Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Bridge Alliance Education Fund will take over and refashion The Fulcrum

Bridge Alliance Education Fund and The Fulcrum

The Fulcrum is getting a new owner, and a somewhat different mission.

The Bridge Alliance Education Fund announced Tuesday that it will take over next month and reposition the nonprofit digital news and commentary site in partnership with a public relations firm. Issue One, among the more prominent cross-partisan political reform groups in Washington, had created The Fulcrum in 2018 with a commitment to focus rigorous journalism on efforts to reverse the dysfunctions plaguing American democracy.

Terms were not disclosed, but Issue One and The Fulcrum leadership had struggled to raise money to sustain the project in recent months, despite a steadily growing audience at a time when democratic norms faced unprecedented stress. The Bridge Alliance Education Fund itself was among several original funders to sharply reduce their contributions.


The organization is the funding and communications arm of the nonprofit Bridge Alliance, a coalition of 90 groups that advocate for an array of policies they believe would achieve central goals of the democracy reform movement — more competitive elections, influenced less by money than by enhanced civic engagement, leading to transparent and effective governance "with a country-before-party mindset."

In an email to those members, Bridge Alliance leaders made clear The Fulcrum's identity would soon be altered.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

"We hope we can count on your continued support as we strike the proper balance between maintaining impeccable journalistic standards and magnifying the voices of all Americans yearning for a healthier governing system," Board Chairman David L. Nevins and CEO Debilyn Molineaux said, promising to soon "share increased possibilities of amplification" of the messaging of umbrella group members.

To that end, they have tapped the Baltimore-based marketing and public relations firm Nevins & Associates. (Its owner is not related to the Bridge Alliance's Nevins.) It will be "overseeing the future success and continued growth of The Fulcrum," Senior Vice President Mitchell Schmale said, with the goal of finding "new and diverse audiences that are interested in supporting a healthy democracy."

That is different from The Fulcrum's approach of the past 29 months. A focus on the debates over dozens of different ideas for bettering the political process — tighter campaign finance rules, alternative election methods, ending partisan gerrymandering and the like — dominated the first year, along with reporting on how fix-the-system promises were only tangential to the nascent presidential race.

But two profound and simultaneous threats to democracy upended coverage: The pandemic put the country's ability to conduct fair and comprehensive voting to an extraordinary test, while President Donald Trump's campaign of lies about fraud have restored voting rights as a topic of national prominence.

"While rooting for our democratic institutions to get stronger, we have no rooting interest in any of the prescriptions out there," the site's mission statement has said. "Our journalistic role is to help you by bringing a clear and unbiased eye to the debates."

The Fulcrum's new strategy will be to "to reach people where they are and help them connect to the reforming democracy movement," BAEF said, and unbiased reporting on efforts to make the American "democratic republic less partisan and more diverse" will remain only "part of its ongoing mission."

The Fulcrum's original publisher, David Meyers, will remain at least temporarily, to "ensure a seamless transition."

"We launched The Fulcrum at a time of intense interest in fixing our country's political system," Issue One CEO Nick Penniman said. "We are pleased that The Fulcrum will be able to continue its important work and reporting."

Read More

Large Bipartisan Majorities Oppose Deep Cuts to Foreign Aid

The Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland releases a new survey, fielded February 6-7, 2025, with a representative sample of 1,160 adults nationwide.

Pexels, Tima Miroshnichenko

Large Bipartisan Majorities Oppose Deep Cuts to Foreign Aid

An overwhelming majority of 89% of Americans say the U.S. should spend at least one percent of the federal budget on foreign aid—the current amount the U.S. spends on aid. This includes 84% of Republicans and 94% of Democrats.

Fifty-eight percent oppose abolishing the U.S. Agency for International Development and folding its functions into the State Department, including 77% of Democrats and 62% of independents. But 60% of Republicans favor the move.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Super Bowl of Unity

A crowd in a football stadium.

Getty Images, Adamkaz

A Super Bowl of Unity

Philadelphia is known as the City of Brotherly Love, and perhaps it is fitting that the Philadelphia Eagles won Sunday night's Super Bowl 59, given the number of messages of unity, resilience, and coming together that aired throughout the evening.

The unity messaging started early as the pre-game kicked off with movie star Brad Pitt narrating a moving ad that champions residence and togetherness in honor of those who suffered from the Los Angeles fires and Hurricane Helen:

Keep ReadingShow less
The Paradox for Independents

A handheld American Flag.

Canva Images

The Paradox for Independents

Political independents in the United States are not chiefly moderates. In The Independent Voter, Thomas Reilly, Jacqueline Salit, and Omar Ali make it clear that independents are basically anti-establishment. They have a "mindset" that aims to dismantle the duopoly in our national politics.

I have previously written about different ways that independents can obtain power in Washington. First, they can get elected or converted in Washington and advocate with their own independent voices. Second, they can seek a revolution in which they would be the most dominant voice in Washington. And third, a middle position, they can seek a critical mass in the Senate especially, namely five to six seats, which would give them leverage to help the majority party get to 60 votes on policy bills.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

A single pawn separated from a group of pawns.

Canva Images

The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

Excerpt from To Stop a Tyrant by Ira Chaleff

In my book To Stop a Tyrant, I identify five types of a political leader’s followers. Given the importance of access in politics, I range these from the more distant to the closest. In the middle are bureaucrats. No political leader can accomplish anything without a cadre of bureaucrats to implement their vision and policies. Custom, culture and law establish boundaries for a bureaucrat’s freedom of action. At times, these constraints must be balanced with moral considerations. The following excerpt discusses ways in which bureaucrats need to thread this needle.

Keep ReadingShow less