Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Clinton says weaker Voting Rights Act was pivotal in her loss

At last weekend's annual commemoration of the 1965 civil rights standoff in Selma, Ala., most of the attention focused on the 2020 presidential candidates who attended. But the 2016 presidential loser made some news as well.

A main reason for her defeat, Hillary Clinton told an audience, was the Supreme Court's striking down six years ago of the Voting Rights Act requirement that jurisdictions with histories of racial discrimination obtain federal approval for any changes to voting laws or practices.


After saying that opponents of the law "found a receptive Supreme Court who came up with the most absurd decision," she argued that the changes didn't just "make a difference in Alabama and Georgia. It made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40,000 and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting."

Several legal experts contact by Salon disputed her rationale, noting that Wisconsin was not covered by the so-called preclearance requirement the court ruled unconstitutional in 2013 (nor were any of the other Rust Belt states where she was narrowly upset by Donald Trump).

Read More

Democracy 2.0 Requires a Commitment to the Common Good

Democracy 2.0 Requires a Commitment to the Common Good

From the sustained community organizing that followed Mozambique's 2024 elections to the student-led civic protests in Serbia, the world is full of reminders that the future of democracy is ours to shape.

The world is at a critical juncture. People everywhere are facing multiple, concurrent threats including extreme wealth concentration, attacks on democratic freedoms, and various humanitarian crises.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democracy 2.0 Requires a Commitment to the Common Good

Democracy 2.0 Requires a Commitment to the Common Good

From the sustained community organizing that followed Mozambique's 2024 elections to the student-led civic protests in Serbia, the world is full of reminders that the future of democracy is ours to shape.

The world is at a critical juncture. People everywhere are facing multiple, concurrent threats including extreme wealth concentration, attacks on democratic freedoms, and various humanitarian crises.

Keep ReadingShow less
Someone submitting a purple ballot.

Both parties could benefit from backing Independent candidates in tough races—reducing polarization, increasing leverage in Congress, and reshaping U.S. politics.

Getty Images, Gwengoat

Democrats and Republicans Should Each Support Some Independents

The Democratic Party sent a strong message to President Trump and the Republican Party in the 2025 elections, but ironically one part of their overall strategy forward should be to support Independents in House and Senate races where the chances of victory for a Democratic candidate are low.

Double irony: Republicans should employ the same strategy. Triple irony: If both parties pursue this strategy, then this would both serve their self-interest and be in the best interest of the country overall.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Bend But Don’t Break Economy

AI may disrupt the workplace, but with smart investment in workforce transitions and innovation, the economy can bend without breaking—unlocking growth and new opportunities.

Getty Images, J Studios

A Bend But Don’t Break Economy

Everyone has a stake in keeping the unemployment rate low. A single percentage point increase in unemployment is tied to a jump in the poverty rate of about 0.4 to 0.7 percentage points. Higher rates of unemployment are likewise associated with an increase in rates of depression among the unemployed and, in some cases, reduced mental health among their family members. Based on that finding, it's unsurprising that higher rates of unemployment are also correlated with higher rates of divorce. Finally, and somewhat obviously, unemployment leads to a surge in social safety spending. Everyone benefits when more folks have meaningful, high-paying work.

That’s why everyone needs to pay attention to the very real possibility that AI will lead to at least a temporary surge in unemployment. Economists vary in their estimates of how AI will lead to displacement. Gather three economists together, and they’ll probably offer nine different predictionsthey’ll tell you that AI is advancing at different rates in different fields, that professions vary in their willingness to adopt AI, and that a shifting regulatory framework is likely to diminish AI use in some sectors. And, of course, they’re right!

Keep ReadingShow less