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.
An Independent Voter's Perspective on Current Political Divides
In the column, "Is Donald Trump Right?", Fulcrum Executive Editor, Hugo Balta, wrote:
For millions of Americans, President Trump’s second term isn’t a threat to democracy—it’s the fulfillment of a promise they believe was long overdue.
Is Donald Trump right?
Should the presidency serve as a force for disruption or a safeguard of preservation?
Balta invited readers to share their thoughts at newsroom@fulcrum.us.
David Levine from Portland, Oregon, shared these thoughts...
I am an independent voter who voted for Kamala Harris in the last election.
I pay very close attention to the events going on, and I try and avoid taking other people's opinions as fact, so the following writing should be looked at with that in mind:
Is Trump right? On some things, absolutely.
As to DEI, there is a strong feeling that you cannot fight racism with more racism or sexism with more sexism. Standards have to be the same across the board, and the idea that only white people can be racist is one that I think a lot of us find delusional on its face. The question is not whether we want equality in the workplace, but whether these systems are the mechanism to achieve it, despite their claims to virtue, and many of us feel they are not.
I think if the Democrats want to take back immigration as an issue then every single illegal alien no matter how they are discovered needs to be processed and sanctuary cities need to end, every single illegal alien needs to be found at that point Democrats could argue for an amnesty for those who have shown they have been Good actors for a period of time but the dynamic of simply ignoring those who break the law by coming here illegally is I think a losing issue for the Democrats, they need to bend the knee and make a deal.
I think you have to quit calling the man Hitler or a fascist because an actual fascist would simply shoot the protesters, the journalists, and anyone else who challenges him. And while he definitely has authoritarian tendencies, the Democrats are overplaying their hand using those words, and it makes them look foolish.
Most of us understand that the tariffs are a game of economic chicken, and whether it is successful or not depends on who blinks before the midterms. Still, the Democrats' continuous attacks on the man make them look disloyal to the country, not to Trump.
Referring to any group of people as marginalized is to many of us the same as referring to them as lesser, and it seems racist and insulting.
We invite you to read the opinions of other Fulrum Readers:
Trump's Policies: A Threat to Farmers and American Values
The Trump Era: A Bitter Pill for American Renewal
Federal Hill's Warning: A Baltimorean's Reflection on Leadership
Also, check out "Is Donald Trump Right?" and consider accepting Hugo's invitation to share your thoughts at newsroom@fulcrum.us.
The Fulcrum will select a range of submissions to share with readers as part of our ongoing civic dialogue.
We offer this platform for discussion and debate.