Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Where Democrats debating in New Hampshire stand on democracy reform

Pete Buttigieg

Pete Buttigieg, campaigning in New Hampshire on Thursday, is the only candidate who is a clear "yes" on all 17 democracy reform proposals being tracked by The Fulcrum.

Win McNamee/Getty Images

Seven Democrats have been invited on stage for Friday night's debate ahead of the New Hampshire primary, including three who have vowed that their first legislative priority as president would be enacting an ambitious clean government package.

Town hall meetings and candidate coffees in the first primary state have for months featured discussions about expanding voting rights, curbing money in politics and overhauling such bedrock government institutions as the Supreme Court, the Electoral College and the Senate filibuster. But the disagreements among the candidates have been subtle, and so there's no reason to believe the moderators will find new flashpoints or cleave new divisions on democracy reform topics at the debate, being conducted at Saint Anselm College in Manchester at 8 pm Eastern.

The table below shows where the seven candidates stand on 17 of the most prominent proposals for improving the way democracy works — in areas of campaign finance, access to the ballot box, election security, political ethics and revamping our governing systems.


Made with Flourish

In July End Citizens United, an advocacy group mainly interested in shrinking big money's sway over campaigns and governing, asked all the candidates to sign a pledge that they'd make a bill revamping the political system and boosting government ethics their initial legislative priority in the White House.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Three of the top five finishers in Iowa's troubled caucuses put their hand to the paper: Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and former Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind. — the only candidate who's a clear "yes" on all 17 proposals in our tabulation.

Asked at a televised town hall Thursday what he'd do if he was limited to a single presidential accomplishment, Buttigeig said it would be enacting "one bill along the lines of HR 1," the comprehensive ethics, campaign finance and election process overhaul spurned in the GOP Senate since its passage a year ago by the Democratic House.

"We could have that kind of legislation and more to make sure that voting rights are secure, that districts are fair, that money is out of politics," he said. "Bundle that up into a democracy package, then everything else gets a little better, gets a little easier in our politics."

Former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont were the top-tier candidates who did not sign the pledge. Neither did the remaining candidates debating Friday, entrepreneur Andrew Yang and billionaire investor Tom Steyer.

This is the eighth debate of the 2020 race sanctioned by the Democratic National Committee. It's being sponsored by ABC News in partnership with WMUR, the network's New Hampshire affiliate, and Apple News.

Candidates will have one minute and 15 seconds to answer direct questions and 45 seconds for rebuttals. There will be no opening or closing statements, but there will be a closing question at the end of the third hour. (This is the third of the debates designed to last that long.)

The invitations were extended to candidates with at least 5 percent support in four of 21 national polls or polls conducted in New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina — and who had proven grassroots fundraising ability by accruing 225,000 individual donors, with at least 1,000 donors in 20 different states.

Party leaders have recently decided the fundraising test will not apply from now on — which is why the entirely self-funded billionaire candidate, former Mayor Mike Bloomberg of New York, has a solid chance of participating in the next debate, in Las Vegas on Feb 19, three days before that's state's caucuses.

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
Podcast: A right-wing perspective on Jan. 6th and the 2020 election

Podcast: A right-wing perspective on Jan. 6th and the 2020 election

Peter Wood is an anthropologist and president of the National Association of Scholars. He believes—like many Americans on the right—that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump and the January 6th riots were incited by the left in collusion with the FBI. He’s also the author of a new book called Wrath: America Enraged, which wrestles with our politics of anger and counsels conservatives on how to respond to perceived aggression.

Where does America go from here? In this episode, Peter joins Ciaran O’Connor for a frank conversation about the role of anger in our politics as well as the nature of truth, trust, and conspiracy theories.

Keep ReadingShow less