Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

We took big steps toward a multiracial democracy on Election Day

Michelle Wu being sworn in as mayor of Boston

Michelle Wu was sworn in as mayor of Boston on Nov. 16. She is the first Asian American to lead the city.

Scott Eisen/Getty Images

Ispahani is co-director of Open Society-U.S., overseeing grant making, advocacy, and administrative work in U.S. offices of the Open Society Foundations.

Off-yearelections typically produce rough nights for the party in power andthis month's vote was no exception. Democrats lost every statewide race in Virginia and narrowly held the governorship in New Jersey — both blue states. Pundits are parsing familiar themes of Democrats in disarray and the GOP's ability to once again inflame the culture wars to their political advantage.

This negative narrative, though, obscures some landmark victories worthy of their own headlines, as they suggest milestones on the longer march toward a truly multiracial democracy.


In Boston, Democrat Michelle Wu became the first Asian American ever elected mayor of Boston. The runner-up was fellow Democrat Annissa Essaibi George, who is Arab American. Wu will succeed the city's acting mayor, Kim Janey, who became the first Black woman to hold the job after Mayor Marty Walsh joined the Biden administration as secretary of labor. This transition marks a sea change in a city not exactly famous for its racial inclusion, having been run for the better part of a century by white men.

In Cincinnati, Aftab Pureval defeated David Mann, a longtime local political leader. Pureval, whose family immigrated from India, becomes the first Asian American to lead his city. In Dearborn, Mich,, state Rep. Abdullah Hammoud became the first Arab-American and first Muslim to lead the city of 109,000, which has long been home to a sizable Arab population. He bested another political veteran, Gary Waronchak, a former state representative and former Wayne County commissioner.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

And in Seattle, Bruce Harrell, a former city council president and second-generation Japanese American, has been elected the city's first Asian American mayor.

But those weren't the only firsts for multi-racial democracy on Election Day. Change was on the ballot from Manhattan to Middle America. New York City elected five new city council members from the AAPI (Asian American and Pacific Islander) community, including its first Muslim (in a city of 800,000 Muslims), its first South Asian Americans, and its first Korean Americans. And Duluth, Minn., elected its first Muslim to city office: Azrin Awal, a 25-year-old immigrant from Bangladesh.

These advances are all the more stunning given the wave of hate targeting Asian Americans during the pandemic. According to the latest FBI figures, hate crimes against Asian Americans increased by more than 73 percent in 2020. That number is all the more stark given a documented reluctance among Asian Americans historically to report incidents of hate to authorities.

It is also important to note that several of these electoral victories came in cities without large Asian American populations. Indeed, the AAPI community makes up a relatively small percentage of all voters in places like Boston and Cincinnati. The fact that significant numbers of white voters supported these candidates is a storylinesurely as worthy of media attention as the fixation on white suburban swing voters who went Republican on Tuesday.

Pureval summed up the change nicely. When he was first starting out in politics, "[everybody] would tell me: 'there's no way a Brown guy is going to win a countywide seat in Cincinnati.' Now, people tell me, 'I can't run and win because my name is Joe Smith.' So there's a tipping point by which our community's perceived weakness turns into a real strength."

What is equally heartening is how many Americans turned out to vote, despite the tendency for turnout in off-year and midterm elections to drop significantly from presidential election-year levels. Virginia's vote was held following implementation of historic voting reforms, including no-excuse absentee voting, expansion of in-person voting, and removal of a photo voter ID requirement. Parts of the state saw the highest levels of turnout in recent history. Georgia and Iowa also saw substantial turnouts.

This level of civic engagement is encouraging — especially coming on the heels of Donald Trump's endless sore-loser rants about the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election, and a massive effort to approve voter suppression measures in Republican-controlled legislatures across the country. As the results in Virginia suggest, improving access to the ballot box, and removing impediments that make voting harder, can clearly benefit both parties — and all Americans. It's time for Congress to pass federal protections of voting rights, to ensure free, fair and secure elections across the country in 2022 and beyond. The future of America's multiracial democracy looks bright, if only the people have a chance to exercise their constitutional right to choose their leaders.

Read More

Project 2025: The Department of Labor

Hill was policy director for the Center for Humane Technology, co-founder of FairVote and political reform director at New America. You can reach him on X @StevenHill1776.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, a right-wing blueprint for Donald Trump’s return to the White House, is an ambitious manifesto to redesign the federal government and its many administrative agencies to support and sustain neo-conservative dominance for the next decade. One of the agencies in its crosshairs is the Department of Labor, as well as its affiliated agencies, including the National Labor Relations Board, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

Project 2025 proposes a remake of the Department of Labor in order to roll back decades of labor laws and rights amidst a nostalgic “back to the future” framing based on race, gender, religion and anti-abortion sentiment. But oddly, tucked into the corners of the document are some real nuggets of innovative and progressive thinking that propose certain labor rights which even many liberals have never dared to propose.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less
Preamble to the U.S. Constitution
mscornelius/Getty Images

We can’t amend 'We the People' but 'we' do need a constitutional reboot

LaRue writes at Structure Matters. He is former deputy director of the Eisenhower Institute and of the American Society of International Law.

The following article was accepted for publication prior to the attempted assassination attempt of Donald Trump. Both the author and the editors determined no changes were necessary.

Keep ReadingShow less
Beau Breslin on C-SPAN
C-CSPAN screenshot

Project 2025: A C-SPAN interview

Beau Breslin, a regular contributor to The Fulcrum, was recently interviewed on C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal” about Project 2025.

Breslin is the Joseph C. Palamountain Jr. Chair of Political Science at Skidmore College and author of “A Constitution for the Living: Imagining How Five Generations of Americans Would Rewrite the Nation’s Fundamental Law.” He writes “A Republic, if we can keep it,” a Fulcrum series to assist American citizens on the bumpy road ahead this election year. By highlighting components, principles and stories of the Constitution, Breslin hopes to remind us that the American political experiment remains, in the words of Alexander Hamilton, the “most interesting in the world.”

Keep ReadingShow less
People protesting laws against homelessness

People protest outside the Supreme Court as the justices prepared to hear Grants Pass v. Johnson on April 22.

Matt McClain/The Washington Post via Getty Images

High court upholds law criminalizing homelessness, making things worse

Herring is an assistant professor of sociology at UCLA, co-author of an amicus brief in Johnson v. Grants Pass and a member of the Scholars Strategy Network.

In late June, the Supreme Court decided in the case of Johnson v. Grants Pass that the government can criminalize homelessness. In the court’s 6-3 decision, split along ideological lines, the conservative justices ruled that bans on sleeping in public when there are no shelter beds available do not violate the Constitution’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

This ruling will only make homelessness worse. It may also propel U.S. localities into a “race to the bottom” in passing increasingly punitive policies aimed at locking up or banishing the unhoused.

Keep ReadingShow less
Project 2025: A federal Parents' Bill of Rights

Republican House members hold a press event to highlight the introduction in 2023.

Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Project 2025: A federal Parents' Bill of Rights

Biffle is a podcast host and contributor at BillTrack50.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

Project 2025, the conservative Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for a second Trump administration, includes an outline for a Parents' Bill of Rights, cementing parental considerations as a “top tier” right.

The proposal calls for passing legislation to ensure families have a "fair hearing in court when the federal government enforces policies that undermine their rights to raise, educate, and care for their children." Further, “the law would require the government to satisfy ‘strict scrutiny’ — the highest standard of judicial review — when the government infringes parental rights.”

Keep ReadingShow less