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.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

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

While Pledging To Clean Up Toxic Chemicals, EPA Guts Hundreds of Environmental Grants

EPA Administrator Zeldin speaks with reporters on Long Island, NY.

Courtesy EPA via Flickr.

While Pledging To Clean Up Toxic Chemicals, EPA Guts Hundreds of Environmental Grants

WASHINGTON – The Trump administration promised to combat toxic “forever chemicals,” while conversely canceling nearly 800 grants aimed at addressing environmental injustices, including in communities plagued with PFAS contamination.

In a court filing, the Environmental Protection Agency revealed for the first time that it intends to cancel 781 environmental justice grants, nearly double what had previously been disclosed.

Keep ReadingShow less
Policy Changes Could Derail Michigan’s Clean Energy Goals

New clean energy manufacturing plants, including for EV batteries, solar panels, and wind turbines, are being built across states like Michigan, Georgia, and Ohio.

Steve/Adobe Stock

Policy Changes Could Derail Michigan’s Clean Energy Goals

In recent years, Michigan has been aggressive in its approach to clean energy: It’s invested millions of dollars in renewable energy infrastructure, created training programs for jobs in the electric vehicle industry, and set a goal of moving the state to 100% carbon neutrality by 2050.

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and other state officials aim to make the Great Lakes State a leader in clean energy manufacturing by bringing jobs and investments to local communities while also tackling pollution, which continues to wreak havoc on the environment.

Now Michigan’s clean energy efforts have seemingly hit a wall of uncertainty as President Donald Trump’s administration takes ongoing actions to roll back federal climate regulations.

“We’ve seen nothing less than an unprecedented, all-out assault on our environment and our democracy,” said Bentley Johnson, the Michigan League of Conservation Voters’ federal government affairs director.

The clean energy sector has grown rapidly in the United States since President Joe Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022. Congress appropriated $370 billion under the IRA, and White House officials at the time touted it as the country’s largest investment in clean energy.

According to Climate Power, a national public relations and advocacy organization dedicated to climate justice, Michigan was the No. 1 state in the nation in 2024 in its number of clean energy projects; from 2022-2024, the state announced 74 projects totalling over 26,000 jobs and roughly $27 billion in federal funding.

Trump has long been critical of the country’s climate initiatives and development of clean energy technology. He’s previously made false claims that climate change is a hoax and wind turbines cause cancer. Since taking office again in January, Trump has tried to pause IRA funding and signed an executive order to boost coal production.

Additionally, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced in March that the agency had canceled more than 400 environmental justice grants to be used to improve air and water quality in disadvantaged communities. Senate Democrats, who released a full list of the canceled grants, accused the EPA of illegally terminating the contracts, through which funds were appropriated by Congress under the IRA. Of those 400 grants, 15 were allocated for projects in Michigan, including one to restore housing units in Kalamazoo and another to transform Detroit area food pantries and soup kitchens into emergency shelters for those in need.

Johnson said the federal government reversing course on the allotted funding has left community groups who were set to receive it in the lurch.

“That just seems wrong, to take away these public benefits that there was already an agreement — Congress has already appropriated or committed to spending this, to handing this money out, and the rug is being pulled out from under them,” Johnson said.

Climate Power has tracked clean energy projects across the country totaling $56.3 billion in projected funding and over 50,000 potential jobs that have been stalled or canceled since Trump was elected in November. Michigan accounts for seven of those projects, including Nel Hydrogen’s plans to build an electrolyzer manufacturing facility in Plymouth.

Nel Hydrogen announced an indefinite delay in the construction of its Plymouth factory in February 2025. Wilhelm Flinder, the company’s head of investor relations, communications, and marketing, cited uncertainty regarding the IRA’s tax credits for clean hydrogen production as a factor in the company’s decision, according to reporting by Hometownlife.com. The facility was expected to invest $400 million in the local community and to create over 500 people when it started production.

“America is losing nearly a thousand jobs a day because of Trump’s war against cheaper, faster, and cleaner energy. Congressional Republicans have a choice: get in line with Trump’s job-killing energy agenda or take a stand to protect jobs and lower costs for American families,” Climate Power executive director Lori Lodes said in a March statement.

Opposition groups make misleading claims about the benefits of renewable energy, such as the reliability of wind or solar energy and the land used for clean energy projects, in order to stir up public distrust, Johnson said.

In support of its clean energy goals, the state fronted some of its own taxpayer dollars for several projects to complement the federal IRA money. Johnson said the strategy was initially successful, but with sudden shifts in federal policies, it’s potentially become a risk, because the state would be unable to foot the bill entirely on its own.

The state still has its self-imposed clean energy goals to reach in 25 years, but whether it will meet that deadline is hard to predict, Johnson said. Michigan’s clean energy laws are still in place and, despite Trump’s efforts, the IRA remains intact for now.

“Thanks to the combination — I like to call it a one-two punch of the state-passed Clean Energy and Jobs Act … and the Inflation Reduction Act, with the two of those intact — as long as we don’t weaken it — and then the combination of the private sector and technological advancement, we can absolutely still make it,” Johnson said. “It is still going to be tough, even if there wasn’t a single rollback.”

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less
A Missed Opportunity

Broken speech bubbles.

Getty Images, MirageC

A Missed Opportunity

en español

In a disappointing turn of events, Connecticut has chosen to follow the precedent set by President Donald Trump’s English-Only Executive Order, effectively disregarding the federal mandates of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Keep ReadingShow less
The DOGE and Executive Power

White House Senior Advisor, Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk attends a Cabinet meeting at the White House on April 30, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The DOGE and Executive Power

The DOGE is not the first effort to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse in government. It is the first to receive such vociferous disdain along what appears to be purely political lines. Most presidents have made efforts in these areas, some more substantial than others, with limited success. Here are some modern examples.

In 1982, President Reagan used an executive order to establish a private sector task force to identify inefficiencies in government spending (commonly called the Grace Commission). The final report included 2,478 recommendations to reduce wasteful government practices, estimated savings of $429 billion over the first three years and $6.8 trillion between 1985 and 2000. Most of the savings required legislative changes, and Congress ignored most of those proposals.

Keep ReadingShow less