An Update from the Center for North Carolina Politics & Public Service
North Carolinians overwhelmingly believe election officials should put the public interest ahead of their political party when making election-related policy and administrative decisions, but a new Catawba College-YouGov survey also finds that partisanship shapes how voters evaluate those officials and their decisions.
Six in 10 North Carolinians (62%) say election officials should make policy and administrative decisions solely on what they believe is best for the public, regardless of how those decisions might affect their political party. Just 14% say officials should be permitted to consider whether a decision would help their party's electoral success, as long as the decision is legal.
That expectation is broadly shared across the political spectrum. Nearly two-thirds (65%) of self-identified independents say officials should base their decisions solely on what they believe is best for the public, with 64% of Republicans and 61% of Democrats saying the same.
“North Carolinians appear to draw an important distinction between politics and election administration,” said Michael Bitzer, professor of politics & history and director of the Center for North Carolina Politics & Public Service at Catawba College, which commissioned the survey with YouGov. “While election decisions can have political consequences, North Carolinians overwhelmingly believe those consequences should not be part of an election official's decision-making.”
SAME DECISION, DIFFERENT REACTIONS BASED ON AN OFFICIAL’S PARTY LABEL
After being asked whether election officials should prioritize the public interest over party interests, respondents were randomly assigned to one of three versions of a hypothetical scenario. The scenario described a state elections official who said a policy or administrative decision was in the public interest but also chose the option because it would benefit the official’s political party. The official was identified as a Democrat, Republican, or independent.
The results found that partisan considerations can affect how voters themselves evaluate the same behavior. When the hypothetical election official was a Republican, 57% of Democratic respondents considered the decision inappropriate, compared with 36% when the official was a Democrat, a 21-point partisan gap.
Among Republican respondents, 63% considered the decision inappropriate when the official was Democratic, compared with 31% when the official was Republican, a 32-point partisan gap.
The same pattern appears when respondents were asked how much confidence they would have in the official’s action. Partisans were much more divided when evaluating an official from their own party but expressed substantially less confidence in an opposing-party official.
Among Democrats, 51% said they would have a great deal or some confidence in a Democratic official who made the decision to benefit the official’s party, compared with 29% who would have that level of confidence in a Republican official. Among Republicans, 49% expressed a great deal or some confidence in a Republican official, compared with 27% for a Democratic official.
“These findings reveal an important tension,” said Bitzer. “North Carolinians appear to broadly endorse the principle that election officials should put the public interest ahead of partisan interests. At the same time, Democrats and Republicans are more likely to give an official from their own party the benefit of the doubt.”
The results do not mean that partisans broadly approve of officials considering their party's interests. Even among respondents evaluating an official from their own party, fewer than four in 10 considered the hypothetical decision appropriate.
“It appears that while same-party identity reduces criticism, it does not create majority approval,” Bitzer said.
The survey suggests that partisan decision-making can have consequences for institutional trust. Seven in 10 Democrats (71%) said they would have little or no confidence in a Republican official who made such a decision, while 73% of Republicans said they would have little or no confidence in a Democratic official.
WHAT ABOUT INDEPENDENT ELECTION ADMINISTRATORS?
The third group examined whether removing an explicit Democratic or Republican label changed how respondents evaluated an election official who said a decision was in the public interest but also chose it because it would benefit that official’s unnamed political party.
Because many self-identified independents lean toward one of the major parties and relatively few North Carolinians identify as pure independents, the independent-official condition serves as a comparison point rather than as a direct measure of attitudes toward a fully nonpartisan official.
“While many North Carolinians describe themselves as independent and may prefer election administrators who are not visibly aligned with either major party, fewer than two in 10 respondents in our 2026 surveys identify as pure independents,” Bitzer said. “Many North Carolina independents lean toward one party or the other. The independent-official scenario helps us understand how voters respond when an official is not explicitly labeled as a Democrat or Republican, but is still described as making a decision that benefits political interests.”
Among Democratic and Republican respondents, reactions to the independent official generally fell between reactions to a same-party official and an opposing-party official when evaluating whether the decision was appropriate.
- Democratic respondents rated the action inappropriate at 36% for a Democratic official, 46% for an independent official, and 57% for a Republican official.
- Republican respondents rated the action inappropriate at 31% for a Republican official, 41% for an independent official, and 63% for a Democratic official.
The same “in-between” pattern appeared when respondents were asked about confidence in an independent official’s action.
- Democratic respondents reported little or no confidence at 50% for a Democratic official, 60% for an independent official, and 71% for a Republican official.
- Republican respondents reported little or no confidence at 51% for a Republican official, 58% for an independent official, and 73% for a Democratic official.
“This pattern suggests that an explicit Democratic or Republican label can heighten partisan skepticism,” Bitzer said. “An independent label did not eliminate concerns about an official making a decision that also benefits political interests, but among Democratic and Republican respondents, it generally drew less distrust than an opposing-party label.”
“Overall, these survey findings point to both a potential strength and a challenge for election administration in North Carolina: a broad public expectation that election officials should act in the public interest, coupled with evidence that partisan identity can influence how voters evaluate whether officials are living up to that standard,” Bitzer noted.
Bitzer added that “maintaining public confidence in elections requires more than officials following the law. The public also expects election officials to demonstrate that their decisions are motivated by the public interest rather than by which political party might benefit.”
This is the second of several press releases from the August 2026 Catawba College-YouGov Survey of North Carolinians. Future releases will report on North Carolinians’ attitudes about:
- voting access and administration, including preferences and perceptions of in-person, early, absentee-by-mail, and other voting methods; whether ballots should be counted after a voter’s death; the length and scheduling of early voting and Sunday voting; photo ID requirements; and public outreach intended to encourage voter turnout; and
- feelings about the three proposed constitutional amendments for the November 2026 general election; the state of democracy; and where Republicans stand as either Trump or party supporters.
You may find additional details about the poll’s finding, methodology, and responses below.
About the Center for NC Politics and Public Service
The Center for North Carolina Politics & Public Service at Catawba College is dedicated to enriching civic dialogue, deepening understanding, and fostering engagement within North Carolina. Through non-partisan initiatives, the Center promotes the ideals of public service, civic character and engagement, and informed citizenship across the state. By educating North Carolinians about the state's political dynamics and emphasizing the value of public service, the Center cultivates practical political understanding and encourages active civic participation. In doing so, it helps instill a lasting respect for public life and being a responsible citizen — both among Catawba College students and throughout the wider North Carolina community.
About Catawba College
Founded in 1851, Catawba College is a four-year, private, liberal arts college located in Salisbury, N.C. Ranked as one of the best regional colleges in the South, Catawba is known for its intellectual rigor, dedicated faculty, beautiful campus, and strong commitment to sustainability and the environment. The College offers more than 70 undergraduate and four graduate programs allowing students to explore diverse interests and create their own academic pathway. Additional information is available at catawba.edu.
