Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories
Is The War on Iran Unlawful And Unfair To U.S. Troops?

Is The War on Iran Unlawful And Unfair To U.S. Troops?

Protestors holding signs, many that say "Stop Bombing Iran."

Trump’s ‘Just for Fun’ War Talk Shows a Dangerous Trivialization

Disinformation Wins: Justifying ICE Murders through Transphobia

Disinformation Wins: Justifying ICE Murders through Transphobia

Republican scheming backfires in Texas election

Republican scheming backfires in Texas election

Trump: The King of Fake

Trump: The King of Fake

Democracy Madness: Follow the money to the second round

basketball and democracy
enjoynz/Getty Images
The Fulcrum
By The FulcrumMay 07, 2020
The Fulcrum
The Fulcrum staff.
See More Writings by author

The first-round results from the Money in Politics region of our Democracy Madness tournament looked like a typical March Madness bracket: The top seeds advanced, with a couple of low-level upsets spicing things up.

So now it's on to the Elite Eight, with our readers urged to take another shot at picking their favorite ideas for fixing the campaign finance system. (Our tournament of 64 democracy reform proposals has already seen ranked-choice voting and the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact advance to the Final Four.)

The top six Money in Politics proposals all took care of business, but the seventh- and eighth-ranked entries both fell in minor upsets. In the matchup pitting limitations on foreign campaign contributions (No. 7) against limitations on lobbyists' campaign donations (No. 10), the curb on lobbyists came out on top. And in the battle of public financing options — subsidies for candidates (No. 8) versus vouchers for voters to donate (No. 9) — the underdog triumphed again.

But now they face the big dogs. Campaign vouchers are up against the top seed, the effort to effectively repeal the Citizens United decision by constitutional amendment, while the cap on lobbyists' donations battles the campaign to reveal "dark money."

The second round runs through Saturday, with the regional semi-finals and finals following next week.

Click the Vote Now button to make your selections. (You can click the matchups, then each label, for more about the proposals.)




Latest news

Non Content

Republish Our Work

With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.
Electoral Reforms

Stop Fighting Voter ID. Start Defining It.

A person praying.
Community

Sacred Restraint in a Restless World

Read More

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

A woman sifts through the rubble in her house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026, in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

This question is not an exercise in double-talk. It is critical to understand the power that our Constitution grants exclusively to Congress, and the power that resides in the President as Commander-in-Chief of the military.

The Constitution clearly states that Congress has the power to declare war. The President does not have that power. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 recognizes that distribution of power by saying that a President can only introduce military force into an existing or imminent hostility if Congress has declared war or specifically authorized the President to use military force, or there is a national emergency created by an attack on the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less
Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs
person sitting while using laptop computer and green stethoscope near
Photo by National Cancer Institute on Unsplash

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs

Healthcare and social assistance professions added 693,000 jobs in 2025. Without those gains, the U.S. economy would have lost roughly 570,000 jobs.

At first glance, these numbers suggest that healthcare is a growth engine in an otherwise slowing labor market. But a closer look reveals something more troubling for patients and healthcare professionals.

Keep ReadingShow less
A large group of people is depicted while invisible systems actively scan and analyze individuals within the crowd

Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over a Pentagon “supply-chain risk” label raises major constitutional questions about AI policy, corporate speech, and political retaliation.

Getty Images, Flavio Coelho

Anthropic Sues Trump Over ‘Unlawful’ AI Retaliation

Anthropic’s dispute with the Trump administration is no longer just about AI policy; it has escalated into a constitutional test of whether American companies can uphold their values against political retaliation. After the administration labeled Anthropic a “supply‑chain risk”, a designation historically reserved for foreign adversaries, and ordered federal agencies to cease using its technology, the company did not yield. Instead, Anthropic filed two lawsuits: one in the Northern District of California and another in the D.C. Circuit, each challenging different aspects of the government’s actions and calling them “unprecedented and unlawful.”

The Pentagon has now formally issued the supply‑chain risk designation, triggering immediate cancellations of federal contracts and jeopardizing “hundreds of millions of dollars” in near‑term revenue. Anthropic’s filings describe the losses as “unrecoverable,” with reputational damage compounding the financial harm. Yet even as the government blacklists the company, the Pentagon continues using Claude in classified systems because the model is deeply embedded in wartime workflows. This contradiction underscores the political nature of the designation: a tool deemed too “dangerous” to be used by federal agencies is simultaneously indispensable in active military operations.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2026