Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

U.S. steps up support for foreign democracies

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, at Taipei Songshan Airport in Taiwan.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, at Taipei Songshan Airport in Taiwan.

Even though American democracy continues to face challenges from within and is on the decline, according to various studies, national leaders are continuing their efforts to support democracy abroad.

Within the past week, officials took steps to support the governments of Taiwan and Ukraine despite pressure from China and Russia to stay out of their respective neighborhoods. These actions, which garnered bipartisan support, stand in stark contrast to the polarizing battles over election administration, voting rights and investigations of the former president.


Tensions between Taiwan, China and the United States ratcheted up after Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited the island on Aug. 3, becoming the highest ranked U.S. official to visit Taiwan in 25 years.

China claims Taiwan is a part of its territory while other countries, including the United States, believe it to be independent. The Taiwanese people have their own democratic government and a capitalist economy, a sharp juxtaposition from China’s communist system.

Pelosi’s visit has been labeled by some as “ reckless and provocative ” by some, although she defended the trip as a symbol of U.S. solidarity with, and support for, Taiwan, arguing that her “visit should be seen as an unequivocal statement that America stands with Taiwan, our democratic partner, as it defends itself and its freedom.”

China has threatened to unify Taiwan with the mainland using its military authority many times in the past several decades. The threat has taken on a whole new meaning following China’s crackdown on pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong in 2019. In the few years that have passed, more people have taken China’s warning to heart, especially Taiwanese people and the United States.

Pelosi’s visit came at a time where China’s authoritarian tactics have become increase, with the government censoring journalists, limiting free speech, spreading misinformation, and seemingly committing human rights violations in Hong Kong and through the Uyghur genocide.

China has retaliated against the speaker’s visit by firing several missiles into the waters surrounding Taiwan and launching large-scale military drills around the island on Thursday. In their attempts to further deepen the divide between the mainland and the US, Beijing officials announced that they were ending cooperation with the United States on topics including climate change and military issues.

However, the conflict has created some unity among Democrats and Republicans. Several lawmakers from both parties urged Pelosi to carry out her plan to visit Taiwan in the face of China’s threats. The chairman of the Senate GOP’s campaign committee, Rick Scott of Florida, said: “I think it’s important that we go over there and tell Taiwan that they are an important democratic ally. We ought to be clear there is no ambiguity that we will support them if they get invaded by communist China.”

Several Democrats echoed this sentiment. “Nobody should not go someplace because the Chinese government — which is guilty of genocide — is speaking in threatening terms,” said Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts.

Pelosi also claimed that China’s Communist Party is a threat to democracy and drew parallels between the Taiwan-China conflict and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, writing: “I conveyed to President Volodymyr Zelensky that we admired his people’s defense of democracy for Ukraine and for democracy worldwide.”

And on Monday, the Pentagon announced it would be sending another $1 billion worth of military equipment to Ukraine, to further its defense against the ongoing Russian invasion. That brings the total financial support for Ukraine, since the invasion began, to approximately $9 billion. And in general, both parties have been supportive of U.S. efforts to help Ukraine push back against authoritarian Russia.

However, here at home, democracy has seen better days. According to the most recent Freedom House report, countries under democratic rule have been declining over the past 16 years; with authoritarianism on the rise. And the United States continues to drop in the rankings. More broadly, 38 percent of the world’s countries are considered to be “not free” or under some sort of undemocratic government compared to only 20 percent of the countries that are considered “free.”

Continued aggression from China and Russia will determine the future of democracy in Taiwan and Ukraine.

According to Freedom House, “democratic governments need to strengthen domestic laws and institutions while taking bold, coordinated action to support the struggle for democracy around the world.”

While the United States has made conscious efforts to show political support for Taiwan by rallying behind the island, it has not made substantial changes in actual foreign policies that uphold democracy abroad. The Biden administration has continually aided authoritarian militaries — like Saudi Arabia — despite publicly denouncing their decision to send airstrikes that killed civilians in March 2022.


Read More

U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche

U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche at the Robert F. Kennedy Department of Justice building on September 30, 2026 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Trump’s Weaponization of the DOJ Threatens Democratic Governance

The dust from the November 2026 midterm elections has barely settled, yet a familiar, toxic chorus of political warfare is already drowning out the clear message from American voters.

With Democrats securing majorities in both the House and Senate, voters signaled a desire for checks, balances, and a focused effort on the pressing economic issues squeezing everyday families. Instead, President Donald Trump has chosen to meet the incoming legislative branch not with an open hand, but with a weaponized Department of Justice.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democratic Presidential candidate U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) holds his first presidential campaign rally at Brooklyn College on March 02, 2019 in Brooklyn, New York.

A lobbyist who worked for both Bernie Sanders and Fortune 500 clients explains what democratic socialist wins mean for business, and how to prepare.

VIEW press/Getty Images

I Campaigned for Bernie Sanders Then Lobbied for Amazon

In 2016, my political outreach company, Firehouse Phones, worked on the presidential campaign of a democratic socialist. It was one of many campaigns my firm touched, but that one stays on my resume for a reason: it taught me more about how persuasion actually works than any client engagement before or since.

Today I run Ohio River South, a government affairs firm focused on the nation's fastest-growing region — the American South. Over the past decade we've advocated for nearly two dozen Fortune 500 companies — Amazon in my earlier lobbying years, and later growing a client roster that included Alphabet, Microsoft, General Motors, United Healthcare, and Capital One.

Keep ReadingShow less
The White House
The white house with green lawn and trees
Photo by Josh on Unsplash

The Politics of Gratitude: Why Washington Punishes the Loyalty It Cannot Price

On a Sunday night in August, Senator Jon Ossoff told a campaign rally in Atlanta that President Trump would rather build his ballroom and “travel with Natalie” than do his job. He never used her last name. He did not need to. Natalie Harp, the White House aide known to colleagues as Trump’s “human printer” for trailing him with a portable printer and transcribing his social-media dictation, had become a punchline before most Americans knew who she was.

The backlash arrived within hours. White House officials accused Ossoff of insinuating an affair; Republican Rep. Brandon Gill noted that Harp survived bone cancer only because the Right to Try Act, which Trump signed in 2018, let her seek an experimental treatment outside the normal approval process, and dismissed any other reading of the moment as unfair. Weeks earlier, Harp had been at the center of a far more consequential story: in July, she was one of a handful of aides, alongside the defense secretary and two senior staffers, chosen to accompany Trump on a covert switch of aircraft as he left a security summit in Turkey after officials detected a credible Iranian threat, while most of the traveling delegation stayed behind on a decoy plane. That is the real proximity Ossoff's line was needling. Then came a detail that complicated the story further: Trump had personally given Harp and several other aides cash gifts of $45,000 apiece, which a former federal ethics official called troublesome, since money on that scale can leave a recipient feeling indebted to whoever signs the check.

Keep ReadingShow less
A map labeling Lake Ontario as "Lake America" is displayed behind U.S. President Donald Trump.

A map labeling Lake Ontario as "Lake America" is displayed as U.S. President Donald Trump signs an executive order during an event in the Oval Office of the White House on August 27, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Cartography of Convenience: Why Rushed Renaming Erodes Public Trust

In tough economic times, governments often reach for the easiest kind of progress: a new name on an old sign. Wage stagnation, inflation, crumbling roads, and rising rents are hard problems that take years and real money to fix. Renaming a street, a lake, or a strait is not. It costs a fraction as much and lets officials point to something they “did.” A new name never fixes a pothole or lowers a grocery bill. This year offered an unusually rich catalogue of the habit, reaching from a city council in Texas to a wartime waterway in the Persian Gulf.

A Concept Borrowed From the Cremation Ground

Indian philosophy has an old idea called shmashana vairagya, describing the sudden clarity a person feels standing at a cremation ground, when ordinary ambitions look small. The feeling fades once the mourner goes home. Public policy has its own version of this cycle. In the raw hours after a tragedy, a scandal, or a surge of national feeling, officials decide, sometimes within a single social media post, what belongs on a map or a sign forever. The emotion passes in hours. The bill, when there is one, stays for years.

Keep ReadingShow less