Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Cinderella bracket continues in Democracy Madness

Cinderella bracket continues in Democracy Madness

The Final Four in the Elections quarter of our Democracy Madness draw is upon us — and it turns out only one top seed has made it to the regional semifinals.


Turning redistricting over to independent commissions, our No. 2 seed, advanced by cruising past the call for congressional term limits.

The biggest upset in the weekend voting: The idea of electing several members to represent each U.S. House district, our No. 9 seed, snuck out a win over the top-seeded proposal of presidential elections simply by popular vote.

Multimember districts now face Supreme Court term limits (No. 13), while anti-gerrymandering commissions confront the No. 11 proposal, states promising to award their electoral votes to the national popular winner.

Press the Vote Now button to make your two choices. (You can click the matchups, then each label, for more on the proposals.)

We're hoping to learn what readers think is the best of 64 ideas for reforming our governing systems and putting voters back at the center of things. The money in politics "region" starts next.



Read More

Entrance Sign at the University of Florida

Universities are embracing “institutional neutrality,” but at places like the University of Florida it’s becoming a tool to silence faculty and erode academic freedom.

Getty Images, Bryan Pollard

When Insisting on “Neutrality” Becomes a Gag Order

Universities across the country are adopting policies under the banner of “institutional neutrality,” which, at face value, sounds entirely reasonable. A university’s official voice should remain measured, cautious, and focused on its core mission regardless of which elected officials are in office. But two very different interpretations of institutional neutrality are emerging.

At places like the University of Wisconsin – Madison and Harvard, neutrality is applied narrowly and traditionally: the institution itself refrains from partisan political statements, while faculty leaders and scholars remain free to speak in their professional and civic capacities. Elsewhere, the same term is being applied far more aggressively — not to restrain institutions, but to silence individuals.

Keep ReadingShow less