Braver Angels leaders John Wood, Jr. (red) and Ciaran O'Connor (blue) come together for a wide-ranging debate on the most critical issues animating the 2022 midterm elections, including the economy, abortion, and the future of American democracy. Throughout the discussion, John and Ciaran demonstrate how to embrace humility in the pursuit of deeper truth.
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
Older Americans Who Vote Live Longer Than Those Who Don’t – New Research
May 13, 2026
Most people know the basics of healthy living that become more important as you grow older: Eat plenty of vegetables, exercise regularly, sleep well, have a social life, limit your alcohol consumption and don’t smoke.
As an economist and social psychologist who study altruism and health, we wondered whether civic engagement might play a role as well.
In 2022, the American Medical Association, an organization representing doctors, noted that voting could potentially have health benefits. So we conducted a study that directly tested this idea: We examined whether older Americans – people who are 65 and up – who vote live longer than nonvoters.
Older adults vote at a higher rate than younger adults in the United States. In Wisconsin, the focus of our study, the voting rate of older adults is even higher.
We used data from the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study, a study which has followed a randomly selected sample of Wisconsin high school graduates since 1957. We compared the long-term health of older adults who voted in the 2008 presidential election to those who did not vote in that election. Using objectively verified voting records from Catalist, which tracks Americans’ voting behavior, along with official National Death Index records, we found that voters were 45% less likely to die within five years after the 2008 election, 37% less likely to die 10 years after the election, and 29% less likely to die 15 years later.
We also examined voting in the 2004 and 2012 presidential elections and found that the results were stronger for more recent elections – those held in 2008 and 2012 – compared to the earlier one held in 2004.
You may wonder whether this is just because healthier people are more likely to vote in the first place.
It’s easier to vote when you’re healthy than when you’re not, but this does not fully explain our results. Voters still had a lower risk of dying when we controlled for demographic factors such as gender, marital status and income, other forms of civic engagement such as volunteering, and a voter’s health status prior to voting.
We also found that those in poorer health to begin with benefited more from voting 15 years later than those who had been healthier before they voted.
Here’s another finding: How someone voted didn’t matter. When we compared what happened to older adults who cast their ballots in person to those who mailed their ballots, we found that both groups had about an equally lower risk of dying over the 15-year period.
It also did not matter whether a voter’s preferred candidate won. We found that although it can be stressful when the candidate you support loses, the people we studied experienced similar long-term health benefits of voting regardless of their political affiliation.
Voters had a lower risk of dying when the researchers controlled for demographic factors such as gender, marital status and income. Paul Hennessy/Anadolu via Getty Images
Why it matters
Scientists have long known that people who volunteer for nonprofits experience many health benefits, including a longer lifespan.
Voting is, arguably, also an altruistically motivated act. That’s because individual voters are aware that their one vote will not change the outcome of a national election.
What still isn’t known
If you are wondering why voting predicts lower mortality risk, well, so did we.
One possibility is that as with other civic engagement activities, including volunteering, voting may trigger positive biological responses that support well-being. Other researchers have found ample evidence showing that volunteering can boost the brain’s reward system, reduce stress and even slow some aspects of aging. Although we didn’t test for these in the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study, they may help explain why people who vote tend to have better health outcomes than those who don’t.
Voting might also improve health through a sense of self-efficacy, civic duty and social connection, since it is both an altruistic and shared activity.
Although the exact explanations aren’t known, studies consistently show a link between volunteering and a lower mortality risk, which suggests that participating in civic life – even something as simple as casting a ballot – may be good for your health, like going for a run or eating vegetables.
Older Americans Who Vote Live Longer Than Those Who Don’t – New Research was originally published by The Conversation and is republished with permission.
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended

The Bring Our Families Home campaign brought together loved ones of Americans wrongly detained overseas to display portraits in the Senate Russell Rotunda on Wednesday, May 6.
(Jacques Abou-Rizk, MNS)
Families of Americans Overseas Wrongfully Detained Bring Advocacy to Capitol Hill
May 12, 2026
WASHINGTON – American journalist Reza Valizadeh visited his elderly Iranian parents in March 2024 for the first time in 15 years. Valizadeh’s stories for Voice of America and other U.S. government-funded outlets often criticized the Iranian regime. So before traveling, he sought and received confirmation that he would be safe from a high-ranking commander in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a branch of Iran’s armed forces. However, in September that same year, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps arrested Valizadeh, and Tehran’s Revolutionary Court sentenced him to ten years in prison for “collaboration with a hostile government.”
In the Rotunda of the Senate Russell Building last week, the Bring Our Families Home campaign set up portraits of Valizadeh and 12 other Americans currently wrongfully detained overseas. The group, family members of illegitimately detained Americans, appealed to Congress to push for their safe return. Each foam poster board included the name, home state, and country of detainment. The display also included portraits of the 33 people released after advocacy by the James W. Foley Foundation.
The portrait of Reza Valizadeh stands in the Senate Russell Rotunda in front of images of wrongful American detainees that the Foley Foundation has helped bring home. (Jacques Abou-Rizk, MNS)
The morning of Wednesday, May 6, the families of the campaign stood together in the Senate Russell Rotunda holding the portraits of their loved ones.
One of the people holding portraits was Neda Sharghi, a former chair of the campaign, whose brother returned to the U.S. in 2023 after being wrongfully detained in Iran for 5 years, convicted of espionage without a trial.
Sharghi said the challenges of individual advocacy reinforce the value of a campaign made up of families.
“Individual families generally have a hard time getting the attention of the media, senior-level officials, and the administration,” Sharghi said. “We decided that we were going to bring our voices together and advocate as a whole organization.”
While people walked through the portraits set up on easels, Congress was out of session, so no lawmakers were spotted.
“For a lot of these families, it’s the last photo they have of their loved one,” said the artist for the campaign, Isaac Campbell. “Art offers so much opportunity for storytelling and interpretation and reflection that I think it’s really the best way to meet people and remind them that these people are not political issues, they’re human beings.”
Valizadeh is among 42 Americans determined to be wrongfully detained overseas by the Foley Foundation. Because the U.S. does not publicly disclose a list of wrongful detentions abroad, the nonprofit advocacy group researches cases and maintains a list. The Foley Foundations names 16 of the 42 whose families requested public advocacy. These people hail from Florida, California, Massachusetts, Texas, New York, Virginia, Michigan, and Washington, D.C. The Bring Our Families Home campaign is a family-led initiative funded by the Foley Foundation.
The Foundation began its work advocating for American hostages and reporter safety in 2014, just 16 days after American journalist James Foley was murdered by ISIS in Syria while covering the civil war.
The concept of the portraits was meant to use the power of art and communicate the humanity behind each individual story.
One of those stories is Zach Shahin, an American businessman arrested in the United Arab Emirates in March 2008. In 2017, a Dubai court sentenced him to spend the rest of his life in prison for a white-collar crime without any evidence, according to his sister-in-law Aida Dagher. Like many families in the campaign, Dagher gave up her career and has worked endlessly to bring her brother-in-law home.
“This is his 19th year,” Dagher said. “We’ve been fighting all the time to get him out. We’re hoping the U.S. government is doing what they should, the UAE government as well. We’re hoping that now finally they will compromise, settle, whatever it takes to release them.”
Wrongfully Detained Americans Overseas
Wrongfully Detained Americans Overseas public.flourish.studio
A Flourish data visualization by Jacques Abou-Rizk
Campbell said the murals are meant to make people stop to think about the scale of what he calls the American hostage crisis.
“It’s hopeful because you look at all those stickers of people coming home, and they far outnumber the people that are still in detainment,” he said. “And that could be the same result for these other families that are in detainment, and hopefully will be, that they’ll come home.”
Among those involved is Ryan Fayhee, a former federal prosecutor and board member of the Foley Foundation who now conducts pro-bono work for families of those wrongfully detained abroad. His pro bono work began with Paul Whelan in 2018, a veteran arrested in Russia for alleged espionage, before being released as part of a United States-Russia prisoner swap in 2024. He now represents Valizadeh, who is being held in Evin Prison in Tehran.
“He’d already been in Evin Prison last July when the Israeli strike targeted the prison,” Fayhee said. “With a continuing blackout in Iran and threats from the IRGC to his family, we really haven’t been able to communicate in any way, and that’s deeply concerning.”
But Fayhee expressed hope over the changing landscape of American hostage and detainee recovery over the past decade. In 2015, after Foley’s murder, President Barack Obama signed Presidential Policy Directive 30, which created the Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs and restructured U.S. policy toward terrorist negotiations. In 2020, Congress passed the Robert Levinson Hostage Recovery and Hostage-Taking Accountability Act, which codified some of the processes set up in the policy directive.
“Even from the time when I began doing work of this sort with Paul Whelan and his family… we’re just light years ahead of where we were in terms of the resources, the personnel, the engagement, the willingness to resolve,” Fayhee said.
Dagher, who lives in Texas, stressed the importance of the Foley Foundation and the campaign in bringing these families together.
“[Zach Shahin’s] wife cries every single day for the last 18 years,” Dagher said. “That’s why I left my career… But I think finally we’ll get him out. I feel that this year they will be out.”
Jacques Abou-Rizk is a graduate student journalist at Northwestern Medill.
Keep ReadingShow less

A former Navy Lieutenant Commander warns that Trump and his associates are profiting from the Iran conflict through defense contracts, crypto ventures, and prediction markets while putting American troops and taxpayers at risk.
Getty Images, gopixa
The Blood Money Presidency
May 12, 2026
Trump is running a war racket. Between arms dealing, prediction markets, and crypto, the war in Iran is looking more and more like a not-so-elaborate scheme to rake in blood money for himself and his cronies. Even his own Defense Secretary attempted to buy defense stocks on the eve of the war. At least, if you have been wondering what we’re still doing at war with Iran, then Trump’s financial dealings may offer an explanation.
The Trumps are war dogs. Powerus, a startup based in West Palm Beach, was founded only last year, specializing in counter-drone tech tailored for none other than Middle East operations. Then, in March, just after Trump started a war in the Middle East, the company went public–and Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump joined the board with sizable equity stakes. The conflict of interest may be their entire business model. Just weeks after the brothers came aboard, the Air Force gifted Powerus its first military contract for an undisclosed number of interceptor drones. At the same time, the company is pitching drone demonstrations to Gulf countries that know buying from the President's sons is sure to curry favor. As former chief White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter put it: “This is going to be the first family of a president to make a lot of money off war — a war he didn’t get the consent of Congress for.”
Now, the Trump family is propping up and profiting from an industry that allows Americans to essentially gamble on blood: prediction markets. Airstrikes used to require strategic necessity, and ones that harmed civilians used to be called tragedies; now, they are “event contracts” for a young man–and a Trump insider–to trade. And regardless of who places the bet, the prediction markets benefit through transaction fees. Lo and behold, Don Jr. just became a paid adviser of Kalshi and an investor in and an unpaid adviser to Polymarket. What’s he doing there? Bet you can piece it together. The First Family’s cozy relationship with these prediction market platforms has turned geopolitical instability into a tradable asset–and they get a cut.
A chaotic global landscape is good for business in other ways too. Trump and his associates stand to see immense financial gains from increased black-market transactions using a digital financial system that allows our enemies to bypass our sanctions. I’m talking about crypto. While many call crypto worse than a Ponzi scheme, its main selling point is that it is decentralized and untraceable. That opacity is useful if you smuggle drugs, arms, oil, or humans (by the way, Epstein had unsurprisingly deep ties to crypto). Sanctioned regimes stand to benefit from backdoor crypto dealings. Now, so does the President of the United States, and so do his friends.
Trump won the 2024 election with the help of crypto megadonors and has been returning the favor ever since, with his family even co-founding the cryptocurrency company World Liberty Financial. Now, a new report just revealed that “the same exchange that holds the vast majority of Trump's USD1 stablecoin has now facilitated billions of dollars in transactions for Iran and designated terrorist organizations.” Iran is charging $1 per barrel of oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz, in crypto. Trump wants to talk about crushing terrorists, but he is creating the conditions that fund them. He doesn’t mind, though, because he’s also getting a payout.
Our own Department of Commerce is being led by Trump-appointed and Epstein-affiliated Howard Lutnick, whose connections to the stablecoin Tether, the primary vehicle Russian oligarchs use to move sanctioned Iranian oil to China, are well-documented. Meanwhile, Trump continues to send Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff to negotiate peace deals. But Witkoff was a co-founder of World Liberty Financial with the Trump family! Why would any of these guys want to end the war when they’re getting a piece of the action, making billions of untraceable money? Clearly, they don’t. Saying “the arsonists are selling fire extinguishers” doesn’t quite cover it when the fire extinguishers are filled with more fuel.
Ultimately, the Trump regime is running a vertical integration of war where the policy, the weaponry, the financial bypasses, and the outcomes are all controlled by a small group of people enriching themselves at each step. American tax dollars are being funneled into a drone company owned by the President’s sons, who are profiting off a nouveau-gambling trend where users can cash in on casualties, all while the war feeds industries that strengthen our adversaries. They are turning the war, and our service members, into one big short. And they have the audacity to ask the American taxpayers to foot an ever-growing bill.
I got out of the Navy in June as a Lieutenant Commander. I crossed the Strait of Hormuz for the first time in 2013 as part of Operation Enduring Freedom; it was a stressful exercise even when we weren’t at war with Iran. Now, the President is putting American troops in harm’s way (and gutting programs Americans rely on to pay for it) to serve his bottom line. It is viscerally sickening.
Our military deserves a government that isn’t checking its stock options while indefinitely extending deployments. The American people deserve a government that doesn’t use their tax dollars as a personal checkbook. And the global community deserves stability unthreatened by the greed of a gang of billionaires. Congress is asleep at the wheel, and if the American people don’t get more involved soon, we’re all gonna crash. It’s time to investigate the entanglements at the highest levels and end the collusion–for the sake of our resources, our morality, and our hope for a peaceful future.Julie Roland was a Naval Officer for ten years, deploying to both the South China Sea and the Persian Gulf as a helicopter pilot before separating in June 2025 as a Lieutenant Commander. She has a law degree from the University of San Diego, a Master of Laws from Columbia University, and is a member of the Truman National Security Project.
Keep ReadingShow less

As misinformation and political polarization deepen in America, the Pro-Truth Pledge offers a nonpartisan, science-backed framework for rebuilding trust, civic honesty, and productive public discourse.
Getty Images, Luis Alvarez
Can We Disagree Honestly Again? The Pro‑Truth Answer
May 12, 2026
Walk into any family dinner, town hall, or social media feed in 2026, and the diagnosis is the same: we are not just disagreeing anymore. We are operating from different sets of facts.
Oxford Dictionary named "post-truth" its word of the year a decade ago, and the air has only gotten thinner since. AI-generated deepfakes circulate faster than corrections. Cable news rewards heat over light. And ordinary citizens — well-intentioned, busy, exhausted — share things their tribe wants to hear without checking whether those things are real.
The instinct is to blame the other side. That instinct is part of the problem.
Behavioral truthseeking is a skill. Most of us were never taught it. We were taught to argue, not to verify. To win, not to update. To distinguish "us" from "them," not opinion from fact. You cannot have a productive disagreement about immigration, school choice, or election reform if the participants cannot agree on what is actually happening.
The Pro-Truth Pledge was built to fix exactly that problem. And it was deliberately designed to be something both sides of the aisle can carry.
Created by a team of behavioral scientists and now signed by more than 33,000 people — including over 1,200 elected and appointed officials and 1,300 public figures — the pledge asks signers to commit to twelve specific truth-oriented behaviors, organized under three commitments: share truth, honor truth, and encourage truth.
It is, on its face, a list of things any thoughtful person should already do. That is exactly the point. The pledge takes the unglamorous work of civic honesty and makes it visible, shared, and accountable. This matters for civil discourse in two ways our current moment desperately needs.
First, the pledge gives us a way to disagree productively. Its twelve behaviors are nonpartisan by design and apply equally to everyone who signs. The shared standard does not eliminate disagreement; it gives disagreement somewhere stable to stand.
Second, the pledge enables what is mostly missing from American politics right now: solution discourse. Solutions require facts everyone can stipulate to, experts whose consensus is honored even when inconvenient, and the ability to update our beliefs when we are wrong. Each of those is a Pro-Truth behavior.
Two peer-reviewed studies — one in Behavior and Social Issues, another in the Journal of Social and Political Psychology — have measured the pledge's effect on signers. Both found statistically significant improvement: fewer misinformation-laden posts, more sourcing, more balanced framing. The pledge works because it leverages four behavioral levers at once — precommitment, reputation, peer accountability, and clear behavioral standards. In plain terms, it is a science-backed habit change for public conversation.
Signing the pledge is just the first step. Turning the Pro-Truth Pledge from a personal commitment into a national civic movement requires advocacy.
Changing how millions of Americans engage with information happens person by person, conversation by conversation. Pro-Truth advocates do that work: gathering signatures at community events, pitching the pledge to journalists and elected officials, writing letters to local editors, teaching the twelve behaviors in public settings, and gently holding fellow signers accountable when we slip.
That last part is everyone's job, including mine. The pledge is not a purity test. Signers who make honest mistakes are not punished; they are invited, compassionately, to correct the record. The point is not to catch people lying. The point is to make truth-telling the visible, expected, rewarded default.
If you are tired of feeling like the loudest, least honest voices are setting the terms of our public life, the Pro-Truth Pledge is a way to push back without picking a side — and there is a place for you in this movement at every level of time and capacity.
Start by signing the pledge at protruthpledge.org.
Then share it: post it on social media, send it to five people whose judgment you respect, and ask your elected representatives — both parties — to sign it themselves. If you have time to give, volunteer as a Pro-Truth advocate and help us bring the twelve behaviors into your community. If you have resources to give, become a checkbook volunteer; even a modest monthly donation funds the materials, training, and outreach that turn pledge signers into pledge teachers, and pledge teachers into a movement.
The lies are bipartisan. The antidote can be too — and it only works if we build it together.
Alana House is Director of the Pro-Truth Pledge, a project of the nonprofit Intentional Insights.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More


















Some MAGA loyalists have turned on Trump. Why the rest haven’t