Gov. Josh Shapiro, D-Pa., joined Morning Joe to discuss the start of his time in office and appointing Republican Al Schmidt as Secretary of the Commonwealth.
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Join a growing community committed to civic renewal.
Subscribe to The Fulcrum and be part of the conversation.
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More
People voting
Hill Street Studios/Getty Images
Catch a Wave
Oct 09, 2026
Millions of Americans no longer fully trust our elections, and the mid-term elections are on Tuesday, November 3rd. Can we fix this? We can make a meaningful impact if enough of us choose to join. After this election, we can keep building trust for all the right reasons.
While talking with faith leaders about Faith in America events this fall, I heard concern that we lack sufficient time to make this as fabulous and widespread as it needs to be. We have a vision of massive engagement to help shift us toward a culture of faith in our elections and trust in each other.
I felt regret that we didn’t have more time, and then I remembered: millennial celebrations were an extravagant worldwide affair that took well over a year to plan. The celebrations were spectacular, and watching them unfold worldwide as the sun moved around the globe reminded us that we are all on this planet together. But a year of planning isn't the only way to organize a huge event. In my eyes, even more remarkable were the worldwide anti-war protests that happened on Feb. 15th 2003, before the Iraq War started. Yes, I could be biased. I participated in organizing these protests as a co-founder of MoveOn.org.
This was a fire drill– we had a war to stop! What we didn’t fully anticipate was the snowball effect that resulted in the protests not only taking off nationally, but also wrapping around the world! All around this country and around the world, individuals and organizations took on the challenge. Massive numbers of people showed up to stand for peace. Watching these protests from around this country and around the world was stunning. The NYT reported the following day:
"Perhaps now there are two superpowers, the USA and world public Opinion”
It was a head-turning example of how people can step up in a time of need. It still breaks my heart that we failed to stop that war. Nonetheless, those February 2003 protests had valuable impacts. They show that a pressing need, coupled with doable, meaningful action, can mobilize a massive number of people. It builds community. It reminds us that together, we can be seen and make an impact.
So why now? Most people recognize that the fairness and reliability of our elections will be questioned. Concerns about the trustworthiness of our upcoming elections have become increasingly present in our media and personal conversations. Yet an overwhelming majority of people want “Free, Fair and Trustworthy” elections. Or, said another way, “Voting should be easy. Cheating should be hard.” This is the first principle of Braver Angels' Trustworthy Elections Report. We have a deep agreement and a call to action. Local communities could gather en masse to build confidence and pride in their election processes.
Yes, time is short. People are too busy. Many people feel powerless. Still, meaningful impact is possible. So why not try? Whatever momentum we can gather this year can then be leveraged to do even more next year.
The beauty of this work is that even if we don’t create the broad cultural shift we want today, each conversation and every community that gathers brings us a little closer to the connected, more trustworthy culture most everyone desires. So, if you are part of a congregation, hold a Faith in America event. If you are part of a civic group or an individual who wants to build trust in our elections, go to TrustworthyElections.US. Consider what you would like to do to join a wave of civic engagement that builds local and national trust in elections and in each other.
Joan Blades is the co-founder of Living Room Conversations and MomsRising, and an organizer of the Trust in Elections initiative for the 2026 cycle.
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
Christa Pike in an undated photo.
(Tennessee Department of Correction/ZUMA Press/TNS)
How death penalty opponents share the blame for botched executions
Oct 09, 2026
“Botched” is a perfectly fine word for golf, cooking, or home repair. It seems inadequate for the taking of a life, even the life of Christa Pike, a heinous murderer.
In 1996, a jury found Pike guilty of the torture and murder of her Jobs Corps classmate, Colleen Slemmer. Pike was sentenced to death. In the 30 years since, her case has gone through at least seven major rounds of appeal and judicial review, including four petitions to the Supreme Court. All were rejected. This doesn’t even include the many more attempts to reopen or reverse her sentence that went nowhere. She is guilty, lawfully and rightly convicted.
Last week, the state tried to carry out Pike’s death sentence and, as many in the media have said, “botched” it. It appears that two attempts to deliver a lethal dose of pentobarbital failed because the technicians could not find good IV access. Not enough of the drug entered her veins. Pike is reportedly now unconscious and on a respirator in a Nashville hospital.
I don’t think “botched” conveys the scope of the scandalous failure of the technicians or the state of Tennessee. There’s an investigation underway.
While that proceeds, I think it’s worth looking at the other parties responsible for this ugly spectacle and the controversy it has sparked: the anti-death penalty lobby.
It is not very difficult to kill people painlessly with drugs. How do I know this? For starters, Canada kills people with drugs every day. According to the latest annual report on Canada’s medical assistance in dying, 16,499 people were medically euthanized in 2024. The number of people voluntarily killed has steadily gone up every year, so it’s a good bet the numbers for 2026 will be higher than that.
In the Netherlands, 10,341 people were killed in 2025. That’s 5.97 percent of all Dutch deaths for the year. How often have you heard about these instances being “botched”?
Of course, there are very important differences between euthanasia and executions. The most relevant: With euthanasia, doctors are almost always present, and when they aren’t, other trained medical professionals are. They have the skills required to deal with the kind of foreseeable problems that seem to have plagued Pike’s execution. Also, euthanizers have access to the best possible drugs to make sure the medicalized killing is as painless and as peaceful as possible.
In America, doctors are barred from participating in executions. The American Medical Association, for entirely defensible and understandable reasons, believes doctors should not violate their Hippocratic oath. To their credit, they have the same position on euthanasia as they do on executions.
That doesn’t mean it’s impossible to find — or train — qualified personnel for executions. But opponents of capital punishment want it to be. They lobby to bar medical personnel from performing executions while simultaneously arguing that executions cannot be done without qualified medical personnel. They threaten and file lawsuits to back up the effort. Pike’s lawyer said in advance of the failed execution, "the state does not have the qualified, trained personnel in place to carry out Christa’s execution in a way that will not lead to a gruesome spectacle.”
Almost as if to make such arguments self-fulfilling, abolitionists have mounted massive — and massively successful — campaigns to prevent pharmaceutical companies from providing the optimal drugs for executions. As one scholar explains, “A pattern of increasingly inhumane methods of execution is partially due to the success of advocacy by a growing number of death penalty abolitionists.”
The mistake in Pike’s case almost surely had more to do with human error than the wrong drug, but abolitionists don’t care because all they want is another story about the “pattern” of “botched” executions.
I favor capital punishment for the most heinous crimes, but I think opposition to it is a perfectly honorable and defensible stance. I do not think — and neither does the Supreme Court — that there is any plausible or persuasive argument that it is unconstitutional. (It’s referenced in the 5th and 14th Amendments.)
My chief problem with the abolitionists is not that they’re wrong, philosophically or morally. It’s that they are so sure they are right that they pursue an organized policy of bad faith, grabbing the nearest weapon to hand for every case. They lie with statistics about wrongful convictions and racial bias.
They drag cases out for decades and then claim the lengthy and expensive process is an argument for abolition. They make the procedure more difficult and ugly, and then claim the ugliness and difficulty are problems. They make it more likely executions will be botched — and then argue that the botching is why we shouldn’t have them.\
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.
Keep ReadingShow less
silhouette of child sitting behind tree during sunset
Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash
The Future Of Puerto Rico: Consider Needs of The Children
Oct 09, 2026
When I entered my second-grade classroom in 1982 at Chicago’s Moos Elementary School, in the heart of the Puerto Rican community of Humboldt Park, I was greeted with “Mirelsie, que nombre bello, de donde tu eres?”
“Mirelsie, what a beautiful name, where are you from?”
Even now, decades later, I still remember the smile on the face of Ms. Navarro holding the door open for me, and the joy I felt for the first time when she was able to find my home on a map of Puerto Rico; a home I had left just two years before walking into her classroom.
Unbeknownst to me, Ms. Navarro had also said goodbye to Puerto Rico just a few years before our encounter, and perhaps in me she saw herself. I would never know that feeling again in my K-12 experience.
Decades later, she and I would reconnect, sharing stories of our three years together, our times reflected of shared experiences of displacement, migration, and linguistic erasure.
Perhaps today in a small classroom, tucked in a corner of a community whether in Florida, Georgia, Illinois or Oklahoma, a Puerto Rican teacher and an eight-year-old child are sharing the same experience.
My hope is that child is being greeted by their own kind teacher at a time when environmental injustices, climate change, political discourses and economic violence, is shifting the future for Puerto Rico and its people.
As local communities and schools across the country use the next month to celebrate and highlight Latine Heritage, September 15- October 15, possibly many are thinking of this new generation of migrants sitting in classrooms, carrying the consequences of a history of political and economic instability, and the residual effects of environmental harm in their everyday life.
No amount of music or food finding its way to their classrooms this month, can soften their relationship to this history and continued reality.
Since Hurricane Maria in 2017, there has been a dramatic shift in the populations number across the archipelago, with the number declining to about 3.2 million according to reports from the Pew Research Center.
In 2024, it was reported that over six million Puerto Ricans resided in the United States, with 27% of that population under 18 years of age. Who these Puerto Ricans are matter, as schools in places like Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia, and Florida are seeing an increase of students in districts either struggling to provide services to the population or unsure of what kind of services these children need most.
But there are also recruitment efforts in Puerto Rico to bring teachers to U.S. cities to support the increase of Latina/o students in classrooms in states such as Oklahoma, with very little thought of the unique needs and skills of these educators.
This outmigration of teachers and students does not just reflect an opportunity but a necessity. Between 2017 and 2021, Puerto Rico has seen numerous school closings and schools sold to private organizations.
In communities such as Vega Baja, the hometown of global artist Bad Bunny (whose own mother is a retired schoolteacher), numerous schools sit close, limiting the opportunities for local teachers and students.
And for those schools that remain open, disinvestment in schools and services across the archipelago have made it imperative that families make the decision to leave Puerto Rico to meet the needs of their children.
Puerto Rico’s territorial status leaves in limbo in many areas, with education and educational reform and opportunity often left out of discourses on the future of the archipelago.
For example, although federal policies such as 1965’s Elementary and Secondary School Act and the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 provided a framework on serving the needs of students and earmarked federal funds to provide much needed services, it failed to consider localized needs in Puerto Rico.
These gaps in learning outcomes continued to be exasperated by natural disasters, fiscal collapse, and outside oversight over Puerto Rico’s decision making and policies.
Students are arriving in classroom in states like Florida in large number, where the Puerto Rican population was over 1.3 million in 2024 ,with close to a quarter of that number young people under the age of 18.
For those students arriving from Puerto Rico they experienced underfunded schools, including rural schools failing to receive much needed federal resources because of discrepancies in reporting agencies. These young students experience this alongside the consequences of natural disasters and their impact in the very physical infrastructures of schools.
There are so many reasons to be concerned with the consequences of the over 125-year history of United States involvement in Puerto Rico. But one main reason is perhaps now sitting in a corner classroom in a school in Florida—or any state– hoping their own Ms. Navarro is there to greet them. Chances are they will find someone who until very recently couldn’t point to Puerto Rico on a map.
What needs to happen now is for policy makers in the U.S., as well as educational institutions, advocates, educators, community leaders and nonprofits to continue to work to create a future in Puerto Rico that includes children.
Mirelsie Velázquez is Associate Professor of Latina/o Studies at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, a Public Voices Fellow through The OpEd Project, and author of Puerto Rican Chicago: Schooling the City, 1940-1977 (University of Illinois Press).
The Future Of Puerto Rico: Consider Needs of The Children was first published by Common Dreams and is republished with permission.
Keep ReadingShow less
After the Lindsay Clancy mistrial, we must confront postpartum mental illness and ask how to better support mothers before tragedy strikes.
Viktoriya Skorikova/Getty Images
The Questions We Should Be Asking About the Lindsay Clancy Case
Oct 09, 2026
Three children are dead.
Nothing that follows should ever diminish that heartbreaking reality.
Cora, 5. Dawson, 3. Callan, 8 months old.
Their names have become part of a tragic legal case of a Massachusetts mother charged in the death of her three children; one that has captivated the nation and divided public opinion.
For weeks, Americans watched the trial of Lindsay Clancy unfold through testimony, debated evidence, and argued about guilt, innocence, and accountability. Then came the verdict that wasn't a verdict at all. After six weeks of testimony and seven days of deliberations, the jury was unable to reach a unanimous decision.
Reports indicate that eleven jurors favored finding Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity, while one juror disagreed, resulting in a mistrial. Her defense attorney on Thursday filed a new motion to find her not guilty by “lack of criminal responsibility” The next court hearing is set for Sept. 29.
But the tragedy that unfolded in Massachusetts should not simply become another true-crime headline or political argument. It should serve as a wake-up call.
This trial has ignited a fierce debate. Some see this as a mother who committed the unthinkable and should be held fully accountable. Others see this as a woman who suffered from a severe psychiatric illness postpartum and a severe break from reality. Social media has become a battleground of opinions, accusations, and certainty.
But certainty is exactly what this case lacks. And as a nation, we must start asking some uncomfortable questions.
How many warning signs do families miss because they do not know what to look for? How many women avoid seeking help because they fear losing custody of their children or being stigmatized? How many healthcare systems are unprepared to identify a psychiatric emergency before it becomes a crisis?
As I followed this trial, it reminded me of several years ago when my sister gave birth to twins. Like many new mothers, she experienced the physical exhaustion, emotional stress, and overwhelming responsibility that comes with caring for newborns. I remember watching her navigate sleepless nights, constant feedings, and the pressure many mothers place on themselves to be everything for everyone. It was not easy.
While her experience was nothing like the tragedy that unfolded in the Lindsay Clancy case, it gave me a glimpse into how profoundly childbirth can affect a woman's physical, emotional, and mental well-being. It reminded me that postpartum challenges are often invisible to everyone except the person experiencing them.
Too often, we assume that because a mother looks fine on the outside, she is fine on the inside. We celebrate the arrival of a new baby but rarely ask whether the mother is receiving the support she needs. We admire her strength while overlooking her struggles.
My sister was fortunate to have support from family and loved ones. Not every mother does. And that reality should concern all of us.
No one disputes what happened. Clancy admitted to killing her three children before attempting to take her own life. The central question at trial was whether she was criminally responsible for her actions or whether severe postpartum psychosis rendered her incapable of understanding the wrongfulness of what she was doing. Mental health experts from both sides agreed she suffered from serious mental illness, though they disagreed about whether she understood right from wrong at the time of the killings.
It is possible to grieve for Cora, Dawson, and Callan while also acknowledging that severe mental illness may have played a profound role in their deaths. Those two truths can exist simultaneously. Compassion for one does not require abandoning compassion for the other.
The justice system will ultimately decide what happens next in the Lindsay Clancy case. Judges, attorneys, and perhaps another jury will wrestle with the legal questions. But there is a larger question that belongs to all of us
What kind of society do we want to be when confronted with unimaginable tragedy?
Do we immediately search for someone to hate? Or do we seek to understand how such devastation could occur and what can be done to prevent it from happening again? As a nation, we must confront the difficult questions around postpartum challenges and mental health and find meaningful ways to answer each one of these questions.
The deaths of three innocent children deserve more than public outrage. They deserve reflection. They deserve action. They deserve a renewed commitment to maternal mental health, early intervention, family support systems, and compassionate care.
Because if there is anything more heartbreaking than this tragedy itself, it is the possibility that we learn nothing from it.
And somewhere beneath the headlines, the verdicts, and the arguments are three children whose lives mattered far more than the debate that now surrounds them.
Noor Zoma is a Public Voices Fellow on Public Health with The OpEd Project and Blue Shield of California Foundation.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More
The President Invited Iran to Bomb My Home