Mediators Foundation supports and enhances the work of many of the best bridge-builders, peace-makers, and civic thought-leaders in America. Also helps a new generation of civic agents test and launch their initiatives. The overarching purpose of Mediators Foundation is to prevent and reduce conflicts and promote collaboration. The Foundation develops and promotes proven methods for increasing the human capacity for peaceful, creative problem-solving in ways that motivate participants to become more aware and engaged citizens. In addition, the Foundation provides fiscal sponsorship to organizations and projects that reflect and enhance our mission.
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Join a growing community committed to civic renewal.
Subscribe to The Fulcrum and be part of the conversation.
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More
two stickers with the words i vote on them
Photo by Mockup Free on Unsplash
President Trump and His Allies Are Trying to Make It Harder for Americans to Vote
Mar 22, 2026
President Trump and his administration have been working diligently to try to undermine Americans’ trust in our elections. The steady drumbeat of lies and disinformation is intended to give cover to their efforts to interfere in our elections and stack the deck in their own favor. Time and time again, we see them justify their actions by making false claims of widespread fraud from noncitizens voting (something that is exceedingly rare). Back in 2020, we saw secretaries of state from both parties hold the line and protect our elections from executive branch interference. However, this year, President Trump is prepared to go further. From deploying the FBI to raid local elections offices in Fulton County, Georgia, to the President’s repeated claim that the only way the opposing party can win is by “cheating,” the administration has been working overtime to sow doubt in our elections.
That’s bad enough. But now, the President’s allies in Congress are getting in on the act with a raft of new legislation that would trample Americans’ most basic right: the right to vote. As former members of Congress, we are deeply concerned.
This bundle of so-called “election security” bills consists of the SAVE Act, the SAVE America Act, and the MEGA Act. Advocates for these bills argue that they are necessary to combat voter fraud, but the truth is that voter fraud is already extremely rare, and this legislation would make it harder for millions of American citizens to vote. Perhaps even more worrisome, one bill in particular — the MEGA Act — would effectively nationalize elections, violating states’ rights and concentrating unprecedented power over elections in the executive branch.
But that’s exactly what President Trump and his allies want.
Mere days after the FBI’s Fulton County raid, the President called on Republicans to “nationalize” elections, which conservatives would’ve thought unimaginable just a few short years ago. Nationalizing America’s elections would be a flagrant violation of Article I of the U.S. Constitution, which gives the states control of our elections. If the MEGA Act were to become law, it would come with sweeping consequences for voters: opaque purges from voter rolls, stricter ballot deadlines, restricted registration and voting methods, voter eligibility screening by political appointees with flawed federal databases, new executive branch authority over sensitive voter data and election systems, and more. The consequences would be disastrous: disenfranchising eligible voters, imposing serious, unfunded burdens on overworked state and local officials, and violating states’ Constitutional right to administer their own elections.
Similarly, the SAVE and SAVE America Acts would implement stringent documentation requirements, forcing voters to bring a birth certificate or U.S. passport in person just to register to vote, and requiring them to update their registration every time they move or change their name. This is an attack on married women who have changed their last names and have a discrepancy with what is on their birth certificate. And, these bills take away the conventional option to register or update registration online or by mail. The SAVE America Act would go further by tacking on federally mandated on-site citizenship re-verification and strict voter identification rules that would shift authority away from local election administrators and into the hands of Washington. Last year, nearly 60 bipartisan election officials sent a letter to Congress opposing the SAVE Act.
Some of these may seem like reasonable requirements at first glance. But this is not about common-sense election improvements. It is about placing the machinery of voter registration and list maintenance — including the power to purge voters and control sensitive personal data — under the executive branch's political control. And it is about making registration and voting much harder for millions of American citizens who do not readily have access to these documents. Seniors, newlyweds, military service members, rural voters, citizens in the process of moving — there are any number of reasons why someone may not have immediate access to all the necessary, up-to-date documents. The Constitution protects the right of American citizens to vote. It must not be undermined or weaponized based on unreasonably high hurdles that prevent eligible voters from casting a ballot.
Election security and access are not mutually exclusive. Americans deserve free and fair elections without unnecessary, politically motivated restrictions. We must protect the integrity of our elections. And in so doing, we must ensure eligible citizens are not discouraged from exercising their civic duties.
This week, the Senate will debate the SAVE America Act. And in the coming weeks, Congress will likely continue to vote on one or more of these pieces of legislation. Call your senators and representatives to demand that they reject these bills and any attempt to centralize political control over elections. Instead, insist that they uphold the Constitution and the rights of the citizens they serve. Let us be abundantly clear: these are dangerous bills designed to undermine the Constitution and make it harder for more Americans to vote.Peter Smith, a Republican, served in Congress representing Vermont’s at-large district from 1989-1991.Elizabeth Holtzman, a Democrat, served in Congress representing New York’s 16th congressional district from 1973-1981. Both are now members of Issue One's ReFormers Caucus.
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
blue white and red flag
Photo by Mark König on Unsplash
The Antidote to Our Growing Crises Must Transcend Politics
Mar 22, 2026
Each day, the challenges in our nation pile up. In just recent weeks, there has been the ongoing war in Iran and the Middle East, and ongoing debates about the growing negative impact of the Internet, looming AI challenges, and the Epstein files. The anticipation of divisive, even ugly, midterm elections only adds more angst to our woes. It can feel like we have lost control over our present and our future.
Is there an antidote? Yes. But we must seize it together.
We need a civic response that calls us to our better selves, offers a sense of possibility and hope, and provides a practical path forward. Such a response must transcend politics and galvanize our fragmented, divided, hurting nation. And it must speak plainly to people’s yearning for a sense of common purpose, belonging, shared action, and healing.
For two years, I’ve crisscrossed our nation nonstop on my Campaign for the New Civic Path from Flint, MI, to Selma, AL, to Chicago, IL, to Philadelphia, PA, to Redding, CA, to rural Grundy, VA, tucked deep in Appalachia. People’s enthusiastic response proves that Americans crave an apolitical message from an apolitical messenger. I’ve only seen this hunger grow and deepen over time, and it cuts across typical divides like political affiliation, race, geography, and income.
This is a crucial year. None of us can afford to sit on the sidelines. We must not surrender to the negative forces consuming society today. That’s why I’m continuing to run this campaign through 2026. As we move forward, the shared civic response I have in mind is based on four principles:
- Addressing our “crisis of belief.” Our politics are broken; but at root, we face a crisis of belief—in our systems, institutions, leaders, even one another. We must act to restore our belief that we can get things done together. This is a cultural and human challenge. The good news? Addressing this crisis is doable and practical. Take Union County, OH, which is in Jim Jordan’s congressional district. Groups of leaders and residents there are growing people’s belief by coming together in new ways to produce needed change on what truly matters to people in their daily lives, like youth and healthcare.
- Harnessing America’s 250th to declare who we seek to become. This year provides a unique opportunity to examine who we seek to be as Americans and how we can make the next 250 years even better, for all of us, starting today. I take great inspiration from American history. It is in the stories of the abolition movement, the civil rights movement, and others that we might rediscover that change starts in our local communities and spreads nationwide. Through the determined actions of everyday Americans, we can strive to make this country live up to its founding ideals.
- Rallying around a new moral vision. Every day I hear Americans from all walks of life say they seek greater decency, dignity, belonging, and shared responsibility in society. And they’re ready to take action on a set of shared concerns—like youth opportunities, senior care, affordable housing, mental health, and others. Taken together, I believe this is the foundation of a new moral vision that transcends divisive politics and has the power to galvanize us.
- Getting on a new civic path. Only by getting on a new civic path can we restore our belief and reclaim our shared agency by building on what we can agree on and taking real action together—not as Republicans, Democrats, or Independents, but as Americans. Lest you think this is some utopian dream, I’ve witnessed firsthand how getting on a new civic path has transformed places like Reading, PA—once declared the poorest community in America—and Alamance County, NC—perhaps the most divided place I’ve worked in my nearly 40 years. It is possible. It is already happening.
I believe such a civic response to today’s crises is so important because politics alone cannot deliver what so many Americans are deeply yearning for.
Of course, each of us must vote. Debate issues. Speak out. This is part and parcel of the American experiment. Much is at stake.
Yet people across America are desperate for something that transcends politics and enables us to focus on what really matters, take shared action, and restore our belief in one another. The cure to our toxic politics can’t be to double down on the status quo. A new civic path can be the antidote. But it’s an antidote our politicians by definition cannot offer—it must be apolitical.
That’s why I plan to keep sounding this message. I hope you’ll join me.
We need each other. Let’s go together.
Rich Harwood is the president and founder of The Harwood Institute.
Keep ReadingShow less
a group of people outside a building
Photo by Ernie Journeys on Unsplash
Fulcrum Roundtable: Election Interference
Mar 22, 2026
President Donald Trump’s comments urging Republicans to “nationalize” elections have intensified debate over the future of U.S. election administration. In an interview last month on Dan Bongino’s podcast, Trump repeated disproven claims of widespread voter fraud and argued that the GOP should “take over” voting operations in multiple states.
Amherst College professor and legal scholar Austin Sarat joined Executive Editor Hugo Balta on this month's edition of The Fulcrum Roundtable for a wide‑ranging conversation on the state of American democracy and the challenges facing the nation’s electoral system.
- YouTube youtu.be
Sarat’s appearance centered on his recent Fulcrum column, "Why the GOP Needs to Help Prevent Pres. Trump from Interfering in the November Election," which examines concerns about potential election interference in 2026 and the role he argues Republican leaders must play in preventing it. In the piece, Sarat writes that the country is entering a period in which “the guardrails of democratic practice are being tested,” and he contends that party leadership will face heightened responsibility to ensure that election administration remains insulated from political pressure.
"Republican legislators could and should say to the president: 'Keep your hands off these elections. It's better that we lose than that we win with a shadow cast over the legitimacy of the results of the 2026 elections," Sarat said.
During the Roundtable, Sarat expanded on those themes, discussing the historical context of election interference claims, the legal boundaries that govern state and federal authority, and the broader implications for public trust. He emphasized that the durability of democratic institutions depends not only on laws but also on political actors' willingness to uphold them.
The conversation also highlighted two additional Fulcrum contributors whose recent work examines the shifting landscape of election governance.
Francis Johnson's column, "Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design," centered on the debate over nationalizing elections, exploring whether federalizing election administration could reduce disparities among states or risk further political polarization. Johnson outlines competing arguments: some advocates say national standards would strengthen voting rights, while critics warn that centralized control could undermine local expertise and accountability.
Sarat acknowledged that, historically, the system has been "highly weighted" toward the states' role in conducting elections, as established in the Constitution, and argued that a national role is legitimate when the federal government acts specifically to "promote and protect the right of all Americans to cast their ballots" and ensure voting rights.
Nick Allison’s recent analysis looked at efforts by Republican officials in several states to assert greater control over election systems. His piece, "A Party That Seeks to Nationalize and Control Elections Has Entered Fascist Territory," traced legislative proposals, administrative changes, and political messaging that have emerged around election oversight. Allison noted that these developments reflect deeper tensions over who should wield authority in administering elections and how those decisions shape public confidence.
"Once this thing is out of the bag that the federal government is going to interfere with elections, it'll lie around like a loaded gun waiting for the next political party or the next political leader to pick it up," he said. "Democracy demands a kind of faith. Faith in the wisdom of the people. Faith that nobody's fate is going to be sealed or decided by a single election... Faith in democracy and the faith that democracy requires are precious things."
Sarat connected both perspectives, arguing that the country is witnessing a redefinition of election governance that will require vigilance from policymakers, civic leaders, and voters. He stressed that debates over nationalization, state authority, and partisan influence are not isolated disputes but part of a broader reckoning with how elections should function in a polarized era.
Balta closed the discussion by underscoring The Fulcrum’s mission to elevate informed, solutions‑oriented dialogue about democratic institutions. The Fulcrum Roundtable reflects the publication’s commitment to bringing together diverse voices to examine the pressures facing American democracy and the pathways to strengthening it.
Hugo Balta is the executive editor of The Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network.
Keep ReadingShow less
Travelers wait in a TSA Pre security line at Miami International Airport on March 17, 2026, in Miami, Florida. Travelers across the country are enduring long airport security lines as a partial federal government shutdown affects the Transportation Security Administration officers working the security lines.
(Joe Raedle/Getty Images/TCA)
A New Norm of DHS Shutdown & Long Airport Lines
Mar 22, 2026
If you’ve ever traveled to France, chances are you’ve come up against this all-too-common phenomenon. You get to the train station and, without warning, your train is out of service. Or a restaurant is oddly closed during regular business hours.
“C’est la grève,” you may hear from a local, accompanied by a shrug. It’s the strike.
There’s a joke in France about their time-honored tradition of labor protests: A tourist asks a waiter what the signs are about at a protest across the street. The waiter hardly looks up and simply says, “Thursday.”
Strikes, protests, work stoppages and closures are so frequent in France, there are multiple apps and websites devoted to letting locals and tourists alike know what will be open and what will be closed, and those in the know check daily.
A strike today at schools in Dijon, Lyon and Rennes; an ongoing transport strike in Rouen; closures at the Louvre. One site promises: “Thanks to our service, unexpected problems are a thing of the past. You’ll no longer be stuck waiting for your train, and you can plan a backup solution!”
Americans may hear this and smugly scoff at a society that’s turned such dysfunction into a revered art form. But our pride is increasingly undeserved.
Last week I flew between Newark and Austin. As you may have seen on the news, the security lines were hours long and, in some cases, snaked out the airport doors and onto the street.
This wasn’t because of a protest or a strike, however, but yet another government shutdown, the third in just six months.
Starting in October last year and lasting for 43 days, we endured the longest shutdown in U.S. history due to an impasse over Affordable Care Act subsidies. Then, earlier this year, a partial shutdown over delays in a funding package linked to immigration. And now, going on more than a month, we’re in another partial shutdown over Department of Homeland Security funding.
The shutdown has meant about 50,000 Transportation Security Administration officers have been working without pay. Many have picked up second jobs, while others are calling in sick and more than 300 have simply quit.
Acting Deputy TSA Administrator Adam Stahl says we’re rapidly approaching a breaking point:
“If the call rate does climb,” he said of agents calling out of work, “there could be scenarios where we may have to shut down airports. This is a serious situation.”
You’d think Congress would want to fix this quickly in an election year, but all evidence to the contrary. Republicans and Democrats remain in a stalemate over DHS funding, with both parties blaming each other and using strikingly similar language to do so.
“Democrats need to end their political posturing, stop using our TSA agents as political pawns, and fully fund DHS,” said Sen. Katie Britt.
Sen. Raphael Warnock said, “I think it’s simply wrong for my Republican colleagues to use these hard-working Americans as leverage, as pawns, in what they are presenting as a false choice to the American people.”
But while both parties finger-point, all the average American sees is a dysfunctional government getting more dysfunctional by the day, with basic pursuits — like air travel — feeling more like capricious and unreliable luxuries.
While inching through security in Austin, someone asked me what the lines were about. “The shutdown,” I said. He didn’t even know we were in one again.
We deserve better from our government. But if this is just our new normal — where on any given day we’re left wondering what parts of our government are open and running — we may, like the French, need to get ourselves an app for that.
S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More
Trump’s ‘Just for Fun’ War Talk Shows a Dangerous Trivialization