Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Reform in 2023: Building a beacon of hope in Boston

Opinion

Boston
Maddie Meyer/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 sixth in the series.

Santana is the director of the Boston Mayor’s Office of Civic Organizing. Chang is the co-founder and CEO of GenUnity, a civic well-being nonprofit.

We feel unbridled hope for our democracy heading into 2023.

The fissures in our democracy – from state voter suppression and gerrymandering to growing polarization – are urgent and existential. But, our 2022 elections showed us that people – from voters to poll workers to those working at NGOs – are willing to fight for democracy. Their efforts have given us an opportunity to not only repair the cracks of our democracy, but to build beacons of hope – shining examples of how our communities flourish when everyone is involved in the decisions that shape our lives. We are starting to build this beacon in Boston and invite you to join us.


Our urgent and existential democratic issues are deeply rooted, intertwined with history, culture and the ever-present challenge of who we share power with. Rising inequality, digital and physical segregation, and distrust have not only exacerbated these issues but challenged our fidelity in democracy itself.

Yet, our last election showed us that Americans are rising to meet the moment. The young people that polls said are disillusioned with democracy showed up and were critically influential in key races. People may be disillusioned with our democracy today, but they have hopes for what it could be and energy to not just survive but build a democracy that thrives.

Imagine a community built by everyone, for everyone. One where residents who want to drive change beyond Election Day can find pathways to do so. One where residents can come together across differences to share their lived expertise and learn from each other. One where the residents most impacted by an issue – like health equity – are collaborating with institutions – like local governments, health care providers or health insurers – to co-create better solutions. A community like this would be a beacon of hope, showing us that democracy can deliver our ideals of equal opportunity and helping us discover the path to get there.

We are building this beacon in Boston, a city emblematic of our ideals and the deeply entrenched issues we still need to address. From being the birthplace of U.S. democracy to the historic election of Mayor Michelle Wu, Boston has been a trailblazer for freedom and justice. At the same time, Boston’s distribution of power, resources and opportunities still falls along stark racial lines. Boston is the country’s 15th most segregated city, where the net wealth of the average white household is $247,500 compared to $8 for the average Black household.

Embracing the possibilities of Boston’s future begins with embracing the power of our residents and neighborhoods. To realize this bold vision for the city, Wu created the Office of Civic Organizing, which reduces barriers and expands opportunities for residents to be active citizens. Programs like the City Hall on the Go Truck bring City Hall services straight to residents in all of Boston’s 24 diverse neighborhoods. OCO supports community beautification projects through its Love Your Block neighborhood cleanup initiatives as well as through small grants to community organizations for projects like transforming a graffiti-covered bridge into a neighborhood art display and revitalizing a neighborhood park to include a lending library and climate-resilient plants. OCO encourages all kinds of community engagement and collaboration, including promoting neighborhood block parties and offering free Block Party Kits to residents including games, chalk and signage. Most recently, OCO launched a Civic Power Pledge to inspire and support residents and businesses to take everyday actions that build community and improve quality of life for all Bostonians.

In the coming year, OCO will collaborate with local nonprofits to create new opportunities for residents to build their civic agency. For example, GenUnity will launch its community leadership programs where both “proximate experts” experiencing local issues and “siloed experts” working in the public and private organizations meant to address them share their expertise, develop new ideas and execute on action plans. Over time, we plan to launch a collaborative ecosystem of partners to democratize, elevate and build the civic power of everyday residents to unlock transformational change. Critically, we will only succeed collectively, so we invite friends, neighbors and all others to join us.

Many might point to Massachusetts’ historic 2022 election as a sign the state’s democracy is strong and that we should focus instead on where democracy is most fragile. We strongly challenge this scarcity mindset that asks us to choose between providing emergency care to our democracy and treating the root-cause ailments. Today, philanthropy invests only 0.1 percent in democracy-strengthening work. Corporations are ncreasingly recognizing and embracing their role in promoting civic and community engagement. We can and should marshal the resources to do both.

If we do, local communities like Boston can become spotlights that guide our country toward its long-deferred promise of freedom and justice by means of democracy. So in this new year, we invite you to join us in Boston to build a beacon of hope for what our city and country can become.

Learn more about the City of Boston’s Office of Civic Organizing an d GenUnity, a nonprofit organization. Are you interested in making your city a better place? Sign up for the City of Boston’s Civic Power pledge here.


Read More

Trump Is Protecting Insurrectionists But Not Your Kids

An analysis of gun violence, political extremism, Islamophobia, and community resilience in America after the San Diego Islamic Center shooting.

GemaIbarra / Getty Images

Trump Is Protecting Insurrectionists But Not Your Kids

Last Monday, two teenage gunmen opened fire outside the Islamic Center of San Diego, murdering three Muslim men. Unfortunately, this is the type of horror Americans have been conditioned to expect. After years of political stagnation on gun safety and ongoing hateful acts of violence, our president has signaled once again to children, to the Muslim community, and to everyone else: he does not care if you get shot.

Gun violence has been on the rise in the United States for too long. Perhaps the most harrowing consequence is that gun violence is now the leading cause of death among children. Whether from school shootings, homicides, suicides, or accidents, the gun-death rate for children is nearly five in every 100,000. In fact, the number of domestic deaths due to gun violence is about as many as U.S. military deaths in every war since World War I combined. More children have been lost to gun violence since 2020 than troops lost since 9/11. Yet even with such a striking death toll—and one affecting children no less—happening on our own soil, Vice President J.D. Vance calls it a “fact of life.

Keep ReadingShow less
The dome of the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., stands tall against a blue sky with the American flag waving proudly

Congress faces growing pressure to pass redistricting reform as lawmakers debate banning gerrymandering, independent commissions, and mid-decade map changes amid renewed national controversy over fair elections.

Getty Images, aire images

Congress's Missed Opportunities on Redistricting Reform

On April 29, Issue One posted an image on Facebook and Instagram: CONGRESS CAN FIX THIS WITH THREE SIMPLE STEPS:

  1. Establish Clear National Criteria for Fair Maps
  2. Require Independent Redistricting Commissions in Every State
  3. Ban Mid-Decade Redistricting.

Issue One added below: “… but it needs 60 Senate votes to do it.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional
beige concrete building under blue sky during daytime

Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional

The Supreme Court, in holding that partisan gerrymandering is permissible—unless it "goes too far"—stated that the argument made against this practice based on the Court's "one person, one vote" doctrine didn't work because the cases that developed that doctrine were about ensuring that each vote had an equal weight. The Court reasoned that after redistricting, each vote still has equal weight.

I would respectfully disagree. After admittedly partisan redistricting, each vote does not have an equal weight. The purpose of partisan gerrymandering is typically to create a "safe" seat—to group citizens so that the dominant political party has a clear majority of the voters. It's the transformation of a contested seat or even a seat safe for the other party into a safe seat for the party doing the redistricting.

Keep ReadingShow less
Tourists gather at Mather Point on the South Rim of the Grand Canyon, enjoying panoramic views of the iconic natural wonder

National Park Service budget cuts are reshaping America’s public lands through underfunding and neglect. Explore how declining park staffing, deferred maintenance, and political inaction threaten national parks, local economies, and public trust in government.

Getty Images, miroslav_1

They Won’t Close the Parks. They’ll Just Let Them Fail.

This summer, before dawn, the Liu family from Buffalo will load up their SUV, coffee in hand, bound for a long-planned trip out west. The Grand Canyon has been on their list for years, something to do before the kids get too old and schedules get too tight. They expect crowds. They expect long lines at the entrance. That is part of the deal. In recent years, national parks have drawn more than 325 million visits annually, near record highs.

What they do not expect are shuttered visitor centers and closed trails, not because of weather but because there are not enough staff to maintain them. What they do not see is the budget decision in Washington that made those trade-offs, quietly, indirectly, and without much debate.

Keep ReadingShow less