Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

In swing states, D's and R's favor federal action to help families

Survey finds support for higher child tax credit, universal preschool, subsidized child care, paid leave

Child tax credit written on a paper.
designer491/Getty Images

As many costs for families, especially those with children, continue to rise faster than wages, a new public consultation survey by the Program for Public Consultation finds bipartisan majorities of Americans in the six swing states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, as well as nationally, support federal government action.

The study found Republicans and Democrats are in favor of:

  • Reinstating the higher pandemic-era child tax credit.
  • Providing funding for free universal preschool.
  • Subsidizing child care for low- and middle-income families.
  • Creating a national 12-week paid family and medical leave program for all workers.

    “There is strong bipartisan support for the Federal government taking a more active role in strengthening the support system for families, especially those with children,” said PPC Director Steven Kull.

    This survey is the seventh entry in the Swing Six Issue Surveys being conducted in the run-up to the November election. It covers major policy issues across six swing states. Unlike traditional polls, respondents in a public consultation survey go through an online “policymaking simulation” in which they are provided briefings and arguments for and against each policy. Content is reviewed by experts on different sides to ensure accuracy and balance. All Americans are invited to go through the same policymaking simulation as the survey sample.

    Reinstating higher child tax credit

    The annual tax credit provided to parents with children under the age of 18 was temporarily increased by Congress during the Covid pandemic, from a maximum credit of $2,000 per child to a maximum of $3,600 per child. The higher tax credit was also made fully refundable, so parents who did not pay income taxes still got the full benefit. Those changes expired in 2022.

    Bipartisan majorities in every swing state support reinstating this pandemic-era credit (69 percent to 77 percent), including majorities of Republicans (60 percent to 71 percent) and Democrats (80 percent to 85 percent). Nationally, 74 percent are in favor, including 64 percent of Republicans and 83 percent of Democrats.

    Respondents were informed in advance that the pandemic-era tax credit both reduced child poverty by about a third and significantly reduced federal revenues, and would likely have the same effects if reinstated.

    In addition, majorities in every swing state (57 percent to 71 percent) support providing a $6,000 tax credit per child to parents of children under age 1, including majorities of Democrats (65 percent to 79 percent). However, views are more mixed among Republicans. Majorities of Republicans are in support in Arizona, Georgia and Michigan (60 percent to 66 percent), and they are statistically divided in Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (47 percent to 53 percent). Nationally, 65 percent are in favor, including a modest majority of Republicans (55 percent) and a large majority of Democrats (75 percent).

    Bar chart showing support for $6,000 child tax creditpublicconsultation.org

    Federal funding to support free universal preschool

    A proposal for the federal government to provide $25 billion to help states or local governments that want to set up or expand free preschool programs, available to all children ages 3 and 4, is favored by 76 percent to 83 percent in the swing states. This includes majorities of Republicans (63 percent to 78 percent) and Democrats (90 percent to 94 percent). Nationally, a bipartisan majority of 82 percent is in favor (Republicans 74 percent, Democrats 92 percent).

    Bar chart showing support for free universal preschoolpublicconsultation.org

    Subsidizing child care for low and middle-income families

    Bipartisan majorities in every swing state (74 percent to 80 percent) support the federal government providing funds to states that want it, to subsidize child care programs for young children so they are free for low-income parents. Middle-income parents would pay no more than 7 percent of their income. That support includes majorities of Republicans (63 percent to 72 percent) and Democrats (85 percent to 93 percent). Nationally, 76 percent are in favor (Republicans 66 percent, Democrats 88 percent).

    Bar chart showing support ofr subsidizing child carepublicconsultation.org

    Paid family and medical leave for all workers

    Majorities in every swing state (68 percent to 75 percent) favor creating a national paid family and medical leave program that would:

    • Require employers to allow all workers to take up to 12 weeks of leave.
    • Provide workers on leave with two-thirds of their wages (up to $4,000 a month), with funds from a new 0.2 percent payroll tax on both employees and employers.

    In the swing states, this proposal is favored by majorities of Republicans in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (55 percent to 67 percent), while Republicans are statistically divided in Nevada (52 percent). The proposal is favored by a majority of Democrats in all six states (81 percent to 86 percent). Nationally, 72 percent are in favor, including majorities of Republicans (61 percent) and Democrats (85 percent).

    In advance, respondents were informed that current federal law requires most employers to allow most workers to take up to 12 weeks of family or medical leave, but this law does not apply to workers who are in small companies, are new to their job or work part-time. In addition, current law does not mandate that workers receive any pay while on leave. They were informed that, while not required, some employers provide paid family and medical leave to their workers. But currently, less than half of workers have access to such paid leave.


    Read More

    How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

    A memorial for Ashli Babbitt sits near the US Capitol during a Day of Remembrance and Action on the one year anniversary of the January 6, 2021 insurrection.

    (John Lamparski/NurPhoto/AP)

    How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

    In the wake of the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, President Donald Trump quickly took up the cause of a 35-year-old veteran named Ashli Babbitt.

    “Who killed Ashli Babbitt?” he asked in a one-sentence statement on July 1, 2021.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

    Supreme Court, Allen v. Milligan Illegal Congressional Voting Map

    Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

    A wave of redistricting battles in early 2026 is reshaping the political map ahead of the midterm elections and intensifying long‑running fights over gerrymandering and democratic representation.

    In California, a three‑judge federal panel on January 15 upheld the state’s new congressional districts created under Proposition 50, ruling 2–1 that the map—expected to strengthen Democratic advantages in several competitive seats—could be used in the 2026 elections. The following day, a separate federal court dismissed a Republican lawsuit arguing that the maps were unconstitutional, clearing the way for the state’s redistricting overhaul to stand. In Virginia, Democratic lawmakers have advanced a constitutional amendment that would allow mid‑decade redistricting, a move they describe as a response to aggressive Republican map‑drawing in other states; some legislators have openly discussed the possibility of a congressional map that could yield 10 Democratic‑leaning seats out of 11. In Missouri, the secretary of state has acknowledged in court that ballot language for a referendum on the state’s congressional map could mislead voters, a key development in ongoing litigation over the fairness of the state’s redistricting process. And in Utah, a state judge has ordered a new congressional map that includes one Democratic‑leaning district after years of litigation over the legislature’s earlier plan, prompting strong objections from Republican lawmakers who argue the court exceeded its authority.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

    Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) (L) and Rep. August Pfluger (R-TX) lead a group of fellow Republicans through Statuary Hall on the way to a news conference on the 28th day of the federal government shutdown at the U.S. Capitol on October 28, 2025 in Washington, DC.

    Getty Images, Chip Somodevilla

    New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

    Every January 1st, many Americans face their failings and resolve to do better by making New Year’s Resolutions. Wouldn’t it be delightful if Congress would do the same? According to Gallup, half of all Americans currently have very little confidence in Congress. And while confidence in our government institutions is shrinking across the board, Congress is near rock bottom. With that in mind, here is a list of resolutions Congress could make and keep, which would help to rebuild public trust in Congress and our government institutions. Let’s start with:

    1 – Working for the American people. We elect our senators and representatives to work on our behalf – not on their behalf or on behalf of the wealthiest donors, but on our behalf. There are many issues on which a large majority of Americans agree but Congress can’t. Congress should resolve to address those issues.

    Keep ReadingShow less
    Two groups of glass figures. One red, one blue.

    Congressional paralysis is no longer accidental. Polarization has reshaped incentives, hollowed out Congress, and shifted power to the executive.

    Getty Images, Andrii Yalanskyi

    How Congress Lost Its Capacity to Act and How to Get It Back

    In late 2025, Congress fumbled the Affordable Care Act, failing to move a modest stabilization bill through its own procedures and leaving insurers and families facing renewed uncertainty. As the Congressional Budget Office has warned in multiple analyses over the past decade, policy uncertainty increases premiums and reduces insurer participation (see, for example: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61734). I examined this episode in an earlier Fulcrum article, “Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis,” as a case study in congressional paralysis and leadership failure. The deeper problem, however, runs beyond any single deadline or decision and into the incentives and procedures that now structure congressional authority. Polarization has become so embedded in America’s governing institutions themselves that it shapes how power is exercised and why even routine governance now breaks down.

    From Episode to System

    The ACA episode wasn’t an anomaly but a symptom. Recent scholarship suggests it reflects a broader structural shift in how Congress operates. In a 2025 academic article available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN), political scientist Dmitrii Lebedev reaches a stark conclusion about the current Congress, noting that the 118th Congress enacted fewer major laws than any in the modern era despite facing multiple time-sensitive policy deadlines (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5346916). Drawing on legislative data, he finds that dysfunction is no longer best understood as partisan gridlock alone. Instead, Congress increasingly exhibits a breakdown of institutional capacity within the governing majority itself. Leadership avoidance, procedural delay, and the erosion of governing norms have become routine features of legislative life rather than temporary responses to crisis.

    Keep ReadingShow less