World Peace

What’s current with Congress?

GoogleAI Mode: “As of Monday, November 17, 2025, the U.S. Congress is in session, focusing on committee activities and the potential release of the Jeffrey Epstein files. The House is currently controlled by a narrow Republican majority, while Republicans also hold the majority in the Senate. 

Key Activities & Legislation

Epstein Files Vote: The House is scheduled to vote this week on a measure to release the files related to Jeffrey Epstein, a vote forced by a discharge petition. This has been a major political focus, with President Trump initially opposing but later reversing his stance and saying he would sign the bill if passed.

Government Funding: A 43-day government shutdown recently ended after President Trump signed a funding bill (H.R. 5371) on November 12, 2025. The Senate had previously passed the bill with a 60-40 vote.

Committee Hearings: House and Senate committees are holding various hearings.

The House Committee on Rules is meeting today to consider resolutions of disapproval related to Bureau of Land Management rules for the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska and the Buffalo Field Office.

The House Committee on Small Business has various measures scheduled for consideration tomorrow, November 18.

The House Committee on Energy and Commerce’s Subcommittee on Communications and Technology previously met to examine solutions to expedite broadband permitting.

Leadership Dynamics: Tensions remain within the Republican party, with public spats between President Trump and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Meanwhile, some Democrats, including Rep. Ro Khanna, have suggested that Sen. Chuck Schumer is “no longer the future” of the party’s leadership.

Congressional Composition

The current 119th Congress has a closely divided membership: 

Chamber
House

Republican Seats
219

Democratic Seats
214

Independent Seats
0

Vacancies
2

Chamber
Senate

Republican Seats
53

Democratic Seats
45

Independent Seats
2

Vacancies
0

You can find more detailed legislative information and track bills on the official Congress.gov website. The official websites for the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate also provide live floor activity and news.”

On a scale of 1 out 5, how effective is the current Congress in serving the people?

GoogleAI Mode: “Public opinion on the current U.S. Congress’s effectiveness is broadly negative, consistently resulting in a low rating, likely a 1 or 2 out of 5. 

As of late 2025, public approval ratings for Congress are very low, with a recent Gallup poll from October 2025 finding only 15% of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, while a vast majority disapprove. A February 2025 Statista poll reported a slightly higher, but still low, 29% approval rating. 

This low public opinion is driven by several factors:

Perception of self-interest: A large majority of Americans (63%) believe most members of Congress run for office to make money, not to serve the public.

Lack of bipartisanship and responsibility: Polls consistently show that most Americans feel members of Congress do a bad job working with the opposing party (84%) and taking responsibility for their actions (86%).

Low productivity: The 118th Congress has been described as one of the least functional in modern history, with a very low number of bills passed into law, which contributes to the perception of ineffectiveness.

Influence of special interests: Seven in ten Americans believe ordinary people have too little influence over congressional decisions, while lobbyists, wealthy donors, and special interest groups have too much influence. 

Overall, Americans are largely critical of Congress, with about seven in ten holding an unfavorable view of the institution as a whole.”

What are the approval ratings for the House and Senate individually?

GoogleAI Mode: “While most major polls measure the approval rating of “Congress” as a single entity (which recently hit a low of 15%), Americans generally view the House and the Senate similarly and only slightly more positively than the institution as a whole. The primary difference in how they are viewed is along partisan lines, depending on which party controls the chamber. 

Overall Chamber Views

A Pew Research poll from September 2023 indicated that about a third of Americans viewed each chamber positively (around 30% to 33%), slightly higher than the 26% who viewed “Congress” as a whole favorably at the time. The unfavorability rating for the institution of Congress as a whole is around 72%. 

Partisan Differences

Public opinion of the House and Senate is largely influenced by an individual’s political affiliation and which party holds the majority in each chamber. 

House of Representatives: Republicans currently control the House. In the 2023 poll, 38% of Republicans had a favorable view of the House, compared to 30% of Democrats.

Senate: Democrats currently control the Senate. Democrats rated the Senate more positively (39%) than the House, while Republican views of the Senate were similar to their overall view of Congress (26%). 

Individual Members vs. the Institution

Interestingly, Americans tend to view their own individual representatives and senators more favorably than the institution as a whole. For instance, in an October 2024 Gallup poll, 48% of respondents thought their own U.S. representative deserved reelection, while only 21% felt that most members of Congress deserved reelection.”

What are some recent examples of Congressional gridlock and its impact?

GoogleAI Mode: “Recent examples of congressional gridlock, especially prominent in late 2024 and 2025, center around the federal government shutdown and a general failure to pass major legislation on critical issues like healthcare and the federal budget. 

2025 Government Shutdown 

The most significant recent example of gridlock was the 43-day federal government shutdown that began on October 1, 2025, and ended on November 12, 2025. 

The Stalemate: The shutdown occurred because lawmakers failed to pass the 12 annual appropriations bills or a short-term funding measure (continuing resolution) due to a standoff over government spending, specifically a dispute over the expiration of Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits and the repeal of Medicaid cuts.

Impact:

Approximately 1.4 million federal employees and military personnel either were furloughed or forced to work without pay.

Millions of people, particularly low-income individuals, faced a risk of losing access to critical programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and some services were interrupted.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated the shutdown would result in an $11 billion reduction in real GDP by the end of 2026, with some economic effects being permanent.

The resulting uncertainty disrupted air travel and put pressure on food pantries across the country. 

Stalled Legislation and Broader Issues

Beyond the shutdown, general gridlock has led to a lack of movement on major policy initiatives:

Healthcare Costs: Lawmakers have failed to address the rising cost of healthcare premiums and the future of ACA subsidies, a key point of contention during the shutdown negotiations.

Minimum Wage: Proposals to increase the federal minimum wage have consistently failed to advance in recent years, impacting workers who face stagnant wages.

AI Legislation: Despite bipartisan recognition of the need to regulate Artificial Intelligence, significant legislation has stalled due to deep political divides and procedural roadblocks.

Tax Policy: The majority party has resorted to using the “reconciliation” process to pass major tax legislation, which allows them to bypass the Senate’s 60-vote threshold but limits the scope and durability of the laws, ensuring future policy remains contentious. 

This consistent gridlock is generally perceived by the public as a sign of congressional ineffectiveness and is linked to the low public approval ratings of the institution.”

Why do Americans view their own representatives more favorably than Congress overall?

GoogleAI Mode: “Americans view their own representatives more favorably than the institution of Congress as a whole for several key reasons, a phenomenon often referred to as “Fenno’s Paradox”. The primary factors are the focus on personal service and local connection by individual members versus the perception of national partisan gridlock and self-interest in Washington, D.C.. 

Personal Connection and Casework

Individual representatives build local support by focusing on the needs of their constituents, which bypasses the often divisive national political scene. 

Constituent Service (Casework): Members of Congress and their staff actively help individuals and local entities navigate the federal bureaucracy (e.g., resolving issues with Social Security, veterans’ benefits, or immigration). This direct, tangible help builds positive personal relationships and goodwill.

“Home Style” Representation: Legislators tailor their behavior and messaging to suit their specific home district, ensuring their public image aligns with local values and needs. This makes them appear more in touch with “ordinary people” compared to the general perception of a distant, national government.

Bringing Home Federal Money: Securing federal funds and projects for their home districts (“pork barrel spending”) is a visible, popular accomplishment that directly benefits the local economy and community, making the representative look effective and dedicated.

Shared Partisanship: Most Americans are more positive about their own representative if that official shares their political party affiliation. Since most representatives are elected from politically aligned districts, this further reinforces local approval. 

Perceptions of the Institution

In contrast, the view of Congress as a whole is shaped by national media coverage that focuses on conflict, legislative stalemates, and scandals. 

Partisan Conflict: News coverage often highlights the intense ideological battles, a lack of bipartisanship, and legislative gridlock, leading to the perception that the institution is dysfunctional.

General Distrust: There is a broad, long-standing public frustration with national political bodies. Americans often believe that “most members” of Congress are primarily motivated by financial gain or special interests, rather than the public good, which lowers the institution’s overall rating.

Abstract Judgments: When asked about “Congress,” people tend to think in abstract, negative terms about the system’s failures. When asked about their own representative, they think of personal interactions, local projects, and individual characteristics.

Constitutional Design: The legislative process itself is designed for deliberation and compromise, which can appear slow and inefficient to the public, contributing to overall frustration with the institution’s output. 

Ultimately, individual members can insulate themselves from the institution’s negative image by focusing on a personal, local connection, which is why incumbents have a high re-election rate even as Congress’s approval rating remains low.”

How does gerrymandering affect Congress?

GoogleAI Mode: “Gerrymandering significantly affects the U.S. House of Representatives by entrenching the power of the party in control of the redistricting process, reducing electoral competition, increasing political polarization, and diminishing accountability to voters. 

Key Effects on Congress:

Skews Election Results: Gerrymandering allows the party in power to win a disproportionate number of seats relative to its actual share of the statewide vote by strategically “packing” opposing voters into a few districts and “cracking” them across many. This can result in a party securing a legislative majority even with only a minority of the popular vote.

Reduces Electoral Competition: Districts are often drawn as “safe seats” for one party, making the general election a formality. In the 2004 election, for example, California had only one congressional seat change hands because district lines were drawn to protect all incumbents.

Increases Political Polarization: With little fear of a general election challenge, representatives in safe seats are incentivized to appeal to the more ideological members of their base during low-turnout primary elections. This leads to more extreme candidates, a decline in moderate members, and greater difficulty in achieving bipartisan compromise and functional governance.

Decreases Accountability: When politicians can choose their voters instead of the other way around, they have less incentive to be responsive to the needs of the broader constituency or engage in cross-aisle problem-solving. This can lead to a sense of voter disempowerment and lower voter turnout.

Affects Balance of Power: The strategic drawing of maps can directly impact which party holds the majority in the House of Representatives. After the 2020 census, for instance, aggressive gerrymandering in key states was a factor in the slim Republican House majority in the 118th Congress.

Dilutes Minority Voting Power: While racial gerrymandering is illegal under the Voting Rights Act, it is often intertwined with partisan gerrymandering. Lawmakers may defend maps that dilute the voting power of communities of color on the grounds that they were discriminating based on political party affiliation, which the Supreme Court has found to be a non-justiciable (not reviewable by federal courts) political question.”

How many members of Congress have stock in the war industry?

GoogleAI Mode: “While the exact number fluctuates, reports from 2024 and 2025 indicate that at least 50 members of Congress have holdings in defense and war-related industries, with some analyses suggesting the number is higher. These figures often include stocks held by a member’s spouse or dependent children, as mandated by disclosure laws. 

Key findings on congressional defense stock ownership:

Widespread Ownership: A September 2024 analysis by Sludge, based on 2023 financial disclosures, found at least 50 members of Congress or their households held stock in defense contractors. An earlier analysis from December 2024 found that at least 37 lawmakers and their relatives traded between $24 million and $113 million worth of stock in arms companies during 2024.

Key Committees: Some of the members with defense stock holdings sit on committees directly overseeing defense policy and foreign relations, such as the Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees. This raises concerns about potential conflicts of interest, as members are voting on legislation that benefits companies they are invested in.

Active Trading: Some lawmakers, like Rep. Josh Gottheimer, have been particularly active traders of defense stocks, with reports indicating tens of millions of dollars in trades in 2024 alone.

Legislation and Profit: Critics argue there is a conflict of interest when lawmakers who vote on military funding and interventions are also personally invested in defense contractors. For example, some stock holdings of defense giants increased in value in 2025 following geopolitical events.

Calls for Reform: In response to these concerns, bills have been introduced to ban members of Congress from trading individual stocks. Existing legislation like the STOCK Act of 2012 requires disclosure but has been criticized as having weak enforcement and minor penalties. 

AI responses may include mistakes. For financial advice, consult a professional.”

On a scale of 1 out 5, with 5 being most influential, how influential are big money lobbyists in Congress?

GoogleAI Mode: “Big money lobbyists are widely considered to be highly influential in Congress, with a rating of 5 out of 5 in terms of their power and impact on decision-making. 

The evidence points to an extremely high level of influence:

Public Perception: An overwhelming majority of Americans agree that lobbyists and campaign donors have too much influence. An October 2023 Pew Research survey found that 73% of U.S. adults believe special interest groups have too much influence on congressional decisions, while 80% say the same of large campaign donors.

Record Spending: Federal lobbying spending reached a record-breaking $4.5 billion in 2024, demonstrating the vast resources dedicated to influencing policy. Industries and corporations often reap massive financial returns on their lobbying investments, indicating success in shaping favorable policies, regulations, and tax benefits.

Access to Decision-Makers: Lobbyists, many of whom are former members of Congress or high-level staffers themselves (the “revolving door” phenomenon), have direct access to decision-makers. Studies have found that groups identifying themselves as donors have an easier time securing meetings with members of Congress and their staff.

Policy Shaping: Lobbyists actively help lawmakers draft legislation and propose amendments, providing expertise and data that support their clients’ interests and can expedite the lawmaking process. In a system marked by congressional gridlock, lobbyists can play a key role in bringing sharply divided lawmakers together on specific bills, as seen with legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act.

Drowning Out Ordinary Voices: Campaign finance laws, particularly the impact of Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United, have allowed for unlimited spending by Super PACs and “dark money” groups. This has led to the belief that the voices of ordinary Americans are drowned out, while the super-wealthy and special interests dominate political campaigns and policy outcomes. Seven in ten Americans say the people in lawmakers’ districts have too little influence on their decisions.”

Which specific reforms do Americans want to see from Congress?

GoogleAI Mode: “Americans want Congress to prioritize ethics reforms, limits on political influence, and solutions to key policy issues such as healthcare, the economy, and immigration. The public broadly supports specific measures to increase accountability and transparency. 

Government and Ethics Reforms

A vast majority of Americans support specific changes to the rules and operations of Congress. 

Term Limits: An overwhelming majority of Americans (87%) favor limiting the number of terms members of Congress are allowed to serve.

Banning Stock Trading: There is majority support for banning members of Congress from trading individual stocks while in office.

Lobbying Restrictions: Americans want to require members of Congress to wait at least five years after leaving office before they can become lobbyists.

Independent Redistricting: A majority (57%) supports using independent, nonpartisan commissions to draw electoral district maps to prevent gerrymandering.

Campaign Finance Reform: There is strong support (71%) for reforms aimed at increasing transparency and limiting the influence of wealthy donors and special interest groups in political campaigns.

Age Limits: Nearly eight in ten adults (79%) favor maximum age limits for elected officials in Washington, D.C.. 

Policy Priorities

Americans also want Congress to focus on passing legislation to address pressing national issues, with several areas receiving bipartisan support: 

Healthcare: Making healthcare more affordable, capping annual out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs, and making it easier for the government to negotiate drug prices are popular proposals.

Consumer Protection: Banning excessive price increases during emergencies and increasing restrictions on robocalling have high public support.

Voting Rights and Election Security: Ensuring the right to vote for all Americans and increasing federal funding for states to upgrade their voting systems are a top priority for many.

Economic Relief: Increasing the federal minimum wage and ensuring employers pay wages that keep up with the cost of basic necessities, such as housing and food, are high priorities.

Infrastructure and Technology: There is support for increasing funding for highway maintenance and expanding high-speed internet in rural areas. 

In general, Americans are looking for action and accountability, and many believe the way members are elected and how the system functions needs a significant overhaul. 

AI responses may include mistakes. Information may vary depending on location or individual circumstances.”