Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Lending America a helping hand

Hands reaching for each other
Suwinai Sukanant/500px/Getty Images

Anderson edited "Leveraging: A Political, Economic and Societal Framework," has taught at five universities and ran for the Democratic nomination for a Maryland congressional seat in 2016.

The 20th century had three main approaches to political philosophy that are symbolized by three images with human hands: the hands-off laissez-faire economy, the hands controlling society model and the helping hand model.

The laissez-faire model envisions a society in which the government does not intervene in the economy or the private lives of individuals apart from some basic forms of protection for companies and individuals, including enforcing contracts, police support and defense against foreign nations. In the 18th and 19th centuries, the laissez-faire model was prominent in the United States and Western democracies, notably England, France and Germany.


By the early 20th century, the laissez-faire model in the United States started morphing into the helping hand model with the regulation of industry under Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Germany, not a democratic state, nevertheless instituted helping hand policies in Bismarck's Germany in the mid-19th century. By the 1930s, Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s America took a decisive turn toward the helping hand model, notably by empowering labor through the National Labor Relations Act, Fair Labor Standards Act, and jobs programs like the Tennessee Valley Authority as well as the creation of the Social Security Administration.

Simultaneously, the control model emerged in Germany, Italy, Spain and countries outside of Western Europe, especially Japan. World War II was essentially a contest between the fascist control models and the helping hand models plus the control model of the Soviet Union. After World War II, the Cold War saw helping hand America and a more robust helping hand Western Europe fighting the control model Soviet Union and its satellite countries.

The helping hand model in the United States, espoused more by Democrats than Republicans, has had its ongoing domestic struggle with the laissez-faire model — for example, the contest between Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society and Ronald Reagan's conservative morning in America. Although the Republican Party in the 20th century challenged the expansion of the mixed economy, the GOP typically accepted many of its main features, including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and a host of federal agencies, such as the Security and Exchange Commission, Food and Drug Administration, Federal Trade Commission, Federal Communication Commission, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Education.

Republicans typically called for scaling back these federal agencies and their programs, but they rarely succeeded in closing them down even if the more right-wing members of their party called for such extreme actions. In the 21st century, an even more right-wing (more populist and libertarian than conservative) Republican Party has emerged, but laissez-faire is still not a genuine possibility. The United States is not giving up Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, even if these programs need to be revamped. If anything, the control model has emerged as a realistic alternative with Donald Trump possibly returning to the White House next year. If he wins, Trump has threatened to engage in a range of actions that would violate core parts of our Constitution.

Americans born after 1990 and raised largely in the 21st century do not live with the frameworks of those born and raised earlier: World War II, the Cold War, the civil rights movement, the women's movement — these historical events and dramatic revolutions are not ingrained in their consciousness. For younger Americans, 9/11 is the starting point.

The time is right to return to the helping hand model and explore the range of examples that exist. The helping hand symbolizes government intervention in the private sector, whether it is weak or strong. Democrats, Republicans and independents need to jettison laissez-faire models and control models. Approaches to political economy and social practices that are extremist are dangerous to the well-being of the vast majority of Americans. And we certainly do not need strong-man authoritarian leaders modeled along the lines of European and Asian dictators.

Those red, orange and blue helping hands that kids saw in the windows of houses on their way home from school and on their way to school in the 1970s and 1980s were good symbols of our national life as well part of the actual system of protecting children in local communities. Let's get on the same page and explore the rival helping hand models that would help us again. There is plenty to argue about, but so long as we stay within the helping hand model, the dominant democratic values of freedom, equality, stability and safety can be sustained.

Read More

Veterans’ Care at Risk Under Trump As Hundreds of Doctors and Nurses Reject Working at VA Hospitals
Photo illustration by Lisa Larson-Walker/ProPublica

Veterans’ Care at Risk Under Trump As Hundreds of Doctors and Nurses Reject Working at VA Hospitals

Veterans hospitals are struggling to replace hundreds of doctors and nurses who have left the health care system this year as the Trump administration pursues its pledge to simultaneously slash Department of Veterans Affairs staff and improve care.

Many job applicants are turning down offers, worried that the positions are not stable and uneasy with the overall direction of the agency, according to internal documents examined by ProPublica. The records show nearly 4 in 10 of the roughly 2,000 doctors offered jobs from January through March of this year turned them down. That is quadruple the rate of doctors rejecting offers during the same time period last year.

Keep ReadingShow less
Protecting the U.S. Press: The PRESS Act and What It Could Mean for Journalists

The Protect Reporters from Excessive State Suppression (PRESS) Act aims to fill the national shield law gap by providing two protections for journalists.

Getty Images, Manu Vega

Protecting the U.S. Press: The PRESS Act and What It Could Mean for Journalists

The First Amendment protects journalists during the news-gathering and publication processes. For example, under the First Amendment, reporters cannot be forced to report on an issue. However, the press is not entitled to different legal protections compared to a general member of the public under the First Amendment.

In the United States, there are protections for journalists beyond the First Amendment, including shield laws that protect journalists from pressure to reveal sources or information during news-gathering. 48 states and the District of Columbia have shield laws, but protections vary widely. There is currently no federal shield law. As of 2019, at least 22 journalists have been jailed in the U.S. for refusing to comply with requests to reveal sources of information. Seven other journalists have been jailed and fined for the same reason.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democrats Score Strategic Wins Amid Redistricting Battles

Democrat Donkey is winning arm wrestling match against Republican elephant

AI generated image

Democrats Score Strategic Wins Amid Redistricting Battles

Democrats are quietly building momentum in the 2025 election cycle, notching two key legislative flips in special elections and gaining ground in early polling ahead of the 2026 midterms. While the victories are modest in number, they signal a potential shift in voter sentiment — and a brewing backlash against Republican-led redistricting efforts.

Out of 40 special elections held across the United States so far in 2025, only two seats have changed party control — both flipping from Republican to Democrat.

Keep ReadingShow less
Policing or Occupation? Trump’s Militarizing America’s Cities Sets a Dangerous Precedent

A DC Metropolitan Police Department car is parked near a rally against the Trump Administration's federal takeover of the District of Columbia, outside of the AFL-CIO on August 11, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Policing or Occupation? Trump’s Militarizing America’s Cities Sets a Dangerous Precedent

President Trump announced the activation of hundreds of National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., along with the deployment of federal agents—including more than 100 from the FBI. This comes despite Justice Department data showing that violent crime in D.C. fell 35% from 2023 to 2024, reaching its lowest point in over three decades. These aren’t abstract numbers—they paint a picture of a city safer than it has been in a generation, with fewer homicides, assaults, and robberies than at any point since the early 1990s.

The contradiction could not be more glaring: the same president who, on January 6, 2021, stalled for hours as a violent uprising engulfed the Capitol is now rushing to “liberate” a city that—based on federal data—hasn’t been this safe in more than thirty years. Then, when democracy itself was under siege, urgency gave way to dithering; today, with no comparable emergency—only vague claims of lawlessness—he mobilizes troops for a mission that looks less like public safety and more like political theater. The disparity between those two moments is more than irony; it is a blueprint for how power can be selectively applied, depending on whose power is threatened.

Keep ReadingShow less