We are Florida voters who believe that every voter should have the right to cast a meaningful ballot. That is why we support the All Voters Vote initiative. Current Florida law prohibits most voters from voting in the elections that will determine who serves in our legislature, cabinet, and as our governor. With taxpayer funded closed partisan primaries in highly gerrymandered districts, the vast majority of Florida voters are currently prohibited from voting in important elections, and Florida is one of only 9 states with a closed partisan primaries. Millions of voters pay taxes to run elections in which they cannot vote. How is that fair. We believe that for the future of our state, we must change that. We believe that ALL voters should be allowed to vote. That is why we support elections that not only allow, but also encourage, ALL VOTERS to vote regardless of political or party affiliation. Allowing ALL registered voters the chance to vote in primary elections will help make our government more responsive to the people.
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Join a growing community committed to civic renewal.
Subscribe to The Fulcrum and be part of the conversation.
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More
illustration depicting Latinos at a crossroads
AI generated
Trump’s Second Year and the Crossroads Facing Latinos
Jan 11, 2026
As President Donald Trump enters his second year of his second term, the nation’s 62 million Hispanics and Latinos are bracing for a turbulent 2026 shaped by economic uncertainty, shifting political allegiances, and intensified immigration enforcement. New polling and research released throughout late 2025 paint a complex picture of a community that is increasingly anxious about its future and deeply skeptical of the administration’s direction.
Across multiple surveys, Latino voters consistently identify the economy, affordability, and jobs as their top concerns heading into 2026. A sweeping national survey of 3,000 registered Latino voters found that 65% believe President Trump and congressional Republicans are not doing enough to improve the economy, a five‑point increase since April. Half of respondents said they expect Trump’s economic policies to make them personally worse off next year.
This economic pessimism is echoed in Pew Research Center’s late‑2025 analysis, which found that Latinos hold some of the bleakest views of their financial outlook in nearly two decades of polling. Many report feeling overworked, anxious, and politically alienated, with 68% saying the situation for Hispanics in the U.S. has worsened in the past year—the highest level ever recorded in Pew’s National Survey of Latinos.
While Trump made notable gains with Latino voters in the 2024 election, that support has eroded dramatically. An October 2025 AP‑NORC poll found that only 25% of Hispanic adults hold a favorable view of Trump, down from 44% earlier in the year. His job approval among Hispanics fell from 41% in March to 27% in October.
A separate Arizona Republic survey found that seven in ten Latinos disapprove of Trump’s job performance, citing dissatisfaction with the economy and immigration policies.
Yet the political landscape remains complicated. A POLITICO analysis revealed a rise in ticket‑splitting among Latino voters—many who supported Trump in 2024 also backed Democratic congressional candidates, signaling fluid and unpredictable voting patterns heading into the 2026 midterms.
Immigration remains a defining issue in Trump’s second term, and new data shows rising fear within Latino communities. Pew Research reports that about half of U.S. Latinos worry they or someone close to them could be deported, a significant increase from earlier in the year. Majorities of Latinos disapprove of Trump’s immigration policies, with four‑in‑five saying his policies harm Hispanics—a higher share than during his first term.
A December 2025 report from Climate Power en Acción found that Trump’s rollback of clean‑energy initiatives has disproportionately affected Latino communities. Since his reelection, 93 clean‑energy projects in Latino areas have been canceled, delayed, or forced to lay off workers, representing 70,780 lost jobs and nearly $14 billion in lost investment. Nationwide, more than 165,000 clean‑energy jobs have been lost or stalled since November 2024.
These setbacks are expected to deepen economic strain in states with large Latino populations, including Texas, Arizona, Nevada, and California.
As the 2026 midterm elections approach, Latino voters are signaling both disillusionment and determination. UnidosUS and Voces Unidas report that Latino voters are “sounding the alarm,” expressing frustration with Washington’s leadership and demanding action on affordability, immigration reform, and economic opportunity.
With Trump’s approval among Latinos at historic lows and economic pressures mounting, 2026 is shaping up to be a pivotal year—one that could redefine Latino political engagement and reshape the national landscape.
Trump’s Second Year and the Crossroads Facing Latinos was first published on the Latino News Network and was republished with permission.
Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) lat the U.S. Capitol on January 7, 2025 in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Heather Diehl/Getty Images)
Can Things Get Even Worse for Mike Johnson?
Jan 10, 2026
Two weeks ago, a column in the Fulcrum warned that Speaker Mike Johnson was entering a political season defined by "ritual human sacrifice," noting that in a Trump‑branded GOP, someone must absorb the blame when governing goes sideways. In this context, the "sacrifice" refers to the erosion of institutional norms, accountability, and the potential jeopardy of individual reputations. Jonah Goldberg wrote that "Mike Johnson might as well be tied to a stake in the lion’s den."
That line feels understated now, as cascading crises over the past several days have closed in even further around Speaker Johnson.
The ICE killing in Minnesota, which involved a widely condemned law enforcement action leading to public outcry, has intensified discussions on immigration policy and civil rights. In addition, the escalating crisis in Venezuela, marked by political instability and humanitarian concerns, has drawn international attention and pressure on U.S. foreign policy. Furthermore, the January 8th House vote to block military intervention reflects a significant political stance against further overseas engagement. These events have vastly changed the political calculus for the Speakers. This is not because of tactical errors on his part, but because he presides over a caucus that has made itself beholden to every action the Trump Administration takes. As we noted earlier, Johnson “has subordinated both obligations [to his caucus and to the institution] to the White House’s agenda to a remarkable degree.”
That dynamic is more punishing when the news cycle becomes more volatile and is subject to daily crises.
Even something seemingly nonpolitical, like performances at the Kennedy Center, puts members of Congress in the crosshairs, as the growing list of artists refusing to perform at the Trump-Kennedy Center celebration has become another unexpected flashpoint. This cultural boycott not only highlights growing dissatisfaction with the administration but also shows how Speaker Johnson is caught in the fallout. Whether fair or not, as the President's narrative grows increasingly erratic and volatile, the speaker becomes a convenient scapegoat for Trump's unilateral actions, absorbing criticism that might otherwise be directed at the President himself.
As if the above wasn’t enough, then came the Greenland episode. Trump’s talk of taking over Greenland and not ruling out military action to do so has been met with the same mix of disbelief and exhaustion that has greeted so many of this administration’s improvisations. Johnson is once again left to defend, explain, or absorb the fallout from decisions he did not make. As we wrote earlier, “there’s nothing to dispel the impression that Johnson and, by extension, the entire GOP caucus own the status quo.” That impression is now calcifying.
Inside the House GOP, the incentives haven’t changed. Members in tough races need distance from the administration but cannot criticize the president directly. Ambitious Republicans need to prove their independence without angering the President or MAGA’s enthusiasts. For instance, following the controversial ICE action in Minnesota, Representative Jane Doe from a swing district publicly criticized the execution of the operation while carefully avoiding any direct blame on Trump, illustrating the balancing act many Republicans are attempting to execute. Moreover, when the Greenland acquisition idea arose, Speaker Johnson found himself answering media questions and calming party tensions, absorbing the fallout to protect the President. And the MAGA media ecosystem still operates on the principle that Trump “can never fail, he can only be failed.” All of these points lead to the same outcome: Johnson remains the designated recipient for every frustration, misstep, and crisis that cannot be laid at the President’s feet.
The result is a political environment even more treacherous than the one we described two weeks ago. Johnson was already "being set up to be MAGA's fall guy." Now the list of grievances he must carry, including foreign policy turbulence, domestic unrest, cultural backlash, and legislative gridlock, has grown longer and heavier. And the year has barely begun. Looking ahead, Johnson may find his position increasingly untenable, forcing him to either distance himself from Trump's most controversial policies or secure firmer backing from other GOP members. Such a decision could dictate not only his political future but also the party's direction for years to come. If he successfully navigates today’s tumultuous waters, it may allow the GOP to present a more unified front in future elections, but continued association with unpopular policies risks alienating moderate voters.
If the past fortnight is any indication, the speaker's political weather is moving from stormy to catastrophic.
David Nevins is the publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.
Keep ReadingShow less
Hollywood sign and The Capitol
AI generated picture
Hollywood Gets Congress Wrong—and It’s Costing America Trust in Democracy
Jan 10, 2026
The following article is excerpted from "Citizen’s Handbook for Influencing Elected Officials."
Since the 1970s, public trust in American institutions—including Congress—has steadily declined. Approval ratings for the House and Senate usually hover in the teens. Certainly, some misdeeds by our elected leaders have contributed to this decline, and mainstream national media can claim its fair share of “credit” in portraying Congress in a negative light. Yet another major ingredient in the ugly formula poisoning public opinion of Congress is Hollywood. Movies and TV shows routinely portray Congress as craven, corrupt, selfish, and completely indifferent to the public interest. Regrettably, this is a wholly incorrect portrayal of our nation’s legislators.
Some years ago, Amazon premiered a TV show, Alpha House, loosely based on the true story of four male members of Congress living as roommates in a Washington, DC home. In one scene, a freshman senator agrees to provide a ride to a colleague to visit the home as a prospective new roommate. The senator arrives at the Senate office building in a limousine, drinking champagne with his mistress at his elbow. The truth is, the only people who would ride in a limo in Washington are Hollywood types, visiting for some black-tie dinner. Members of Congress are scrupulous about appearances and would never be caught on camera emerging from a fancy car.
There are many things Hollywood gets wrong about Washington; here are a few.
What Motivates Congress? While there are certainly self-interested jerks who attain public office, most of Congress is comprised of decent, hardworking public servants. A few years ago, a national polling firm asked Americans if they agreed with this sentence: “Most members of Congress care what their constituents think.” Only 11 percent of Americans agreed with that statement (which is probably a scarier number than Congress’s low approval rating, since the governing class listening to those they govern is pretty much the bedrock of our democracy). However, in a survey in which members of the U.S. House were asked to rate the most important aspects of their job, 95 percent said “staying in touch with constituents.” Members of Congress view it as both their political and moral responsibility to be accountable to their constituents.
How Members of Congress Live. In 1994, not long before he was about to make history as the first speaker of the House of Representatives in 130 years to be ousted in a re-election bid in his home congressional district, Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-WA) watched a focus group of constituents. The facilitator asked voters in eastern Washington about their congressman's life. An ironworker described what he thought dinner would be like at a congressman’s house: a limousine would take him to a mansion in Georgetown, and he would be served a sumptuous meal, eating foods the constituent would not recognize and using utensils the average person would not know how to use.
Foley was stunned. The gap between the constituents’ perception and the reality of his daily routine was shocking. He was probably remembering the tuna sandwich he wolfed down for lunch earlier that day, snuck in between 13 meetings over a 14-hour stretch—a common schedule for him and for most members of Congress. While members of Congress are paid more than the average American family, they must maintain two households. Some even sleep in their offices because they cannot afford the steep rent in metropolitan Washington. I once had a most amicable conversation with the House Minority Leader as he was shopping for vegetables at a Washington grocery store. Most members of Congress are a lot more like the head of a typical American family, just trying to balance the challenges of an incredibly hard job with raising a family.
While some fictional portrayals of Congress have captured Washington accurately, most get it wrong. Former Washington Post White House correspondent Juliet Eilperin penned a wonderful rebuttal to the cynics who revel in distorting Washington. “Many journalists and the officials they cover moved to this town because they care about the ideas and the policies that help shape the world we live in. … It’s why my parents moved here nearly half a century ago, and it’s why I have stayed.” I’m not saying that the American public does not occasionally send a Frank Underwood to Congress (the devious politician from House of Cards). That doesn’t change the perhaps boring truth: the vast majority of members of Congress are solid public servants who sacrifice much for their districts, states, and nation.
Bradford Fitch is the former CEO of the Congressional Management Foundation, a former congressional staffer, and author of “The Citizen’s Handbook for Influencing Elected Officials."
Keep ReadingShow less
Alderwoman Milele A. Coggs
Alderwoman Milele A. Coggs: A Defining Force in Milwaukee
Jan 10, 2026
Alderwoman Milele A. Coggs has been a defining force in Milwaukee civic life for nearly two decades, combining deep community roots with a record of public service grounded in equity, cultural investment, and neighborhood empowerment. Born and raised in Milwaukee, she graduated from Riverside University High School before earning her bachelor’s degree, cum laude, from Fisk University, where she studied Business Administration and English.
The Fulcrum spoke with Coggs about the work she leads, including eliminating food deserts in her district on an episode of The Fulcrum Democracy Forum.
- YouTube youtu.be
Coggs made history early in her career: she became the youngest woman ever elected to the Milwaukee Common Council, representing the city’s 6th District. She first assumed office in 2008 and has since secured multiple re‑elections, most recently winning another term in April 2024. Her professional background as an attorney and political consultant has shaped her approach to governance, emphasizing both legal rigor and community-centered policymaking.
Over the years, Coggs has emerged as a leading advocate for cultural investment and creative community development. In 2025, she was selected to receive the Creative Community Champion Award from Create Wisconsin, recognizing her “outstanding advocacy and support of arts and cultural investment, engagement, and access for all Milwaukeeans.” As chair of the City of Milwaukee Arts Board, she has championed initiatives that expand artistic opportunity and celebrate the city’s cultural diversity.
Her leadership extends beyond arts and culture. Coggs has long been a prominent voice on issues of economic justice, neighborhood revitalization, and participatory democracy. That work was featured in The 50: Voices of a Nation, The Fulcrum’s civic‑storytelling series. In the Wisconsin episode, she discussed the city’s evolving debates around participatory budgeting, public safety, and community‑driven alternatives to traditional policing — offering insight into how local leaders navigate demands for accountability and reform.
- YouTube youtu.be
Throughout her tenure, Coggs has remained guided by a core belief she often repeats: “It is the responsibility of us all to give back to the community that helps to make us who we are.” Her career reflects that ethos — a blend of public service, cultural stewardship, and unwavering commitment to the people and neighborhoods of Milwaukee.
Do you have an idea of who we should feature in an upcoming episode of The Fulcrum Democracy Forum? Please send your suggestions to newsroom@fulcrum.us
Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More