battlegrounds/iowa

With healthcare costs continuing to rank among Americans’ top concerns, new surveys conducted in Iowa and its most competitive districts – the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd – 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 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.

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.

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.

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):

• IA-statewide: 90% of Democrats, 88% of Republicans
• IA-1: 92% of Democrats, 87% of Republicans
• IA-2: 89% of Democrats, 88% of Republicans
• IA-3: 88% of Democrats, 91% of Republicans
• IA-4: 91% of Democrats, 88% of Republicans

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.”

• IA-statewide: 81% of Democrats, 78% of Republicans
• IA-1: 79% of Democrats, 78% of Republicans
• IA-2: 85% of Democrats, 76% of Republicans
• IA-3: 80% of Democrats, 80% of Republicans
• IA-4: 79% of Democrats, 77% of Republicans

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.

• IA-statewide: 79% of Democrats, 83% of Republicans
• IA-1: 82% of Democrats, 87% of Republicans
• IA-2: 80% of Democrats, 78% of Republicans
• IA-3: 84% of Democrats, 81% of Republicans
• IA-4: 72% of Democrats, 87% of Republicans

Large bipartisan majorities favor these proposals in all competitive states and House districts surveyed, as well as nationally.

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 bipartisan majorities:

• IA-statewide: 91% of Democrats, 77% of Republicans
• IA-1: 88% of Democrats, 82% of Republicans
• IA-2: 91% of Democrats, 75% of Republicans
• IA-3: 93% of Democrats, 77% of Republicans
• IA-4: 93% of Democrats, 73% of Republicans

Large bipartisan majorities favor this proposal in all competitive states and House districts surveyed, as well as nationally.

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, bipartisan majorities say it should be increased.

• IA-statewide: 83% of Democrats, 62% of Republicans
• IA-1: 86% of Democrats, 57% of Republicans
• IA-2: 78% of Democrats, 66% of Republicans
• IA-3: 86% of Democrats, 62% of Republicans
• IA-4: 80% of Democrats, 63% of Republicans

Bipartisan majorities favor increasing federal spending on Medicaid in all competitive states and House districts surveyed, as well as nationally.

Expanding Government Health Insurance

Allowing people aged 55 years or older to purchase a Medicare plan is favored by large bipartisan majorities.

• IA-statewide: 84% of Democrats, 79% of Republicans
• IA-1: 81% of Democrats, 82% of Republicans
• IA-2: 85% of Democrats, 79% of Republicans
• IA-3: 85% of Democrats, 73% of Republicans
• IA-4: 84% of Democrats, 81% of Republicans

Creating a “government-run public option (similar to Medicare) and allow all individuals who want to buy into it,” is also favored by large bipartisan majorities.

• IA-statewide: 86% of Democrats, 76% of Republicans
• IA-1: 89% of Democrats, 81% of Republicans
• IA-2: 85% of Democrats, 75% of Republicans
• IA-3: 86% of Democrats, 74% of Republicans
• IA-4: 82% of Democrats, 73% of Republicans

These proposals are favored by at least two-thirds of Democrats and Republicans in all competitive states and House districts, as well as nationally.

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.”

• IA-statewide: 84% of Democrats, 69% of Republicans
• IA-1: 84% of Democrats, 70% of Republicans
• IA-2: 81% of Democrats, 71% of Republicans
• IA-3: 84% of Democrats, 72% of Republicans
• IA-4: 87% of Democrats, 63% of Republicans

In general, ensuring that every person who needs and wants substance use treatment can get it is seen as a high priority.

• IA-statewide: 94% of Democrats, 87% of Republicans
• IA-1: 95% of Democrats, 84% of Republicans
• IA-2: 93% of Democrats, 85% of Republicans
• IA-3: 94% of Democrats, 87% of Republicans
• IA-4: 92% of Democrats, 91% of Republicans

Large bipartisan majorities favor spending more on treatment, and making it a high priority, in all competitive states and House districts surveyed, as well as nationally.

More Information

• Iowa + National Questionnaire with Toplines, Crosstabs and Methodology
• All State and District Results

About the Surveys

The Iowa surveys were fielded May 27 – June 23, 2026, to 2000 adults, including 500 in Iowa’s 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th congressional districts. The response rates were 7.1 to 8.7%. The confidence intervals range from +/- 2.9 to 6.0%, and the maximum weights range from 5.5 to 6.7.

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 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

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.

While Democrats and Republicans in Congress recently came together to pass legislation addressing the cost of housing, new surveys in Iowa’s most competitive congressional districts – the 1st, 2nd and 3rd – 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 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.

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 large bipartisan majorities.

• IA-statewide: Democrats 83%, Republicans 80%, overall 81%
• IA-1: Democrats 83%, Republicans 83%, overall 84%
• IA-2: Democrats 77%, Republicans 79%, overall 78%
• IA-3: Democrats 88%, Republicans 79%, overall 82%
• IA-4: Democrats 85%, Republicans 77%, overall 80%

This proposal was favored by two-thirds of both Democrats and Republicans in all competitive states and districts surveyed, as well as nationally.

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 were favored by large bipartisan majorities.

For very low- and low-income households, investing $40 billion to increase high-density affordable housing supply.

• IA-statewide: Democrats 76%, Republicans 63%, overall 69%
• IA-1: Democrats 76%, Republicans 63%, overall 68%
• IA-2: Democrats 69%, Republicans 66%, overall 67%
• IA-3: Democrats 79%, Republicans 63%, overall 71%
• IA-4: Democrats 82%, Republicans 60%, overall 71%

For low- and middle-income households, providing $25 billion to local governments to increase high-density affordable housing supply.

• IA-statewide: Democrats 83%, Republicans 62%, overall 73%
• IA-1: Democrats 84%, Republicans 65%, overall 76%
• IA-2: Democrats 81%, Republicans 59%, overall 69%
• IA-3: Democrats 85%, Republicans 65%, overall 74%
• IA-4: Democrats 81%, Republicans 59%, overall 71%

Each proposal was favored by bipartisan majorities in all competitive states and nearly all House districts surveyed, as well as nationally.

Increasing Assistance for the Very Low-Income

Bipartisan majorities favored, “spending up to $24 billion to provide more vouchers to help people pay rent who are very low income, disabled or elderly.” The new housing law does not increase funding for rental vouchers.

• IA-statewide: Democrats 88%, Republicans 72%, overall 79%
• IA-1: Democrats 87%, Republicans 73%, overall 78%
• IA-2: Democrats 87%, Republicans 76%, overall 80%
• IA-3: Democrats 90%, Republicans 72%, overall 81%
• IA-4: Democrats 87%, Republicans 65%, overall 76%

A large bipartisan majority was in favor in all competitive states and districts surveyed, as well as nationally.

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.

• IA-statewide: Democrats 81%, Republicans 78%, overall 79%
• IA-1: Democrats 79%, Republicans 74%, overall 77%
• IA-2: Democrats 80%, Republicans 83%, overall 80%
• IA-3: Democrats 82%, Republicans 77%, overall 80%
• IA-4: Democrats 83%, Republicans 79%, overall 81%

A large bipartisan majority was in favor in all competitive states and districts surveyed, as well as nationally.

More Information

• Iowa + National Questionnaire with Toplines, Crosstabs and Methodology
• All State and District Results

About the Surveys

The Iowa surveys were fielded May 27 – June 23, 2026, to 2000 adults, including 500 in Iowa’s 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th congressional districts. The response rates were 7.1 to 8.7%. The confidence intervals range from +/- 2.9 to 6.0%, and the maximum weights range from 5.5 to 6.7.

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 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

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.

A new Program for Public Consultation (PPC) survey in Iowa and its most competitive congressional districts – the 1st, 2nd and 3rd – reveals 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 to be labelled as such, and prohibiting their use in political campaign ads

Large bipartisan majorities favored the U.S. participating in international efforts to regulate AI by:

• creating an international treaty to regulate large-scale AI programs
• creating an international treaty to ban the use of weapons that can fire on targets without a direct human command

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

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

Majorities of Democrats and Republicans favored 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 regulations,” in:

• IA-statewide: Favored by 85% Democrats, 80% Republicans, 80% overall
• IA-1: Favored by 84% Democrats, 83% Republicans, 80% overall
• IA-2: Favored by 86% Democrats, 79% Republicans, 80% overall
• IA-3: Favored by 85% Democrats, 80% Republicans, 82% overall
• IA-4: Favored by 85% Democrats, 78% Republicans, 79% overall

Bipartisan majorities were in favor in all competitive states and districts surveyed, as well as nationally.

Regulating AI Programs That Make Critical Decisions

Bipartisan majorities 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.”

“For new AI programs, require they first pass a government-designed test.”

• IA-statewide: Favored by 82% Democrats, 81% Republicans, 80% overall
• IA-1: Favored by 81% Democrats, 84% Republicans, 83% overall
• IA-2: Favored by 81% Democrats, 78% Republicans, 76% overall
• IA-3: Favored by 87% Democrats, 82% Republicans, 82% overall
• IA-4: Favored by 80% Democrats, 81% Republicans, 78% overall

“For AI programs already in use, allow the government to audit them.”

• IA-statewide: Favored by 74% Democrats, 70% Republicans, 70% overall
• IA-1: Favored by 80% Democrats, 78% Republicans, 77% overall
• IA-2: Favored by 70% Democrats, 66% Republicans, 66% overall
• IA-3: Favored by 73% Democrats, 71% Republicans, 69% overall
• IA-4: Favored by 72% Democrats, 66% Republicans, 68% overall

Bipartisan majorities were in favor of these policies in all competitive states and districts surveyed, as well as nationally.

Regulating Deepfakes

Bipartisan majorities favored two new rules for AI-created images, audio and videos, also known as deepfakes.

“Require that any deepfake image or video 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.”

• IA-statewide: Favored by 90% Democrats, 88% Republicans, 87% overall
• IA-1: Favored by 92% Democrats, 83% Republicans, 86% overall
• IA-2: Favored by 88% Democrats, 86% Republicans, 86% overall
• IA-3: Favored by 92% Democrats, 91% Republicans, 89% overall
• IA-4: Favored by 87% Democrats, 91% Republicans, 88% overall

“Prohibit political campaigns, including PACs, from using deepfakes in their campaign advertisements.”

• IA-statewide: Favored by 85% Democrats, 85% Republicans, 84% overall
• IA-1: Favored by 88% Democrats, 90% Republicans, 88% overall
• IA-2: Favored by 84% Democrats, 80% Republicans, 81% overall
• IA-3: Favored by 88% Democrats, 89% Republicans, 87% overall
• IA-4: Favored by 87% Democrats, 91% Republicans, 88% overall

Bipartisan majorities were in favor of these policies in all competitive states and districts surveyed, as well as nationally.

International Treaty to Regulate Large Scale AI

Bipartisan majorities favored, “the US actively working with other nations to create an international treaty to regulate large-scale AI programs.”

• IA-statewide: Favored by 82% Democrats, 80% Republicans, 79% overall
• IA-1: Favored by 86% Democrats, 83% Republicans, 84% overall
• IA-2: Favored by 86% Democrats, 72% Republicans, 75% overall
• IA-3: Favored by 79% Democrats, 79% Republicans, 77% overall
• IA-4: Favored by 78% Democrats, 84% Republicans, 79% overall

Bipartisan majorities were in favor in all competitive states and districts surveyed, as well as nationally.

Banning the Use of Fully Autonomous Weapons

Bipartisan majorities favored “the US actively 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.”

• IA-statewide: Favored by 84% Democrats, 79% Republicans, 79% overall
• IA-1: Favored by 87% Democrats, 81% Republicans, 81% overall
• IA-2: Favored by 82% Democrats, 79% Republicans, 79% overall
• IA-3: Favored by 85% Democrats, 77% Republicans, 79% overall
• IA-4: Favored by 80% Democrats, 78% Republicans, 78% overall

Bipartisan majorities were in favor in all competitive states and districts surveyed, as well as nationally.

More Information

• Iowa + National Questionnaire with Toplines, Crosstabs and Methodology
• All Battleground State and District Results

About the Surveys

The Iowa surveys were fielded May 27 – June 23, 2026, to 2000 adults, including 500 in Iowa’s 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th congressional districts. The response rates were 7.1 to 8.7%. The confidence intervals range from +/- 2.9 to 6.0%, and the maximum weights range from 5.5 to 6.7.

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.