Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Younger House members a bit more bipartisan, research decides

partisan balance
MHJ/Getty Images

Younger House members are more likely to work across the aisle than their older colleagues, a new study shows.

Bipartisanship is extraordinarily hard to come by on Capitol Hill, one of the main reasons why the legislative branch has devolved into near-total dysfunction and further hobbled the regular operations of democracy. The report provides a glimmer of hope the next generation of lawmaker leaders may be willing to change that.


The findings were released this week by the Millennial Action Project, which was created to champion young legislators committed to bipartisanship, and the Lugar Center, a think tank promoting civility and collaboration across party lines.

For the study, researchers created a formula to quantify the bipartisan tendencies of every current House member. It was based on how often in this term they have signed on to bills introduced by someone of the opposite party, and how many of their own proposals have attracted sponsorship from across the aisle. (The numbers are one of the few ways to quantify behavior that often manifests itself in subjective acts of behind-closed-doors cooperation.)

The results were compared to how members of Congress behaved from 1993 to 2018, a period when partisan loyalties soared while collaborative legislating fell into disfavor and disuse each year more than the last. High scores identified members acting in a more bipartisan way than the average of the previous quarter-century.

One in six House members, 75 of them, were identified as young because at the start of this Congress they had not yet turned 45. But they accounted for 22 percent of the members who scored above zero for bipartisanship. (That group of 185 members represents 43 percent of the House.)

"This correlation is all the more impressive in that it has held true for three Congresses in a row and both younger Republicans and younger Democrats are scoring above the historical average," said Dan Diller of the Lugar Center.

Overall, 56 percent of younger members were in positive territory for being more bipartisan than the recent historical average — but that was true of only 40 percent of their older colleagues.

Steven Olikara, who runs the Millennial Action Project, said this study affirms that "the next generation of leaders is already redefining how we govern."

Younger members with the highest bipartisanship scores:

  • 1. Democrat Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey
  • 2. Republican Lee Zeldin of New York
  • 3. Republican Elise Stefanik of New York
  • 4. Democrat Joe Cunningham of South Carolina
  • 5. Democrat Abigail Spanberger of Virginia

Younger members with the lowest bipartisanship scores:

  • 73. Democrat Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts
  • 72. Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York
  • 71. Democrat Ilhan Omar of Minnesota
  • 70. Republican Michael Cloud of Texas
  • 69. Democrat Rashida Tlaib of Michigan

Older members with the highest bipartisanship scores:

  • 1. Republican Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania
  • 2. Republican John Katko of New York
  • 3. Republican Peter King of New York
  • 4. Republican Don Young of Alaska
  • 5. Republican Chris Smith of New Jersey

Older members with the lowest bipartisanship scores:

  • 360. Republican Gary Palmer of Alabama
  • 359. Republican Rick Allen of Georgia
  • 358. Republican Chip Roy of Texas
  • 357. Republican Jim Jordan of Ohio
  • 356. Republican Tom McClintock of California

Read More

Why Fed Independence Is a Cornerstone of Democracy—and Why It’s Under Threat
1 U.S.A dollar banknotes

Why Fed Independence Is a Cornerstone of Democracy—and Why It’s Under Threat

In an era of rising polarization and performative politics, few institutions remain as consequential and as poorly understood by citizens as the Federal Reserve.

While headlines swirl around inflation, interest rates, and stock market reactions, the deeper story is often missed: the Fed’s independence is not just a technical matter of monetary policy. It’s a democratic safeguard.

Keep ReadingShow less
An oil drilling platform with a fracking rig.

An oil drilling platform with a fracking rig extracts valuable resources from beneath the earth's surface.

Getty Images, grandriver

Trump Says America’s Oil Industry Is Cleaner Than Other Countries’. New Data Shows Massive Emissions From Texas Wells.

Hakim Dermish moved to the small South Texas town of Catarina in 2002 in search of a rural lifestyle on a budget. The property where he lived with his wife didn’t have electricity or sewer lines at first, but that didn’t bother him.

“Even if we lived in a cardboard box, no one could kick us out,” Dermish said.

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