisan Majorities Favor Going Further Than Newly-Enacted Law

COLLEGE PARK, MD – While Democrats and Republicans in Congress recently came together to pass legislation addressing the cost of housing, new surveys in 11 competitive states and 28 competitive congressional districts shows that majorities of both Democrats and Republicans favor policies that go substantially further.

The recently-enacted law provides more tax incentives to build or repair affordable housing, which large bipartisan majorities favor, but they also favor the government investing tens of billions of dollars to help build more housing affordable to low- and middle-income households.

Large bipartisan majorities also favor the government providing an additional $24 billion in rental assistance for the very low-income, elderly and disabled. The new law does not include an increase in spending on rental assistance.

Under the new law, corporations are prohibited from owning more than 350 single-family homes, but bipartisan majorities in all competitive states and districts surveyed favor a more restrictive policy of prohibiting large corporations from owning any single-family homes.

The policy questions included in the survey were derived from federal legislative proposals.

Steven Kull, Director of the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation (PPC) noted, “While many of the proposals in the bipartisan legislation that just passed are consistent with the public’s goals for housing, large majorities of Democrats and Republicans favor the government going much further in both investment and regulation.”

Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? Survey Series

This release is the second in the Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? survey series being conducted by PPC in 11 competitive states and 28 competitive U.S. House districts in advance of the midterm elections.

Surveys on fifteen topics will be released on a rolling basis, covering over 100 specific policy questions. The policies – most of which are pending legislative proposals in Congress – have elicited bipartisan agreement nationally. PPC is exploring whether the same bipartisan common ground found at the national level exists in the battlegrounds. The results for all individual states and districts surveyed can be found here.

Providing Tax Credits to Build Affordable Housing

A proposal for the federal government to provide, “tax incentives to home builders to build or repair homes affordable to low- and middle-income households” – consistent with the new law – was favored by over two thirds of Democrats (77 to 93%) and Republicans (71 to 87%) in all competitive states and districts surveyed. Nationally, 88% of Democrats and 80% of Republicans were in favor.

Investing Billions to Build Affordable Housing

Unlike the recent law, two legislative proposals call for substantial federal investments in affordable high density housing (e.g. apartment buildings, duplexes and triplexes). Both proposals receive bipartisan majority support in all states and most districts.

For very low- and low-income households, investing $40 billion to increase high-density affordable housing supply is favored by 69 to 91% of Democrats. Among Republicans, majorities were in favor in all states and nearly all districts (52 to 81%), with divided views in two of the 28 House districts (49% favor). Nationally, 86% of Democrats and 64% of Republicans were in favor.
For low- and middle-income households, providing $25 billion to local governments to increase high-density affordable housing supply is favored by 77 to 91% of Democrats. Among Republicans, majorities were in favor in all states and nearly all House districts (58 to 77%). In two of the 28 House districts, slightly under half of Republicans were in favor (45 and 49%). Nationally, 84% of Democrats and 63% of Republicans were in favor.

Increasing Rental Assistance

Over three-quarters of Democrats (80 to 93%) and majorities of Republicans (58 to 83%) favored, “spending up to $24 billion to provide more vouchers to help people pay rent who are very low income, disabled or elderly.” Nationally, 89% of Democrats and 74% of Republicans were in favor. The new housing law does not increase funding for rental vouchers.

Banning Large Corporate Ownership of Single-Family Homes

While the new housing law prohibits corporations from owning more than 350 single-family homes, large bipartisan majorities favored prohibiting large corporations from owning any: Democrats 76 to 89%, Republicans 64 to 86%. Nationally, 82% of Democrats and 77% of Republicans were in favor.

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 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.

About the Common Ground in the Battlegrounds? Survey Series

Program for Public Consultation

Civic Innovation Center

Voice of the People

For Immediate Release: July 16, 2026

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

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

COLLEGE PARK, MD – 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 27 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.

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.