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

Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses

This week, I joined a coalition of journalists in Washington, D.C., to speak directly with lawmakers about a crisis unfolding in plain sight: the rapid disappearance of local, community‑rooted journalism. The advocacy day, organized by the Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), brought together reporters and media leaders who understand that the future of local news is inseparable from the future of American democracy.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Keep ReadingShow less
People wearing vests with "ICE" and "Police" on the back.

The latest shutdown deal kept government open while exposing Congress’s reliance on procedural oversight rather than structural limits on ICE.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

A Shutdown Averted, and a Narrow Window Into Congress’s ICE Dilemma

Congress’s latest shutdown scare ended the way these episodes usually do: with a stopgap deal, a sigh of relief, and little sense that the underlying conflict had been resolved. But buried inside the agreement was a revealing maneuver. While most of the federal government received longer-term funding, the Department of Homeland Security, and especially Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was given only a short-term extension. That asymmetry was deliberate. It preserved leverage over one of the most controversial federal agencies without triggering a prolonged shutdown, while also exposing the narrow terrain on which Congress is still willing to confront executive power. As with so many recent budget deals, the decision emerged less from open debate than from late-stage negotiations compressed into the final hours before the deadline.

How the Deal Was Framed

Democrats used the funding deadline to force a conversation about ICE’s enforcement practices, but they were careful about how that conversation was structured. Rather than reopening the far more combustible debate over immigration levels, deportation priorities, or statutory authority, they framed the dispute as one about law-enforcement standards, specifically transparency, accountability, and oversight.

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You

The brutality of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the related cohort of federal officers in Minneapolis spurred more than 30,000 stalwart Minnesotans to step forward in January and be trained as monitors. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s demands to Minnesota’s Governor demonstrate that the ICE surge is linked to elections, and other ICE-related threats, including Steve Bannon calling for ICE agents deployment to polling stations, make clear that elections should be on the monitoring agenda in Minnesota and across the nation.

A recent exhortation by the New York Times Editorial Board underscores the need for citizen action to defend elections and outlines some steps. Additional avenues are also available. My three decades of experience with international and citizen election observation in numerous countries demonstrates that monitoring safeguards trustworthy elections and promotes public confidence in them - both of which are needed here and now in the US.

Keep ReadingShow less