The battle between facts and lies, truth and untruth, is one of the most pressing issues democracies face.
Peter Pomerantsev, author and a senior fellow at the London School of Economics and the SNF Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University, joins The McCourtney Institute for Democracy's podcast, "Democracy Works," to discuss the scope of the problem and how to move forward.
Since the birth of the United States, people have been dreaming of the American "Good Life."
This dream accelerated after the Industrial Revolution arrived in the U.S. in the 1800s. Innovative manufacturing practices integrated new technologies, lowering costs and spurring economic growth. As a result, millions of people gained access to affordable consumer goods. These changes improved living standards, making the dream attainable for more people.
As the nation celebrates its first 250 years, it’s time to examine the overall impact of modern conveniences on Americans’ quality of life.
However, these advancements also have unforeseen consequences. Mass production of household goods reduces manufacturing costs, making products more affordable. Unfortunately, researchers have found that some components of some products are toxic to human health.
Industrial manufacturing decisions prioritize cost and efficiency to drive strong consumer demand. Manufacturers often overlook potential health risks to keep prices low.
People often choose products that emit toxic pollutants indoors without realizing the harm they can cause. The fact that these chemicals build up in the body and cause long-term health problems is a troubling irony of modern life.
Initially, modern products seemed useful and convenient. Later, researchers found that many household goods
emit vapors or particles that pollute indoor air.
Unlike outdoor pollutants, which people can see or smell, indoor pollutants are invisible and odorless. Kumar et al. conducted a study on indoor air quality, reporting that it can be up to 10 times more polluted than outdoor air.
Each year, there are an estimated three to five million premature deaths linked to indoor air pollution worldwide. This issue poses a significant health crisis that demands urgent attention.
These global findings became personal to me. I learned that household contaminants might have caused my cancer and the loss of my kidney. This experience showed the urgency of addressing these risks.
Indoor air contains highly toxic heavy metals. Even in small amounts, these elements—such as mercury, cadmium, and lead—do not degrade. Once inhaled, ingested, or absorbed, these metals accumulate in vital organs. This buildup causes serious health problems like cancer, kidney damage, and immune dysfunction.
New research examines how toxins, including heavy metals, interact with human biology. Dr. Bruce Lanphear explains that chemicals can disrupt the body’s master switches—key regulatory mechanisms. These disruptions trigger biological reactions, causing chronic diseases like heart disease, stroke, and cancer.
Common household products expose people to dangerous heavy metals. Mercury, a liquid metal at room temperature, is a contaminant in seafood and cosmetics. Batteries and various foods also contain cadmium, which is another toxic metal.
Industries release 5.4 million tons of lead annually. Although lead is a toxic metal that contaminates air, food, and water, it is still used to make some jewelry and toys. This widespread exposure causes an estimated $50 billion in annual health-related costs. According to the National Library of Medicine, no level of lead is safe.
The U.S. federal government regulates heavy metals such as mercury, cadmium, and lead by setting toxicity thresholds. But these limits ignore the immediate and long-term health risks of low-level exposures. Current rules don’t stop health and economic harm. Americans need strict bans on these materials to protect future generations.
Individual consumer choices must drive the push for bans on these toxic metals. Consumers must demand a shift away from products containing heavy metals. By doing so, Americans can force manufacturers to adapt even before federal regulations take effect.
A personal commitment is essential to make these stricter policies work in practice. Choosing non-toxic household products reduces daily exposure to these dangerous substances.
When I replaced my carpet, I found many companies offering non-toxic materials and padding. I chose a healthy carpet option with no chemical smell after installation. My experience showed that safe alternatives are widely available. I plan to continue this transition by using non-toxic coatings when I resurface the wood floors throughout my home.
Recent research shows that living in a greener environment lowers the risk of heart disease and mental health issues. Using natural elements indoors can also reduce stress, improve mood, and enhance thinking skills.
To improve personal health and environmental sustainability, people should reconsider their consumer habits. Consumers can choose natural, sustainable fibers such as bamboo, jute, and hemp for flooring, carpets, and drapery.
The market for eco-friendly furnishings is growing as people seek healthier options. Consider researching and investing in non-toxic brands that prioritize personal and environmental health.
Replacing all toxic items in a home at once can be expensive. Instead, replace toxic products with natural alternatives one at a time. Bamboo comforters and bath towels, jute welcome mats, and hemp pillows are all excellent, sustainable options.
Americans must understand the risks of indoor pollution and embrace sustainable choices. Everyone can live the "Good Life" by redefining the American Dream for future generations.
Carole Rollins has been an environmental educator for 35 years, holds a Ph.D. in environmental science, and has taught environmental education at the University of California, Berkeley. Carole has received the White House Millennium Green Award and the National Endowment for the Arts Public Education and Awareness Award.
As part of a collaboration between The Fulcrum's NextGen initiative and Made By Us, The Fulcrum is publishing Letters to America, a series created through the Youth250 project that invites Gen Z to reflect on the nation’s past, present, and future as the United States approaches its 250th anniversary.
In small towns across the nation, in accordance with ours of Madison New Jersey, we will gather to recognize an anniversary. Though this milestone has been one of many, I ask that it not be a mere nod to the curiosities of the past, but the spark of an ongoing admiration for all that led us here.
Our founding fathers through incredible strife composed a nation they saw fit for those they would never meet, and 250 years ago took the declarative act of rolling that idea into motion. Setting in stride a sort of imperfect waltz that has bridged the generations.
From our brilliant triumphant stands to our bittersweet sacrifices to times mired in the trouble and chaos of ill decision. And amidst the growing distractions and ample conveniences of modern life, it can be difficult to recall these struggles. But as the years have mounted higher we now find ourselves the tailors and seamstresses of this great tapestry. And as we weave our portion may we do so with care to those neighbors binding us on this great timeline. And sift among their aging and rusted heirlooms with the veneration of a dutiful curator. Keeping alive those voices that reside in our countries keep.
May we remember with honesty the people who played their role in those years, whether they be doers of just or unjust actions. For the sole act of having been where we now are, they remain our most valuable counsel to navigate what may come. we cannot let ourselves be the ones who cutoff our future countrymen, from those cables of communication which we have had the privilege to hear. For we too shall have been where others will stand as time does what it will.
On this anniversary, We arrive at this 250th year not at a culmination, but as an active set of hands entrusted with holding, for a short while an idea that may never be finished yet must always be maintained.
John Cerutti, 24, Madison, NJ
The rule of law, American democracy, constitutional rights, and judicial independence.
It has been said that a good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. Apparently, that’s not the case in very red Collin County, Texas, where a self-described recovering alcoholic fatally shot his daughter in the chest, only to be the beneficiary of a particularly lenient grand jury. As a retired justice of the New York State Supreme Court, the case intrigued me and I tried to understand why the prosecutor had failed to obtain an indictment against him.
In January 2025, the victim and her boyfriend traveled from their home in England to visit her father at his home in Collin County where the shooting had occurred. Although the evidence presented to a grand jury cannot be disclosed, it is reasonably assumed that the grand jury heard the statement made by the father to the police at the scene immediately following the shooting. He related how he had taken his daughter, at her request, to see his gun, and that when he brought her to his bedroom and removed the gun from a cabinet in which he kept it, “it went off.” He could not recall if his finger had been on the trigger.
Even without the inculpatory details later revealed at an inquest held in England, the father’s admission that the gun had gone off when he picked it up demonstrates at least, that he had failed to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk of death arising from his failure to ensure that the gun was not loaded or that the safety was on. That his finger may have been on the trigger is an incriminating detail that the grand jurors seemed to have ignored.
As grand jury proceedings are secret, it is impossible to know why the grand jurors did not indict the father, nor is there any procedure by which a prosecutor may address such a failure apart from conducting further investigations and/or re-presenting the case. Recently, the victim’s mother reasonably demanded that the prosecutor re-present the case to another grand jury. It is anyone’s guess whether that will happen. Is this a matter of a prosecutorial abuse of discretion or grand jury nullification or both?
An interesting contrast to the Collin County case is the famous New York case of “subway vigilante” Bernhard Goetz. On December 22, 1984, while seated in a New York City subway car, Goetz was approached by four teenagers, two of whom asked him for $5. Feeling menaced, Goetz opened fire, crippling one and injuring the others. On December 31, 1984, the
grand jury indicted Goetz for two felony counts of criminal possession of a weapon. The public was outraged as it was not disputed that the four had been shot by Goetz. As reported in theopinion of Chief Judge Sol Wachtler of the Court of Appeals of the State of New York, in March 1985, the prosecutor re-presented the case to a newly empaneled grand jury which indicted Goetz for attempted murder in the second degree and other offenses. Even if there was evidence presented to the grand jury that Goetz had not intended to kill, his intent was an issue for trial and did not preclude an indictment.
Just as the evidence was sufficient to indict Goetz for attempted murder, the evidence against the Texas father was sufficient to indict him for criminally negligent homicide, if not reckless homicide, as again, his intent was an issue for trial. But the Collin County prosecutor, in contrast to the Goetz prosecutor, seemed content to leave well enough alone and not seek to re present the case to another grand jury. I guess in Texas, guns kill people after all.
In a substantially weaker case than the two described above, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), without compunction, pursued indictments against six Democratic lawmakers who appeared on videotape urging military personnel to refuse to carry out illegal orders. Not surprisingly, the DOJ was rebuked by the grand jury which did not vote to indict anyof the lawmakers. While it may be tempting to commend the DOJ for leaving well enough alone in this instance by not seeking to re-present the case, the determination to seek those indictments in the first place constitutes an ostentatious abuse of prosecutorial discretion. Although the violation of or failure to obey any lawful general order or regulation is prohibited by law, the violation of or failure to obey any unlawful general order or regulation is not prohibited. The DOJ, apparently, thought otherwise.
In my view, the failure of the Collin County prosecutor to re-present clearly sufficient evidence of criminally negligent homicide to another grand jury, and the DOJ’s presentation of clearly insufficient evidence against the lawmakers, present instances of prosecutorial abuses of a kind that seems more common today than in the days preceding the current administration. In both instances, justice is not served and the rule of law suffers.
Barbara Jaffe is a retired New York State Supreme Court Justice and volunteer for Lawyers Defending American Democracy (LDAD).
As America nears its 250th anniversary, learn why schools, mentoring, and leadership development are critical to preparing the next generation of leaders.
As America approaches its 250th birthday, we've been reflecting on the leadership that built our nation and sustained it through two and a half centuries of challenge and change. From local communities to national institutions, America's progress has always depended on people who were willing to take initiative, serve others, and help navigate moments of uncertainty and opportunity.
As we celebrate these leaders for the impact they had on history, a critical question surfaces: Where—and how—did they learn to lead?
That question feels especially urgent today. As communities face increasingly complex challenges and institutions search for the next generation of problem-solvers, the need for capable leaders has never been greater. Leadership is not something people simply inherit or discover overnight. It grows through guidance, experience, and opportunity. If we want strong leaders tomorrow, we must be intentional about creating environments that help young people build the skills they need to lead today.
Across sectors, there is concern about whether we are preparing the next generation for success. Business leaders consistently report difficulty finding young people with the problem-solving, collaboration, and critical-thinking skills needed in today's workplace. A Gallup–Lumina Foundation survey found that only 11% of business leaders strongly agree that college graduates possess the competencies required for workplace success.
These concerns extend beyond the workforce. They point to a broader challenge facing our communities and democracy: developing the leadership capacity America will need in the decades ahead.
As we look toward America's next 250 years, the question is not simply who our future leaders will be, but where they will develop the skills and experiences needed to lead. For millions of young people, that journey begins in school. Schools are more than places of academic learning; they are where students build relationships with caring adults, gain access to opportunities, and develop the resilience, communication, and problem-solving skills that leadership requires. When schools intentionally create these experiences, they help students discover their potential and prepare them to contribute to their communities and our nation. Kevin's story illustrates what that journey of growth and leadership can look like.
Six years ago, Kevin, a ninth grader from Sarasota, Florida, doubted that leadership was for someone like him. His family was struggling financially, college felt distant, and he rarely spoke in class. After being paired with a mentor, Kevin began setting goals, practicing communication skills, and taking on leadership roles. Today, he is pursuing a degree at Hillsborough Community College, and outside of school, he mentors a younger peer and coaches youth soccer.
Stories like Kevin's remind us that the ability to make a difference is not reserved for a select few. Yet many young people never recognize their own potential.
"Many students don't see themselves as leaders because they associate leadership with authority or a title," said Tara Smith, CEO of Brilliant Pathways. "When they understand that leadership can take many forms, they begin to recognize their own potential."
Schools are tasked with preparing students for college and careers, so they focus heavily on academic achievement and standardized testing. These measures and, of course, academic knowledge matter, but if schools are truly preparing young people for the future, they must also help students develop the skills to turn knowledge into action.
As artificial intelligence increasingly performs routine tasks, human capabilities become more valuable. The challenges facing our communities, economy, and democracy require people who can solve problems and bring others together.
Too often, opportunities to develop and practice leadership skills are reserved for students who already stand out—the student council president, the team captain, or the valedictorian. Leadership potential exists in every school and every classroom, but leadership opportunities do not. The challenge is not identifying future leaders; it is creating opportunities for them to emerge.
For 35 years, we've seen that leadership development begins long before students enter the workforce. In schools, young people can learn to serve, contribute, and lead through mentoring, skill development, and exposure to college, careers, and community. The leadership they practice in school does not stay there. It travels with them—to college campuses, workplaces, and communities—where they continue to contribute and create positive change. These experiences reinforce a lesson that is often overlooked: leadership is not a position bestowed later in life but a capacity that can be cultivated early and strengthened over time.
To strengthen America's leadership pipeline, we must broaden our definition of educational success. Academic achievement matters, but so does helping students develop the skills and sense of purpose needed to lead.
When young people believe they can make a difference, they do. Schools can address this challenge by providing authentic leadership opportunities, making mentoring a central component of education, and helping students understand that leadership is ultimately about contributing to something larger than themselves. Leadership develops through experience, encouragement, and service.
These ideas—and the belief that America's future depends on developing leadership in every young person—form the foundation of our forthcoming book, America's Next Dream.
As we prepare to celebrate America's 250th birthday, let’s remember that our nation's future will be shaped not only by past leaders we honor, but by the leaders we are developing today.
The strength of our communities, economy, and democracy will depend on our ability to prepare young people to solve problems, bring people together, and tackle the challenges ahead. The people who will shape that future are sitting in classrooms today. If America's first 250 years were shaped by the leaders who answered history's call, the next 250 will be shaped by how well we prepare today's students to answer theirs.
Rick Dalton and Ray McNulty are co-authors of the forthcoming book America's Next Dream and leaders of Brilliant Pathways, a national nonprofit focused on helping young people achieve success in college, careers, and life.
