Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Reform in 2023: Congress actually had a pretty good 2022, and next year may be even better

Opinion

US Capitol
Free Agents Limited/Getty Images

As 2022 draws to a close, The Fulcrum has invited leaders of democracy reform organizations to share their hopes and plans for the coming year. This is the second in the series.

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

It’s that time of year when one reflects on the joys and disappointments of the past year and looks to the hopes and plans for 2023. The Congressional Management Foundation is the only nonpartisan, nonprofit in the United States with 100 percent of its staff and resources dedicated to improving Congress and its interactions with constituents, so naturally our end-of-year analyses and wishes are focused on the legislative branch.


While it’s been hard to see, the House of Representatives has seen some remarkable achievements in the past few years, primarily through the work of the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress. I know most of the people will find this hard to believe, but the committee was one of the few groups in Congress I’ve witnessed in my years at CMF that functioned the way our Founding Fathers intended. During the four years of the committee’s existence this bipartisan group of lawmakers discussed, debated and adopted more than 200 recommendations to improve Congress and democracy – nearly all with unanimous support from both the Democrats and Republicans on the committee.

It may sound mundane, but the committee’s recommendations, if fully implemented, would strengthen Congress’ ability to retain competent staff, enhance the resources to develop sound public policy, enable more efficient processes for the Congress to operate and improve Congress’ ability to listen to the American people. They will also restore some of the powers granted to Congress in Article I of the Constitution, including shifting some spending authority from the executive branch back to the legislative branch, as the country’s founders intended. Their recommendations will strengthen Congress, allow constituents to have a greater voice in government, and lead to better service to and representation of the American people.

In our four decades of working with Congress, CMF has rarely seen a group of legislators so astutely assess a public policy need, analyze the implications, and chart a course that benefits both the institution and the constituents it serves. This effort was aided by a remarkable coalition of about 40 organizations that rallied around the common purpose of enhancing Congress. When I started work at CMF two decades ago there were so few groups focused on Congress that we probably couldn’t put together a poker game. Well, now we’ve got a whole softball league filled with reformers! Groups and initiatives such as the Hewlett Foundation’s Democracy Program, the Democracy Fund, and the Bridge Alliance have become hubs of democratic ingenuity and support. [Bridge Alliance operates The Fulcrum.]

To continue to support this effort, this month CMF announced it was launching a new Congressional Revitalization and Modernization Project. The initiative aims to assist in the implementation of the committee’s recommendations in the House and support efforts to launch a similar initiative in the Senate. Part of this effort also will include CMF continuing to identify key benchmarks for improving Congress as an institution. In collaboration with the Partnership for Public Service, CMF published “The State of the Congress 2022, ” which revealed bipartisan agreement that congressional functionality, civility, and capacity need to improve for Congress to best perform its role in democracy. This first annual report provides an assessment of congressional performance by the people who know the institution best: congressional staff. We created the Exemplary Congressional Staff Cohort composed of more than 100 of the best staff working in personal, committee, leadership and institutional offices throughout the Legislative Branch.

As we look to 2023, CMF will also continue its work with our academic partners to enhance trust in Congress through better constituent engagement. We will continue our partnership with the Institute for Democratic Engagement and Accountability at The Ohio State University to conduct novel online/telephone town hall meetings with members of Congress and constituents. Our goal will be to explore whether these modern and scalable settings can be used to bridge the divide in a highly partisan environment.

Finally, if I could foist a few New Year’s resolutions on key institutions, I would urge some important participants in our democracy to change a bit of their culture in ways that improve trust in our system of government. For the media, I would hope that the genuine bipartisan accomplishments that occur get greater attention. During this past Congress we saw bipartisan agreement on improving our national infrastructure, incentivizing the manufacturing of microchips in the United States, and supporting democracy in Ukraine in its war with Russia.

For Congress, it would be nice if it spent more time acknowledging the progress and success the institution has achieved, and less time unfairly beating itself up. I’m not taking a Pollyanna approach; I fully recognize that Congress needs to improve how it functions. But Coke doesn’t employ advertising slogans like, “Don’t drink Pepsi, it’ll rot your teeth.” Sure, Congress has its share of whack-a-doodles, scoundrels, and incompetents – just like any profession. Yet most of the Congress is composed of dedicated public servants striving tirelessly to improve the lives of their constituents and make the world a better place. Nearly all members of Congress genuinely believe this – it would be nice if in 2023 they articulated it a little more often.


Read More

An empty grocery cart in a market.

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani proposes five city-run grocery stores. See the arguments for and against, from food deserts to bodega concerns and the $70M cost.

Getty Images, Kwangmoozaa

Government-Owned Grocery Stores: Accessible Nutrition or Government Overreach?

Issue Introduction

Over the past few years, affordability has become the most central issue affecting Americans and the quality of life in the United States. The prices of groceries and basic necessities have risen 25-30% since the COVID-19 pandemic and are projected to rise another 3.2% in 2026. At the same time, the exodus of grocery chains from rural and low-income areas has scattered food deserts throughout individual states. Recent mass closures include Grocery Outlet’s shuttering of 36 stores and continued shut-downs of many Albertsons locations. These factors have led politicians to make affordability a major campaign issue.

During his progressive campaign for mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani raised the idea of opening grocery stores owned and operated by the city government to provide New Yorkers with affordable groceries. In his April 2026 public address that marked his first 100 days in office, Mayor Mamdani announced plans for the first of five city-run grocery stores. Mamdani’s proposed initiative will use $70 million in capital funding to build five city-owned municipal stores–one in each borough–and place them under control of the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC). NYCEDC will then select third-party operating staff in accordance with city standards for affordability and proper labor practices. Public opinion following the announcement continues to be divided between uproar and support.

Keep ReadingShow less
​U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies during a Senate Committee on Appropriations hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on July 21, 2026. Hegseth is crafting a strong and masculine identity for his audience as he reportedly contemplates a presidential run.

(Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)

Politicians Can’t Just ’Give the People What They Want’

For reasons that will baffle my many detractors, I am often asked for advice about being an opinion journalist. One of my standard responses is: You have to be willing to disappoint your biggest fans.

What I mean is that if you start to see your job as telling fans what they want to hear, you risk becoming an entertainer rather than a thinker, and eventually you become a caricature. I’ve seen it happen numerous times. Patrick Buchanan was a brilliant columnist and a serious person. But over the course of his career, he listened too much to the people who said, “Go Pat, go!” and too little to friends who said, “I think that’s taking it too far.”

Keep ReadingShow less
White marble exterior of the United States Capitol, often called the Capitol Building, is the home of the United States Congress and the seat of the legislative branch of the U.S. federal government

Congress approval is at a record-low 10%. Moderation and consensus-building, not partisan theatrics, are how Washington gets problems solved.

Richard Sharrocks / Getty Images

Reclaiming the Politics of the Possible

Washington is stuck in a cycle of performative conflict. The incentives seem to reward outrage, not outcomes that last; purity tests, not problem‑solving. So it’s no surprise that after three shutdowns in less than a year, public approval of Congress collapsed to just 10 percent this spring. (Gallup, April 2026.) But the country we live in — where many middle-income families report persistent financial strain and businesses are navigating unprecedented technological upheaval — cannot be governed by theatrics. Breaking this cycle requires moderation, consensus‑building, and a cooperative approach to governance.

This is not a call for centrism as an ideology. Instead, this is a call for transformative leaders to embrace moderation as their governing strategy, recognizing that in a pluralistic country of nearly 350 million people durable solutions require broad and stable alliances. Ultimately, this is a call for the 240 million of us who are eligible to vote in November to elect consensus-builders instead of bomb-throwers, and healers instead of arsonists.

Keep ReadingShow less
Adult man holds a microphone while asking a question during a town hall meeting.

Congress ignored 90% of public support for background checks. Learn how citizen assemblies and sortition helped Ireland break gridlock and could work in the US.

SDI Productions/Getty Images

Consensus Without Power: How Sortition Could Break America's Legislative Gridlock

In April 2013, four months after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting killed twenty children, the US Senate voted on the Manchin-Toomey Act to expand background checks and to include gun-show and internet sales of firearms. Roughly nine in ten Americans, including a majority of gun owners, supported the bill—a figure that has held steady across more than a decade of polling. It fell short of the 60-vote threshold by six votes. This was not an outlier. On complex issues, representatives often fail to translate public consensus into reality. Research shows that legislators consistently vote in line with donor and interest group preferences over constituent opinion. Before the vote, the National Rifle Association (NRA) warned every senator it would “rate” their vote on its annual rating system, and a low NRA rating could cost senators their next primary. Consequently, the bill died 54-46, and the majority of Americans watched, powerless, as their consensus was overridden by self-interested representatives.

Liberal democracies need a method to bypass electoral incentives that run counter to public opinion. One already exists: Ireland faced the same stalemate on complex issues before it instituted a process called sortition. The beauty of sortition lies in its removal of the primary pressure that misaligns representatives’ interests from public interest: reelection. Much like jury duty, citizens are randomly drawn from the population. An independent body then stratifies the pool, so the final group mirrors the country by age, gender, geography, and income. The group meets over weeks or months, hearing from experts and the public, as well as debating frequently. At the end, it issues a recommendation that parliament may then put to a referendum or pass into law.

Keep ReadingShow less