The Free and Equal Elections Foundation is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization with a mission to open the electoral process through education and collaborative action. Founded in 2008 by electoral reform and voters' rights leader Christina Tobin, Free & Equal leads national, state and local efforts to transform the electoral system in the United States. Free & Equal hosts open gubernatorial, presidential and senatorial debates. Since 2009, Free & Equal has hosted annual electoral reform symposiums uniting intellectuals and experts to share, debate and offer reforms to the current U.S. electoral system. In 2014, Free & Equal launched United We Stand, an annual nationwide tour uniting the younger generations with musicians, artists, and thought leaders to encourage local civics participation and inspire people to run for office. Free & Equal's latest project is creating a Blockchain Election Assistant App to promote transparency and empower voters with information about all their candidate choices.
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Join a growing community committed to civic renewal.
Subscribe to The Fulcrum and be part of the conversation.
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More
Recommended
As America debates Social Security and federal spending, older adults face rising costs and financial insecurity. Here's why retirement policy affects every generation.
MargJohnsonVA/Getty Images
We Will All Grow Old Someday
Aug 06, 2026
America is debating budgets, taxes, deficits, and spending priorities. Those discussions are necessary. But amid the political arguments, we cannot lose sight of a simple truth: every budget reflects our values.
Nearly every American hopes to grow old. Yet growing old with dignity has become increasingly difficult for many seniors living on fixed incomes. Rising housing costs, groceries, utilities, insurance premiums, and prescription drug expenses continue to strain household budgets. For many older adults, retirement is no longer a season of security but one of constant financial calculation.
During more than thirty years working in healthcare, long-term care, and community health, I met countless older adults who quietly made impossible choices. Some delayed filling prescriptions so they could pay the electric bill. Others skipped meals to afford medication. Many worried less about themselves than about becoming a burden on their children.
These are not isolated stories. They represent the reality faced by many older Americans.
The conversation about Social Security should never be reduced to partisan slogans. Regardless of political affiliation, voters deserve to understand how proposed changes could affect current beneficiaries, future retirees, workers, and families. Citizens cannot make informed decisions without clear, factual information from those who seek to represent them.
Our elected officials should be prepared to answer straightforward questions: How will your proposals affect today's retirees? How will they affect future generations? What safeguards will protect those who are most vulnerable? What evidence supports your approach?
Transparency should not be controversial.
As someone who coordinated public education initiatives and later developed Boomer Nation: Democracy Matters, I have long believed that democracy functions best when citizens understand the practical consequences of public policy. Informed voters strengthen democratic institutions. Honest conversations strengthen public trust.
Protecting older Americans is not simply about retirement checks. It is about preserving independence, reducing preventable poverty, supporting family caregivers, strengthening local communities, and affirming the dignity of people who have spent decades contributing to our nation.
The effects ripple far beyond individual households. When older adults struggle to afford basic necessities, families often absorb additional caregiving responsibilities. Healthcare systems face greater strain. Community organizations work harder to fill widening gaps. Financial stress can increase isolation and vulnerability to exploitation. These challenges touch every generation.
America has repeatedly demonstrated its capacity to invest in ambitious national priorities. The question is not only whether resources exist, but how we choose to prioritize them. Budgets reveal what a nation values.
This is not a call to abandon fiscal responsibility. It is a call to ensure that decisions about Social Security and programs affecting older Americans are made thoughtfully, transparently, and with a full understanding of their human impact.
Every elected official—regardless of party—should clearly explain where they stand and why. Every civic organization should encourage informed public dialogue. Every voter should ask questions before casting a ballot.
One day, if we are fortunate, each of us will join the ranks of older Americans.
The policies we debate today will become the realities we live tomorrow.
How we treat our seniors will ultimately say as much about our nation's character as any budget ever could.
Drema Hymon, PhD is a healthcare professional, community advocate, and researcher with more than 30 years of experience in healthcare administration, community health, public affairs, and aging issues. She is the creator of Boomer Nation: Democracy Matters, an initiative promoting informed civic engagement and public dialogue.
Keep ReadingShow less
MOntgomery, Alabama flag
Youth Leadership in Montgomery, Alabama, and Beyond
Aug 06, 2026
In 2024, when Jeremiah Treece was a high school senior in Montgomery, Alabama, he noticed that his city’s flag reflected the Confederacy and Jim Crow laws, so he set about trying to change it. It’s a daunting challenge to change a city’s flag, but Jeremiah said the seven stars in the current flag, adopted in 1952, represented the seven states of the Confederacy, and the gold wreath represented “honor and glory.” Montgomery, a two-time All-America City, is “the heart of the civil rights movement,” Jeremiah said, “and symbols like this symbolize what the city stands for, and I don’t think anyone would want to be in a city that stands for division.”
Over the next two years, Jeremiah gathered over a thousand signatures in support of his initiative to change the flag, and, along the way, he worked with a group to design a new flag without the previous symbols. In May 2026, a month before the city won its second designation as an All-America City, the Montgomery City Council voted 6-1 in support of Jeremiah’s proposal. The Council’s vote approved a new flag designed by another local student that features nine stars, one for each city council district.
The work in Montgomery by Jeremiah Treece is just one example of how young people are getting involved in civic affairs. It’s also a good example of why cities should engage young people: many of the challenges our communities face are issues they care about and often directly involve them. For challenges like mental health, substance abuse, crime, health, and economic well-being, the best solutions start with young people, who now comprise a third of our population nationwide.
It’s easy to agree in principle that youth should be engaged, but there is also a value proposition for youth engagement: their involvement has been shown to add value and accomplish important goals. Beyond the work by Jeremiah and his supporters in Montgomery, here are a few other examples of ways in which youth engagement has benefited communities:
- As part of their work to prevent and mitigate climate change, a group of young people in San Antonio worked with the school district to establish schools as “resilience hubs,” safe, trusted spaces to support their communities during emergencies, with each school prepared to provide families with the information and resources they need.
- A nonprofit youth organization in Somerville, Massachusetts, the Center for Teen Empowerment, engaged teenagers to help reduce crime, resulting in a 50% decrease in juvenile crime between 2007 and 2014, with arrests for youth ages 10-24 declining 84%, from 126 arrests to 20 during that time period.
- A group of 15 students in Salinas, CA, created a way to promote fitness and alternatives to cars, the city’s first Ciclovía, 14 years ago, an annual youth-led event that continues to draw thousands of participants.
The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) at Tufts University cites four types of benefits from youth civic engagement:
- Democracy is stronger because it is more representative;
- Communities are more resilient and more able to address important issues;
- Benefits to youths themselves in terms of skills learned and habits formed; and
- Equity is improved, since underrepresentation leads to marginalization.
CIRCLE has conducted research to show the benefits of youth civic engagement, while at the same time emphasizing the need to equalize opportunities for engagement among youth of different races and economic status. In a study done during the COVID 19 pandemic, CIRCLE showed that youth with civic access and participation were experiencing better wellbeing, although those without as much access—like without internet service for example—were experiencing fewer benefits. Another CIRCLE study found that youths who leave high school but do not continue to college are less civically connected, in part due to various barriers.
There are dozens of ways to create meaningful opportunities for youth civic engagement, and many of the League’s All-America Cities have incorporated this engagement as part of their civic muscle. As we celebrate America 250, please don’t forget that it was, in part, rebellious youth that fueled the revolution. After all some of the founding “fathers” included James Madison, who was 25 in 1776, Thomas Jefferson, age 33, and Alexander Hamilton, age 21!
Doug Linkhart is the President of the National Civic League.
Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) speaks during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on the FY2027 budget request in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill on May 12, 2026 in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
A Sudden Vacuum: Unpacking Lindsey Graham’s Legacy and Implications for the GOP’s Senate Agenda
Aug 06, 2026
On July 11, 2026, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham unexpectedly passed away at age 71. The likely cause of death was a tear in the main vessel that carries blood out of the heart, otherwise known as aortic dissection. According to a medical examiner’s preliminary report, the aortic dissection itself was due to a “brief and sudden illness” known as arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease, which hardened Graham’s arteries.
Graham’s death prompted widespread, bipartisan tributes from across the political spectrum. President Trump ordered all flags to be flown at half-mast in the senator’s honor, later exclaiming that “Lindsey will be greatly missed!!!” on social media. On the global stage, key international allies mourned the loss of a fierce advocate for overseas alliances, with tributes coming from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.
The senator was a larger-than-life figure, a champion of proactive American foreign policy who crossed bipartisan and party divides, serving as an instrumental congressional figure for the Republican Party for decades. His death comes at an unfavorable time for the Republican Party, otherwise known as the GOP, as midterm election campaigns ramp up and key legislation advances through Congress.
What Does This Vacancy Mean for the Republican Party?
One of the longest-tenured lawmakers on Capitol Hill, Graham first served as a member of the House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, and then as a senator from 2003 to the present day. By 2026, the South Carolina Republican was an integral part of the Republican Party, chairing the Budget Committee, the congressional group that drafts the United States’ annual $7.4 trillion budget. Over time, he also developed into a prominent foreign policy figure, becoming a key advocate for the defense of the free world, global leadership, and alliance building.
Beyond leaving behind an extensive congressional and international legacy, the late senator was also a widely recognized figure in U.S. politics. Within his party’s ranks, he was known as a staunch Trump ally while simultaneously retaining elements of the Reagan-era old guard Republicans due to his role as a foreign policy tsar. This unique position allowed Graham to serve as a unifying force within the party, eventually earning the moniker the “bridge”.
This reputation for dealmaking also extended across party boundaries. In 2009, Graham teamed up with Democratic Senator John Kerry to push through climate legislation. In 2012, Graham worked with Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer to orchestrate a bipartisan immigration reform bill. More recently, the senator was working across the political spectrum to pass additional sanctions on Russia. In an era of political polarization and congressional deadlock, such a bipartisan figure is rare, and his absence will be sorely felt.
How Lindsey Graham’s Passing Disrupts the Senate GOP Agenda
Senator Graham’s passing has significant effects on both the GOP’s legislative agenda and the upcoming 2026 midterms. Most pressing is the upcoming September 30 deadline to fund the government, a legislative issue that Graham retained heavy influence over through his positions on the Senate Budget Committee and Appropriations Committee. Due to his untimely death and Senator Mitch McConnell’s indefinite hospitalization, the GOP is down to a 14-13 minority in the Appropriations Committee. The powerful Appropriations Committee is responsible for the allocation of federal government funds, either through authorizing bills from other Congressional committees or through writing annual appropriation bills.
The vacated seat creates problems for the broader battle for Senate control as well. Without McConnell and Graham, the Republican Party’s majority goes down from 53-47 to 51-47, leaving a slim margin of error for defections. At a time when the GOP is advancing an expansive legislative agenda, including the SAVE American Act, the Birthright Citizenship Act, regular appropriations bills, an $87.6 billion emergency fund for the 2026 Iran War, and an additional $350 billion for Pentagon funding, these absences are troubling. South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster recently appointed Lindsey Graham’s sister, Darline Graham Nordone, as a temporary replacement. Yet, while the transition takes place, Senate politics remain significantly altered.
While Nordone is the temporary replacement, Republicans must now find a permanent successor. Graham defeated South Carolina primary challengers for his Senate seat for the upcoming 2026 midterm elections in June. His death now forces the GOP to hold special primaries by August 11 to find a candidate by election day, November 3. In an era where election campaigns ramp up months in advance, the lack of time combined with a primary race has thrown a previously secure seat into chaos. Despite the uncertainty, the chances of Democratic candidate Annie Andrews flipping the seat remain slim, given that South Carolina is a deeply red state that has not elected a Democrat to the Senate since 1998. Only time will tell who steps forward to fill the significant gap Graham leaves behind in a deeply divided Congress.
Jaden Macomber is an undergraduate student at UCLA, where he is earning his B.A. in political science alongside a minor.
A Sudden Vacuum: Unpacking Lindsey Graham’s Legacy and Implications for the GOP’s Senate Agenda, a nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More
A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.