In the face of rising hate crimes and discrimination on the basis of race and religion, we focus on growing the number of Americans who know their fellow Muslim, Arab, Black, Sikh, and South Asian American neighbors. We promote core American values of equality, pluralism, and strength through diversity. We believe in an America that is indivisible – join us to help realize that vision.
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
New Jersey, USA flag, person voting
AI generated image
How New Jersey’s Ballot Slogans Could Put Power Back in Voters Hands
Jan 24, 2026
With American democracy in crisis amid national turmoil, neither political party is prepared to lead us out of the wilderness. However, here in New Jersey, voters can bring in outsiders through one legal strategy to overcome barriers: the ballot slogan system.
This year, New Jersey's primary elections are unusually open. Until recently, party organizations could manipulate voters' choices by the deceptive arrangement of candidate names, a system called the county line. This guaranteed that nominees would be the parties' handpicked choices.
But two years ago, that system was blocked in a landmark federal voting rights lawsuit. I should know - I was an expert witness in that lawsuit, and helped do away with that unfair rule. Now all candidates compete on a more level playing field.
But there’s still the problem of name recognition. How can we tell the difference between an establishment candidate and someone who can make real change? The answer is in the ballot slogan. Candidates in New Jersey are allowed to list a slogan of up to six words describing their views.
The ballot slogan can be used by individuals to express their views. There’s still the problem of whether someone is a serious candidate. A slogan like “free pizza and beer on Fridays” is, after all, six words. Such a slogan would not speak to problems well-suited to legislation.
But the slogan can take on new force, both by being serious - and by coordination between many candidates. Protest movements gain power in numbers. If a whole slate of candidates used the same slogan, that would show a unified front and a movement. For example, in the Democratic primary in every congressional district in New Jersey, imagine 12 candidates - one for each district, using “No Kings” in their ballot slogan. They could convey a message that harnesses the energy of protests across the Garden State. Such a slogan would support the kind of radical rescue operations that Democrats think are urgently needed.
We're living in a time when our institutions have failed us. Our parties, our elected officials, business, law, universities—all are weakening or caving out of fear. But one element of society has less to lose by speaking the truth and more to gain by saving the system: individual voters. The slogan system gives those voters a real say.
Democratic Party leadership is responding very slowly to the radical changes of the last 12 months. While their party base is becoming increasingly infuriated by the actions of ICE in Minneapolis and across the nation, their consultants are urging a more cautious approach. But ICE's aggression is just the beginning. Drastic changes to the administration of law, corruption at the highest levels of government, and the undermining of public health and science threaten to upend the prosperity and peace of the last 50 years. This is not even to mention the undoing of progress on civil rights and voting rights. In the face of this, Democrats would rally behind new leaders willing to do whatever it takes to save the nation.
Although entrenched party organizations may be afraid to call for necessary action, individual candidates are not similarly constrained. Their slogan can be free of any pressure from party elders. Think of a ballot slogan like "Abolish ICE. Prosecute crimes. No kings." With 46% of Americans in favor of abolishing ICE and 43% opposed, such a slogan starts with a natural advantage.
And since primaries are dominated by party activists, such a slogan could be galvanizing. Recall that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez used the Democratic primary to oust a longtime veteran of Congress, Joseph Crowley. Amplify that to hundreds of districts nationwide. Such a message would resonate with rank-and-file voters all over the nation. New Jersey could lead the way.
The same path is available to Republicans. Members of Congress are largely voting in lockstep with the Trump Administration - even as that Administration takes ever more extreme actions. If they are dismayed by the radicalism that has gripped their party, they can express a slogan that points toward a better way. Imagine Republican outsiders running under the slogan “Restore the Fed, NATO, and integrity.” Old-school Republicans and conservatives who want to, well, conserve, would find their home at last.
The candidate filing deadline is March 23. For any candidates who can gather signatures by that date, a path is open to expressing the rage of Democrats, the uneasiness of Republicans, and the millions of independents who have no home in either party. Through the ballot slogan system, the banner is ready for a new generation of candidates to pick up.
Sam Wang is a professor of neuroscience at Princeton University and a leading expert on statistical analysis in public policy. He is the founder of Fixing Bugs in Democracy where he covers topics related to democracy, data analysis, and potential reforms.
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
Margaret Kobos is CEO and founder of Oklahoma United
Photo Provided
The Fahey Q&A with Margaret Kobos, CEO and founder of Oklahoma United
Jan 24, 2026
Since organizing the Voters Not Politicians 2018 ballot initiative that put citizens in charge of drawing Michigan's legislative maps, Katie Fahey has been the founding executive director of The People, which is forming statewide networks to promote government accountability. She regularly interviews colleagues in the democracy reform world for our Opinion section.
Margaret Kobos is CEO and founder of Oklahoma United, a grassroots political nonprofit with the mission to empower moderate and centrist voters in Oklahoma. OKUnited seeks to enact balance, common-sense solutions, and full representation of all voters through advocacy and systemic improvements. Currently, Margaret leads the Vote Yes 836 campaign to open the state’s closed primary system.
Our conversation has been edited for clarity and brevity.
Fahey: We have heard you are approaching a big deadline. What needs to happen to put Oklahoma’s State Question 836 on the November ballot?
Kobos:
We have until January 26 to collect over 173,000 signatures, and we are working hard to reach that goal. Hundreds of signature gatherers are fanning out across the state daily, seeking out registered voters at high-volume locations like sporting events and shopping centers. We also have dozens of pre-set locations statewide posted regularly to VoteYes836.com. If you are an Oklahoman who feels that voting is an essential basis for sound government, we need your signature! Anyone interested in signing the petition, please check the website for a time and location that works for you.
Fahey: How did you get involved with OKUnited?
Kobos:
I am a fourth-generation Oklahoman with a long career in law and banking. I have worked with private donors and public institutions to build community facilities and maintain parks and cultural assets. It became clear to me that the persistent challenges that hold Oklahoma back are rooted in a political system that excludes too many voters and rewards division. I founded OKUnited in 2021 to build a broad, nonpartisan coalition focused on voter education, civic engagement, and reform, which ultimately led to the filing of State Question 836.
Fahey: What is State Question 836 advocating for?
Kobos:
State Question 836 would replace Oklahoma’s closed primary system with a single, open primary ballot for state and county offices. All candidates, regardless of party, would appear on one primary ballot with their party affiliation listed, and every registered voter could vote in that “open” primary. The two candidates who receive the most votes would advance to the general election.
The goal is to ensure every Oklahoma voter has a voice in every taxpayer-funded election, and to encourage broader participation and accountability.
Fahey: Tell us about the current system of closed primaries in your state and how it impacts independent voters.
Kobos:
Oklahoma is one of a few states with a fully closed primary system, meaning only voters registered with a political party can participate in that party’s primary elections. All independent voters are sidelined completely in primaries, which is important as those primaries are the elections that matter. Only about 2 percent of elected officials are chosen in a competitive general election; the rest essentially win office when they win a primary.
What this means is that a huge number of taxpayers are shut out of the most important elections, including 500,000 independent voters (about 20% of the electorate) who are completely excluded from June primaries and August primary run-offs. Democrats in heavily Republican districts and Republicans in heavily Democratic districts also cannot vote in those vital local elections.
Fahey: Who are the main opponents of your effort, and what are their arguments against it?
Kobos:
Our opponents are mostly party insiders who benefit, politically and/or financially, from the closed primary system. They fear disruption and invest considerable sums into sowing fear and distractions to maintain the status quo.
Our pitch to Oklahomans in both parties is: aren’t we tired of a system where a small number of insiders make the rules, set the agenda, and choose our candidates? Let’s put power back in the hands of the people, where it belongs.
Fahey: What do you think your campaign needs to do to be successful this November?
Kobos: Step one is to get on the ballot by hitting our signature goal. We are making good progress, but every signature counts. If you are reading this and are an Oklahoma voter, please go to VoteYes836.com and find a location to sign this petition.
Step two is continue to communicate the deficiencies of our current system and how open primaries will address those deficiencies. Oklahoma has the lowest voter turnout in this country; we are last in education, and rank poorly in health and economic indicators. We rank last in voter turnout as we actively discourage and disqualify people from voting. Closed primaries punish candidates seeking solutions and collaboration rather than serving up controversy on social media, and it is impossible to solve problems in that environment.
We are moving to a system that is more inclusive and accountable, so we can move this state forward. If we get that message out, it will resonate with many voters.
Fahey: What are some of the best practices and lessons you have learned from past successes in ballot initiatives?
Kobos: This is my first ballot initiative, but we have drawn some lessons from other successful petitions. Our bipartisan team is the reason we were successful initially and have sustained that success. Our team and supporters originate from all political sides. They share an intense commitment to basic ideals of voting and public service, and complementary expertise. The next component for success in any movement is persistence. Currently, that means hitting the streets and gathering signatures daily, and we are sprinting to the finish line of January 26th.
In Oklahoma, we had to approach our issue via ballot initiative, and not via the legislative process. Political elites benefiting from the status quo will throw up every obstacle they can to keep the people of Oklahoma from voting on this. It is essential to balance your perspective in this process: surround yourself with smart people with constructive attitudes, yet listen when you hear criticism. I believe that is the secret to sustaining momentum while pivoting when necessary in a movement.
Fahey: What do you currently need the most help with?
Until January 26th, we need registered voters to sign the petition, spread the word that they’ve signed, and direct friends and colleagues to do the same. Additionally we need donations to fund our signature gathering operation, including printing ballots, training, transportation, and other essentials that power this effort.
You can check signature-gathering locations and also make donations at VoteYes836.com.
Fahey: If you were speaking with a high school student or a new immigrant to our country, how would you describe what being an American means to you?
Kobos: My friend and I were recently musing about how we wanted to be remembered, at the end of the day. Without hesitation, I stated that I just want my son to be proud of me. That’s a high bar for a parent, as our children look up to us. That is why I became involved in this election reform work; I felt a need to “walk the walk”.
Our young people are bright, talented, and full of creative and positive energy. We must set them up with every tool they will need to take this country and our state of Oklahoma into the future. The right to vote is the most powerful tool.
Being an American to me means looking forward with positive energy. As a nation we often reinvent or forget much of our history, yet the ability to shake off the past, move forward, and problem-solve through daunting odds is also a strength, and something America does exceptionally well. It frees us to create.
We are a nation built on progress, determination, grit, and common sense. I get excited when I imagine the new ideas our youth and immigrants will certainly bring to action in the future. America was created in collaboration, using the best available tools and systems known to civilization. That is where we will shine in the future.
Katie Fahey is Executive Director of The People.
Keep ReadingShow less
Photo produced using AI
Reflecting on the First Year of The 50: Voices of a Nation
Jan 24, 2026
As we begin the second year of The 50: Voices of a Nation, I want to take a moment to thank you — our readers, partners, and communities across the country — for walking with us through this ambitious, four‑year journey to understand American democracy from the ground up.
This project began in 2025 with a simple but urgent question: What motivated Americans to vote in 2024, and how is life unfolding under the Trump administration?
Over the first twelve months, Hugo Balta, Executive Editor of The Fulcrum, traveled state by state, listening to people whose stories rarely make national headlines but whose experiences reveal the real conditions of civic life in this country. The 50 is built on that commitment — to meet people where they are, a rare chance to see democracy in action—one story, one state, one voice at a time.
A Maryland Program Connects Marginalized Communities to Critical Health Services
- YouTube youtu.be
We closed 2025 with a trip to Maryland, where community health ambassadors are working tirelessly to connect marginalized residents with lifesaving information and services.
Their work began during the uncertainty of the COVID‑19 pandemic and continues today as they build trust, counter misinformation, and bridge long‑standing gaps in access to care. Their story is a reminder that democracy is not only about elections — it’s about the everyday labor of people strengthening their communities from within.
2025 also marked a major milestone: the premiere of The 50: Voices of a Nation television special on CAN-TV. The hour‑long broadcast brought viewers across the country into the living rooms, workplaces, and neighborhoods where Americans are navigating the impact of national policies on their daily lives.
It was a powerful moment of visibility for the communities we’ve met — and for the mission that drives this work.
I invite you to watch the groundbreaking program.
- YouTube youtu.be
We Need Your Support
As the new year gets underway, our commitment deepens. In 2026, we continue traveling to new states, expanding our multimedia storytelling, and bringing you closer to the people whose voices define the civic landscape. The stakes remain high, and so does our responsibility to tell these stories with accuracy, empathy, and depth.
Independent, community‑centered journalism like The 50 is only possible because of people like you. If you believe in this work — in elevating lived experience, in strengthening civic understanding, in building a more informed democracy — we ask you to consider donating today by clicking HERE.
Your support ensures we can continue reporting from every corner of the country and keep this project accessible to all.
Thank you for being part of this journey.
Here’s to another year of listening, learning, and lifting the voices of a nation.
Best wishes,
David
David Nevins is the publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.
Keep ReadingShow less
US President Donald Trump delivers a special address during the World Economic Forum (WEF) annual meeting in Davos on Jan. 21, 2026.
(Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images/TNS)
Trump’s globalist era is going to make everyone poorer
Jan 24, 2026
I’m not sure what to call the new era we seem to be entering. But I am sure it will make people poorer.
Let’s start with some basics. Imagine you inherit a thriving department store chain. Rather than listen to experts on consumer trends, supply-chain logistics, human resources, etc., you instead opt to go with your gut. Rather than follow market research or anything like that, you prefer to just hire your friends and do business with vendors who flatter you or sell stuff you think is cool. Under such a “system,” you might make some good business decisions, but odds are very strong that you’ll more often make bad ones. The rep from the Pet Rock supplier who gives you a “World’s Greatest Businessman” award gets his products in the store window.
I chose a department store for this analogy because that’s precisely how President Trump thinks about international trade, and the American economy in general. He sees America like “a department store, and we set the price. I meet with the companies, and then I set a fair price, what I consider to be a fair price.” In Trump’s mind, that’s what tariffs are, even though they are mostly paid for by American consumers.
The problem, beyond the basic economic illiteracy inherent in the analogy, is that Trump keeps changing the “price” based on noneconomic considerations. To name just the most recent example (of many), over the weekend the president declared that he’ll tear up trade deals he made with eight European allies and levy tariffs on their goods until they acquiesce to his demands for Greenland.
Now, in almost every business, there’s a little favoritism — giving a job or promotion to a nephew, offering a lucrative contract to a friend. But it’s understood that these are deviations from sound business practices. For Trump, sound business practices are the deviation from his policy of favoritism.
I should note that there are other forms of more explicitly ideological favoritism. For decades, many on the left have championed policies that prioritize social or political goals over sound economics. They’ve gone by different labels, including “social responsibility,” which morphed into things such as environmental, social and governance investing and diversity, equity and inclusion. But the idea is always the same: The government should impose standards and policies based on something other than profit-seeking and shareholder value. This is not always wrong, either. Child labor and worker safety laws, for example, are worth the costs they impose.
Such examples are outnumbered by countless other laws and regulations that replace economic decision-making with political expediency. Populism has historically been one of the main drivers of such distortions. Hence, it should surprise no one that Trump and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts, see eye to eye on capping credit card interest rates.
What differentiates Warren from Trump is that she’s a traditional progressive populist ideologue arguing from a body of thought that exists as much on her bookshelf as in her own head. Trump’s approach resides entirely in his gut.
As a free market guy, I don’t trust Warren’s bookshelf or Trump’s gut.
Which gets us to why this new era — let’s call it, the post-globalist era — will make us poorer.
Across the world, corporations large and small are making business decisions based upon geopolitical and plain old political calculations. Nowhere is this more obvious than international trade. If you think tariffs can rise at a moment’s notice because the president of the United States woke up on the wrong side of the bed, you’re going to hedge against that risk. Firms around the world are reorganizing their supply chains to become less reliant on the American market (and in some cases the Russian and Chinese markets). Almost by definition, these moves are not maximally efficient. Less efficiency equals less productivity. Less productivity equals less wealth creation and growth.
But it’s also true in other ways. If you know that the department store’s new boss likes gold, you’re going to paint more of your Pet Rocks gold. If the management insists on taking partial ownership of your company — something Trump has done more than any president in modern history — you’re going to make defensive decisions aimed at not pissing them off. As the Economist reports, everywhere you look, multinational companies are making decisions based on geopolitical considerations. “When companies are forced to allocate capital on geopolitical lines, they become less productive, reducing prosperity for all.”
For nearly my entire adult life, American conservatives understood this basic point and argued against excessive political or ideological distortions of markets. Remember all that talk about “picking winners and losers” and “crony capitalism” in the Obama era?
But for some reason, many conservatives think it’s fine to outsource economic decision-making to a single man. And most of us will be poorer for it.
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More