• Home
  • Opinion
  • Quizzes
  • Redistricting
  • Sections
  • About Us
  • Voting
  • Events
  • Civic Ed
  • Campaign Finance
  • Directory
  • Election Dissection
  • Fact Check
  • Glossary
  • Independent Voter News
  • News
  • Analysis
  • Subscriptions
  • Log in
Leveraging Our Differences
  • news & opinion
    • Big Picture
      • Civic Ed
      • Ethics
      • Leadership
      • Leveraging big ideas
      • Media
    • Business & Democracy
      • Corporate Responsibility
      • Impact Investment
      • Innovation & Incubation
      • Small Businesses
      • Stakeholder Capitalism
    • Elections
      • Campaign Finance
      • Independent Voter News
      • Redistricting
      • Voting
    • Government
      • Balance of Power
      • Budgeting
      • Congress
      • Judicial
      • Local
      • State
      • White House
    • Justice
      • Accountability
      • Anti-corruption
      • Budget equity
    • Columns
      • Beyond Right and Left
      • Civic Soul
      • Congress at a Crossroads
      • Cross-Partisan Visions
      • Democracy Pie
      • Our Freedom
  • Pop Culture
      • American Heroes
      • Ask Joe
      • Celebrity News
      • Comedy
      • Dance, Theatre & Film
      • Diversity, Inclusion & Belonging
      • Faithful & Mindful Living
      • Music, Poetry & Arts
      • Sports
      • Technology
      • Your Take
      • American Heroes
      • Ask Joe
      • Celebrity News
      • Comedy
      • Dance, Theatre & Film
      • Diversity, Inclusion & Belonging
      • Faithful & Mindful Living
      • Music, Poetry & Arts
      • Sports
      • Technology
      • Your Take
  • events
  • About
      • Mission
      • Advisory Board
      • Staff
      • Contact Us
Sign Up
  1. Home>
  2. Newsletter>
  3. newsletter>

Op-eds of the week: Inflation, Supreme Court reform and replacement theory

The Fulcrum
May 21, 2022

Our weekly op-ed highlight reel

The Fulcrum is a forum for debate about what's ailing American democracy and what could make the system healthier. Here are the most recent arguments from our columnists and other contributors.


Inflation will hit health of low-income Americans hardest

Prapass Pulsub/Getty Images

Dr. Robert Pearl, who teaches at both Stanford’s School of Medicine and Graduate School of Business, regularly writes about the intersection of health care and repairing democracy for The Fulcrum.

In his latest piece, Robert describes the three-punch combination that inflation is going to deliver to the health of low-income Americans.

  1. The initial hit to personal health.
  2. The delayed hit to health care access.
  3. The crushing blow of chronic disease.

While it may be too late for structural changes to solve the near term crisis, it’s imperative we start working toward a long-term solution. The key, according to Robert, is eliminating wasted health care spending.

Read more.

The ‘great replacement theory’ is nonsense

Scott Olson/Getty Images

The claims espoused by some on the far right that liberals are trying to replace conservatives by importing more “compliant” voters is garbage, writes Debilyn Molineaux, our co-publisher. In fact, to the extent that people from around the world are moving to the United States, they are just continuing migratory patterns that kicked off when early humans left Africa.

But it's just disinformation, it’s causing damage to our society.

The “great replacement” nonsense (GRN), the idea that the white race will be relegated to minority status and lose power, is myth-making of the highest order. There are good guys (white people), damsels/children in distress (sex trafficking) and bad guys (migrants, supported by liberals and socialists). It’s the classic, if perverted, hero’s journey. We worship heroes in Western culture, so much so that we are easily manipulated by this perverted story that “those people” are out to get “us and our livelihood.”

Read Debilyn’s entire argument.

We’ve expanded the Supreme Court before. It’s time to do so again.

Paul Morigi/Getty Images

Democrats have been clamoring for Congress to expand the Supreme Court, as it has done in the past, since Republicans tilted the balance heavily to the right in recent years. This began when Mitch McConnell refused to consider Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland and was renewed in recent days after someone leaked Justice Samuel Alito’s draft opinion undoing Roe v. Wade.

Anushka Sakar, deputy communications director for Stand Up America, explains the history of changes to the court’s size and argues it’s time to do it again.

Expanding the Supreme Court to advance a political agenda or protect our fundamental rights is neither new nor nefarious — these politically informed changes to the size of the bench are inherent to the Framers’ delegation of the court’s design to Congress. As the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority threatens to overturn our long-held constitutional right to an abortion, it is ever more the moral and constitutional imperative of Congress to check the court when Americans' fundamental rights are at stake.

Keep reading.

The Supreme Court is caught in a draft

Pool/Getty Images

Justice Clarence Thomas says the leak of the Alito draft has fundamentally changed the court for the worse. Chief Justice John Roberts says there will be an investigation. But perhaps the leak can kickstart reforms that will make the nation’s highest court more transparent and responsive to the American people, writes author and court scholar Lawrence Goldstone.

Almost a dozen years ago, I wrote in my book “Inherently Unequal,” “Constitutional Law is simply politics made incomprehensible to the common man.” The notion was scoffed at — a reviewer in The Washington Post referred to it as a “sound bite” — but I believe time has proved the assertion accurate. If the people are to have any chance of asserting control over the people’s branch of government, this must change. Americans need to have as much understanding as possible of the workings of that branch, and Supreme Court justices being required to share their thinking is a move in that direction.

Read more.

William Seward was a man of imperfection and perseverance, just like our nation

Epics/Getty Images

Lately, there have been calls to tear down statues of William Henry Seward, Abraham Lincoln’s secretary of state and the man behind the acquisition of Alaska (known as Seward’s Folly). American Promise President Jeff Clements, who delivered a lecture named for Seward at the University of Alaska a few years ago, came to Seward’s defense – connecting his successes and failures to the great story of the United States.

Much as Seward achieved great things for this nation (he also played a key role in ending slavery), he also was a central player in a massive land transaction that never considered the native people living there. His legacy is mixed, and so is all of ours.

Both these statements are true:

  1. America is founded on the revolutionary principle that all humans are created equal, with inalienable liberties, and has been a haven of freedom for untold millions of people from all over the globe for more than two centuries.
  2. In becoming a nation, America waged war, expanded into new territory, sought to eliminate long standing native tribes and communities, and brutally enslaved millions of human beings under laws in effect at the time.

Read more.

newsletter

Want to write
for The Fulcrum?

If you have something to say about ways to protect or repair our American democracy, we want to hear from you.

Submit
Get some Leverage Sign up for The Fulcrum Newsletter
Follow
Contributors

Reform in 2023: Leadership worth celebrating

Layla Zaidane

Two technology balancing acts

Dave Anderson

Reform in 2023: It’s time for the civil rights community to embrace independent voters

Jeremy Gruber

Congress’ fix to presidential votes lights the way for broader election reform

Kevin Johnson

Democrats and Republicans want the status quo, but we need to move Forward

Christine Todd Whitman

Reform in 2023: Building a beacon of hope in Boston

Henry Santana
Jerren Chang
latest News

Reframing judicial elections — not “who should we elect,” but “why should we elect them at all?”

Alexander Vanderklipp
23h

Seven Days in March

Lawrence Goldstone
23h

Video: Modernizing Congress: The business case to upgrade government

Our Staff
16 March

Something is horribly, horribly wrong

Debilyn Molineaux
15 March

Virtue’s place in our politics

Kevin Frazier
15 March

D.C. voter suppression by the Federal Government

David Butler
14 March
Videos

Video: A conversation with Tiahna Pantovich

Our Staff

Video: What would happen if Trump was a third-party candidate in 2024?

Our Staff

Video: How the Federal Reserve is the shadow branch of the government

Our Staff

Video: 2023 National Week of Conversation

Our Staff

Video: Bipartisan lunch with lawmakers: Making elections work better in PA

Our Staff

Video: Antisemitism and its impacts

Our Staff
Podcasts

Podcast: A tricky dance

Our Staff
14 March

Podcast: Kevin, Tucker and wokism, oh my!

Debilyn Molineaux
David Riordan
13 March

Podcast: Civic learning amid the culture wars

Our Staff
13 March

Podcast: Winning legislative majorities

Our Staff
09 March
Recommended
Video: A conversation with Tiahna Pantovich

Video: A conversation with Tiahna Pantovich

Reframing judicial elections — not “who should we elect,” but “why should we elect them at all?”

Reframing judicial elections — not “who should we elect,” but “why should we elect them at all?”

Judicial
Seven Days in March

Seven Days in March

Threats to democracy
Video: Modernizing Congress: The business case to upgrade government

Video: Modernizing Congress: The business case to upgrade government

Congress
Something is horribly, horribly wrong

Something is horribly, horribly wrong

Big Picture
Virtue’s place in our politics

Virtue’s place in our politics

Big Picture