Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Trendsetter? Ohio city makes Election Day a holiday

While the provision making Election Day a federal holiday is quickly becoming one of the more polarizing parts of the House Democrats' political process overhaul bill, dubbed HR 1, one small city in Ohio has quietly and easily decided to make the move on its own.

Sandusky, a summertime destination on Lake Erie halfway between Toledo and Cleveland (population 26,000), will make the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November a holiday starting this fall – replacing Columbus Day. City commissioners made the move with minimal debate last week, just as Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was deriding such an idea as a Democratic "power grab" on the Senate floor.

"What better way to celebrate the value of our employees and citizens than by removing barriers for them to participate in the greatest of American innovations, our democracy," the city government postedon Facebook.


"We are swapping them to prioritize Voting Day as a day off so that our employees can vote," city manager Eric Wobser told the Sandusky Register. "It's also because Columbus Day has become controversial, and many cities have eliminated it as a holiday."

Several other cities have stopped observing Columbus Day or renamed it "Indigenous Peoples' Day," noting the poor treatment of Native Americans by Christopher Columbus and other European explorers. But the House Democratic legislation would retain Columbus Day as a federal holiday and add Election Day.

Election Day is a paid day off for state employees in 13 states. And a survey by the Pew Research Center last fall found 71 percent of Democrats and 59 percent of Republicans in favor of nationalizing the holiday.

Sandusky proper falls in the congressional district held by Democrat Marcy Kaptur, a cosponsor of HR 1, but some of its neighboring towns are represented by Jim Jordan, a Republican who has been one of the most vocal critics of the legislation.


Read More

Happy teacher asking girl with hand raised sitting in classroom at elementary school

Trump's education policies are reshaping public schools. Learn how Department of Education cuts, school boards, and local elections could shape children's futures.

Maskot / Getty Images

When It Comes to Our Children’s Education, Trump Gets An ‘F’

When grading a government, there should be no metric more telling than how the kids are doing. It may come as no surprise that they are not doing well–but if the kids are failing, it is because Trump has failed them. The United States has the highest child poverty rate of any wealthy nation, yet the president continues to systematically abandon children: stripping away vital affordability protections, dismantling public education infrastructure, and cutting Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits. Plus, there’s the ongoing threat of gun violence in schools, the cruel realities facing migrant kids in detention centers, and now new threats to digital safety and youth mental health–an intersectional crisis that desperately requires federal attention while Trump is actively trying to prevent states from stepping up in the meantime. Each of these issues deserves its own op-ed, but today let’s talk about the silver bullet for addressing inequality and building a resilient, inclusive society: public education. Its days may be numbered, but you can help.

In a move characteristically devoid of compassion, President Trump signed an executive order to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education (DOE), mandated that federal funding would be conditional on cutting all diversity, equity, or inclusion programs, and urged Congress to abolish the DOE outright. Following suit, Congress proposed and enacted budget cuts to reduce essential funding for programs supporting low-income students, students with disabilities, and otherwise vulnerable populations. The Supreme Court decision to allow mass layoffs at the Department of Education only worsens this crisis, reducing the department’s ability to assist schools during these challenging times. These combined federal actions will have far-reaching consequences for children and communities across the country. School’s out for summer? School might be out forever.

Keep ReadingShow less
How My Benzodiazepine Experience Impacted the Trust I Have in the Healthcare System
a doctor showing a patient something on the tablet
Photo by Nappy on Unsplash

How My Benzodiazepine Experience Impacted the Trust I Have in the Healthcare System

During my junior year of high school, I was prescribed my first benzodiazepine, called lorazepam, at 16 years of age. At the time, my parents and I did not understand the potential consequences of long-term use of benzos. Like so many other patients out there, we trusted that the healthcare system would not only provide treatment and correct guidance to move forward with my prescriptions, but I never realized they would be the force that would ruin my future and so many dreams I had for my young adulthood.

What followed was a years-long struggle with severe medication dependence and withdrawal that fundamentally changed my life for the worse.

Keep ReadingShow less
Constitution of the United State with the U.S. flag in the background.

The Framers designed a republic with the intention to manage factionalism through deliberate compromise and institutional guardrails, whereas 21st-century polarization often treats compromise as a moral failing.

Douglas Sacha, Getty Images

Our Framers on 21st Century Primaries and Polarization

The Framers would view 21st-century closed primaries and political polarization as the exact manifestation of "factionalism" they spent the 1787 Constitutional Convention trying to prevent. They would argue these systems force candidates to appeal to ideological extremes rather than the broad, moderate consensus required for stable governance.

The Danger of Factionalism: In Federalist No. 10, James Madison defined a "faction" as a group of citizens united by a passion or interest adverse to the rights of others. He argued that while factions are inevitable, their effects must be controlled. The Framers would recognize 21st-century hyper-polarization as the dominance of unyielding factions that prioritize absolute ideological purity over democratic compromise.

Keep ReadingShow less