Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Yes, there is some common ground in politics, according to this data

Rep. Don Bacon

Republican Rep. Don Bacon has the highest score on the Common Ground Scorecard.

Drew Angerer/Getty Images

The infrastructure bill recently passed by Congress is a rare example of bipartisanship in government. But the Common Ground Committee, which strives to find a central point from which the parties can work together, is hoping its ratings system will provide guidance for more cross-partisan collaboration.

The Common Ground Scorecard rates the president, vice president, governors, and members of the House of Representatives and Senate on their willingness to collaborate across partisan lines. First released in September 2020, the data updated last month.

Bruce Bond, co-founder and CEO of the Common Ground Committee said the scorecard provided some unexpected results. He said the group was surprised by "how many people are actually good common grounders, and how they come from both parties and are at all levels of government."


Among the 20 politicians with the highest scores, 17 are members of the House, two are senators and one is a governor. Seven are Republicans (including the top four) and 13 are Democrats.

Officials were judged in five categories:

  • Sponsorship of bipartisan bills (for legislators) or bipartisan job approval (for executives).
  • Having a public conversation across the political divide, visiting a district with a member of the opposite party and joining a legislative caucus that promotes working together.
  • Using communications tools to urge people to find common ground.
  • Affirmation of a commitment to a set of common ground principles.
  • Winning any of a set of awards for behavior that promotes finding common ground.

The maximum score is 110, and the average among all elected officials was 29. But because negative points were assessed for insulting a member of the opposing party, a handful of officials ended up with a final score below zero.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Two House Republicans, Nebraska's Don Bacon (108) and Pennsylvania's Brian Fitzpatrick (100) were the only people to earn at least 100 points. Utah's GOP governor, Spencer Cox, had the third highest rating, earning 95 points. The highest scoring Democrats were a pair of House members: New York's Antonio Delgado (94 points) and Virginia's Elaine Luria (93).

Shelley Moore Capito, a Republican from West Virginia, had the highest score among senators, earning 80 points, two ahead of her home-state colleague, Joe Manchin, who has a higher profile as one of two Democrats critical to passing legislation in the Senate. The other, Arizona's Kyrsten Sinema, earned 70 points, the minimum to be labeled a "champion" by the Common Ground Committee.

Of the seven lowest scores, six belong to House members, including one member of the informal group of progressives known as "the squad" and some of former President Donald Trump's most controversial supporters:

  • Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib (Mich.): -20
  • Democratic Rep. Norma Torres (Calif.): -19
  • Republican Rep, Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.): -16
  • Democratic Rep. Filemon Vela (Texa)s: -13
  • Republican Sen. John Kennedy (La.): -13
  • Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz (Fla.): -13
  • Republican Rep. Paul Gosar (Ariz): -11

President Biden earned 41 points, placing him in the "somewhat above average" range. President Trump left office with a score of -20.

Nine of the 13 highest scoring House Republicans voted in favor of the infrastructure bill last week, including the top five. But some Republicans at the low end of the scale supported the bill as well, including a pair of New Yorkers, Nicole Malliotakis (4 points) and Andrew Garbarino (14).

Among the six House Democrats who opposed the bill, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts tied for the highest score (20 points).

The Common Ground Committee hopes the scorecard will encourage more elected officials and candidates to work across party lines. Bond identified two specific goals: "Spotlighting those who are 'demonstrating what good looks like' and "informing voters who care about the degree to which a candidate (incumbent or challenger) is a common grounder."

Read More

When Power Protects Predators: How U.S. Rape Culture Silences Survivors

Individuals protesting.

Gabrielle Chalk

When Power Protects Predators: How U.S. Rape Culture Silences Survivors

On November 5, 2024—the night of the most anticipated election cycle for residents of the United States—thousands gathered around the country, sitting with friends in front of large-screen TVs, optimistic and ready to witness the election of the next president of the United States.

As the hours of election night stretched on and digital state maps turned red or blue with each counted ballot, every 68 seconds a woman was sexually assaulted in the U.S., an estimate calculated by the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN).

Keep ReadingShow less
The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

A single pawn separated from a group of pawns.

Canva Images

The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

Excerpt from To Stop a Tyrant by Ira Chaleff

In my book To Stop a Tyrant, I identify five types of a political leader’s followers. Given the importance of access in politics, I range these from the more distant to the closest. In the middle are bureaucrats. No political leader can accomplish anything without a cadre of bureaucrats to implement their vision and policies. Custom, culture and law establish boundaries for a bureaucrat’s freedom of action. At times, these constraints must be balanced with moral considerations. The following excerpt discusses ways in which bureaucrats need to thread this needle.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump’s Project 2025 agenda caps decades-long resistance to 20th century progressive reform

There has long been a tug-of-war over White House plans to make government more liberal or more conservative.

Getty Images, zimmytws

Trump’s Project 2025 agenda caps decades-long resistance to 20th century progressive reform

Project 2025 is a conservative guideline for reforming government and policymaking during the second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross-partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased, critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025. To that end, we also amplify the work of others in doing the same.

For much of the 20th century, efforts to remake government were driven by a progressive desire to make the government work for regular Americans, including the New Deal and the Great Society reforms.

Keep ReadingShow less
Religious elite can follow their source of moral guidance

An open book at a community gathering.

Canva

Religious elite can follow their source of moral guidance

In some societies, there is no distinction between religious elites and political elites. In others, there is a strong wall between them. Either way, they tend to have direct access to huge swaths of the populace and influence with them. This is an irresistible target for the proto-tyrant to court or nullify.

In many cases, the shrewd proto-tyrant will pose as befriending the major religious sect or, at least, dissemble that they mean it no harm. It is extremely enticing for the leaders of these sects to give the proto-tyrant public support or, at least, studiously refrain from criticizing their regime. There is apparently much to be gained or, at least, much less to lose in terms of their temporal power and ability to continue serving their faithful.

Keep ReadingShow less