Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Quite simply, fairness matters

American flag
SimpleImages/Getty Images

Sturner, the author of “Fairness Matters,” is the managing partner of Entourage Effect Capital. Meyers is the executive editor of The Fulcrum.

This is the first entry in the “Fairness Matters” series, examining structural problems with the current political systems, critical policies issues that are going unaddressed and the state of the 2024 election.

Our path forward as a nation requires that we send a resounding message to Washington that fairness matters. That proportional representation needs to be the heart and soul of our political system because, right now, the far left and the far right are disproportionately represented. Meanwhile, "we the people" are not nearly as polarized as our legislatures, and that is by design.

The absence of fairness (some real and some perceived) is driving the political dysfunction in our country today. The vast majority of the American public wakes up every day and we go to work. We are moderate in our views on most issues, mostly just to the right or left of center. Most of us value common sense in our lives and strive to find a way to peacefully get through our days, to enable us to care for our loved ones while trying to make better lives for ourselves and our children.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter


If this sounds familiar and you find yourself in the proverbial middle, you too are likely frustrated with the state of disarray in politics in America.

But even if you find yourself further along — either right or left — on the ideological spectrum, and/or you've become so disenfranchised and consider yourself "anti-establishment," then you too believe our political system isn't working in the best interests of America. All of our voices matter, whether we are somewhere near the political center or closer to the extremes. We are all entitled to a proportional voice in how our nation is run.

According to a study by the Harvard Institute of Politics, a large percentage of Americans are feeling hopeless.

“Roughly 55 percent of Americans under 30 years old reported feeling ‘nervous, anxious, or on edge’ and 47 percent reported feeling ‘down, depressed or hopeless’ at least several days in the last two weeks in a new survey of young adults released by the Harvard Institute of Politics Monday.”

When people lose hope, they act in irrational ways.

To regain our footing and build hope for the future, we need to rebuild trust in our political system. We will only begin to believe, collectively, that our elected leaders were aligned in working towards our collective best interests after we instill fairness and competition in elections and governing. Then, much of what divides us and distracts us from finding common-sense solutions to the challenges we face would fade away.

Data supports this idea. A number of studies from social psychologists show that procedural fairness matters in citizens’ evaluations of the success and legitimacy of various outcomes. According to one study, conducted by the International Political Science Review:

“One of the key factors distinguishing democracies from non-democracies is the process by which political decisions are made. Central to democratic thought is the idea that policy made in an (objectively) procedurally fair manner is more legitimate than policy that violates central tenets of procedural fairness.”

The problem is pervasive and not limited to this or that particular candidate. It’s not who we elect as governor of our state or president of the United States. The problem is not the Democratic Party or the Republican Party or their partisan views or platforms. Ultimately, the problem lies with the system itself. It is a fact that the system that governs us today has been corrupted and is the source of much of the rancor and divisiveness that we struggle with every day in this country.

When it comes to taking action to address the issues facing our country, Americans have been lulled into complacency — including the two of us. Andy found it felt too daunting to even imagine how he could make a difference. He also rationalized that the United States will persevere, having been conditioned by the past five decades to believe we will continue to thrive. But over the past 10 to 15 years, he has come to the conclusion that our foundation is crumbling. That our competitiveness in a global connected economy is declining.

David was trained to be a dispassionate journalist, focused on providing balanced coverage of politics and the political system. It was only in the last half-dozen or so years his thinking changed as he realized the system will only improve when all the players — political leaders, reformers, researchers, the media, voters — accept our failings and begin to work towards solutions.

We face an alarming array of weaknesses. Challenges such as education, worker skills, complex regulation, and crumbling infrastructure are not being discussed in a meaningful way as paralysis has Washington in its grips.

Numerous factors have led us to where we are today, and one of the most damaging is the erosion of the journalism industry. If we intend to restore a sense of unity as a nation, we must transform the media industry in this country. Declining media literacy, expanding news deserts, and diminished revenue for traditional news outlets have created opportunities for bias, misinformation and disinformation.

And while economic policy is an important driver of prosperity, it is only one part of the government’s job. The other half is social policy. In the same way that our economic competitiveness has been declining, we are falling behind in many aspects of social performance, including some in areas that Americans cherish and often pioneered. And it's a vicious cycle because a decline in social performance has contributed to our economic challenges, too — especially inequality and fairness.

A foreboding feeling

Carl Sagan said the following in 1995:

“I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time — when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness. … The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance.”

That was nearly 30 years ago. Time to face a hard truth: Our generation, and the generation before us, manifested this reality.

At times, it feels like we are so divided that common ground is out of reach. But thankfully, it's not as bad as partisans and the media make it seem. Together, we can fight for fairness.

Read More

Dictionary entry for "democracy"
Paving the path forward to strengthening democracy
Lobro78.Getty Images

A Path Forward for the Pro-Democracy Community

The Fulcrum presents The Path Forward: Defining the Democracy Reform Movement. Scott Warren's weekly interviews engage diverse thought leaders to elevate the conversation about building a thriving and healthy democratic republic that fulfills its potential as a national social and political game-changer. This series is the start of focused collaborations and dialogue led by The Bridge Alliance and The Fulcrum teams to help the movement find a path forward.

In the weeks following President Trump’s inauguration, it is challenging to make sense of the state of our democracy. I am in some conversations where colleagues and friends who assert that Elon Musk is leading a coup. For many, “constitutional crisis” has become the term of the day. I’ve met with conservatives buoyed by a new sense of dynamism and opportunity for re-invention of a stagnant and dysfunctional government and are critical of the left for alarmism. I also know many who have already lost their jobs due to federal cuts, having spent their entire careers fighting for democracy.

Keep ReadingShow less
What Would Patrick Henry Say Today?

An engraving from a painting of Patrick Henry delivering an address before the Virginia Assembly. From the New York Public Library.

Getty Images, Smith Collection/Gado

What Would Patrick Henry Say Today?

In Federalist 10, explaining some of the protections of the new Constitution in 1787, James Madison observed that, “Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm….” The Founders defined tyranny as the legislative, executive, and judicial powers all being combined in the hands of a single individual or small group of people. So, they divided these three powers into separate and independent branches of the government that checked and balanced each other, preventing this accumulation of power. If, however, the people elected an authoritarian president and a legislature of toadies, who allowed this president to install a compliant judiciary, this protection could be lost. Hence, when asked shortly after the Constitutional Convention concluded in 1787 what the delegates had created, Benjamin Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

Echoing Madison, the Supreme Court in 1866, in Ex Parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2 (1866), wrote, “Wicked men, ambitious of power, with hatred of liberty and contempt of law, may fill the place once occupied by Washington and Lincoln” as they overturned Lambden Milligan’s conviction before a military commission under martial law in Indiana during the Civil War. Milligan was charged with aiding a secret society that gave material support to the rebellion, conspiring to free Confederate prisoners, and conspiring to raid northern arsenals to come to the aid of the South. The Court’s five-member majority ruled that martial law could not be imposed in states where the civilian courts were open and functioning. Four members of the Court disagreed because state courts could be open and functioning but be in the hands of rebels. Martial law may again be tested, but more fundamental questions are how to prevent the rise of a tyrant in the first place and what remedies are available should the voters elect one.

Keep ReadingShow less
Meet the Faces of Democracy: Derek Bowens

Derek Bowen.

Issue One

Meet the Faces of Democracy: Derek Bowens

Derek Bowens has been a nonpartisan election administrator in North Carolina for over a decade. Since 2012, he served in various capacities, including as the director of elections in New Hanover County, North Carolina. In 2017, he became the director of elections in Durham County. Durham County is home to Duke University and North Carolina Central University, a jurisdiction of nearly a quarter of a million registered voters, the fifth largest in the state.

Bowens has been nationally recognized for his work by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) and the National Association of Counties. In 2020, Durham County won a Clearinghouse Award from the EAC for its innovative app that allowed voters to locate polling places near them, view voting information, and see current polling place wait times.

Keep ReadingShow less
Do Trump’s Goals Justify His Words and Actions?

President Donald Trump.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Do Trump’s Goals Justify His Words and Actions?

As co-publishers of The Fulcrum, it is time to clarify our mission in the context of what we are witnessing from the current Trump Administration.

The barrage of executive orders in the last few weeks has resulted in outrage by his political opponents. In many cases, the responses are justified. Still, oftentimes, the responses often ignore the fact that there might be some truth in what the Trump administration is saying and legitimate reasons for some actions they are taking.

Keep ReadingShow less