Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Americans have no faith in government’s interest in its citizens

Americans are dissatisfied with government mainly because they view it as unresponsive to the needs of average citizens, not because they're turned off by the partisanship or depressed by the dysfunction, a two-year-long survey has found.

An astonishing 89 percent of respondents said they view the government as being run by a few big interests looking out for themselves instead of "for the benefit of all the people" – a record high compared with similar surveys since the Great Society. (The figure was at 64 percent just a decade ago.)

In addition, 89 percent of voters also described Congress as being run mainly with lawmakers' own political well-being in mind and "not about what is good for the country," while 90 percent agreed with the view that elected officials are more interested in appealing to their campaign donors than addressing "the common good of the people."

Finally, an overwhelming 88 percent say Congress would be more likely to find common ground if the public's views had more sway on senators and House members.


The surveys of 16,525 registered voters was conducted between December 2016 and the week before last November's election, using five different time periods for phone calls and mailings. It was run by the Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland in collaboration with two nonpartisan organizations, Voice of the People and Common Ground Solutions, and released last week.

"In both 2016 and 2018 outsider candidates like Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders, and Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez were buoyed by their claim that they would listen to the people over special interests and their parties," said the director of the poll, Steven Kull. "Voters may well be looking for candidates with that message in the 2020 election as well."

The two advocacy groups took part in the survey in part to promote their favorite idea for bolstering democracy – encouraging more lawmakers to form what they have dubbed "Citizen Cabinets," representative samples of their constituents whom they consult routinely for input on legislative priorities and policy positioning.

Nine in 10 respondents reacted favorably to this concept. And 78 percent of Republicans and 90 percent of Democrats signaled they would consider voting for a candidate of the other party who would commit to formalizing such an advisory board, which the advocacy groups envision would receive regular briefings and hear debates on policy proposals before making their recommendations.

A report accompanying the poll detailed results of a pilot project, engineered by the University of Maryland, that tested the Citizen Cabinet concept in nine states during the past two campaign seasons. Bipartisan majorities agreed on proposals for reshaping immigration, budget, Social Security, Medicare, poverty, energy, environment and criminal justice policies.


Read More

Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

US Capitol and South America. Nicolas Maduro’s capture is not the end of an era. It marks the opening act of a turbulent transition

AI generated

Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

The U.S. capture of Nicolás Maduro will be remembered as one of the most dramatic American interventions in Latin America in a generation. But the real story isn’t the raid itself. It’s what the raid reveals about the political imagination of the hemisphere—how quickly governments abandon the language of sovereignty when it becomes inconvenient, and how easily Washington slips back into the posture of regional enforcer.

The operation was months in the making, driven by a mix of narcotrafficking allegations, geopolitical anxiety, and the belief that Maduro’s security perimeter had finally cracked. The Justice Department’s $50 million bounty—an extraordinary price tag for a sitting head of state—signaled that the U.S. no longer viewed Maduro as a political problem to be negotiated with, but as a criminal target to be hunted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Red elephants and blue donkeys

The ACA subsidy deadline reveals how Republican paralysis and loyalty-driven leadership are hollowing out Congress’s ability to govern.

Carol Yepes

Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis

Picture a bridge with a clearly posted warning: without a routine maintenance fix, it will close. Engineers agree on the repair, but the construction crew in charge refuses to act. The problem is not that the fix is controversial or complex, but that making the repair might be seen as endorsing the bridge itself.

So, traffic keeps moving, the deadline approaches, and those responsible promise to revisit the issue “next year,” even as the risk of failure grows. The danger is that the bridge fails anyway, leaving everyone who depends on it to bear the cost of inaction.

Keep ReadingShow less
White House
A third party candidate has never won the White House, but there are two ways to examine the current political situation, writes Anderson.
DEA/M. BORCHI/Getty Images

250 Years of Presidential Scandals: From Harding’s Oil Bribes to Trump’s Criminal Conviction

During the 250 years of America’s existence, whenever a scandal involving the U.S. President occurred, the public was shocked and dismayed. When presidential scandals erupt, faith and trust in America – by its citizens as well as allies throughout the world – is lost and takes decades to redeem.

Below are several of the more prominent presidential scandals, followed by a suggestion as to how "We the People" can make America truly America again like our founding fathers so eloquently established in the constitution.

Keep ReadingShow less
Money and the American flag
Half of Americans want participatory budgeting at the local level. What's standing in the way?
SimpleImages/Getty Images

For the People, By the People — Or By the Wealthy?

When did America replace “for the people, by the people” with “for the wealthy, by the wealthy”? Wealthy donors are increasingly shaping our policies, institutions, and even the balance of power, while the American people are left as spectators, watching democracy erode before their eyes. The question is not why billionaires need wealth — they already have it. The question is why they insist on owning and controlling government — and the people.

Back in 1968, my Government teacher never spoke of powerful think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, now funded by billionaires determined to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. Yet here in 2025, these forces openly work to control the Presidency, Congress, and the Supreme Court through Project 2025. The corruption is visible everywhere. Quid pro quo and pay for play are not abstractions — they are evident in the gifts showered on Supreme Court justices.

Keep ReadingShow less