Open Primaries is a movement of diverse Americans who believe in a simple, yet radical idea: no American should be required to join a political party to exercise their right to vote. The mission of Open Primaries is to advocate for open and nonpartisan primary systems, counter efforts to impose closed primaries, educate voters and policymakers, advance litigation, train spokespeople, conduct and support research, and participate in the building of local, state and national open primaries coalitions. We provide information to the public about open and nonpartisan primaries. We engage all sectors—voters, policy makers, good government and civic organizations, business leaders, community activists—to educate, build bridges and develop the primary reform movement.
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Start your day right!
Get latest updates and insights delivered to your inbox.
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More
Pope Leo XIV’s Rebuke of U.S. Immigration Policy Is a Wake-Up Call
Oct 02, 2025
When Pope Leo XIV spoke from Castel Gandolfo this week, he didn’t mince words. The first American-born pontiff condemned the “inhuman treatment of immigrants in the United States,” challenging the moral consistency of Catholic politicians who claim to be pro-life while supporting harsh immigration policies.
“Someone who says ‘I’m against abortion’ but I’m in agreement with the inhuman treatment of immigrants in the United States, I don’t know if that’s pro-life,” Pope Leo said, in remarks that have since ricocheted across political and religious circles.
The Pope’s comments came amid controversy surrounding a proposed lifetime achievement award for Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, a Democrat known for his advocacy on immigration and his support for abortion rights. Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich had nominated Durbin for the honor, citing his “unwavering support of immigrants.” But Springfield Bishop Thomas Paprocki, who barred Durbin from receiving Communion in 2004, objected. The tension escalated until Durbin himself declined the award.
“I understand the difficulty and the tensions,” Pope Leo said. “But… it’s important to consider many issues related to the teaching of the Church.”
That’s the heart of the matter. Catholic social teaching is not a buffet. It demands a consistent ethic of life—one that honors the dignity of the unborn, the incarcerated, the poor, and the migrant. Pope Leo’s words reminds that being pro-life is not just about opposing abortion; it’s about opposing all forms of dehumanization.
This is not a new teaching. Pope Francis, Pope Benedict XVI, and Saint John Paul II all emphasized the interconnectedness of life issues. But Pope Leo’s American roots—and his willingness to name the United States directly—make this intervention especially potent.
The White House was quick to push back. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt rejected the Pope’s characterization, stating, “I would reject there is inhumane treatment of illegal immigrants in the United States under this administration.” She added that the government is “trying to enforce our nation’s laws in the most humane way possible.”
Leavitt also emphasized that President Trump “has done more to protect innocent life than any president in history,” citing his stance on abortion and his judicial appointments. “We welcome the Pope’s support for protecting innocent life,” she said, “and hope he will continue to advocate for the unborn.”
But the facts tell a different story. From family separations and prolonged detentions to the expansion of expedited removals and the use of ankle monitors on asylum seekers, the U.S. immigration system has routinely treated vulnerable people as threats rather than neighbors. The language of “illegality” obscures the humanity of those fleeing violence, poverty, and persecution.
Pope Leo’s challenge is not just political—it’s pastoral. He is calling Catholics to examine their consciences. Can a person claim to be pro-life if they support policies that traumatize children, criminalize desperation, and deny refuge?
This is especially relevant for Catholic lawmakers and voters. Too often, abortion becomes the sole litmus test for moral credibility, while other life issues are dismissed as “political.” But as Pope Leo reminds us, “Church teaching on each one of those issues is very clear.”
His words also offer a path forward. “I would ask, first and foremost, that there be greater respect for one another and that we search together… to find the way forward as Church.”
That search must begin with humility. It must include listening to migrants, refugees, and border communities. It must reckon with the racial and economic injustices embedded in our immigration system. And it must resist the temptation to weaponize faith for partisan gain.
Pope Leo XIV is not asking American Catholics to abandon their convictions. He is asking them to deepen them—to see the face of Christ not only in the unborn child but in the migrant mother, the detained father, the asylum-seeking teenager.
In doing so, he is reminding the faithful that pro-life is not a slogan. It is a summons. And it demands nothing less than a revolution of compassion.
-
Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network. Balta is the only person to serve twice as president of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists (NAHJ).
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
The Roots of America’s Violence: White Supremacy, Power, and the Struggle for Dignity
Oct 02, 2025
In September 2025, activist Charlie Kirk was assassinated while speaking at a Utah campus event. His death was shocking — not only for its brutality, but because it showed that political violence is not just a relic of the past or a threat on the horizon. It is part of our national identity. Today’s surge in violence follows patterns we’ve seen before. Let’s take a look at that history.
When Pope Alexander VI issued the Doctrine of Discovery in 1493, he gave theological and legal cover for European conquest of lands already inhabited by indigenous people. These papal bulls declared non-Christian peoples “less than” and their lands open for seizure. This was more than a geopolitical maneuver — it embedded into the Western imagination a belief in the inherent supremacy of some over others.
When the United States was founded nearly three centuries later, the Founders carried this worldview with them. In the Constitution, they enshrined compromises that upheld racial hierarchy:
- The 3/5 Compromise gave enslavers disproportionate power by counting enslaved people as partial humans.
- The Fugitive Slave Clause treated Black people as property to be returned.
- Indigenous sovereignty was denied, laying the groundwork for forced removal and massacres.
These legal structures weren’t neutral. They authorized violence: slave patrols, lynchings, Native removals enforced by militias, and the steady expansion of “whiteness” as the standard of belonging.
That seed has borne bitter fruit for centuries. In the United States, political violence has always been part of enforcing this hierarchy.
- In 1837, abolitionist editor Elijah Lovejoy was murdered by a pro-slavery mob for daring to print against bondage.
- After emancipation, the Colfax Massacre (1873) and the Wilmington coup (1898) used terror to crush Black political power during and after Reconstruction.
- Native peoples were targeted in state-sanctioned violence, culminating in the Wounded Knee Massacre (1890).
- In the 20th century, racial violence surged whenever Black communities flourished. The Tulsa Race Massacre (1921) destroyed “Black Wall Street,” while the Red Summer of 1919 saw dozens of cities erupt in white mob violence.
- The Civil Rights Movement was met with assassinations and bombings: Medgar Evers (1963), the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing (1963), the murders of James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, and Michael Schwerner (1964), and of course, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (1968).
- White supremacist violence continued into our own time: the Greensboro Massacre (1979), the murder of Denver talk show host Alan Berg (1984), and mass shootings in Charleston (2015), Pittsburgh (2018), El Paso (2019), Buffalo (2022), and Allen, Texas (2023).
Across four centuries, violence has been used to enforce the same hierarchy: the supremacy of some over others.
We often think of white supremacy as something “out there,” belonging only to extremists. But if we are honest, we must ask: Where does it live inside us? In our unspoken fears, in the reflex to protect what is “ours,” in the subtle hierarchies we accept as normal. To live in peace, we must do the hard work of rooting it out of our own hearts and minds.
What we all yearn for is simple: a dignified life. A way to live securely, peacefully, and in community with one another. That dignity cannot be built on the subjugation of others — it can only grow in soil where all belong.
Steps Forward
My heart yearns for a peaceful world where our society is based in convenient, life-affirming systems. Our current society has deep roots in a hierarchy of human value and we have yet to break free. Our liberation depends upon us doing so. Here are things everyone can do:
- Tell the truth about our history. Remember the massacres, lynchings, and assassinations not as isolated tragedies but as a continuous thread.
- Examine our own complicity. Where do supremacy-based assumptions show up in our daily lives, in how we see neighbors, or strangers?
- Practice dignity. Uphold it in how we speak, how we act, how we shape institutions.
- Create new norms. From local communities to national politics, insist on policies and practices that make space for everyone to thrive.
The arc of violence will not bend toward peace on its own. It requires all of us, together, to name the roots, pull them up, and choose a different inheritance.
The Roots of America’s Violence was first published on Debilyn Molineaux's substack platform and was republished with permission.
Debilyn Molineaux is a storyteller, collaborator & connector. For 20 years, she led cross-partisan organizations. She currently holds several roles, including catalyst for JEDIFutures.org and podcast host of Terrified Nation. She also works with the Center for Collaborative Democracy, which is home to the Grand Bargain Project as a way to unify Americans by getting unstuck on six big issues, all at the same time. She previously co-founded BridgeAlliance, Living Room Conversations, and the National Week of Conversation. You can learn more about her work on LinkedIn.
Keep ReadingShow less
Third Grade Students at Francis Wyman Elementary learning with outgoing Town Clerk Amy Warfield.
Photo by Sean Musselman.
Burlington Looks to Schools to Spark Civic Engagement
Oct 02, 2025
Civic engagement in Burlington has been low in recent years, often with under 80% turnout at town meetings, limited committee participation, and a notable lack of interest from younger residents. In addition, local election turnout prior to 2024 averaged about 15%. But longtime community advocate Myrna Saltman believes the solution begins with education—and action.
Saltman has spent decades trying to strengthen local involvement. She got her start in the 1970s by supporting her daughter’s education and joining the League of Women Voters in Wayland, where she helped revive the women’s softball team and developed a passion for political engagement.
After moving to Burlington, Saltman brought that same energy to town affairs. Saltman has worked on committees focused on public transportation, capital budgeting, and environmental protection. Today, she’s advocating for better voter registration, stronger support for local candidates, and increased turnout in municipal elections.
“Most of the people who live here and that I interact with don’t even know how the town really runs,” said Saltman.
Following January’s Civic Expo hosted by Burlington Buzz and the Town of Burlington, Saltman recently proposed having a Candidate’s Night – a forum where residents could meet and ask questions of local office seekers – but struggled to find support. She hoped to increase the community’s understanding on local issues and politics. She reached out to the Lexington League of Women Voters for help organizing the event but didn’t hear back.
Burlington lacks its own chapter of the League of Women Voters, which makes organizing civic events difficult. But while town-level efforts face roadblocks, Burlington’s schools are leading the way in fostering civic knowledge.
Saltman sees early education as key to long-term engagement. She has supported intergenerational programming in the Burlington Public Schools and hopes to see more civic curriculum introduced at the high school level.
“I would tie it to my intergenerational interest,” said Saltman. “I would love to go up to the high school and see what they do to teach civics there.”
Civics education in Massachusetts became a state requirement in recent years, prompting districts like Burlington to embed engagement opportunities into their curriculum.
One example is the sophomore civics project at Burlington High School, a program that allows students to research local government, analyze problems, and develop policy proposals. Social studies teacher and department chair Jennifer Brumby said the project is a cornerstone of their civic education efforts.
“We started it because it was a state requirement that was added when they redid their curriculum and guidelines. This is something that we sort of housed within that,” said Brumby. “That is by far the biggest thing we do. It pretty much hits every student in the school.”
Some of the students’ ideas have even reached town and state officials. One student group advocated for a crosswalk on Cambridge Street—a busy road near the high school. Their proposal was accepted by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation and is now in progress.
The school systems are also getting involved in supporting the community.
At the middle school, Christine Evans, the seventh grade social studies teacher and Curriculum Coordinator, makes it a goal for her students to be involved in student council.
As a part of the student council, students give back to the community. “We do fundraisers to raise money for the different causes in the community,” said Evans. “We do a food drive to the Burlington Food Pantry.”
Outside of these efforts, Evans supports the use of the eighth grade civic curriculum to get students to become active participants in society.
“Over the last few years, there had been more engagement and involvement in trying to add more civic awareness to and projects to the eighth grade curriculum,” said Evans.
Efforts to build civic awareness start even earlier. At the elementary level, Sean Musselman, science and social studies specialist, helps teachers connect classroom lessons to local government.
“Recently we’ve partnered with the town’s clerk’s office to engage kids in … recognizing when there are town elections, and we’ve done that by promoting an “I voted” sticker contest,” said Musselman.
Through the initiative, students create locally-relevant designs for the stickers residents receive when they vote at a local election. They also visit polling places and learn about the democratic process. Another program, Interview Day, brings elected officials into classrooms to speak with students.
“I’ve been happy to support interview days where we get those elected people and people of the city to come in and be interviewed,” said Musselman.
The Town Clerk’s office also holds a Student Vote at the local elections, where kids get a ballot and “vote” alongside their parents.
By combining civic education with hands-on experience, Burlington schools are aiming to create a new generation of engaged residents. For educators like Brumby, the stakes are high—but so is the potential.
“This generation of kids that’s coming up, they’re so aware of social advocacy and global issues,” said Brumby. “I think a lot of them have these sorts of ideals.” By instilling a sense of civic awareness, she says, teachers are showing students, “you have a voice and let’s do something.”
Burlington Looks to Schools to Spark Civic Engagement was first published on Massachusetts News Service and was republished with permission.
Ella Rogerson is a student at Endicott College studying journalism. Her reporting class, taught by Professor Lara Salahi, participated in News Ambassadors program in spring 2025
Keep ReadingShow less
"Just the Facts" on the new $100,000 H-1B visa fee, its impact on tech firms, startups, and healthcare, plus legal challenges and alternatives for skilled workers.
Getty Images, Popartic
Just the Facts: $100,000 Visa Executive Order
Oct 01, 2025
The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.
What Is the $100,000 Visa Fee?
This is a new one-time $100,000 application fee for employers seeking to sponsor foreign workers under the H-1B visa program. The visa is designed for highly skilled professionals in fields like tech, medicine, and engineering.
Who does it apply to, and when does it take effect?
It applies only to new H-1B petitions (not renewals or current visa holders). It takes effect in the next annual lottery cycle (the system used to allocate the 85,000 annual H-1B slots). Employers must submit proof of payment before filing the petition, and petitions will be restricted for 12 months if payment isn’t made.
Why Was It Introduced?
President Trump framed the fee as a way to:
- Protect American jobs by discouraging companies from hiring cheaper foreign labor.
- Curb abuse of the H-1B system, especially by outsourcing firms that flood the lottery with low-wage applications.
- Raise revenue—the administration estimates it could generate over $100 billion to fund tax cuts and reduce national debt.
Who’s Affected?
- Tech giants like Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, and Google—which collectively sponsor tens of thousands of H-1B workers—are expected to be hit hardest.
- Startups and small businesses may struggle to afford the fee, potentially losing access to global talent.
- Universities and hospitals that rely on H-1B workers for research and healthcare roles are also concerned.
Are There Any Exceptions?
This is not 100% certain, but the administration has stated:
- Medical professionals (e.g., physicians and residents) may be exempt.
- National interest waivers can be granted by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
- Current visa holders are not subject to the fee when reentering the U.S.
What Is the H-1B Visa?
The H-1B visa is a non-immigrant visa that allows U.S. companies to temporarily employ foreign workers in specialty occupations that require theoretical or technical expertise.
Key Features:
- Fields covered: IT, engineering, finance, medicine, architecture, and more.
- Education requirement: Typically a bachelor’s degree or higher in a relevant field.
- Duration: Initially granted for three years, extendable to a maximum of six years.
- Annual cap: 85,000 visas per year (65,000 regular + 20,000 for U.S. master’s degree holders).
Who Uses It?
- Major tech firms (Google, Amazon, Microsoft)
- Universities and research institutions
- Hospitals and medical centers, startups, and consulting firms
Are there any related programs?
Trump also introduced the “Trump Gold Card.” For $1 million, individuals can obtain permanent residency and a path to citizenship, and for $2 million, companies can sponsor a foreign worker under a corporate version of the Gold Card. A “Platinum Card” is also in development, offering tax exemptions for wealthy foreigners spending up to 270 days in the U.S.
Legal and Industry Reactions:
- Immigration attorneys are preparing lawsuits, citing a lack of public comment and potential overreach of executive authority.
- Tech companies have issued travel warnings to H-1B employees abroad.
- India’s government has expressed concern over the humanitarian and economic impact.
Do Merit Requirements Still Exist?
Even with the new fee, the core H-1B eligibility criteria remain unchanged:
- The job must be in a specialty occupation requiring a bachelor’s degree or higher.
- The applicant must have relevant education and experience.
- Employers must pay the prevailing wage, matching what similar U.S. workers earn.
You can’t just pay $100,000 and get a visa if you don’t meet the qualifications.
But the $100,000 Fee Adds a Major Barrier:
This new fee applies only to new H-1B applications, and it’s paid by the employer, not the worker. However, it disincentivizes companies from sponsoring foreign talent unless they’re absolutely essential. It favors wealthier firms that can afford the fee, potentially sidelining startups and nonprofits. However, it does not replace the lottery system as applicants still go through the random selection process, but only if the fee is paid.
No Merit-Based Waivers (Yet):
Unlike some other visa categories, there’s no clear path for merit-based exemptions from the fee. The only known exceptions are medical professionals in underserved areas and national interest waivers, which are vague and not well-defined yet.
Bottom Line:
Merit is still required to qualify for the H-1B visa, but the new policy puts a price tag on access. It’s not a “pay-to-play” system in the purest sense—you still need the skills—but it’s now a pay-to-compete system.
If you’re an employer who can’t afford the $100,000 H-1B visa fee or can’t justify it, there are still viable paths for skilled workers to work in the U.S. legally.
What Are the Visa Alternatives if Employers Can’t Afford the $100,000 Fee?
- O-1 Visa: Extraordinary Ability: For individuals with exceptional achievements in science, education, business, arts, or athletics.
- No lottery or cap—direct merit-based approval.
- Requires proof of national/international recognition.
- Faster processing and tailored to specific projects or roles.
- Ideal for researchers, artists, and elite professionals.
- EB-1A Visa: Permanent Residency for Top Talent: A green card option for those with extraordinary ability—no employer sponsorship required.
- Self-petition allowed.
- Leads to permanent residency.
- No labor certification or H-1B-style restrictions.
- Best for long-term career planning.
- L-1 Visa: Intra-Company Transfers: For employees of multinational companies transferring to a U.S. office.
- Must have worked abroad for the company for at least one year.
- No annual cap.
- Suitable for managers, executives, or specialized knowledge workers.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More