Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories
A woman timing another women in the military as she does push ups.

Hegseth Made the Fitness Test Harder for Women in Combat Roles. Most Female Marines Are Passing.

​Paintings of Stalin

The Stalinization of America

U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee speaks as Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter, U.S. Vice President JD Vance, U.S

Trump's Sale of Arms to Israel Violates U.S. Law

people filling out their ballots at voting booths and submitting their vote.

Swinging Outcomes Is Not Enough

Top-seeded campaign finance reforms squaring off in Democracy Madness

tournament
enjoynz/Getty Images
The Fulcrum
By The FulcrumMay 13, 2020
The Fulcrum
The Fulcrum staff.
See More Writings by author

It's down to the top two in the Money in Politics "region" of our reader-driven Democracy Madness tournament. Repealing the Supreme Court's 2013 Citizen United decision (No. 1) is taking on "dark money" disclosures (No. 2) for the championship in this quarter of our bracket.

Similar to an earlier bracket, ideas for bettering voting, the second seed has coasted its way into the finals, blowing out every opponent it came across. The top seed faced a couple of matchups that were a little tighter — but also didn't face any real challenges along the way.

Will the Money in Politics quarter of the draw deliver an upset in the championship round, which is what happened when ranked-choice voting and the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact got past higher-seeded ideas to earn the first births in our Democracy Madness Final Four? You decide.

Cast your vote by Thursday for the campaign finance reform you view as the single most important. Click the Vote Now button and take your pick.

We'll unveil our 16 "best of the rest" democracy reform proposals and start whittling them down next week.


Latest news

Creative Images Creative Images & Video Images Creative Editorial Video Creative Editorial Search by image or video Teenage boy getting help from male professor in solving math problem at school
Education

“Make Education Great Again” for Which Children?

Flooding around a highway.
Environment

From Information to Muscle Memory: Disaster Preparedness in Texas

Tattered American flag
Governance & Legislation

Trump's Mendacious, Deceitful Rewriting of American History

Read More

U.S. Rep. David Valadao (R-CA)

U.S. Rep. David Valadao (R-CA) at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC. House Republicans

(Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Democrats Gerrymandered David Valadao’s District. Did It Backfire?

GOP US Rep. David Valadao has never won his seat in Congress on Republican votes alone because too few Republicans live in the district where he was raised, lives, and runs his family farm.

- YouTube youtu.be

Keep ReadingShow less
​U.S. standard certificate of live birth application form next to flag of USA.

U.S. standard certificate of live birth application form next to flag of USA.

Getty Images

Birthright Citizenship Explained: History, SCOTUS Rulings & Executive Orders

Birthright citizenship has been part of American law for more than 150 years. As the American public continues to see challenges against its constitutionality, brought on by the Trump administration, it is important to remember why.

After the Civil War, Congress adopted the 14th Amendment in 1868 to overturn Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which had denied citizenship to Black Americans, dampening their federal protections. While the 13th amendment had abolished slavery a few years earlier, Free Black Americans were considered noncitizens by many, and thus had to work around a separate set of laws, meaning they could never be fully integrated as members of American society. In response to this issue, the 14th Amendment declares that all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, are citizens of the United States.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scales of justice
a golden scale with an eagle on top of it
Photo by Nellie Adamyan on Unsplash

A Real Test for “Lawfare” Must Protect Allies and Enemies Alike

“Lawfare” is becoming a word that ends arguments instead of clarifying them. When Donald Trump or his allies are prosecuted, many on the right call the case political. When the Trump administration investigates critics, many on the left call it retaliation or “score-settling.” Sometimes those accusations are justified. Sometimes they are partisan reflexes. A label that changes with the identity of the defendant is not a rule of law.

The hard cases are not the ones with a public order to punish an enemy. They are cases with mixed facts: a real investigative predicate, a politically active target, disputed timing, later changes in treatment, and no contemporaneous record the public can inspect. Those cases require something better than “trust the prosecutors” or “trust the accused.” They require an auditable standard.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2026