How this issue is resolved shapes the rules voters live under.
Polls consistently show that a minority of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, often less than 30 percent. Supporters of the institution argue the low numbers reflect frustration with a system designed for compromise, while critics see chronic dysfunction. Voters' tendency to re-elect their own representatives even while disapproving of Congress as a whole adds a further wrinkle to interpreting the data.
The arguments reveal who gets a stronger voice when the question is settled.
Whether the process feels fair influences how voters trust the outcome.
Defenders of Congress note that the legislature has continued to pass major laws in recent sessions, including infrastructure, semiconductor, veterans' health and gun-safety measures that drew bipartisan support. They argue that the institution is functioning as designed: a deliberative body that requires negotiation across regions, parties and chambers, and that slow movement is a feature rather than a bug of a separation-of-powers system. Supporters also point out that constituent services, oversight hearings and appropriations work continue regardless of headline conflicts. From this view, low approval ratings reflect dissatisfaction with politics in general — amplified by partisan media and high-profile standoffs — more than an accurate measure of legislative output.
Critics argue that persistent low approval reflects genuine institutional problems: recurring shutdown threats, debt-ceiling brinkmanship, missed budget deadlines and the use of stopgap continuing resolutions in place of regular appropriations. They contend that party-line voting, narrow majorities and procedural hurdles such as the Senate filibuster have made it difficult to address issues that polls show majorities of Americans want addressed. Skeptics also point to ethics controversies, the influence of campaign donors and lobbyists, and the time lawmakers spend on fundraising as reasons for public frustration. In this view, the gap between congressional approval and presidential approval is evidence that voters distinguish between the branches and have concluded the legislative branch is underperforming.
Gallup
Gallup
Center for Responsive Politics / OpenSecrets
Gallup
Gallup, Pew Research, Quinnipiac and other pollsters have asked variants of the congressional approval question for decades, typically phrased as whether respondents approve or disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job. Results have trended downward since the early 2000s, with approval frequently registering between 15 and 25 percent and only occasionally rising above 30 percent following major bipartisan legislation or national emergencies. Analysts caution that approval of "Congress" as an institution differs from approval of individual lawmakers. Surveys regularly find that respondents rate their own member of Congress more favorably than the body as a whole, a pattern that helps explain why incumbent re-election rates often exceed 90 percent even when institutional approval is low.
Congressional approval briefly spiked to 84 percent in Gallup polling after the September 11, 2001 attacks but has rarely topped 30 percent in the years since. It fell to a record low of 9 percent in November 2013 following a 16-day government shutdown, and has generally remained in the teens and low 20s through subsequent budget fights. Shorter-term movements tend to track legislative events. Approval has ticked up modestly after passage of bipartisan packages and dipped during high-profile impeachment proceedings, shutdown standoffs and contested speaker elections. The paradox of low institutional approval coexisting with high incumbent re-election rates has been documented by political scientists since at least the 1970s, when scholar Richard Fenno popularized the observation.
Is the government spending your tax dollars wisely?
Americans disagree sharply over whether Washington gets value for the trillions it spends each year.
Should members of Congress have term limits?
Lawmakers and voters continue to debate how much enforcement, technology, and personnel the U.S.-Mexico border requires.