Rate Congressmen, Senators, & Governors | Common Ground Scorecard

The Common Ground Scorecard is a tool for helping voters learn which elected officials and candidates seek common ground on important issues to move the country forward.

Common Ground Committee is a nonpartisan, non-profit group working to help citizens hold leaders accountable for progress and civil discourse.

New to the Scorecard?

Learn How It Works

Testimonials

See which elected officials seek common ground

Search by name of elected official

View all officials in a state

Search by clicking a congressional district in the map or enter a city or zip code

ZIP / Address:

Radius:

Common Ground Scorecard GuideStar Platinum Transparency 2021 Seal

We have earned GuideStar’s Highest Seal of Transparency.

The Platinum Seal of Transparency is the highest level of recognition offered by GuideStar, the world’s largest source of nonprofit information.

Common Ground Scorecard Frequently Asked Questions

What does the Common Ground Scorecard measure and how?

Official Performance (30 Points)	Scoring Details
Legislators: Bipartisan bill sponsorship and co-sponsorship	Source: The Bipartisan Index by The Lugar Center and Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy. Valuation: We award points (1-30) to legislators in the top 75% of Bipartisan Index scores. Legislators in the bottom 25% receive zero (0) points.
Executives: Bipartisan job approval	Source: FiveThirtyEight’s Popularity Above Replacement Governor, which measures job approval relative to what would be expected if approval were based purely on the partisanship of the governor and the state’s voters. Valuation: We award points (1-30) to executives in the top 75% of Popularity Above Replacement Governor (PARG) scores. Executives in the bottom 25% receive zero (0) points.
Candidates without congressional or gubernatorial service and newly elected officials: Predictive estimate by statistical modeling	Source: Statistical model derived from the performance of officials already in office is used to estimate what the Official Performance would be, based on existing data in other categories. Valuation: 0-30 as determined by the predictive model.
Personal Actions (30 points)
Public conversation across political differences	Sources: Bret Baier's (Fox News) Common Ground podcast and TV segment, StoryCorps' One Small Step Congress, U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Common Grounds, A Starting Point’s Counterpoints, Bipartisan Policy Center’s The Senate Project, news media, and input from individual’s staff. Valuation: 10 points for members of Congress; 15 points for governors.
Joining an official from the opposing party for a visit of their district/state, or hosting an official from the opposing party for a visit in your district/state	Sources: Bipartisan Policy Center’s American Congressional Exchange, news media, and input from individual’s staff. Valuation: 10 points for members of Congress; 15 points for governors.
Membership in a common ground focused caucus (Only U.S. Congress)	Sources: Membership lists from the Problem Solvers Caucus, Bipartisan Working Group, Senate Common Sense Coalition, Congressional Future Caucus, For Country Caucus, Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress, Congressional Civility and Respect Caucus, and the Commitment to Civility. Valuation: 10 points for caucus membership; 5 points for only signing the Commitment to Civility (U.S. House).
Communication (20 points)
Promoting common ground (+)	Sources: News media, Vote Smart’s Speeches database, and input from individual’s staff. Valuation: 20 points for any instance of promoting common ground.
Insulting political opponents or suggesting political violence (-)	Sources: News media. Valuation: Penalty of setting Communication score to -20 points for personally insulting a political opponent or suggesting political violence regardless of past communication advocating common ground. Specifically, this penalty applies to: Insults that are personal, rather than political, and targeted at specific individuals, i.e. ad hominem attacks (two year penalty) Suggesting or advocating physical violence or targeted harassment against domestic political opponents, either explicitly or implicitly such as by sharing violent depictions or commentary that, intentionally or not, speaks of physically harming or harassing a person or persons (four year penalty). A penalty for suggesting or advocating physical violence or targeted harassment also nullifies any points earned in the Commitments or Bonus categories, all of which will reflect zero points for the duration of this penalty. Additional Details
Commitments (20 points)
I will identify and set aside personal biases. I will commit to seek agreement, progress, and solutions. I will listen first to learn perspectives and experiences. I will not assume, but seek to understand motives and intentions. I will seek outcomes all can live with but not compromise principles. I will accept that good people may disagree. I will use and accept facts. I will stay respectful. I will resist demonizing. I will de-escalate hostile situations.	Sources: Affirmation of the individual via their staff. Valuation: 2 points for each of the ten commitments affirmed.
Bonus: Outstanding Common Grounder (+10 points)
A bold, exceptional act championing common ground, receiving an award for common ground behavior, or significant Common Grounder activity not included in other Scorecard categories. Bold, exceptional acts include authoring a bi-partisan op-ed, authoring an op-ed focused on common ground, founding a bipartisan caucus, and leading negotiations resulting in passage of landmark bi-partisan legislation on a major issue.	Sources: News media, input from individual's staff, Bipartisan Policy Center's Legislative Action Award, and Allegheny College Prize for Civility in Public Life. Valuation: +10 points.

What is the Common Ground Scorecard?

The Common Ground Scorecard provides an objective, easy-to-understand assessment of the degree to which elected officials and candidates for office embody the spirit and practice of a Common Grounder — someone who seeks points of agreement and solutions on social and political issues through listening and productive conversation. The Common Ground Scorecard does not assess issue positions, only common ground spirit and practice. “More progress, less division.”

How do I use the scorecard?

The Common Ground Scorecard awards points on a 100-point scale with an opportunity for 10 additional points. Negative scores can result from the 20 point penalty in the Communication category for any instance of insulting a political opponent in the past three years.

A higher Common Ground Score indicates that the elected official or challenger better embodies the spirit and practice of a Common Grounder, as defined by Common Ground Committee.

The Common Ground Scorecard may be used, alongside other factors, to evaluate candidates for public office. We hope it will also serve to help celebrate and thank current elected officials who demonstrate strong Common Grounder behaviors, and encourage other elected officials and challengers to elevate their Common Ground behavior by taking specific actions to improve their score.

MORE FAQs

After searching by address, city, or zip code, a pin will appear in your district. Click on the pin to view that district's politicians

Additional Details

a. Penalized individuals may eliminate the penalty by retracting, expressing regret and/or apologizing in a forum equivalent to that in which the comments in question were made.

b. Individuals who make off-hand comments that on the surface call for violence or harassment but may not believe that violent or harassing actions should be carried out will still be penalized. Coming from a leader, words that advocate violence or harassment, regardless of intent, run the risk of causing action. Examples:

A clear call for harassment is penalized. Rep. Maxine Waters (CA-D) was penalized for advocating the harassment of Trump Administration cabinet members saying "If you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere."

Words clearly calling for violence regardless of intent are penalized. Gov. Ron DeSantis (FL-R) was penalized for advocating physical violence against a domestic political opponent by saying of Dr. Anthony Fauci, "Someone needs to grab that little elf and chuck him across the Potomac." Although Dr. Fauci himself said he believed that DeSantis did not intend for harm to actually come to him, DeSantis’ words clearly suggested violence.

Pictures and videos that depict violence against political opponents are penalized. Rep. Paul Gosar (AZ-R) was penalized for advocating physical violence against a domestic political opponent for suggesting physical violence by posting an anime video of himself killing Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-D) and preparing to attack President Joe Biden.

Language that may be read to imply but does not clearly call for violence or harassment will not be penalized. Sen. Chuck Schumer (NY-D) said of Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh “you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price.” While his words spoke of consequences, the Senator did not directly call for violence or harassment and therefore was not penalized.