Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

National Week of Conversation aims to heal Americans

Two friends talking
Thomas Barwick/Getty Images

Molineaux is president/CEO of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund, a 501(c)(3) organization that houses The Fulcrum.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.
— Margaret Med

In May 2017, I was invited by my colleague Cheryl Hughes to participate in an annual event she created for the city of Chicago called On The Table. It has since been replicated in over 30 cities across the United States. The idea was simple: Have a single day dedicated to citizens talking about what they wanted for Chicago. Cheryl's team focused on recruiting and supporting conversation hosts — those courageous individuals who would invite their friends, family, colleagues and adversaries to conversations about their collective futures.


My experience that day led me to ask, could we do this nationally? I consulted with Cheryl and she said the funding community didn't believe it was possible. It was too broad in scope. Chicago was hard enough ... and their budget had grown incrementally over their four-year history.

In October 2017, Cheryl and I (now fast friends) co-convened a group of 20 people to discuss the idea of "a national conversation" to help Americans connect with each other and reduce toxic polarization. We started with ideals and purpose: to heal the soul of America.

Those in the meeting were mostly optimists. We had experienced the heart-opening and life-uplifting power of generative conversations. We talked about a website or platform where organizations could list events, provide toolkits and generally promote the idea that talking to each other was necessary and fun. #GivingTuesday was our business model when we needed a little infrastructure but shared ownership of the content. We also recognized strong optimism and wishful thinking about our goal with little pragmatism. It was time to get real.

After lunch, I asked, why should we NOT do this? The pragmatists spoke up and the challenges were all too real and grim. Lack of funding, no media attention, lack of influence, the public's lack of interest, etc. The usual challenges to new ideas.

Next I asked, should we do it anyway? YES was the fervent response.

By the end of that meeting, we had committed to create a National Week of Conversation, which launched in April 2018. I am forever grateful for the tireless efforts of Pearce Godwin, John Gable, Caroline Klibanoff, Sandy Heierbacher, Serena Witherspoon, Cheryl Graeve, Jaymee Copenhaver and many, many others for getting us started. And to my co-creator, Cheryl Hughes, for inspiring all of us with On The Table.

By 2019, Pearce was leading the team with his # ListenFirst Coalition and dozens more organizations. Last year, the National Week of Conversation became a months-long campaign, #WeavingCommunity, meeting the extraordinary needs of 2020 with hundreds of partners.

It's almost time for the fourth annual National Week of Conversation, June 14-20, kicked off by a two-day event, America Talks, on June 12-13.

You're invited to join this national event from the comfort of your home. You're invited to help our nation move forward.


Read More

Dallas County Republicans abandon plan to hand-count ballots in March primary

Election workers hand-count ballots in Gillespie County in the 2024 primary. Dallas County Republicans have abandoned a similar plan for the 2026 primary.

(Maria Crane / The Texas Tribune)

Dallas County Republicans abandon plan to hand-count ballots in March primary

After months of laying the groundwork to hand-count thousands of ballots in the March 3 primary, the Dallas County Republican Party announced on Tuesday it has decided not to do so, opting instead to contract with the county elections department to administer the election using voting equipment.

The decision spares the party the pressure it likely would have faced if a hand-count had delayed results beyond the state’s 24-hour reporting requirements in the state’s closely watched GOP primary for U.S. Senate, among other offices.

Keep ReadingShow less
From “Alternative Facts” to Outright Lies

U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem on January 7, 2026 in Brownsville, Texas.

(Photo by Michael Gonzalez/Getty Images)

From “Alternative Facts” to Outright Lies

The Trump administration has always treated truth as an inconvenience. Nearly a decade ago, Kellyanne Conway gave the country a phrase that instantly became shorthand for the administration’s worldview: “alternative facts.” She used it to defend false claims about the size of Donald Trump’s inauguration crowd, insisting that the White House was simply offering a different version of reality despite clear photographic evidence to the contrary.

That moment was a blueprint.

Keep ReadingShow less
White House ‘Score‑Settling’ Raises Fears of a Weaponized Government
The U.S. White House.
Getty Images, Caroline Purser

White House ‘Score‑Settling’ Raises Fears of a Weaponized Government

The recent casual acknowledgement by the White House Chief of Staff that the President is engaged in prosecutorial “score settling” marks a dangerous departure from the rule-of-law norms that restrain executive power in a constitutional democracy. This admission that the State is using its legal authority to punish perceived enemies is antithetical to core Constitutional principles and the rule of law.

The American experiment was built on the rejection of personal rule and political revenge, replacing them with laws that bind even those who hold the highest offices. In 1776, Thomas Paine wrote, “For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other.” The essence of these words can be found in our Constitution that deliberately placed power in the hands of three co-equal branches of government–Legislative, Executive, and Judicial.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two people looking at screens.

A case for optimism, risk-taking, and policy experimentation in the age of AI—and why pessimism threatens technological progress.

Getty Images, Andriy Onufriyenko

In Defense of AI Optimism

Society needs people to take risks. Entrepreneurs who bet on themselves create new jobs. Institutions that gamble with new processes find out best to integrate advances into modern life. Regulators who accept potential backlash by launching policy experiments give us a chance to devise laws that are based on evidence, not fear.

The need for risk taking is all the more important when society is presented with new technologies. When new tech arrives on the scene, defense of the status quo is the easier path--individually, institutionally, and societally. We are all predisposed to think that the calamities, ailments, and flaws we experience today--as bad as they may be--are preferable to the unknowns tied to tomorrow.

Keep ReadingShow less