Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Democracy reform groups have work to do on diversity, study finds

Diversity

Democracy reform groups need to improve the diversity of their leadership and boards, according to a study by the Bridge Alliance coalition

Andriy Onufriyenko/Getty Images

For anyone who has attended events featuring the key players in democracy reform groups, your eyes and ears tell you what a new diversity study documents: They're mostly old, white and left-leaning.

But the Bridge Alliance, a coalition of about 100 groups promoting healthy self-governance, says that actually conducting the study was important so that fix-the-system groups can know precisely where they stand and chart a more diverse path forward.

Beyond the findings, Bridge Alliance leaders announced two initiatives on Monday to help groups expand their diversity — one focused on professional development and the other on boosting pay.


In the first, dubbed a Mastermind Cohort, 10 leaders from the democracy reform movement will meet weekly for six weeks to share ideas, discuss projects they are working on and research they have discovered. The peer review style of collaborative project development is designed to bring a diversity of opinions and to build relationships among leaders.

The other initiative is the creation of a new Bridge Alliance Justice, Diversity, Equity Fund. The $150,000 fund will invest in national and emerging Black leaders and Black-led organizations that are addressing systemic racism.

The Bridge Alliance Education Fund (which is a funder of The Fulcrum) will be working with the Amplifying Black Voice Fund, which gives grantees access to the fund's network of political, corporate and nonprofit leaders and to collaborate with leaders in education, human rights and women's rights.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

"A diverse community breaks down the barriers that divide us, thereby leading to understanding and a greater sense of compassion," the report states. "Diversity represents the soul of our nation."

The report concludes that the executive offices and boards of directors of democracy reform groups underrepresent people who are not white, are younger than 45, live in the suburbs and have a center-right ideological outlook.

The goal need not be that each group's leadership reflect the demographic mix of the country, but that collectively the people who run the burgeoning number of groups aimed at making democracy work better — focused on such diverse issues as money in politics, bipartisanship, civil discourse, alternative election methods, civic education, redistricting and voting rights — match America's ethnic and political diversity.

Right now, they do not. The leadership staff of Bridge Alliance member groups is 78 percent white and their board members are 77 percent white. The country is 60 percent white.

Regarding their politics, 73 percent of executives and 70 percent of board members are left of center, 24 percent of executives and 27 percent of board members are right of center — and just 1 percent of top staffers and 3 percent of board members are political independents. (Gallup says the country now is 47 percent left, 42 percent right and 11 percent independent.)

The paid leadership of the groups skewed young in the survey — 57 percent are younger than 44 and only 9 percent have turned 65 — but the board membership tilts the opposite way: One-third are older than 65, almost half are in middle-age and only one-fifth are younger than 44. (Seventeen percent of the population is older than 65, one third are 45 to 64 and 38 percent are adults 44 and younger.

Bridge Alliance gathered data on gender but did not include it in the report because the breakdown for executives — 50.3 percent are women — almost exactly matches the American population, said executive director Debilyn Molineaux. The gender gap among board members was a little wider; they are 57 percent male.

The report argues that for democracy reform groups to succeed over the long term they need to make "diversity an operating system" within their organizations and not just a one-time, short-term effort.

"This will expand the number of people involved in social, cultural and democratic reforms," it concludes.

"As we increase the diversity of the people 'in the room where it happened' for collective action (hat tip to Hamilton), we will become more representative of the nation we are working to improve."

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