In this episode of How to Win Friends and Save The Republic, a podcast from the National Association of Nonpartisan Reformers, special guests technology gurus Sara Gifford and Victor Allis talk about their app, ActiVote, which helps people increase their civic engagement by completing meaningful, daily actions.
Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde arrives with Ven. Steve Seely as U.S. President Donald Trump and U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance look on during the National Prayer Service at Washington National Cathedral on January 21, 2025 in Washington, DC.
In the introduction to her 2023 book, How We Learn to Be Brave, the Rt. Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde, the Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Washington, DC, wrote, “We all want to be brave when it counts—to be the one who…does the right thing when it matters most….”
The world remembers Budde’s bravery when, at the National Prayer Service last month, (it now seems like years ago) she looked at President Trump and asked for mercy for those who are scared and “fear for their lives.”
“We all want to be brave when it counts…when it matters most…”
If this is a moment when it matters most, when President Trump is taking a wrecking ball to our democracy, then why are so many of us immobilized by cynicism and despair?
Jamil Zaki, author of Hope for Cynics: The Surprising Science of Human Goodness, says that when we’re cynical, it’s like playing poker and folding our hand before the game even starts. When we are cynical as citizens, we fold our hand before the Congress is sworn in, before the first bill is introduced.
We don’t have to wait for a moment as large as Budde’s to play our hand. We can demonstrate our own version of Budde’s courage on a regular basis.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
“Decisive moments are marking events,” she continued “...We feel a rush of adrenaline, making us acutely aware of what’s happening. We feel alive…”
That was the experience Maxine Thomas shared with me when she described her first-ever meeting with her U.S. Senator as a relatively new volunteer with the anti-poverty lobby RESULTS. “I was a ball of emotion,” Thomas said. “It felt like an out-of-body experience…The volunteers were polished and sharp but I was scared and worried whether I would say the right thing…”
Almost everyone feels that way before their first Congressional meeting, but Thomas had been trained to speak powerfully. After a day of first-ever meetings with her elected officials, she said, “I was euphoric. I was on this high and felt I was part of something revolutionary.”
Thomas is part of an organization that works to deliver a revolutionary form of advocacy, transformational advocacy, which works to help people change an issue and changes them in the process. These organizations offer a specific structure of support. They 1) form people into local chapters so they aren’t working alone and they work to build community both locally and with a monthly, national, whole-of-organization webinar, 2) provide training on how to secure a meeting with an elected official, how to plan for the meeting and what to ask for, and 3) encourage breakthroughs. Encouraging volunteers to move out of their comfort zones, as Budde had to do when she addressed President Trump toward the end of her sermon, creates regular moments calling for bravery rather than waiting for them to occur.
Activism begins with our willingness to engage. Then, we have to find an organization that will train us to act powerfully. Let’s start with what keeps us on the sideline, our cynicism. Futurist Alex Steffen said, “Cynicism is obedience.” Our cynicism is a gift to President Trump’s wrecking ball. Our obedience paves the way for the demolition of our democracy.
But, too many organizations fuel our cynicism and unknowingly empower the wrecking ball with a constant stream of near-meaningless actions. Seventy-nine percent of grassroots advocacy professionals told the Congressional Management Foundation, that “a form email is their primary grassroots advocacy tactic.” We provide our name and ZIP code and the organization sends a pre-written letter for us. Sadly, “just three percent of Congressional staff said that a form email has ‘a lot of influence’ on their offices’ decisions.”
There are other important actions needed. Lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of reckless executive actions are critically important, and so too are protests. But, we have to remember that protests usually aren’t the long game and don’t focus on building relationships with elected officials.
Read again what Budde wrote in the introduction to her book: “We all want to be brave when it counts—to be the one who…does the right thing when it matters most….” This is our moment as citizens and nonprofit organizations to step up and do the right thing. Being focused and joining an organization that works to deliver transformational advocacy is a key first step. It’s not the only solution needed but it is an essential missing piece: citizens awakening to their power.
Sam Daley-Harris is the author of “Reclaiming Our Democracy: Every Citizen’s Guide to Transformational Advocacy” (Rivertowns Books, 2025 paperback) and the founder of RESULTS and Civic Courage.
The Idaho legislative session is scheduled to last through April 10.
Idaho lawmakers have introduced a slate of bills which would put up greater hurdles for passing voter-initiated ballot measures.
Legislation this session includes bills to increase the threshold for passage to 50%, allowing the governor to veto passed measures and proposes a constitutional amendment that would require signatures from six percent of voters in all 35 districts.
Sen. James Ruchti, D-Pocatello, assistant Senate minority leader, said the measures come after years of attacks from Republicans on voter initiatives.
"They constantly live in fear that the people will tire of the Legislature not listening to them and will use the initiative process to get done that which the Legislature should do," Ruchti asserted.
Ruchti noted one instance in which lawmakers did not listen to Idahoans was on Medicaid expansion. In 2018, 60% of voters approved a measure to expand the program. Lawmakers have introduced a bill this session to repeal Medicaid expansion. Sponsors of ballot measure legislation argued out-of-state money drives the initiatives.
Rep. Bruce Skaug, R-Nampa, who sponsored some of the bills to increase initiative thresholds, said allowing the governor to veto measures would be similar to bills passed in the Legislature. He also contended it is "good protection for a misinformed electorate if they don't get the information like we get to have."
Ruchti countered lawmakers deal with people who have agendas.
"We are surrounded by special interest groups who are trying to get their particular bills passed and they use a variety of arguments, some of which are specious, some of which are accurate information," Ruchti observed. "It's just part of living in a democracy. So, the voters can figure this out, and they do."
Senate Joint Resolution 101 would make the signature-gathering process for voter initiatives harder, increasing the number of districts where six percent of voters have to sign from 18 to all 35. The resolution would need approval from voters to amend the constitution. Lawmakers proposed the amending resolution because in 2021, the Idaho Supreme Court blocked a similar bill, calling it unconstitutional.
Ruchti added attempts like this are disrupting grassroots efforts.
"The signature gatherers, for example, as a general rule and maybe even almost entirely are volunteers who are just taking their time to do something that they feel is really important," Ruchti pointed out. "That certainly was the way it was with Medicaid expansion."
ID lawmakers seek to increase barriers for passing voter initiatives was first published on Public News Service, and was republished with permission.
Eric Tegethoff is a journalist covering the Northwest for Public News Service.
SOURCE: APM Research Lab analysis of McCourtney Institute's Mood of the National Poll, Sept. 23-27, 2024.
New findings from the McCourtney Institute for Democracy’s latest Mood of the Nation Poll show that a sizeable minority of Americans agree with the statement, “When I think about our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ‘just let them all burn.’”
The survey, which was conducted Sept. 23-27 among 1,000 adults, found that the desire for drastic institutional change was somewhat more common among younger generations, Hispanic Americans, men and Trump voters.
The question was included in a survey in an attempt to help understand the depth and extent of Americans’ dissatisfaction with institutions and the status quo.
Nearly one-third of those in Generation Z agree with the statement “When I think about our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ‘just let them all burn.’” (Technically Generation Z starts at age 12, but this survey of adult Americans includes older members of the generation, aged 18 to 27). This compares to only 13% of Baby Boomers.
“The data show that the more affluent— those with annual incomes over $100,000 — those with human capital that helps people be resilient in a changing economy — having earned a four-year college degree — and those who are dependent on government for Social Security and Medicare — Baby Boomers — reject this idea most strongly,” observed poll director and Penn State professor Eric Plutzer.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
He went on to say: “Boomers and the economically secure may not think the country is on the right track, but they don't feel that a radical rebuild is needed. They have a lot at stake. A vested interest in incremental change and stability. Those who are more precarious and have less-certain futures in a changing economy may see institutions failing them.”
Among racial and ethnic groups, Hispanic Americans stand out with nearly 3 in 10 agreeing with the statement “When I think about our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ‘just let them all burn.’” About 2 in 10 of the other racial and ethnic groups represented in this survey (white, Black and “other”) agreed with the statement.
While similar proportions of men and women agreed with the statement (22% and 19%, respectively), more than twice as many men than women “strongly” agreed (7% and 3%, respectively).
The size of this survey is not able to scientifically represent a wide variety of religious beliefs, but it can represent Americans who identify as born-again Christians (about one-quarter of adults according to Pew Research Center). A comparison of the responses of born-again Christians with others does not reveal a religiously-related difference of opinions on this question. Similar proportions of both groups agree with the statement about burning down political and social institutions.
There is some alignment between more typical political affiliations and opinions related to letting political and social institutions burn, with a somewhat higher proportion of those preferring President-elect Donald Trump in the then-upcoming presidential election favoring drastic change as compared to those preferring Vice President Kamala Harris. Seven percent of Trump voters strongly favored the statement that political as social institutions should be allowed to burn, compared with only three percent of Harris voters.
There is not, however, much difference in the pattern of responses of Democrats and Republicans on this question. Slightly higher proportions of those unaffiliated with the major parties favor allowing political and social institutions to burn.
Engaging with the political process is not necessarily tied to wanting to preserve political institutions. It depends on the type of engagement. A higher proportion of voters than nonvoters indicated a preference for preserving political and social institutions, but a lower proportion of protesters than non-protesters favored institutional preservation.
This survey included a list of seven political activities besides voting. As we reported previously, 3 in 5 adults had participated in one or more of these activities in the months leading up to the 2024 election.
How does participation relate to a desire for drastic change? Thirty-one percent of those who had attended a protest or rally in the past six months agreed with the statement “When I think about our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ‘just let them all burn.’” As did 27% of nonvoters, those who had attended a political rally or campaign event and those who had posted a political message online.
A desire to see political and social institutions burn was less common among those who contributed money to a political candidate.
Agreeing that political and social institutions should be allowed to burn is not simply another way of asking whether people have trust in institutions — but it is related. About half as many of those who agree with the statement “most of the time I trust the government to do what is right” think that political and social institutions should be allowed to burn as is the case among those who distrust the government (14% compared to 27%).
The survey also asked respondents which of three statements about governance comes closest to their own thoughts: Democracy is the best political system in all circumstances (favored by 88%), In certain circumstances a dictatorship could be a good thing (7%), and “whether we live in a democracy or under a dictatorship makes no difference to people like me” (5%). One-third of those favoring the latter two categories agreed that political and social institutions should be allowed to burn, compared to only 18% of those who believe that democracy is always best.
American Institutions? 1 in 5 say "let them burn"was first published on APM Research Lab, and was republished with permission.
Craig Helmstetter, Ph.D., is the APM Research Lab’s founding Managing Partner.
John C. Yang is the president and executive director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC.
John C. Yang is the president and executive director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC.
At Advancing Justice | AAJC, Yang leads the organization’s efforts to fight for civil rights and empower Asian Americans to create a more just America for all through public policy advocacy, education, and litigation.
His extensive legal background enables Advancing Justice | AAJC to address systemic policies, programs, and legislative attempts to discriminate against and marginalize Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPI) and other minority communities.
I spoke with Mr. Yang on a recent episode of Fulcrum Democracy Forum (FDF). The program engages citizens in evolving government to meet all people's needs better. Consistent with the Fulcrum's mission, FDF strives to share many perspectives to widen our readers' viewpoints.
- YouTubewww.youtube.com
Mr. Yang provided insights about AAJC endorsing the reintroduction of the Reuniting Families Act,legislation that would promote family unity in the country’s immigration system, reduce the family-based immigration backlogs, and update our laws to reflect how families immigrate to the United States.
Most recently, the organization joined Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs (WLC) and OCA -Asian Pacific American Advocates (OCA) in announcing a new lawsuit “challenging President Trump’s authority to unilaterally strip citizenship from babies born in the U.S. to parents who are here on temporary visas or are undocumented.” The lawsuit was filed on January 30, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
AAJC also spoke out against President Donald Trump’s scapegoating comments over the deadly collision of American Airlines flight 5342 with a military United States Army Black Hawk helicopter near Washington, D.C.’s Ronald Reagan International Airport, on Wednesday, January 29.
“We are devastated by the aviation tragedy that took place last night. Our thoughts are with the victims and their families and friends who mourn their loss. We grieve together with the rest of a compassionate nation. In the face of such a devastating loss, it is reprehensible that the President chose to use his airtime to attempt to cast blame on diversity, equity, and inclusion policies in Federal Aviation Administration for the incident.
Mr. Yang has been a leader in the Asian American and Pacific Islander and broader civic community for many years. His experience includes serving in the Obama Administration as Senior Advisor for Trade and Strategic Initiatives at the U.S. Department of Commerce.
Yang graduated with honors from George Washington University Law School, where he served on the George Washington Law Review and the Moot Court Board. Chambers USA recognized John as one of “America’s Leading Business Lawyers” and as a Washington, D.C. “Super Lawyer” by Law & Politics.
Here are other Change Leaders who I had the opportunity to interview as part of the Fulcrum Democracy Forum series:
