Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Get off the sidelines and fight for our democracy

Adonal Foyle

Foyle (center) argues, "We don't have to stand by and watch our democracy crumble."

Kelly Sullivan/Getty Images

Foyle is the founder and president of Democracy Matters, a nonpartisan organization of college students working to reduce the influence of money in politics. He also played 12 years in the NBA, mostly with the Golden State Warriors.

Can you imagine waking up one day to find our democracy gone? To find yourself in a country where rule "by the people, for the people" is replaced with a political system where only the super-wealthy make the decisions and call the shots?

Sadly, this isn't just a thought exercise. It's happening to us right now. When mega-donations by rich political funders determine who runs for office and who wins elections, the foundations of our democracy erode and the peoples' voice is silenced.

Sometimes, the erosion is so slow, we hardly notice. But other times, it results from a single change that threatens our democracy.


On Jan. 21, 2010, the Supreme Court ruled on Citizens United v FEC, opening the door to unlimited anonymous corporate spending in our elections. The result has been to exponentially increase the power of private wealth in politics.

While life as we know it didn't end that day, a decade later the impact of that decision still reverberates.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Citizens United, in essence, says corporate political spending is protected political speech. That means corporations and political action committees can spend as much as they want in support of a candidate, so long as that candidate doesn't receive the money directly or coordinate with the donors about how it is spent.

As we pass the 10th anniversary of that ruling, we wake up to an America struggling to preserve one of our core beliefs — that our government was created to serve the interests of all its citizens. Instead, we have a political system where it is legal for a small group of mega-donors to fund candidates who win elections and then make rules that benefit the donors.

Applied to sports, it would be as if rich gamblers were allowed, by law, to pay off referees to favor one team over another. Sports would be ruined — everyone would know that the games weren't fair. But today our political system is being ruined because of the power of big money in elections.

Politics should be at least as fair as sports! Instead, we are selling our democracy to the highest bidder.

The first five years after Citizens United saw the rise of the super PAC — and the amount of big money in politics exploded. A Brennan Center for Justice report found that fewer than 200 big donors accounted for nearly 60 percent of all super PAC spending between 2010 and 2015. And in the 2016 election, political action committees spent $1.6 billion on behalf of campaigns.

Both super PACs and political action committees funded by the rich are already on track to spend even more in the 2020 election. You can draw a straight line from that money to policies and laws that will benefit the mega-donors — massive tax breaks for the wealthy, drug prices that most Americans can't afford, and weaker environmental regulations among them.

But we don't have to stand by and watch our democracy crumble. It's not too late for us to find a way to put the big money genie back in the bottle.

We can organize and educate our friends and neighbors. We can turn out and vote. And we can urge others to do so as well. If you're a student, you can get in the fight by joining my nonpartisan national student organization.

Right now, there are bills sitting on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's desk that would not only curb the undue influence of big money but also protect voting rights, especially in communities of color that have historically been discriminated against.

We should demand that our senators give these bills a hearing. And if they refuse, we need to elect senators who will vote to put democracy back where it belongs — in the hands of all the people.

So, don't just sit by and watch our democracy die. Get off the sidelines. Get in the game.

Read More

Members of Congress in the House of Representatives

Every four years, Congress gathers to count electoral votes.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

No country still uses an electoral college − except the U.S.

Holzer is an associate professor of political science at Westminster College.

The United States is the only democracy in the world where a presidential candidate can get the most popular votes and still lose the election. Thanks to the Electoral College, that has happened five times in the country’s history. The most recent examples are from 2000, when Al Gore won the popular vote but George W. Bush won the Electoral College after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, and 2016, when Hillary Clinton got more votes nationwide than Donald Trump but lost in the Electoral College.

The Founding Fathers did not invent the idea of an electoral college. Rather, they borrowed the concept from Europe, where it had been used to pick emperors for hundreds of years.

Keep ReadingShow less
Nebraska Capitol

Nebraska's Capitol houses a unicameral legislature, unique in American politics.

Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

100 years ago, a Nebraska Republican fought for democracy reform

Gruber is senior vice president of Open Primaries.

With Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen’s announcement on Sept. 24 that he doesn't have enough votes to call a special session of the Legislature to change the way the state allocates electoral votes, an effort led by former President Donald Trump to pressure the Legislature officially failed.

Nebraska is one of only two states that award a single Electoral College vote to the winner in each congressional district, plus two votes to the statewide winner of the presidential popular vote. Much has been made — justifiably — of Republican state Sen. Mike McDonnell’s heroic decision to buck enormous political pressure from his party to fall in line, and choosing instead to single-handedly defeat the measure. The origins of the senator's independence, though, began in a 100-old experiment in democracy reform.

Keep ReadingShow less
Man sitting in a chair near voting stations

An election official staffs a voting location in Lansing, Mich., during the state's Aug. 6, primary.

Emily Elconin for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Closed primaries, gerrymandering eliminate competition for House seats

Meyers is executive editor of The Fulcrum.

There are 435 voting members of the House of Representatives. But few of those districts — 55, to be exact — will be decided on Election Day, according to new data from the nonprofit organization Unite America. That’s because the vast majority of races were effectively decided during the primaries.

The research data goes deep into what Unite America calls the “Primary Problem,” in which few Americans are determining winners of House elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
House chamber

Rep. Scott Perry objects to Pennsylvania's certification of its Electoral College vote during a joint session of Congress on Jan. 7, 2021.

Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

What voters need to know about the presidential election

Becvar is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and executive director of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund. Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

It is quite clear that the presidential election is going to be incredibly close. In each of the seven swing states, the margin of error is less than 2 percent.

As citizens, this is not something to fear and it is critically important that we all trust the election results.

As part of our ongoing series for the Election Overtime Project, today we present a guide explaining in detail what you, as a voter, need to know about the role of state legislatures and Congress in a presidential election. The guide was prepared by the Election Reformers Network, a nonprofit organization championing impartial elections and concrete policy solutions that strengthen American democracy.

Keep ReadingShow less