Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Holding Trump Accountable: He’s NOT the Emperor

Opinion

Holding Trump Accountable: He’s NOT the Emperor
shallow focus photography white crown hanging decor
Photo by Megan Watson on Unsplash

Publishers' Notes: Our challenge as a publication, dedicated to keeping our readers informed so we can repair our democracy and make it live and work in our everyday lives, is not to be overly reactive or partisan. At the same time, we must not ignore the dangers of the administration's degrading, hostile, and accusatory language and actions when they occur. We invite you to read this column outlining our editorial position covering the Trump administration by clicking HERE.

Not every column represents the editorial focus of the Fulcrum. However, consistent with our mission, the column below represents a commitment to sharing many perspectives to widen our readers' viewpoints.


“But he hasn’t got anything on!” said a little child. “The emperor has no clothes!”

In Hans Christian Andersen’s 1837 fairy tale, “The Emperor’s New Clothes” it takes an innocent child to declare what all those surrounding the emperor will not. That is the “magical” garments,” which only the brilliant and astute purportedly can see, do not exist. They are mere fabrications. But for fear of crossing the mighty ruler and being thought inept or stupid, the courtiers proclaim the beauty of the emperor’s non-existent clothing.

If we take the emperor’s “clothes” to mean the dignity and true power of the office of the Presidency, then indeed, Donald Trump is wearing no clothes. And his chief tailor, Elon Musk, has never sewn a stitch of diplomacy or practiced relational tactics in his life.

In the United States, we do not have an emperor, and despite the publication from the White House declaring otherwise, we do not have a king. We have a president, the head of the Executive branch, whose job is to execute the law. We have two other equally powerful branches: the Legislative and the Judicial, whose jobs are, respectively, to make the laws and to judge the laws. Our forefathers intended for each branch to provide checks on the others, which is critical for the balance of power within the government.

Now, all three branches are peppered heavily with Republicans. In the true sense of Lincoln’s Republican Party, this would not be a problem. But this is no longer the Republican party. A perfect example is how the Republican members of Congress, the party that enthusiastically voted for military aid and support to Ukraine, have changed their tune almost unanimously now in support of Trump's clash with Ukraine president VolodymyrZelensky on the 28th of February.

However, it is the job of all members of Congress, regardless of which party, to speak up when legal or moral rules are violated.

Our country is a tangible collection of many ideas and ideologies, yet all are subject to its laws, and all citizens within the realm possess guaranteed rights. Even those who argue we need a thorough cleansing of the federal bureaucracy are not advocates of “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.” Sure, we have very real problems: unchecked immigration, out-of-control national debt, etc. We do, of course, need to solve these problems.

However, the answers cannot be found in alienating half of our country’s citizens and many allies worldwide. President Trump’s meeting with President Zelensky at the White House was a national embarrassment, playing out on an international stage.

How can any of us remain nonplussed when viewing the chaos of the last several weeks? Or have Donald Trump’s litany of executive orders been so stunning that we are stunned and senseless?

Apparently so. Although some are rising in protest, and some judges and districts are bringing lawsuits, most Americans are acting as if all they need to do is change the channel on their smart TV, and this all-too-real reality show will go away.

But many don’t want to change the channel and believe our 47th President exhibits the “strong leadership” our nation needs. Of course, we do want strong leadership, but it must be tempered with respect and compassion, remembering that as president, our leader speaks for all his constituents, and he is the voice the world hears.

Our 26th President, Teddy Roosevelt, said it plainly, “Speak softly and carry a big stick, and you will go far.” Roosevelt’s approach emphasized the importance of maintaining a strong military as a deterrent while prioritizing diplomacy. One example of many was Roosevelt sending a fleet of U.S. Navy ships on a world tour to demonstrate American naval power, a peaceful yet powerful display of strength, aligning with his philosophy of speaking softly while carrying a big stick.

Perhaps many Americans who don’t support Trump's actions remain silent because they believe that, ultimately, the pendulum will swing, as it has in the past, and that we’ll restore sense and balance. But might it not be too late for us and the world if we do not take action now?

Presently, there are 96 legal challenges to the various Executive orders issued by the Trump Administration. Following the rule of law is one way to act with legal challenges and is likely to overturn many of Trump's executive orders. But there is more you can do. Protests against the DOGE cuts are happening across the country at an ever-increasing rate. A “50501 Movement’ standing for “50 states, 50 protests, one day” has emerged in which dozens of demonstrations across the U.S. were recently held.

The overriding message is “No Kings,” where protesters are criticizing some of President Donald Trump’s actions as illegal and beyond the scope of his presidential powers. Additionally, more and more protestors are taking aim at billionaire Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency-led efforts to cut spending and fire employees across the federal government without due process.

Donald Trump was re-elected as President of the United States to serve, not to reign, and he should return to these core principles.

Amy Lockard is an Iowa resident who regularly contributes to regional newspapers and periodicals. She is working on the second of a four-book fictional series based on Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice."


Read More

US Capitol building
The United States Capitol building with its white dome against a blue sky

Would Congressional Term Limits Make Congress Better—or Worse?

Starting in the 1990’s, the idea of putting term limits on members of Congress became a recurring idea to reform the institution and improve democracy. The idea was born out of the theory that replacing the current crop of legislators with a new batch would produce a better Congress. More than 30 years later we now have quantitative and qualitative data showing the impact of term limits.

Twenty-one state legislatures have enacted some kind of term limit on legislators since 1990. Since then, dozens of academic studies have examined the impact on such factors as: complexity of legislation, influence of lobbyists and staff on legislative outcomes, and interactions with constituent. Here are some key findings.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand points to the word tax on a screen

Data calculations

Getty Images

Inconvenient Numbers Are a Sign the System Works

Earlier in October, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that consumer prices rose 3.7 percent over the past year, a little higher than the month before, with gasoline accounting for more than half of September's increase. Rising prices are the kind of news no incumbent politician wants weeks before an election. The report was published anyway, on schedule. That is the quiet discipline of a trustworthy statistical system. It tells us what is true even when the number is unwelcome to whoever holds power.

So, do Americans trust government data? We do. But that trust is incomplete, and it has room to grow.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

jimfeng/Getty Images

Pennsylvania’s Bipartisan Exchange Is Rebuilding Trust in Governance

The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics has nearly 40 years of experience working with legislators from different political parties, and it is building on this history by drawing on lessons from the successful American Congressional Exchange model, begun in 2018 at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and from state exchanges now underway in Minnesota and Michigan. The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics, in collaboration with the Bridge Alliance, has launched the Pennsylvania Legislative Exchange.

This state-based, systematic approach is designed to foster better relationships and build trust across the political aisle with the following guiding principles:

Keep ReadingShow less
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