Local Government Navigates Negative Impact of Political Polarization Better than Federal Government According to New CivicPulse/Carnegie Survey

An overwhelming majority of local government leaders (87 percent) believes polarization is hurting the country but far fewer (31 percent) see negative effects in their own communities

New York, NY, October 23, 2024 — Local governments are largely insulated from the harshest effects of polarization in America, and communities below 50,000 residents are especially resilient to partisan dysfunction due to greater participation in local activities and a shared focus on tangible needs and services. These are among the findings of a survey conducted by the nonprofit research organization CivicPulse and commissioned by the philanthropic foundation Carnegie Corporation of New York.

The report titled Polarization in America: Survey of Local Government is the first in a three-part series aimed at understanding the impact of polarization, identifying solutions, and strengthening communities. Between August and September 2024, CivicPulse surveyed more than 1,400 volunteer respondents — elected leaders, managers, and key department heads working in municipalities, townships, and counties from across the United States.

Overall, their responses reflect optimism, particularly in America’s smallest communities. Cooperative relationships across different groups are frequently forged in local government — despite the negative impact of polarizing influences, such as divisive rhetoric about federal elections; heated national debates over cultural issues; reduced access to funding due to partisan gridlock in state government; and misinformation caused by a lack of local news coverage.

“We would like to thank the hundreds of volunteers who participated in this national survey by sharing their experiences in local government and suggesting grassroots solutions to a national problem,” said Dame Louise Richardson, president of Carnegie and former head of the University of Oxford. “We are encouraged to see that in many respects, local government is navigating political polarization much better than federal government. Clearly there is much to learn from local leaders about how to make government work for all of us.”

“While the majority of governance happens at the local level, the public and the scholarly community alike have remarkably little access to reliable data about the views of the hundreds of thousands of local officials who lead our communities,” said Nathan Lee, founder and managing director of CivicPulse. “We were surprised and perhaps reassured that despite widespread claims by both academics and journalists that national polarization has consumed politics at every level, we find compelling evidence that the majority of local governments remain a haven for cooperative politics.”

The CivicPulse/Carnegie survey defines political polarization as divisive attitudes or behaviors between liberals or Democrats, on the one hand, and conservatives or Republicans, on the other. It seeks to measure the impact on communities and relationships as well as the factors that have a negative influence and those that have a positive influence.

Key findings:

Polarization’s impact on local communities (quantitative findings)

1. Closer to home, farther from division. A majority (87 percent) of local government leaders believed political polarization negatively affects the country as a whole “a lot” or “a great deal”; less than one third (31 percent) perceived the same negative effect within their local communities.

2. Communities below 50,000 are especially resilient. Reported negative impact of polarization was 28 percent for communities of less than 10,000 residents; 29 percent for communities between 10,000 and 50,000; and 46 percent for communities above 50,000.

Polarization’s impact on relationships in local government (quantitative findings)

3. Polarization is more often seen in relationships with and among constituents. Polarization was ranked as negatively affecting relationships “a lot” or “a great deal” among constituents (36 percent); between elected officials and constituents (25 percent); among elected officials (23 percent); and among staff (11 percent).

4. Local elected officials maintain functional relationships in red, blue, and purple communities. Significant negative impact of polarization on elected leaders’ relationships was reported in 20 percent of Republican-majority communities, 24 percent of Democratic-majority communities, and 21 percent of communities with a balance of Republicans and Democrats.

Polarization’s influence on local government operations (qualitative findings)

5. Divisive rhetoric about federal elections leads to hostility against local government. Respondents cited how local officials receive the brunt of constituents’ anxieties, given their role in administering federal elections.

6. State-level partisan gridlock hampers reliable funding. Local leaders on both sides of the aisle said party divisions within state government reduce access to funding for critical local projects.

7. Hot-button national debates create flashpoints at the local level. Local officials repeatedly mentioned how the intersection between local government and national “culture wars” topics, such as LGBTQ+ programming, children’s literature, and racial equity, can cause conflict and division.

8. Local news deserts lead to misinformation and inflamed rhetoric. Respondents said the lack of quality local news leads to misinformation about local government and an overreliance on divisive social media.

How local officials overcome polarization (qualitative findings)

9. Participating in local activities buffers ideological differences. Local officials pointed out that because they live in the same community and participate together with constituents in local events, they are more able to recognize their shared interests and values.

10. Focusing on concrete needs helps depolarize local politics. Respondents highlighted the importance of focusing on tangible community needs and services, such as infrastructure maintenance and disaster response, to overcome partisan differences.

11. Reducing emphasis on political parties leads to better day-to-day governance. Respondents said that keeping candidates’ parties off local ballots and other measures to deemphasize party affiliations help to foster an environment where community-focused decision-making transcends partisan boundaries.

Read and download the full report here.

About the Survey

The survey used a mixed-methods approach of quantitative analysis of multiple-choice survey responses, qualitative analyses of open-ended survey responses, and follow-up interviews with select respondents. Among the 1,412 local-leader respondents, 49 percent were elected policymakers (ex: mayor, county legislator) and 51 percent were civil service leaders (ex: city manager, head of parks and recreation); 18 percent resided in counties, 60 percent in municipalities, and 22 percent in townships; 29 percent identified as Democrat, 38 percent as Republican; and 33 percent as Independent.

For more on the data, demographics, and survey methodology, please email info@civicpulse.org.

About CivicPulse

CivicPulse is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to enhancing local and state government in the U.S. by conducting representative surveys of public officials, producing actionable research, and facilitating practitioner-researcher dialogue.

About Carnegie Corporation of New York

Carnegie Corporation of New York was established by Andrew Carnegie in 1911 to promote the advancement and diffusion of knowledge and understanding. Today the foundation works to reduce political polarization through philanthropic support for the issues that Carnegie considered most important: education, democracy, and peace. @CarnegieCorp

Contact: Celeste Ford | Chief Communications Officer | Carnegie Corporation of New York | Email: CFC@carnegie.org