Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The Fahey Q&A with Jasmine Hull of Deliberations.US

Since organizing the Voters Not Politicians 2018 ballot initiative that put citizens in charge of drawing Michigan's legislative maps, Katie Fahey has been the founding executive director of The People, which is forming statewide networks to promote government accountability. She regularly interviews colleagues in the world of democracy reform for The Fulcrum’s Opinion section.

Jasmine Hull is Chief Operating Officer for Deliberations.US. She brings extensive experience in educational leadership and a passion for reform in our public educational system and civics education.


The conversation has been edited for clarity and brevity.

Fahey: What is Deliberations.US - and how did it come about?

Hull: It is a virtual space for people to talk to each other about issues that impact them, without the noise of disinformation and distrust. In this deliberative space, participants nationwide can identify areas of agreement and create plausible solutions together.

The program is hosted on a customized video platform called Kazm designed to facilitate small-group deliberation. Via this platform, people of diverse backgrounds can have meaningful conversations on important issues, and the changes they would like to see happen in our democracy. The program was birthed out of a partnership with Lawrence Lessig at Equal Citizens and Katie Fahey with The People, in a desire to strengthen and nurture our democracy.

Fahey: Can you tell us about your background; what led you to get involved with Deliberations.US?

Hull: My background is in public education; with 13 years in K-12 education as an administrator and operational leader. I had the privilege of launching charter schools in Louisiana and Texas that are currently thriving. I successfully improved low performance and enrollment, but experienced burnout due to work/life imbalance and increasing demands set in place with the onset of Covid. Due to staffing shortages, the workload had become overwhelming as we tried to fill in where needed so students would not feel the gaps. While taking a step back to evaluate what I wanted personally and professionally, I saw the Deliberations.US posting. It instantly drew me in, as I am passionate about the demographic. I wanted to be part of this movement. creating the impact I had been missing in my previous educational work.

Fahey: Can you tell me more about the format?

Hull: The format is similar to Zoom; a video-capable conversation platform that is intentionally casual, so people feel comfortable. The Kazm platform is uniquely designed to encourage participation by all, can run with or without a moderator, and is scalable to include thousands of participants in one deliberation. Deliberations can be scheduled at any time and are open to the public or private to a group of invited participants.

When you join a deliberation, you arrive at a virtual waiting room where event guidelines are presented with a brief overview of the user-friendly platform functionality. The participant group is split into breakout rooms of 8-12 people, then paced through slides introducing the topic via brief, engaging videos, followed by question prompts to get the conversation flowing. To ensure we remain nonpartisan and that all facts are articulated, platform media and materials are thoughtfully curated by a carefully assembled panel of professors and professionals in the democracy and deliberations fields, with topic-specific expertise.

With all the facts presented, participants engage in discussion with others, explore diverse perspectives on an issue, and make informed decisions. The experience exposes participants to diverse perspectives that will change how they view each other, empowering them to have thoughtful conversations on important issues facing their communities.

At the end of the deliberation, participants are presented with opportunities to partner with other organizations, or to sign up and stay in contact with The People or Deliberations.US, to join future deliberations.

Fahey: Who is the target audience?

Hull: Our goal is to target all citizens nationwide, so everyone can engage in and trust our platform as a safe space to voice their concerns and identify solutions with others to move forward together.

Currently, we are focusing on students ages 16-29 enrolled in high schools, colleges and universities. We are working with educators to engage their students by assigning deliberations as an in-class project.

Students are one of the lowest percentage groups for voter turnout. Historically we have seen voter participation increase as age, education, and income increase; so by getting in on the ground floor, we can significantly impact voter participation over time while deepening their civic knowledge.

Fahey: How will this program strengthen the ideals of democracy?

Hull: Democracy does not work independently; we must actively participate beyond simply voting. Being able to discuss and deliberate policies and issues impacting our communities is a skill needed for a thriving democracy. By providing education on the issues, legislation, and policies that impact people and their communities, participants can take that knowledge and be a voice to be heard by decision-makers. The result is civically-engaged citizens who are a powerful force in strengthening our democracy.

When we talk directly to each other, we discover that we have more in common than not, and can overcome partisan barriers to change and work together for a healthier democracy.

Fahey: What stage is the program in, and how do you see it evolving?

Hull: We are entering the toddler phase; still learning what strategies and approaches work best while developing new materials to engage diverse audiences. We received great feedback this year from participants in our first module, deliberating the Electoral College. We are working on expanding programming to engage more communities and academic settings.

Over the next few years, there is a tremendous opportunity for expansion in how the platform is used. We are evolving to be a trusted source for the voice and pulse of the people.

Fahey: How do I learn more about upcoming deliberations?

Hull: For general information, access our website at Deliberations.US. We have deliberations scheduled weekly that are available to join here. We can also accommodate requests for private deliberations by emailing us at Support@Deliberations.US. New modules will be added soon and advertised through our social media channels, website, and partner organizations like The People!

Fahey: If you were speaking with a high school student or a new immigrant to our country, how would you describe what being an American means to you?

Hull: I would liken it to farming. A person does not have to be of any particular ethnicity, gender, age, or background to be a farmer. You are presented with a unique opportunity to grow anything you desire (the American dream); yet a commitment is required to actively nurture and work the land to ensure it produces as intended. You can not sit idly by and let it run wild. There are challenges to contend with; soil conditions; weather; economic factors - yet anything worth having is worth preserving; like our democracy. It is our responsibility to leave a legacy for future generations.

Read More

news app
New platforms help overcome biased news reporting
Tero Vesalainen/Getty Images

The Selective Sanctity of Death: When Empathy Depends on Skin Color

Rampant calls to avoid sharing the video of Charlie Kirk’s death have been swift and emphatic across social media. “We need to keep our souls clean,” journalists plead. “Where are social media’s content moderators?” “How did we get so desensitized?” The moral outrage is palpable; the demands for human dignity urgent and clear.

But as a Black woman who has been forced to witness the constant virality of Black death, I must ask: where was this widespread anger for George Floyd? For Philando Castile? For Daunte Wright? For Tyre Nichols?

Keep ReadingShow less
Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Multi-colored speech bubbles overlapping.

Stanford’s Strengthening Democracy Challenge shows a key way to reduce political violence: reveal that most Americans reject it.

Getty Images, MirageC

In the Aftermath of Assassinations, Let’s Show That Americans Overwhelmingly Disapprove of Political Violence

In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and the assassination of Minnesota state legislator Melissa Hortman only three months ago—questions inevitably arise about how to reduce the likelihood of similar heinous actions.

Results from arguably the most important study focused on the U.S. context, the Strengthening Democracy Challenge run by Stanford University, point to one straightforward answer: show people that very few in the other party support political violence. This approach has been shown to reduce support for political violence.

Keep ReadingShow less