Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Congress needs fixing, but it got some advice from an unexpected source

US Capitol
Getty Images

Fitch is the president and CEO of the Congressional Management Foundation and a former congressional staffer.

After watching President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address earlier this month, it would be easy to conclude that members of Congress have little interest in, and do not value, civility, bipartisanship and collaboration as a means to address the challenges our nation faces. But a recent survey of some other folks who were also in the House chamber the same night shows those principles are still respected on Capitol Hill. These people are the men and women who work as staff in Congress.

The Congressional Management Foundation conducted a survey of senior congressional staff late last year and the results offer a roadmap to improving Congress as an institution. It also showed some positive signs that when members of Congress work in a civil and bipartisan fashion, they can actually improve our democratic institutions.


The survey and study, “The State of the Congress 2024,” is by no means a ringing endorsement of the legislative branch. In fact, when staffers were asked whether they agree with the statement, “Congress currently functions as a democratic legislature should,” only 19 percent agreed.

“Dictating is not governing, and governing requires compromise, which seems to be more difficult to obtain with the recent classes of representatives,” said a legislative director for a House Republican.

Yet civility and bipartisanship were clearly identified as necessary for Congress to succeed. Republicans (85 percent) and Democrats (70 percent) said civility was “very important” to a functioning legislature; and 60 percent of Republicans and 51 percent of Democrats said encouraging bipartisanship was “very important.” And a large number (96 percent of Democrats and 98 percent of Republicans) agreed that “it is necessary for Senators and Representatives to collaborate across party lines to best meet the needs of the nation.”

A Republican chief of staff on the House side said: “What we need is more people on both sides of the aisle who are more interested in persuading with facts, rather than seeing nonsense that gets them on TV or a bump in their fundraising.”

One disturbing finding arising from the research is the increasing state of fear for staff working in the institution. “The mental strain of dealing with constituent anger is burdening. I can certainly understand the balance of access to our elected officials and safety. But the vitriol has gotten worse every year that I have worked for Congress,” said a House Democratic district director.

Democrats (68 percent) and Republicans (73 percent) similarly report personally experiencing "direct insulting or threatening messages or communication" at least "somewhat frequently." It’s alarming that there are people who feel it’s OK to spew vitriol at congressional staff and fire off death threats to elected officials.

Importantly, the rising volume of rhetoric could affect whether congressional staff stay in their jobs. When asked how frequently they questioned “whether I should stay in Congress due to heated rhetoric from my party,” 59 percent of Republican staff said they are at least somewhat frequently considering leaving Congress, compared to 16 percent of Democrats.

A House Republican deputy chief of staff said it this way: “Typically when asked about civility I think about it in the bipartisan context. But civility between members of the same party has declined dramatically.”

Yet the research did yield some good news. Since 2019, the House of Representatives has engaged in a bipartisan and constructive effort to improve the capacity of the institution to function. The Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress and the new Subcommittee on Modernization are model efforts in problem-solving in legislatures. We compared the recent survey results with identical questions posed to similar congressional staff in 2022, and in every area staff satisfaction improved. Staff satisfaction with Congress’ access to high-quality, nonpartisan expertise more than doubled in two years. Similarly, satisfaction with the technological infrastructure also doubled the “very satisfied” rating.

“While there is always more that can be done, over the years I've worked at the House I think there's been an impressive evolution in support services offered to employees,” said a House Democratic chief of staff.

The leaders of these efforts are to be commended as outstanding public servants seeking solutions to institutional problems. The chairs and vice chairs of these congressional panels – Reps. Derek Kilmer (D-Wash.), William Timmons (R-S.C.) and Stephanie Bice (R-Okla.) – have demonstrated remarkable creativity, persistence, and collaboration to enact genuine and tangible reforms to how Congress operates. While recent research shows Congress has a long way to go to reach the vision of our founders to build “a more perfect union,” congressional staff have offered both confirmation that progress can be made in this area and guidance on what still needs to be done.

Read More

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: Impact of the Big Beautiful Bill on Health Care

U.S. President Donald Trump takes the stage during a reception for Republican members of the House of Representatives in the East Room of the White House on July 22, 2025 in Washington, DC. Trump thanked GOP lawmakers for passing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Getty Images, Chip Somodevilla

Just the Facts: Impact of the Big Beautiful Bill on Health Care

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

What are the new Medicaid work requirements, and are they more lenient or more restrictive than what previously existed?

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Constitution
Imagining constitutions
Douglas Sacha/Getty Images

A Bold Civic Renaissance for America’s 250th

Every September 17, Americans mark Constitution Day—the anniversary of the signing of our nation’s foundational charter in 1787. The day is often commemorated with classroom lessons and speaking events, but it is more than a ceremonial anniversary. It is an invitation to ask: What does it mean to live under a constitution that was designed as a charge for each generation to study, debate, and uphold its principles? This year, as we look toward the semiquincentennial of our nation in 2026, the question feels especially urgent.

The decade between 1776 and 1787 was defined by a period of bold and intentional nation and national identity building. In that time, the United States declared independence, crafted its first national government, won a war to make their independence a reality, threw out the first government when it failed, and forged a new federal government to lead the nation. We stand at a similar inflection point. The coming decade, from the nation’s semiquincentennial in 2026 to the Constitution’s in 2037, offers a parallel opportunity to reimagine and reinvigorate our American civic culture. Amid the challenges we face today, there’s an opportunity to study, reflect, and prepare to write the next chapters in our American story—it is as much about the past 250 years, as it is about the next 250 years. It will require the same kind of audacious commitment to building for the future that was present at the nation’s outset.

Keep ReadingShow less