Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Staffers say Congress needs improvement and more bipartisanship

U.S. Capitol
drnadig/Getty Images

A new survey, “ State of the Congress 2024,” confirms what many Americans already believe: Congress is not doing well.

This survey of senior congressional staff conducted by the Congressional Management Foundation found that a large majority (81 percent) said Congress is not “functioning as a democratic legislature should” and identified deficiencies in the institution, especially with regard to civility and bipartisan collaboration. However, when comparing this late 2023 survey to a similar one conducted in early 2022, many metrics related to the capacity of the institution to function have improved.


“What we found offers both hope and reason for concern,” the authors of the study wrote. “Based on results comparing the 2023 survey to the 2022 survey, Congress may have improved in some important areas of legislative functionality including: access to high-quality, nonpartisan policy expertise within the Legislative Branch; the technological infrastructure; congressional capacity and support; human resource support; Members’ and staffers’ understanding of Congress’ role in democracy; and accessibility and accountability to the public. But there is still a lot of room for continued improvement.”

The report noted that improved attitudes are most likely attributed to the work of the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress, an equally bipartisan House committee that developed more than 200 recommendations to improve the House of Representatives from 2019 to 2023, with many already implemented. The work of the committee led the House to create a Subcommittee on Modernization under the House Administration Committee in 2023 that continues to implement improvements and focus attention on congressional modernization.

Among the key findings:

  • Civility and bipartisanship were important to almost all senior staffers surveyed, but virtually no one is satisfied with the current state. Republicans (85 percent) and Democrats (70 percent) said civility was “very important” to a functioning legislature, and 60 percent of Republicans and 51 percent of Democrats said encouraging bipartisanship was “very important.” However, only 2 percent of Republicans and zero Democrats were “very satisfied” with the civility in the institution; and no one of either party reported they were “very satisfied” with bipartisanship. A large number (96 percent of Democrats and 98 percent of Republicans) agreed that “it is necessary for Senators and Representatives to collaborate across party lines to best meet the needs of the nation.”
  • More Republicans (31 percent) than Democrats (12 percent) agreed that Congress is “functioning as a democratic legislature should.”
  • Alarmingly, Democratic congressional staff report concern over their personal safety. When asked how satisfied they were that "Members and staff feel safe doing their jobs" only 21 percent of Democratic staff said they were satisfied with the current environment compared to 61 percent of Republican staff. Democrats (68 percent) and Republicans (73 percent) similarly report personally experiencing "direct insulting or threatening messages or communication" at least "somewhat frequently."
  • When asked how frequently they questioned “whether I should stay in Congress due to heated rhetoric from my party,” 59 percent of Republican staff are at least somewhat frequently considering leaving Congress compared to 16 percent of Democrats.
  • Regarding the capacity of the institution to perform its role in democracy, comparing the same survey question from 2022 measuring staff satisfaction, “access to high-quality, non-partisan expertise within the Legislative Branch” went from 12 percent “very satisfied” to 32 percent in 2023; “technological infrastructure is adequate” saw an increase in “very satisfied” from 5 percent in 2022 to 11 percent in 2023; and Congress having “adequate human resource support” went from 6 percent “very satisfied” in 2022 to 14 percent in 2023.
  • Regarding congressional accountability and accessibility to the public, most senior staffers were satisfied with Congress’ physical (96 percent) and technological (85 percent) accessibility to the public. Similar percentages of Republicans (71 percent) and Democrats (70 percent) consider it “very important” that "constituents have sufficient means to hold their Senators/Representative accountable for their performance,” Republicans (50 percent) are much more likely to be “very satisfied” with the current state than Democrats (18 percent).

“While the findings overall suggest the absolute need for improving Congress, the positive change in attitudes about the capacity of the institution to do its job demonstrates that we can improve our democracy,” said Bradford Fitch, president and CEO of CMF. “It’s highly likely that the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress and the new Subcommittee on Modernization were the catalysts for this change. This shows that a bipartisan group of lawmakers, acting in good faith and in a thoughtful way, can improve our democratic institutions and provide better representation and service to the American public.”

The survey involved 138 staff, with 55 percent having worked 10 years or more in Congress. The Congressional Management Foundation is a nonpartisan nonprofit dedicated to strengthening Congress and building trust in its work.


Read More

An Iranian flag and the message "No King" graffitied on the ruins of the data center building of Sharif University of Technology after a U.S.-Israeli missile strike on April 7, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.

How has the meaning of military victory changed? Explore Iran, deterrence, nuclear weapons, and why modern wars are fought with limited objectives.

Kaveh Kazemi/Getty Images

The Last War We Understood

Every modern conflict seems to produce the same debate.

Supporters argue that military action achieved its objectives. Critics ask why the enemy still exists. Iran is only the latest example.

Keep ReadingShow less
United States Capitol building and blurred American flag against blue sky

America’s aging Congress has no maximum age limit. Could a constitutional amendment create age limits for lawmakers and better represent younger voters?

TGI /Tetra Images

Congress Has an Age Floor and No Ceiling. That's Backwards for Gen Z.

Senator Dianne Feinstein's visible decline in her final years in office. Senator Lindsey Graham's sudden death. Senator Mitch McConnell's own recent hospitalization, and his halting explanation of it afterward. Three senators, three separate incidents, no obvious connection between them, except that the saga of these three senators is really one story about the problem of not knowing when to step down. That framing asks the right question of individual leaders. But it assumes the problem is a matter of personal judgment, each senator, in his or her own time, finding the wisdom to recognize the moment has passed. I think that gets the American version of this problem backwards. Congress's age problem is not a string of individual judgment calls. It is a structural feature of the Constitution itself, and it is quietly reshaping who gets represented in American government.

The Constitution sets a floor for federal office and no ceiling. A representative must be at least twenty-five. A senator must be at least thirty. A president must be at least thirty-five. Nothing in the document says how old is too old. Combine that asymmetry with the enormous advantages of incumbency, better name recognition, fundraising networks, committee seniority, and the result is predictable: a Congress that can start young but can never age out. It can only age up. The 119th Congress is now the third oldest in American history, with an average member age of nearly fifty-nine and a Senate averaging in the mid-sixties. This is not a temporary blip. It is the natural output of a system with a gate on one end and no gate on the other.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Enduring Illusion of Article the first
a large white building with a flag on top of it

The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

This is the third and final installment of our series on “Article the first.” Previous parts examined the history of the single inverted word that turned an intended floor into a ceiling and its impact on the amendment’s failed ratification. This concluding part outlines the path forward for enlarging the House today.

Part 3 — The Path Forward

Keep ReadingShow less
The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

Painting from 1856 by Junius Brutus Stearns of George Washington at the Constitutional Convention of 1787.

The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

This is the second of a three-part series on the First Amendment proposed by Congress in 1789—often called “Article the first”—which was never ratified. Part 1 explained how a single inverted word in the text created a mathematical absurdity that has been misread for 237 years. This second part explores the untold history of how that defect affected the original ratification process in state legislatures.

Part 2 — The Untold History

Keep ReadingShow less