Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories
From Diplomat to Dissenter: Why I Protest Trump’s America

From Diplomat to Dissenter: Why I Protest Trump’s America

Protestors holding signs that read "protect trans kids."

Trump's Orders Threaten Transgender Americans’ Rights

A Trump 2020 flag outside of a home.

Trump’s 2.0 Actions Have Harmed Rural America Who Voted for Him

Millions Could Lose Housing Aid Under Trump Plan

Millions Could Lose Housing Aid Under Trump Plan

Books in a school library.

The Censors Have Names. Use Them.

Meet the change leaders: John Palmer

John Palmer
Courtesy John Palmer
David L. Nevins
By David L. NevinsMay 15, 2024
David L. Nevins
David L. Nevins serves as publisher of The Fulcrum. Additionally, Nevins serves as co-founder and Board Chairman of the Bridge Alliance. Nevins brings business acumen, vision and a tireless this-must-and-can-be-done zeal to the burgeoning movement to bridge divides to transform the political process. As a business leader, Nevins excels at building bridges between people and organizations from the right, left and center for civilized conversation and then action. He co-founded the Bridge Alliance because, as he says, “No matter how well managed and how well funded anyone organization is, significant political reform will not happen without an alliance to further collaborative interactions. Together we can and will raise the collective impact of all.” He is a member of the Aspen Institute Society of Fellows, with a focus on the Aspen Rodel Fellowship in Public Leadership, he established and continues to work with The Nevins Democracy Leaders program at Penn State University. Nevins graduated with honors in economics from Penn State in 1969 and received an M.B.A. in finance from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania in 1971.
See More Writings by author

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

John Palmer is long-time electoral reform advocate supportive of a more level playing field for candidates outside the two major parties. He sits on the board of the National Association of Nonpartisan Reformers, an umbrella organization for democracy reform, and currently chairs the board of Rank the Vote, an organization promoting the adoption of ranked-choice voting nationally.

Palmer and his wife, Mary, were significant financial supporters of the Committee for Ranked Choice Voting, the Maine-based organization that led the 2016 campaign resulting in passage of the first statewide use of RCV.

Palmer has supported various other democracy reform organizations and efforts, including American Promise, FairVote, the ProRep Coalition, RepresentUs and UniteAmerica.

Professionally, Palmer is co-founder of Hanover Partners, a San Francisco private equity firm. He currently serves on the boards of two companies in Hanover’s portfolio and has served on the boards of 12 previous Hanover companies.

The Palmers live in San Francisco with three children, and they spend significant time in Maine during the summer.

I had the wonderful opportunity to interview Palmer in April for the CityBiz “Meet the Change Leaders” series. Watch to learn the full extent of his democracy reform work:

The Fulcrum interviews John Palmer, Chairman of Rank the Votewww.youtube.com

Latest news

​Voting booths in a high school.
Democracy

JD Vance Presses Indiana GOP To Redraw Congressional Map

A child looks into an empty fridge-freezer in a domestic kitchen.
Governance & Legislation

Trump Gives Up the Fight Against Hunger

Standing Up for Democracy Requires Giving the Other Side Credit When It Is Deserved
Governance & Legislation

Standing Up for Democracy Requires Giving the Other Side Credit When It Is Deserved

Tucson ‘No Kings’ rally demands Congress swear in Grijalva
Community

Tucson ‘No Kings’ rally demands Congress swear in Grijalva

Read More

U.S. President Barack Obama speaking on the phone in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Barack Obama talks President Barack Obama talks with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan during a phone call from the Oval Office on November 2, 2009 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, The White House

‘Obama, You're 15 Years Too Late!’

The mid-decade redistricting fight continues, while the word “hypocrisy” has become increasingly common in the media.

The origin of mid-decade redistricting dates back to the early history of the United States. However, its resurgence and legal acceptance primarily stem from the Texas redistricting effort in 2003, a controversial move by the Republican Party to redraw the state's congressional districts, and the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court decision in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry. This decision, which confirmed that mid-decade redistricting is not prohibited by federal law, was a significant turning point in the acceptance of this practice.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand of a person casting a ballot at a polling station during voting.

Gerrymandering silences communities and distorts elections. Proportional representation offers a proven path to fairer maps and real democracy.

Getty Images, bizoo_n

Gerrymandering Today, Gerrymandering Tomorrow, Gerrymandering Forever

In 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace declared, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." (Watch the video of his speech.) As a politically aware high school senior, I was shocked by the venom and anger in his voice—the open, defiant embrace of systematic disenfranchisement, so different from the quieter racism I knew growing up outside Boston.

Today, watching politicians openly rig elections, I feel that same disbelief—especially seeing Republican leaders embrace that same systematic approach: gerrymandering now, gerrymandering tomorrow, gerrymandering forever.

Keep ReadingShow less
An oversized ballot box surrounded by people.

Young people worldwide form new parties to reshape politics—yet America’s two-party system blocks them.

Getty Images, J Studios

No Country for Young Politicians—and How To Fix That

In democracies around the world, young people have started new political parties whenever the establishment has sidelined their views or excluded them from policymaking. These parties have sometimes reinvigorated political competition, compelled established parties to take previously neglected issues seriously, or encouraged incumbent leaders to find better ways to include and reach out to young voters.

In Europe, a trio in their twenties started Volt in 2017 as a pan-European response to Brexit, and the party has managed to win seats in the European Parliament and in some national legislatures. In Germany, young people concerned about climate change created Klimaliste, a party committed to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as per the Paris Agreement. Although the party hasn’t won seats at the federal level, they have managed to win some municipal elections. In Chile, leaders of the 2011 student protests, who then won seats as independent candidates, created political parties like Revolución Democrática and Convergencia Social to institutionalize their movements. In 2022, one of these former student leaders, Gabriel Boric, became the president of Chile at 36 years old.

Keep ReadingShow less
How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

Demonstrators gather outside of The United States Supreme Court during an oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering on October 3, 2017 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Olivier Douliery

How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Col. Edward Carrington, Paris, 27 May 1788

The Problem We Face

The U.S. House of Representatives was designed as the chamber of Congress most directly tethered to the people. Article I of the Constitution mandates that seats be apportioned among the states according to population and that members face election every two years—design features meant to keep representatives responsive to shifting public sentiment. Unlike the Senate, which prioritizes state sovereignty and representation, the House translates raw population counts into political voice: each House district is to contain roughly the same number of residents, ensuring that every citizen’s vote carries comparable weight. In principle, then, the House serves as the nation’s demographic mirror, channeling the diverse preferences of the electorate into lawmaking and acting as a safeguard against unresponsive or oligarchic governance.

Nationally, the mismatch between the overall popular vote and the partisan split in House seats is small, with less than a 1% tilt. But state-level results tell a different story. Take Connecticut: Democrats hold all five seats despite Republicans winning over 40% of the statewide vote. In Oklahoma, the inverse occurs—Republicans control every seat even though Democrats consistently earn around 40% of the vote.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2025