Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Campaign is joined on Colorado's future in electoral vote compact

Voting in Colorado
Veronaa/Getty Images

Civic engagement and progressive groups this week launched their campaign in Colorado to defeat one of the hottest ballot measures in the world of democracy reform this year.

The proposal would make the state quit a deal it made just a year ago: It pledged to award all its electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, as soon as states with 270 votes in the Electoral College (a majority) do likewise.

Fifteen other states and Washington, D.C., with a combined 187 votes, have joined the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. All of them are more deeply blue than Colorado, which has tilted increasingly that way — and is the first place where a grassroots campaign to exit the compact has gained significant traction.


For those alarmed at how two of the past three presidents, George W. Bush and Donald Trump, got elected while finishing second in the popular vote, the compact has gained steam as the leading alternative to outright abandoning the Electoral College. That's a near impossibility because it would require amending the Constitution and smaller states would never agree.

The campaign kicked off on Tuesday with a tele-town hall featuring organizers and state officials. The groups will be hosting a series of virtual discussions over the next several weeks, hoping to build momentum for defeating a repeal referendum that has already earned a spot on the ballot in November.

The Democratic General Assembly passed and Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed the measure joining the compact in March 2019. The effort to revere that decision by popular votes started soon thereafter.

It was led by two Republicans, Commissioner Rose Pugliese of Mesa County, centered on Grand Junction, and Mayor Don Wilson of Monument, a suburb of Colorado Springs.

They gathered more than 125,000 signatures to get their challenge on the ballot. Their main argument is that the pact will give the big cities unfair control over the presidency at the expense of suburbs and rural areas.

Their position put them at odds with their party's leader, Trump, who has said he supports doing away with the Electoral College.

Three committees have been formed in support of staying in the pact: Coloradans for a National Popular Vote, Yes on National Popular Vote and Conservatives for Yes on National Popular Vote. The Colorado chapters of the League of Women Voters, the NAACP and Common Cause, along with more than a dozen other civic engagement organizations, are also backing the initiative.

A "yes" vote is for staying in the compact, which is still years away from being joined by enough purple and deep red states to take effect.

A "no" vote is to get out, and if that side wins the state will stick with the current system of awarding its electoral votes to the candidate who wins the most votes in Colorado.

Colorado has nine electoral votes now, but is projected to gain a 10th starting in 2024, because of population gains reflected in the census that will also award the state an additional House seat.


Read More

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Crowd of people walking on a street.

Andy Andrews//Getty Images

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Biologist and author Paul Ehrlich, the most influential Chicken Little of the last century, died at the age of 93 this week. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” launched decades of institutional panic in government, entertainment and journalism.

Ehrlich’s core neo-Malthusian argument was that overpopulation would exhaust the supply of food and natural resources, leading to a cascade of catastrophes around the world. “The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

People clear rubble in a house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. The United States and Israel continued their joint attack on Iran that began on February 28. Iran retaliated by firing waves of missiles and drones at Israel, and targeting U.S. allies in the region.

Getty Images, Majid Saeedi

Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

Most of what we have heard from the administration as it pertains to the Iran War is swagger and bro-talk. A few days into the war, the White House released a social media video that combined footage of the bombardment with clips from video games. Not long after, it released a second video, titled “Justice the American Way,” that mixed images of the U.S. military with scenes from movies like Gladiator and Top Gun Maverick.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, War Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted of “death and destruction from the sky all day long.” “They are toast, and they know it,” he said. “This was never meant to be a fair fight... we are punching them while they’re down.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A student in uniform walking through a campus.

A Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet walks through campus November 7, 2003 in Princeton, New Jersey.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

Hegseth is Dumbing Down the Military (on Purpose)

One day before the United States began an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, Pete Hegseth angrily attacked a different enemy: the Ivy League. The Secretary of War denounced Ivy League universities as "woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” and then eliminated long-standing college fellowship programs with more than a dozen elite colleges, which had historically served as a pipeline for service members to the upper ranks of military leadership. Of the schools now on Hegseth’s "no-fly list," four sit in the top ten of the World’s Top Universities for 2026. So, why does the Secretary of War not want his armed forces to have the best education available? Because he wants a military without a brain.

For a guy obsessed with being the strongest and most lethal force in the world, cutting access to world-class schools is a bizarre gambit. It does reveal Hegseth doesn’t consider intelligence a factor–let alone an asset–in strength or lethality. That tracks. Hegseth alleges the Ivies infect officers with “globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks…” God forbid the tip of the sword of our foreign policy has knowledge of international cooperation and global interconnectedness. The Ivy League has its own issues, but the Pentagon’s claim that they "fail to deliver rigorous education grounded in realism” is almost laughable. I’m a veteran Lieutenant Commander with two Ivy League degrees, both paid for with military tuition assistance, and I promise: it was rigorous. Meanwhile, are Hegseth’s performative politics grounded in reality? Attacking Harvard on social media the eve of initiating a new war with a foreign adversary is disgraceful, and even delusional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?
Person working at a desk with a laptop and books.

Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?

Draft an important email without using AI. Write it from scratch — no suggestions, no autocomplete, and no prompt to ChatGPT to compose or revise the email.

Now ask yourself: Did it feel slower? Harder? Slightly uncomfortable?

Keep ReadingShow less