Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Some leaders don’t want to be held accountable. These two expect it.

Rep. Gus Bilirakis and Rep. Ayanna Pressley

Rep. Gus Bilirakis and Rep. Ayanna Pressley won the Congressional Management Foundation's Democracy Award for Constituent Accountability and Accessibility.

Official portraits

Fitch is president and CEO of the Congressional Management Foundation and a former congressional staffer.

There is probably no more important concept in the compact between elected officials and those who elect them than accountability. One of the founding principles of American democracy is that members of Congress are ultimately accountable to their constituents, both politically and morally. Most members of Congress get this, but how they demonstrate and implement that concept varies. The two winners of the Congressional Management Foundation’s Democracy Award for Constituent Accountability and Accessibility clearly understand and excel at this concept.


The office of Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.) seems to genuinely believe the best ideas come from those he serves and as such has embedded policies and practices throughout his office to maximize constituent engagement. The office has cultivated a culture of excellence and continuous improvement that is supported by formal procedures. The team actively seeks opportunities to translate constituent problems into legislative solutions. They also seek ways to demonstrate accountability by integrating constituent ideas and concerns into their letters to congressional colleagues and testimony at legislative hearings, as well as formal legislation.

The congressman’s voting record is displayed on his website and the rationale for each vote is explained in his weekly newsletter. He held approximately 100 in-person or tele-town hall meetings in 2023. Bilirakis hosts one tele-townhall each month during which he calls 100,000 constituents in the district, offering them an opportunity to hear from him directly.

Bilirakis has won Democracy Awards in three categories — two this year, which kind of makes him the Robert Redford of the Democracy Awards.

The Democratic winner for accountability and accessibility is Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA). She and her staff aim to practice “cooperative governing” and “keeping those closest to the pain closest to the power.” This model of governing informs every interaction that the office has with constituents. Pressley leverages every congressional tool available to communicate important updates to her constituents, including a periodical newsletter with updates on her legislative work and upcoming events, and using social media platforms and press interviews to share federal resources.

The office ensures that videos are captioned and photos include alt-text for constituents with hearing and visual impairments, and it is standard practice to use translation options for public community events. In 2023, Pressley held four in-person town halls, quarterly traditional telephone town halls, and at least 50 virtual town halls, roundtables or community meetings. Her office was also one of the first to use direct-to-camera videos and engaging social media graphics to update constituents on legislation, provide resources and solicit feedback.

In addition, all staff are trained on how to identify casework challenges or incoming letters that could be addressed through longer-term legislation, amendments or appropriations requests. Finally, the office has inculcated in the staff a mentality to look for and create access to constituents where barriers could exist. This includes language barriers, physical accessibility issues and even providing child care services at events so parents can attend.

Many members of Congress use some of these methods to demonstrate accountability and accessibility to their constituents. Yet it is the comprehensive combination of many strategies that sets the Bilirakis and Pressley offices apart from their colleagues. Each office has clearly cultivated a culture of openness that is usually met by surprise from a constituent. Americans have become so cynical about Congress that when they get a phone call returned, or are invited to a telephone town hall meeting, they’re shocked. One participant in a telephone town hall meeting said, “It actually made me feel like I had a voice in government.”

These are the types of strategies that more politicians must employ if we are going to strengthen our democratic institutions.

Read More

After the Ceasefire, the Violence Continues – and Cries for New Words

An Israeli army vehicle moves on the Israeli side, near the border with the Gaza Strip on November 18, 2025 in Southern Israel, Israel.

(Photo by Amir Levy/Getty Images)

After the Ceasefire, the Violence Continues – and Cries for New Words

Since October 10, 2025, the day when the US-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Hamas was announced, Israel has killed at least 401 civilians, including at least 148 children. This has led Palestinian scholar Saree Makdisi to decry a “continuing genocide, albeit one that has shifted gears and has—for now—moved into the slow lane. Rather than hundreds at a time, it is killing by twos and threes” or by twenties and thirties as on November 19 and November 23 – “an obscenity that has coalesced into a new normal.” The Guardian columnist Nesrine Malik describes the post-ceasefire period as nothing more than a “reducefire,” quoting the warning issued by Amnesty International’s secretary general Agnès Callamard that the ”world must not be fooled” into believing that Israel’s genocide is over.

A visual analysis of satellite images conducted by the BBC has established that since the declared ceasefire, “the destruction of buildings in Gaza by the Israeli military has been continuing on a huge scale,” entire neighborhoods “levelled” through “demolitions,” including large swaths of farmland and orchards. The Guardian reported already in March of 2024, that satellite imagery proved the “destruction of about 38-48% of tree cover and farmland” and 23% of Gaza’s greenhouses “completely destroyed.” Writing about the “colossal violence” Israel has wrought on Gaza, Palestinian legal scholar Rabea Eghbariah lists “several variations” on the term “genocide” which researchers found the need to introduce, such as “urbicide” (the systematic destruction of cities), “domicide” (systematic destruction of housing), “sociocide,” “politicide,” and “memoricide.” Others have added the concepts “ecocide,” “scholasticide” (the systematic destruction of Gaza’s schools, universities, libraries), and “medicide” (the deliberate attacks on all aspects of Gaza’s healthcare with the intent to “wipe out” all medical care). It is only the combination of all these “-cides,” all amounting to massive war crimes, that adequately manages to describe the Palestinian condition. Constantine Zurayk introduced the term “Nakba” (“catastrophe” in Arabic) in 1948 to name the unparalleled “magnitude and ramifications of the Zionist conquest of Palestine” and its historical “rupture.” When Eghbariah argues for “Nakba” as a “new legal concept,” he underlines, however, that to understand its magnitude, one needs to go back to the 1917 Balfour Declaration, in which the British colonial power promised “a national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, even though just 6 % of its population were Jewish. From Nakba as the “constitutive violence of 1948,” we need today to conceptualize “Nakba as a structure,” an “overarching frame.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Ukraine, Russia, and the Dangerous Metaphor of Holding the Cards
a hand holding a deck of cards in front of a christmas tree
Photo by Luca Volpe on Unsplash

Ukraine, Russia, and the Dangerous Metaphor of Holding the Cards

Donald Trump has repeatedly used the phrase “holding the cards” during his tenure as President to signal that he, or sometimes an opponent, has the upper hand. The metaphor projects bravado, leverage, and the inevitability of success or failure, depending on who claims control.

Unfortunately, Trump’s repeated invocation of “holding the cards” embodies a worldview where leverage, bluff, and dominance matter more than duty, morality, or responsibility. In contrast, leadership grounded in duty emphasizes ethical obligations to allies, citizens, and democratic principles—elements strikingly absent from this metaphor.

Keep ReadingShow less
Beyond Apologies: Corporate Contempt and the Call for Real Accountability
campbells chicken noodle soup can

Beyond Apologies: Corporate Contempt and the Call for Real Accountability

Most customers carry a particular image of Campbell's Soup: the red-and-white label stacked on a pantry shelf, a touch of nostalgia, and the promise of a dependable bargain. It's food for snow days, tight budgets, and the middle of the week. For generations, the brand has positioned itself as a companion to working families, offering "good food" for everyday people. The company cultivated that trust so thoroughly that it became almost cliché.

Campbell's episode, now the subject of national headlines and an ongoing high-profile legal complaint, is troubling not only for its blunt language but for what it reveals about the hidden injuries that erode the social contract linking institutions to citizens, workers to workplaces, and brands to buyers. If the response ends with the usual PR maneuvers—rapid firings and the well-rehearsed "this does not reflect our values" statement. Then both the lesson and the opportunity for genuine reform by a company or individual are lost. To grasp what this controversy means for the broader corporate landscape, we first have to examine how leadership reveals its actual beliefs.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump

When ego replaces accountability in the presidency, democracy weakens. An analysis of how unchecked leadership erodes trust, institutions, and the rule of law.

Brandon Bell/Getty Images

When Leaders Put Ego Above Accountability—Democracy At Risk

What has become of America’s presidency? Once a symbol of dignity and public service, the office now appears chaotic, ego‑driven, and consumed by spectacle over substance. When personal ambition replaces accountability, the consequences extend far beyond politics — they erode trust, weaken institutions, and threaten democracy itself.

When leaders place ego above accountability, democracy falters. Weak leaders seek to appear powerful. Strong leaders accept responsibility.

Keep ReadingShow less