A group of former Republican and Democratic officials are forming a new political party called "Forward." Former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang and former Republican Christine Todd Whitman joined CNN's New Day to discuss.
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

U.S. Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-FL), flanked by U.S. Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-PA) and U.S. Speaker of the House Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), speaks during a press conference on Capitol Hill after their weekly party conference meeting on June 21, 2017 in Washington, DC
U.S. Representative Carlos Curbelo / Getty Images
Curbelo Warns Gerrymandering Is Eroding Democracy From Within
Jun 05, 2026
Last week’s Unity Forum conversation featured former U.S. Representative Carlos Curbelo giving a cross-partisan assessment of two issues at the heart of America’s polarized politics: gerrymandering and immigration. His message was a refreshing change from common partisan banter. It was grounded in constitutional principle and the pragmatic belief that democracies survive only when citizens feel represented and when political incentives reward problem‑solving rather than extremism.
Curbelo, a Republican who represented a swing district in South Florida from 2015 to 2019, has long been known as a bipartisan voice on issues ranging from energy to immigration. He co‑founded the House Climate Solutions Caucus, a bipartisan group working to develop practical, economically viable solutions to climate-related issues.
And in his view, the most corrosive of those distortions is gerrymandering.
The Disappearing Middle
Curbelo did not mince words. “I’m opposed to all gerrymandering efforts in any state, whether they benefit Republicans or Democrats,” he said. “All of it is bad for our country.”
He pointed out that when districts are rigged, they eliminate competition, and the political system stops rewarding consensus‑builders. It rewards the loudest voices in the safest seats. The result is a Congress increasingly formed by the extremes of both parties, while the vast middle of the electorate lacks meaningful representation.
Curbelo illustrated the consequences by comparing California and Florida. California, he noted, “is gonna have a negligible number of Republicans,” while Florida’s new map leaves Democrats with only a sliver of representation. In both cases, the minority party becomes too small to represent statewide interests efficiently when the other party controls Congress.
That imbalance, he argued, is not simply a political problem; it’s a governance problem. States need bipartisan delegations to navigate federal priorities, secure disaster relief, and advance local needs regardless of which party holds power.
But the more serious damage is the destruction of voters' belief in the system. Gerrymandering, he said, “further disenfranchises people… they feel like they don’t count, like they don’t matter.” When citizens believe the system is rigged, trust collapses. Once trust collapses, polarization hardens, turnout drops, and the angriest voices dominate the elections.
In Curbelo’s view, the long‑term consequence is unavoidable: “Eventually… this is going to open up a lane for a third way in our country.” Not because Americans are clamoring for a new ideology but because the two major parties have structurally insulated themselves from accountability.
Structural Reform, Not Wishful Thinking
Curbelo offered solutions to the present dysfunction. He argues in favor of reforms that increase competition and broaden participation—open primaries, independent redistricting commissions, and systems like those in Maine, Alaska, and Washington that reward candidates who appeal beyond their base.
Florida came close to adopting open primaries in 2020. The measure received 57–58 percent support—just shy of the 60 percent required for a constitutional amendment. “Both parties united to fight the ballot measure,” Curbelo noted, revealing that the duopoly’s strongest point of agreement is often self‑preservation.
Still, he believes the public is ahead of politicians. “Sixty‑five, seventy, seventy‑five percent of the public is being shut out,” he said. “That’s not okay.” He sees citizen‑driven ballot initiatives as the most hopeful route forward.
Whether state courts can or will intervene is less clear. Florida’s Constitution explicitly prohibits drawing districts for partisan advantage, but Curbelo was candid about the political reality: “If I had to bet… I think they’re gonna uphold the new map.” He stressed that the courts’ decision—whatever it is—does not absolve citizens of responsibility. “It’s not gonna fix itself,” he said. “People have to take action.”
A Parallel Crisis at the Border
The conversation then moved to immigration, where Curbelo again urged realism and humanity. As the son of Cuban immigrants, he embraces America’s identity as a nation of newcomers. But he insists that immigration must be “orderly… legal… predictable… and managed so that it helps advance our economic interests.”
He credited the current administration for stabilizing the southwest border—“It is no longer a disorderly situation,” he said—while criticizing its failure to address the millions of undocumented immigrants already living, working, and contributing in the United States.
These individuals, he argued, are essential to the economy: caring for children and older people, working in restaurants, cleaning buildings, and filling labor shortages across sectors. “Why are we going to throw them out of the country?” he asked. “Why not afford them the opportunity to earn legal status?”
He emphasized that this does not require a path to citizenship—though he supports one. It requires political courage and the readiness to acknowledge economic reality.
He also addressed the elephant in the room: due process. While defending constitutional protections, he warned that asylum laws have been exploited by smugglers who coach migrants to make claims that do not reflect their true circumstances. “Most of the people… have shown up at the southwest border for economic reasons,” he said. That reality requires both compassion and reform.
A Call for Citizens to Reclaim Their Democracy
Across both topics, Curbelo returned to a single theme: the health of American democracy depends on structural incentives that reward problem‑solving rather than polarization. Gerrymandering, closed primaries, and broken immigration laws push the system in the wrong direction.
But he stays guardedly optimistic. “Average citizens,” he said, “will sign petitions and organize and say, enough of this.”
If they do, the country may yet reclaim a politics that reflects the broad, pragmatic middle rather than the narrow extremes. If they don’t, the system will continue to drift toward an outcome in which politicians choose their voters—and not the other way around.
Now is the time to get involved. Whether by keeping informed, talking with neighbors, signing petitions, or supporting reforms, every action helps strengthen our democracy. The future depends on citizens like you—your voice and your participation matter.
Watch the full interview to learn more:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVzt6TOg-jbdoML_b...
David Nevins is the publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
AI is unpopular yet widely used. Explore how citizen-led “crackpot schemes” could shape AI policy, protect jobs, strengthen democracy, and maximize AI’s benefits while reducing its risks.
Andriy Onufriyenko / Getty Images
In Defense of “Crackpot Schemes” for AI Governance
Jun 05, 2026
AI is unpopular. And nearly a billion people use ChatGPT.
AI is destroying jobs. And fields predicted to have been eliminated by AI, like radiology, continue to grow and leverage the technology to improve their work.
AI is wrecking the environment. And state officials are learning from hyperscalers how to run the grid more efficiently.
A black or white conception of AI promises to either deny its benefits or exacerbate its shortcomings. Yet, there’s no easy way to ensure a proper balancing of AI’s promises and perils. While every major AI CEO has pledged to "maximize the benefits and mitigate the risks,” they have left out the details of how to do so.
It’s unlikely they or anyone will ever have such a definite plan. But, if we want to avoid repeating what we did with nuclear power — locking a technology away and letting its best uses go unrealized — we need bold ideas from outside the rooms where AI policy currently gets written. We need “crackpot schemes.”
Consider Social Security. Most Americans, asked who we should thank for it, would name FDR. The better answer is a doctor in Long Beach. In 1933, he wrote a letter to the editor proposing a $200 monthly pension for every citizen over 60, funded by a sales tax, with one catch: recipients had to spend the money within thirty days. Two goals, one scheme. Support the elderly. Sustain a Depression-era economy.
The idea caught fire. Clubs formed across the country, 2.2 million members strong. Ten million Americans signed petitions. By 1935, a majority of the country backed it. The plan itself never became law. Critics called it a “crackpot scheme.” But the Social Security system we have today is unimaginable without that op-ed from a doctor with minimal policy chops or political clout but plenty of experience seeing people struggle to achieve financial security in their golden years.
The best policies often come from unexpected places.
Now consider the policy challenges posed by AI. The Bureau of Labor Statistics projects 3.1 percent job growth by 2035. Forecasters at Metaculus project a 1.4 percent loss. Expert forecasters also expect unemployment for recent college graduates to hit 13.5 percent in the near future, with underemployment climbing to nearly 60 percent. Nobody knows for certain how this economic transition will play out. We are entering a volatile decade, and the people most exposed to it are the people with the least say in how it gets governed.
AI must be developed for us and by us if it is going to earn our trust. People support what they help build. As of now, there are few clear mechanisms for people to share their perspective on what they need to feel like AI is a net positive for their wellbeing and the wellbeing of their community. That needs to change.
Here are a few of the “crackpot schemes” I’ve heard about when talking to everyday Americans eager to know that AI progress does not have to come at the expense of Average Joes and Janes.
First, a mandatory national service program with civil and military tracks for Americans between 17 and 19. It would signal that the country values young people's judgment at exactly the moment AI is making judgment more valuable than ever. It would build the interpersonal experience no model can replicate. It would help revive the civic glue that holds this country together.
Second, recurring citizen assemblies at the local, state, and federal levels that provide a representative set of Americans with the chance to share their viewpoints in a calm, deliberative fashion. Polls focused on likely voters may hold sway with political campaigns but do little to help guide actual policymaking. Gathering people in a room to discuss tangible, specific policies and related trade-offs may bolster the ability of politicians to plan for and respond to many different possible futures.
You may regard these as "crackpot schemes" with no odds of passing. Good. The doctor's pension plan was wrong on the numbers, wrong on the mechanism, and wrong on the funding. It was also the most important policy proposal of the decade, because it forced a country that had decided old age was a private problem to admit it was a public one. Your AI proposal does not have to be right. It has to be loud enough to make the wrong answer indefensible. Now share yours.
Kevin Frazier is the Director of the AI Innovation and Law Program at the University of Texas School of Law.
Keep ReadingShow less

President Donald Trump speaks to the press in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., on June 3, 2026.
(Mandel NGAN/AFP via Getty Images/TCA)
Welcome to Trump’s lame duck presidency
Jun 05, 2026
It's been a while since we saw a lame duck presidency — long enough in politics to maybe forget what one looks like.
In October 2014, President Barack Obama hit his lowest approval rating yet at 40%. The midterm elections were an absolute bloodbath for Democrats — Republicans expanded their majority in the House by 13 seats and took control of the Senate with a gain of nine seats.
The predictions for the second half of Obama’s second term were fatalistic. As early as 2013, analysts were calling his presidency DOA, having seemingly spent all of his political capital on getting the Affordable Care Act passed and implemented, which didn’t go smoothly. He suffered early second-term losses on the Bush-era tax cuts, gun control efforts, and immigration reform.
There was just nothing left in the tank. Or so it seemed.
But Obama defied those predictions. In 2015, he got a huge win when the Supreme Court — in a surprise from conservative Chief Justice John Roberts — ruled in favor of keeping Obamacare intact, preserving his signature legislation.
Then, the ambitious Trans Pacific Partnership deal, the world’s biggest ever trade agreement accounting for two-fifths of trade, got fast-tracked by a highly divided Congress.
He got another win in Cuba, where he secured an agreement to resume diplomatic relations after 54 years of hostilities. And he signed an Iran nuclear deal designed to prevent Iran from developing nukes in exchange for sanction relief.
Whatever you think of Obamacare, the TPP, and the Cuba and Iran deals, it’s hard to argue Obama’s final months in office were very “lame.” In as little as a year, he’d redefined the meaning of the term.
We know how much Obama tends to get in Donald Trump’s head. As the legend goes, after all, it was Obama’s mockery of Trump at the 2011 White House Correspondents’ Dinner that provoked him to run for president. Ever since, he’s been fixated on the ex chief, even blasting his Chicago presidential library with petty jabs in recent months.
Well, Trump only wishes he were having the final few years that Obama did. Instead, it seems, Trump’s lame-duck presidency has arrived early.
Trump’s approval has plummeted since his inauguration, dropping from 52% to 38%, while his disapproval has shot up 15 points.
Thanks in large part to his dumb tariffs and dumb war in Iran, the midterms are looking so bad for Republicans, the party’s resorted to mid-census redistricting schemes that may or may not pay off. Democrats could not only take back the House but win the Senate, with candidates in red states like Texas, Iowa and Ohio in real contention.
Then there are his recent losses. A lot of them.
The $1.8 billion slush fund to pay out MAGA loyalists, including Jan. 6 insurrectionists, was met with such disdain from his own party, he had to dump it.
Four Republicans in the House just voted with Democrats to pass a war powers resolution directing Trump to withdraw military forces from Iran.
Republicans in both chambers have come out to condemn Trump’s utterly absurd pick for director of national intelligence, Bill Pulte.
The fate of his billion-dollar ballroom remains up in the air, as do the “Trump battleships” he’s proposed. A judge ruled he cannot put his name on the Kennedy Center, and his Freedom 250 concert series collapsed as musical acts dropped out one by one, leaving Vanilla Ice to headline, if it happens at all.
These are some humiliating losses. And the crazy part is, had Trump pursued “normal” policy wins for Americans instead of the insane, vulgar, and self-interested nonsense he has, he’d surely be in a different position.
But he didn’t. Welcome to your lame duck, era, Mr. President.
S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.
Keep ReadingShow less
From the Field to the Community: Driving Local Change
Jun 04, 2026
When I first became an Engaged Athlete Fellow through TheTeam, I thought civic engagement was simply about interacting with one’s community and giving back. Over the course of a year-long project built through planning, leadership, and community connection, however, I learned that true engagement is about creating spaces where people feel seen, supported, and empowered to grow together. Civic engagement goes beyond your actions and emphasizes the impact you can create.
From the beginning, I understood that completing a successful civic engagement project was the desired outcome of my time as a fellow. Between the first day I began drafting my plans and now, reflecting on all that I’ve been able to accomplish, I realized I gained so much more. The Team helped me recognize the opportunity not only to uplift my community but also to create real, intentional change. Even further, with the support of this organization, the path was paved to establish lasting change — the kind that seeps into the hearts of others and inspires them to do the same for years to come.
I believe this passion for impact resonates deeply with my character because of the life I’ve been blessed to live, especially thanks to my parents. They made it their mission to ensure that my younger brother and I had every opportunity to live the lives we WANT to live, not HAVE to live. Throughout my years as a student, athlete, friend, and colleague, I have interacted with people from many different backgrounds. Those experiences allowed me to understand the importance of education, opportunity, equity, and access — and, even more importantly, the detrimental impact of not having access to those things.
Having the ability to use my platform to create meaningful impact beyond my sport, particularly by empowering youth and strengthening my community, is no easy feat — but choosing TheTeam as an outlet to do so was the easiest part. Their initiatives focus on developing teammates, inspiring leaders, and empowering citizens, making civic engagement joyful and accessible. Although this was only the third cohort of Engaged Athlete Fellows, the fellowship has already created meaningful success and connections among student-athletes nationwide.
What makes TheTeam unique is that it unites athletes around a shared mission while still allowing each teammate to personalize their approach and create something authentic to themselves. Throughout the year, I never felt alone. Their network, resources, and support-centered staff served as a constant safety net. My mentors and advisors were always one call or text away, and the program's structure ensured I was always moving in a positive direction. As a Division I athlete, balancing fellowships, internships, and leadership opportunities alongside athletics can often feel overwhelming. Under The Team, however, I never had to sacrifice one commitment at the expense of another. Their support is truly what carried me to the finish line with my year-long civic engagement project.
Over the course of the year, I planned and executed a civic engagement initiative centered around community empowerment, youth development, educational advocacy, and civic awareness. Through collaborative programs and outreach efforts, my project aimed to encourage meaningful engagement on campus and throughout the Norfolk community, emphasizing leadership, service, and access to resources.
One of the major highlights of the initiative was hosting an interactive “Spartans Vote” Game Zone during Norfolk State University’s Homecoming in partnership with the “All Vote No Play Day” campaign. This event promoted voter awareness and civic participation in an engaging and accessible environment for students and attendees. Civic awareness efforts also extended to social media advocacy, where members of my Track & Field team participated in Election Day awareness campaigns during local elections to encourage informed voting and community involvement.
Throughout the year, I also participated in and organized volunteer opportunities through the Robert C. Nusbaum Honors College and the Student-Athlete Advisory Board, reinforcing the importance of servant leadership and collective community impact. In addition, I coordinated a mentorship-focused event within the Honors College designed to foster guidance, connection, and support among students navigating academic and personal growth.
Financial literacy and educational empowerment also became central components of the project. Through a collaborative event involving the Honors College, the National Association of Black Accountants, and King In You organizations, students were provided with resources and opportunities for conversations centered on financial responsibility, professional development, and long-term success.
To conclude the fellowship experience, I collaborated with SAAC and various athletic teams to organize a Youth Literacy Sports Camp with the Boys & Girls Clubs of America at the Grandy Village location. This final initiative combined athletics, mentorship, and literacy engagement to foster a positive, encouraging environment for local youth. The camp reflected the overall mission of my project: using leadership, education, and community connections to inspire and uplift others.
Standing in front of each event I had spent months planning, watching people engage with something that once existed only as an idea in my notebook, I realized how much this fellowship had changed me. What began as a civic engagement project became a lesson in leadership, service, and the power of intentional community impact. Through this experience, I gained a deeper understanding of civic engagement as not only service but impact rooted in collaboration, accessibility, and genuine care for one’s community.
Now that I’ve had a glimpse of what it truly means to remove myself from complacency and act, I want to continue educating the youth in my community, particularly through literacy advocacy
and mentorship. I also hope to encourage athletes, both within and beyond my own circle, to find themselves in the vast realm of civic engagement and continue changing the world one win at a time. My aspiration to attend law school after receiving my Bachelor’s degree is rooted in my desire to address critical issues, including educational inequity, financial and political literacy, and the need for stronger support systems within underserved communities.
From the bottom of my heart, I want to thank everyone involved with TheTeam for giving me the opportunity not only to find myself, but to experience finding myself through this year-long journey of impact and influence.
Lexa Hunter is a business intelligence and data analytics honors scholar from Chesapeake, Virginia, whose passion for civic engagement is rooted in mentorship, education, and community empowerment. She is a Division I track and field athlete at Norfolk State University, using her platform to create meaningful impact beyond her sport.
The Team, a nonprofit that integrates civic engagement into college sports, describes its mission as developing “teammates, leaders, and citizens” through award‑winning programming that connects athletics with civic responsibility.
The Bridge Alliance, the sponsor of the Fulcrum, is a partner of The Team.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More

















Trump is stuck between two realities. Neither serves the American people