Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

7 candidates pledge to make democracy reform their first push as president

Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg

Mayor Pete Buttigieg headlines a list of seven presidential contenders who have pledged to make fixing the political system their first legislative priority if they win the White House.

Getty Images

This story has been revised after additional reporting.

Seven of the 20 presidential candidates debating this week, but only two of the group polling in the top tier, have vowed to make revamping the political system and boosting government ethics their first legislative priority if elected president.

The seven made that commitment by signing the "Reform First" pledge drafted by End Citizens United, an advocacy group that is mainly interested in shrinking big money's sway over campaigns and governing. It announced the signatories on Monday.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who is currently third in the average of surveys of Democratic voters, and Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., who ranks fifth, have signed the pledge. He turns out to be the only candidate who is unambiguously in favor of 17 of the most prominent proposals for fixing the political system, according to a comprehensive review by The Fulcrum of all the candidates' stances. Many of those proposals are the sorts of things End Citizens United wants to see in legislation moving in 2021.

But Warren and her Senate colleague Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, who also signed the vow, are only a small notch behind Buttigieg in their fealty to the top items on the democracy reformer agenda. Both back 16 proposals unequivocally and say they're open to remaking the Supreme Court, without being solidly on board any specific plan.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The other signatories are Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado, Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Gov. Steve Bullock of Montana and former Rep. Beto O'Rourke of Texas. All of them are polling at an average of 2 percent or less.


The pledge was sent to all presidential candidates asking them to make "comprehensive anti-corruption, money-in-politics, and voting rights reform legislation that is similar to or builds upon the For the People Act, the very first bill you send to Congress." The For the People Act, also known as HR 1, is the the sweeping campaign finance, election administration and ethics overhaul passed on a party-line vote by the House in March but shelved indefinitely by the Senate GOP leadership.

End Citizens United said it plans to encourage voters to make contributions to the seven candidates as well as promote their campaigns on social media. While that's not the same as an endorsement, the help with money and exposure could provide the praised candidates with an important boost.

The organization has quickly become a power player behind Democratic causes. It spent more than $12 million supporting Democrats running for Congress or opposing Republicans on the ballot in 2018, making it one of the largest outside spenders during the midterm campaign, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The group now boasts 4 million members and says more than half a million have been campaign donors.

"Committing to reform first shows the American people you're serious about cleaning up corruption," said Tiffany Muller, president of the organization. "These candidates uniquely understand that reform is the essential first step to accomplishing the progressive change that America needs."

In a statement to End Citizens United, Warren said she planned to rein in corporate special interests that block the will of the people. "The first thing I would do as president is pass my anti-corruption bill to make our economy, government, and democracy work for everyone," she said.

Buttigieg expressed a similar sentiment. "We need bold and deep reforms to fix our broken political system, which is why as President I will make democratic reform my day-one priority," he said in his own statement.

Gillibrand and Klobuchar also flatly support — or say they are open to supporting — each of the 17 leading proposals, which cover campaign finance, voting rights, access to the ballot box, government ethics and changing institutions that include the Supreme Court, the Electoral College and the political gerrymandering system.

"As president, I'll continue taking Washington's corruption and greed head-on by making democracy reform one of my first priorities," Gillibrand said.

Klobuchar said the country needed sweeping anti-corruption and voting rights reform. "As President, it will be the first bill I send to Congress," she said.

Of the 17 proposals, Bennet only opposes changing the makeup of the Supreme Court. "Until we fix our broken politics, we will keep struggling to make progress on the issues Americans care most about — from health care to climate change to gun violence," he said.

O'Rourke hasn't taken a position on presidential candidates releasing their tax returns, but he released his own returns as part of his primary bid. "In order to overcome the greatest challenges we face, we must first fix our democracy and return power to people," he said.

Bullock supports campaign finance reforms but opposes new restrictions on the revolving door. "Taking on the corrupting influence of money in politics is the fight of our time — and it's been the fight of my career," Bullock said.

Read More

Podcast: How do police feel about gun control?

Podcast: How do police feel about gun control?

Jesus "Eddie" Campa, former Chief Deputy of the El Paso County Sheriff's Department and former Chief of Police for Marshall Texas, discusses the recent school shooting in Uvalde and how loose restrictions on gun ownership complicate the lives of law enforcement on this episode of YDHTY.

Listen now

Podcast: Why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies

Podcast: Why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies

There's something natural and organic about perceiving that the people in power are out to advance their own interests. It's in part because it’s often true. Governments actually do keep secrets from the public. Politicians engage in scandals. There often is corruption at high levels. So, we don't want citizens in a democracy to be too trusting of their politicians. It's healthy to be skeptical of the state and its real abuses and tendencies towards secrecy. The danger is when this distrust gets redirected, not toward the state, but targets innocent people who are not actually responsible for people's problems.

On this episode of "Democracy Paradox" Scott Radnitz explains why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies.

Your Take:  The Price of Freedom

Your Take: The Price of Freedom

Our question about the price of freedom received a light response. We asked:

What price have you, your friends or your family paid for the freedom we enjoy? And what price would you willingly pay?

It was a question born out of the horror of images from Ukraine. We hope that the news about the Jan. 6 commission and Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Supreme Court nomination was so riveting that this question was overlooked. We considered another possibility that the images were so traumatic, that our readers didn’t want to consider the question for themselves. We saw the price Ukrainians paid.

One response came from a veteran who noted that being willing to pay the ultimate price for one’s country and surviving was a gift that was repaid over and over throughout his life. “I know exactly what it is like to accept that you are a dead man,” he said. What most closely mirrored my own experience was a respondent who noted her lack of payment in blood, sweat or tears, yet chose to volunteer in helping others exercise their freedom.

Personally, my price includes service to our nation, too. The price I paid was the loss of my former life, which included a husband, a home and a seemingly secure job to enter the political fray with a message of partisan healing and hope for the future. This work isn’t risking my life, but it’s the price I’ve paid.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Given the earnest question we asked, and the meager responses, I am also left wondering if we think at all about the price of freedom? Or have we all become so entitled to our freedom that we fail to defend freedom for others? Or was the question poorly timed?

I read another respondent’s words as an indicator of his pacifism. And another veteran who simply stated his years of service. And that was it. Four responses to a question that lives in my heart every day. We look forward to hearing Your Take on other topics. Feel free to share questions to which you’d like to respond.

Keep ReadingShow less
No, autocracies don't make economies great

libre de droit/Getty Images

No, autocracies don't make economies great

Tom G. Palmer has been involved in the advance of democratic free-market policies and reforms around the globe for more than three decades. He is executive vice president for international programs at Atlas Network and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.

One argument frequently advanced for abandoning the messy business of democratic deliberation is that all those checks and balances, hearings and debates, judicial review and individual rights get in the way of development. What’s needed is action, not more empty debate or selfish individualism!

In the words of European autocrat Viktor Orbán, “No policy-specific debates are needed now, the alternatives in front of us are obvious…[W]e need to understand that for rebuilding the economy it is not theories that are needed but rather thirty robust lads who start working to implement what we all know needs to be done.” See! Just thirty robust lads and one far-sighted overseer and you’re on the way to a great economy!

Keep ReadingShow less