Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The Watchdog That Won’t Bark – How FEC Dysfunction Threatens Democracy

Opinion

The Watchdog That Won’t Bark – How FEC Dysfunction Threatens Democracy
a close up of an american flag on a piece of paper
Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

The American people are being asked to trust a democracy that is, at its core, unguarded.

Right now — in the middle of a national election cycle — the Federal Election Commission (FEC) has just three active commissioners out of six. That makes it legally unable to act on violations, issue rules, or even respond to urgent questions about election law. It’s not just gridlock; it’s institutional paralysis — and it’s happening on purpose.


As of August 2025, the remaining three commissioners are:

  • Dara Lindenbaum (Democrat)
  • Shana M. Broussard (Democrat)
  • Trey Trainor (Republican)

Former Commissioner Ellen Weintraub, also a Democrat, is no longer voting and is not listed as active. With no fourth member, the Commission lacks a quorum, meaning it cannot legally take action — including appointing new commissioners.

The FEC is supposed to be the referee that keeps our elections fair, transparent, and accountable. Instead, it’s been sidelined by years of intentional neglect, partisan obstruction, and political self-interest. And who benefits? Those who are willing to bend or break the rules to stay in power.

A System Designed to Fail

Congress created the FEC after Watergate to serve as a nonpartisan watchdog. But it has a fatal flaw: it requires four votes to take any action. With six commissioners split evenly between the two major parties, all it takes is one party refusing to play ball to stop enforcement entirely.

What we have today is worse: just three commissioners are seated. This means:

  • No investigations of illegal campaign donations
  • No rulings on dark money disclosures
  • No enforcement of super PAC coordination violations
  • No action at all

And with no quorum, there’s no way to even confirm new commissioners. This is not oversight; it’s sabotage.

How This Connects to Gerrymandering

The dysfunction of the FEC is precisely why, in The People’s Redistricting Act of 2025, I refused to entrust them with oversight. Instead, the Act proposes a new citizen-approved model that uses nonpartisan AI to generate district maps, which are then voted on directly by the people.

In contrast to the FEC’s gridlocked model, this process:

  • Requires no partisan appointees
  • Operates transparently and publicly
  • Returns power to voters rather than to entrenched elites

The lesson is clear: we cannot protect democracy using broken institutions. We must build new ones rooted in accountability and simplicity.

A Call for Structural Reform

If we’re serious about safeguarding our elections, we must:

  1. Reform the structure of the FEC to eliminate the built-in deadlock.
  2. Ensure timely appointments through fast-track confirmation procedures.
  3. Expand the role of nonpartisan agencies, such as the Election Assistance Commission, to ensure continuity when the FEC fails.

But more than that, we need to listen to the growing cry from the American people: They are tired of being shut out, gerrymandered, and governed by systems that protect power instead of public trust.

We Can’t Wait

Every day the FEC remains broken is a day we accept an election system without referees. That is not democracy. That is a slow descent into democratic decay.

We don’t have to accept this. We can reform it. We can build something better.

Let's start by urging Congress to pass The People’s Redistricting Act — and by demanding that our institutions work for us, not against us.

Keith Davenport is a candidate for U.S. Congress, NC-06.



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