Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Playing the long game for a civically engaged democracy

The Constitution

The Constitution

zimmytws/iStock via Getty Images

Cambell is executive director of Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement, which describes itself as a community of funders that invest in the sustaining elements of American democracy and civic life.

Tuesday is Constitution Day, a federal commemoration of the day in 1787 when delegates to the Constitutional Convention signed their document laying the foundation of our government and the hope for "a more perfect union."

That hope persists as our democracy grapples with faltering public trust, deepening partisanship and division.

For those of us who work in civic engagement, the reality of these obstacles has prompted — alongside hope — a flurry of debate about how to respond and speculation about what will come next.


Our nation faces great challenges. But the solution lies in that very phrase: "our nation." Our democracy faces a reckoning because many Americans struggle to identify with those words and connect them to a vision of what civic life is and can be. They don't feel our democratic structures and systems represent them and don't feel the sense of ownership, responsibility and commitment that drives civic action. That disconnect has reverberated across our democracy.

Standing at the intersection of civic engagement and philanthropy, I see several opportunities for funders to take strides toward a healthy and robust representative democracy.

For many, civic engagement equates to voting, voter engagement, political reform and advocacy. For PACE, civic engagement includes all those. But it also includes service, leadership development, deliberative dialogue, charitable giving and more — actions that help us self-govern in civil society.

Most importantly, it's the feeling that ties all those actions together: the desire to be part of something bigger than yourself. It's a sense of responsibility to a community, and that sense of commitment requires a sense of connection.

This sense of connection seems to be growing — notice last year's historic midterm turnout and continued flourishes of activism among Americans — but reinforcing it will take time and intention. Expanding our definition of civic engagement is a necessary first step, because it's in this sense of responsibility to something bigger that democracy's roots to begin to grow.

In the 19th century, Alexis de Tocqueville observed that "voluntary associations" were unique to our young democracy and held the power to create organic connections. In short, when you allow people to associate freely in everything, they end up seeing the universal connections in their actions — the unique ways in which people can accomplish what they aim to achieve, then feel inspired to do more. People see how change happens by being part of it.

This reflection is supported by civic engagement data which shows that engagement begets engagement. Whether volunteering for the PTA or mentoring a young person, low-barrier civic engagement has the power to improve your quality of life and the lives of those around you. Volunteers are more likely to find jobs than those who don't serve. Communities with high civic health have better economies. Sense of purpose and connection correlate with positive physical and mental health, personal happiness and satisfaction.

Such small-scale actions can be the most meaningful way to get people in the habit of democracy — by building the sense of ownership, trust and connection that civic engagement requires. People who see themselves in all aspects of community life feel they have a responsibility to act. And that sense of belonging and commitment makes civic engagement — and healthy self-governance — possible.

But another truth is that it's easy to distrust, and avoid altogether, that which you don't see yourself in. And if people don't trust — and therefore don't participate in — government, the possibility of a representative democracy falters. Instead, we'll have a democracy only for the people who show up.

Voter mobilization and fair elections are part of the solution but they tell part of the story. We should expand the mechanisms for meaningful engagement by investing in more robust ways for people to engage with elected officials — activities like participatory budgeting, citizens assembly or initiative reviews, participation in public meetings and advocacy as well as marches and rallies. Participating in politics and engaging with government beyond the ballot box is the only way to ensure our government is representative of our voices. That's step two.

Both steps presume people have the skills and support they need to be effective civic actors. Which leads to step three: civic learning, the range of experiences to prepare for informed and engaged participation in civic life and the democratic process. These experiences can occur in classrooms, or out of school and at all stages of life. What's important is that they happen — and that all Americans have access to them.

Young people with access to robust civic learning opportunities are much more likely to become civically engaged as adults. But there are stark disparities in access to civic learning, many along lines of race and income. As a result, our nation's civic education system risks reinforcing inequities dividing our society.

Democracy is a process, not just an outcome. It's also a skill, and it's our responsibility to ensure young people have the tools to build that skill, as well as the knowledge and dispositions that go with them. Ensuring strategic support of civic learning opportunities that build knowledge as well as skills can ensure informed and effective civic engagement. It also has the potential to create a pathway to equity and opportunity so young people may begin to heal what divides our nation.

This political moment has created urgency and concern as well as a tremendous opportunity. Our democracy has proven resilient throughout history, but we have to double down on our commitment to self-governance in order to see that resilience persist. It is our responsibility to make sure the voices that participate represent the voices, experiences and perspectives of all members of our diverse democracy. All Americans need to see themselves in all aspects of civic life, feel a responsibility to act, have the right to do so and have the skills to support them. Democracy is not a given; it is created, every day, by all of us.

Read More

news app
New platforms help overcome biased news reporting
Tero Vesalainen/Getty Images

The Selective Sanctity of Death: When Empathy Depends on Skin Color

Rampant calls to avoid sharing the video of Charlie Kirk’s death have been swift and emphatic across social media. “We need to keep our souls clean,” journalists plead. “Where are social media’s content moderators?” “How did we get so desensitized?” The moral outrage is palpable; the demands for human dignity urgent and clear.

But as a Black woman who has been forced to witness the constant virality of Black death, I must ask: where was this widespread anger for George Floyd? For Philando Castile? For Daunte Wright? For Tyre Nichols?

Keep ReadingShow less
Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Multi-colored speech bubbles overlapping.

Stanford’s Strengthening Democracy Challenge shows a key way to reduce political violence: reveal that most Americans reject it.

Getty Images, MirageC

In the Aftermath of Assassinations, Let’s Show That Americans Overwhelmingly Disapprove of Political Violence

In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and the assassination of Minnesota state legislator Melissa Hortman only three months ago—questions inevitably arise about how to reduce the likelihood of similar heinous actions.

Results from arguably the most important study focused on the U.S. context, the Strengthening Democracy Challenge run by Stanford University, point to one straightforward answer: show people that very few in the other party support political violence. This approach has been shown to reduce support for political violence.

Keep ReadingShow less