Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Too Young to Vote, Not Too Young to Fix Democracy

Opinion

Anti-gerrymandering sign
Fair maps advocates are raising concerns over several states lacking transparency in the redistricting process.
Bill Clark/Getty Images

We are high schoolers. We are college students. We are redrawing the lines.

For people our age, gerrymandering is a short lesson in AP Government class, a flashcard temporarily memorized for an upcoming test. For our parents, it is a word splashed across a headline, brushed off as yet another way politicians compete for news-cycle attention, soon to be forgotten, just like that vocab word. But as much as districting may seem like a technical or irrelevant procedure, its effects ripple through elections and representation, shaping the balance of power in ways most people never understand.


Gerrymandering is the practice of deliberately drawing district lines to favor one political party over another. Right now, in the midst of a mid-decade redraw, we risk facing another round of creative cartography that would make Picasso jealous. Redistricting has become ammunition in a political arms race. But instead of abstract art, we're getting abstract democracy. In North Carolina, Republicans drew a new congressional map in 2023. While a court-ordered 2020 map had produced a 7–7 split, the new map resulted in Republicans winning 10 of 14 seats in 2024. Now GOP leaders are pushing to redraw again, targeting one swing district to secure an 11–3 Republican advantage. In 2025, Illinois Republicans filed a lawsuit asking the state supreme court to overturn the legislative map drawn in 2021, arguing it unfairly favors Democrats. At the same time, a bipartisan initiative, "Fair Maps Illinois," is advocating for a constitutional amendment to place redistricting under an independent commission. Similar debates are unfolding across the country, highlighting the urgent need for fair redistricting reform.

At the same time, opposition to gerrymandering crosses party lines. In October 2025, Common Cause reported that 84% of the voters considered fair district lines critical to the health of democracy. This bipartisan concern is rare in today's polarized climate, and it is precisely what makes reform possible.

This urgency is why we, a group of three high school seniors and two college freshmen, decided to take action. We have a plan that is gaining traction because it relies on something that will not change every ten years: math.

It all began when a few of us became involved in gerrymandering research through a summer program at the Institute of Mathematics and Democracy (IMD) at Wellesley College. IMD’s mission is to find objective, mathematically-driven solutions to difficult political issues. In all our nerdy glory, and yes, we’re proudly owning it, we spent a couple of summers working at IMD and ended up developing geometric proofs that create guidelines to determine what is political gerrymandering and what is a fair drawing of district lines. We hope to take this research far and wide by using the power of our dual identity as both students and researchers.

The perfect opportunity presented itself when the Institute of Citizens and Scholars launched an initiative last year focused entirely on youth leadership. Youth Leaders for Civic Preparedness is the beginning of a growing youth voice; we made the cut as one of 100 teams nationwide awarded a grant to address a community problem. We proposed to tackle gerrymandering.

We desire to capitalize on the thousands of hours of mathematical analysis and the months of civic workshop planning we have already invested. We are planning to start from the ground up, design activities in our communities, create an educational website, launch social media initiatives amongst our peers, and build them out nationally. We will bring in experts in the field, our peers, and anyone else interested, in the hope of sparking debate and interest in gerrymandering.

We hope to inspire local communities to challenge district lines that deny representation, states to establish independent redistricting commissions, and Congress to pass reforms that protect fair elections. We are working from the ground up to make change that lasts beyond news cycles and AP Government flashcards.

What makes us unique, what gives us power, is that we did not meet in an AP Government class. We have never even been in the same room. Spanning from New York to Maryland to California, our geographic diversity offers an opportunity to make an impact not just in our local community but also in our national community. While the steady pace of academia does not always align with tumultuous politics, we can serve as a bridge between them, especially for our generation.

We cannot even vote yet, but when the time comes to cast our ballots, we want assurance that we are being represented. Changing abusive redistricting is a nuanced dance, one that requires navigating legislative hoops, the academic community, and cultivating a sense of urgency among those who wish to repair our democracy. Meaningful representation is core to our democracy, and those of us who represent this country’s future have an imperative to ensure its survival. We are not waiting for permission to fight for the democracy we will inherit.

Serena Pallan is a senior at Hereford High School in Baltimore, Maryland.

Ananya Shah is a senior at Edgemont Jr. Sr. High School in Scarsdale, NY

Thea Vedula is a Freshman at The University of Wisconsin-Madison

Angelina Wang is a freshman at Brown University

Zubin Rajesh is a senior at Campolindo High School in Moraga, California

The Fulcrum is committed to nurturing the next generation of journalists. To learn about the many NextGen initiatives we are leading, click HERE.


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