Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

A Political Reform Primer Worth Your Time

Voters looking for a solid introduction to the biggest drivers of dysfunction in Washington, and some of the most prominent proposals for making things better, have something new for their reading lists.

It's an easy-to-digest, 36-page report, rich in graphics, from a bipartisan panel of experts and former federal officials assembled by the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress.


Unlike so many other documents in the almost bottomless ocean of blue-ribbon studies, this one does not bite off more than most concerned citizens will be able to digest. Instead, the recommendations are tightly focused on taking partisan power politics out of the mapping of congressional districts and creating more genuine contests for House seats.

The panel, dubbed the Commission on Civility and Effective Governance, narrowed its scope after concluding there is more cross-partisan interest in curbing gerrymandering and the closed-loop primary election systems than in tackling two other core challenges to the functioning democracy: the burgeoning influence of money in politics and the "partisan echo chambers" of so much mainstream media.

The center's president, Glenn Nye, a former one-term Democratic congressman from Virginia, said the commission's work "is not fully comprehensive but serves as a good primer for the potential reform advocate who knows we need change but needs guidance understanding the links between gridlock in Washington and warped incentives coming from lack of real competition in election systems and districting."

The core recommendations are not outside-the-box: turning all political mapmaking over to non-partisan commissions, like those now in effect in nine states, and adopting either ranked-choice voting (as in Maine) or top-two finisher primaries (as in California) in an effort to push more candidates toward the ideological center. The report crisply explains how those ideas work and includes solid data to back the arguments.


Read More

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs
person sitting while using laptop computer and green stethoscope near

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