The redrawing of legislative district boundaries. A 1967 federal law requires House members be elected from single-member districts that (within each state) have nearly identical populations. House maps must be redrawn after reapportionment but before the first congressional election of each decade, based on population changes in each state revealed by the census.
Seattle Washington city downtown skyline during sunset
Sustainability in government is a discussion at both the local and national levels. What is common today is that this conversation has long excluded Indigenous communities' voices and perspectives from the legislative process.
Too often, local governments enact environmental and sustainability legislation without considering its impact on Indigenous groups.
However, cities like Seattle, Washington, are setting a new example of how local and national governments can work collaboratively with Indigenous communities to advance shared sustainability goals.
By working with local government and leveraging Indigenous groups and voices, communities can implement climate solutions more authentically and effectively. This would help create more efficient solutions for the Indigenous communities directly impacted by the environmental crisis.
The Seattle Office of Sustainability and Environment has worked on initiatives that support climate justice and has collaborated with local Indigenous groups within those programs.
Lylianna Allala, the Director of OSE, leads several initiatives aimed at working with Indigenous groups to achieve sustainable goals. She worked as the Equity and Environment Program Manager for seven years, where she managed the development and implementation of programs under the Equity and Environment Initiative.
“Making sure that we were building relationships with native and Indigenous communities, Indigenous-serving organizations, and tribal organizations and government was an area of improvement for us,” Allala said.
By inviting Native and Indigenous leaders to work with OSE, the Seattle City Council established an ordinance that created the Green New Deal Oversight Board, which provides proposals for new policies, programs, and projects regarding climate and environmental justice to the mayor and city departments.
“When that ordinance was shaped, there was a specific callout for representatives from tribal communities who have usual and accustomed land and water in Seattle,” Allala said. “So there was a specific carveout for voice and leadership there, and that has been a really pivotal moment.”
Apart from the Green New Deal Oversight Board, the Seattle Climate Action plan includes a central goal of bringing in collaborators from the local community.
The plan includes how Seattle will decrease pollution and build a more equitable city. One central goal is to strengthen shared climate leadership and partnerships with community members.
Since 2018, they have funded programs that advance environmental education based on Indigenous stewardship and have advocated for protecting marginalized groups.
Beyond efforts within Seattle government, several Indigenous nonprofits across Seattle are advancing their own sustainability and environmental work.
Rising Tides is an Indigenous planning group that promotes Indigenous approaches to urban planning, community development, and cultural placemaking. They have produced several reports studying the native and Indigenous communities in Seattle, providing a more thorough understanding of the perspectives and needs of these communities.
The Duwamish River Community Coalition was established in 2001 and has a mission to elevate the voices of those impacted by the Duwamish River pollution and other environmental injustices. Their initiatives span environmental law, climate policy, health equity, clean air programs, and more.
The Na’ah Illahee Fund is an Indigenous-led organization focused on strengthening Indigenous economies and protecting their land, water, and sustainable practices. Their impact has expanded beyond Seattle and includes urban, rural, and reservation-based Indigenous communities across Washington, Oregon, Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and British Columbia.
In Seattle, OSE, along with the Seattle Foundation and City of Seattle, recently announced the First Peoples’ Climate Fund Grantees, marking a “$5.5 million investment that places Indigenous sovereignty, leadership, and ancestral knowledge at the heart of climate action.”
The fund allows for a process where the perspectives of Tribes and Native leaders in Seattle are at the forefront of developing climate strategies.
“I think that the approach tracks with how [OSE] operates,” Allala said. “Making sure that we’re creating opportunities for co-design and co-development and co-evaluation to make sure that we’re still meeting the outcomes that we intended to achieve when we were designing a policy or programs.”
Beyond creating programs that promote collaboration, Seattle government representatives and local Indigenous groups have been working to address the climate crisis and are brainstorming solutions.
In 2021, the Seattle government created the Seattle Indigenous Advisory Council, where members would advise the city government on issues impacting American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian people in Seattle. Their core goal is to “Build an Indigenous City” by advancing strategies that push for cultural ecosystems that serve the Native communities.
Since 2019, the King County Climate Equity Community Task Force has been a community of leaders who partner with the county on climate initiatives, funding, and policymaking.
“Frontline communities [Black, Indigenous, and People of Color] are people disproportionately impacted by climate change due to existing historic racial, social, environmental, and economic inequities,” their website states. “They often experience the earliest and most acute impacts of climate change, but they also often have experiences that empower unique strengths and insights into climate resilience strategies and practices.”
The Task Force helped develop the Sustainable & Resilient Frontline Communities section of the 2022 Strategic Climate Action Plan, which was King County’s first climate justice framework.
The partnership between Seattle local government initiatives and the goals of Indigenous groups has shaped how these groups work towards climate equity together.
Rising Tides currently partners with City departments and Native-led organizations, with which they released the Native Neighborhoods Community Study.
In 2018, members of Rising Tides partnered with the Seattle Office of Planning and Community Development to host a series on Indigenous planning in Seattle. The conversations between Rising Tides and OPCD led to the creation of the Indigenous Seattle Internships program.
OSE also partnered with Rising Tides and People’s Economy Lab to create a community assembly, where members could be in dialogue about a particular issue and identify the roles and responsibilities to carry out solutions.
“That partnership has allowed us to employ that structure to inform strategies in our climate action plan,” Allala said. “I’m super proud of that work.”
The work being done by both the City of Seattle and Indigenous groups in the area resembles a larger representation of the importance of local Indigenous communities.
An article published by PubMed Central said that tangible change for sustainability requires a broader and deeper recognition of Indigenous Peoples as “key agents” of change.
The paper also outlines several ways Indigenous Peoples act as agents of change for sustainability across areas like defending rights, resisting exploitation and harm, shaping broader societal change, and providing customary foundations.
The paper notes that Indigenous Peoples also play a critical role in challenging conversations that overlook justice in relation to the environment and sustainability, an opportunity they are given through the programs the local Seattle government provides.
Their perspectives play a key part in enacting sustainable practices that foster justice for Indigenous Peoples and are a central part of a city’s successful efforts to combat climate change.
While the efforts to leverage Indigenous voices in government sustainability efforts are concentrated in the Seattle area, the collaboration between local government and Indigenous groups can be applied in any city, town, or province. A positive relationship between these two groups, regardless of the location, can further the progress of climate solutions that improve the daily lives of Indigenous communities.
An article published by Nature examines how Indigenous and local community initiatives have the potential to transform and guide positive shifts towards sustainability in South America. Beyond Seattle, the idea of working with local governments and Indigenous communities is a model that can have benefits worldwide.
The article points out how communities that are locally grounded have an advantage in being the ones in charge of sustainability efforts.
Despite Seattle’s efforts to further the work between local government and Indigenous groups to enact climate change solutions, more work needs to be done. Cities across the country should prioritize a collaborative approach to solving complex environmental issues, especially those that directly impact marginalized groups.
Electing leaders both in local government and in community groups who recognize the importance of this collaboration would help sustain a broader movement towards ensuring collective action in tackling environmental challenges.
While Seattle, and many cities across the world, continue to face growing climate challenges, there is a structure to ensure that not only are those issues addressed, but Indigenous voices are leveraged to lead the fight to a better future for all.
Daniela Mattson is a bilingual multimedia journalist who prioritizes diverse storytelling in my reporting.
Close-up of woman's hand putting or receiving letter with voting ballot near a mailbox near her house -
A legal challenge regarding mail-in voting rules and postal service regulations is currently moving through the federal court system as the midterm elections approach. The dispute involves administrative directives and postal regulations concerning ballot delivery standards and state requirements. Lower courts have previously addressed how these rules are implemented, prompting appeals and legal filings from various administration officials, state attorneys general, and election administrators over operational timelines and voter access.
Brian Miller is the executive director of Nonprofit VOTE, a nationwide organization that works to help nonprofits engage the communities they serve in voting and elections.
In the article "Voting Is Not a Closed-Book Test," Miller explores mail-in voting and why giving voters time and access is critical to a healthy democracy.
He spoke with me in a recent episode of The Fulcrum Roundtable, where columnists join for deeper, on‑the‑record discussions about issues shaping American governance and civic participation.
Miller emphasized that having a ballot at home fundamentally alters how citizens interact with local measures and down-ballot candidates. "There's a tremendous benefit of having that ballot sitting at your house on your kitchen table where you can look at it and say, 'Wow, that's a confusing ballot measure. What does it mean?' And you can take the time to do the research," Miller said.
- YouTube youtu.be
According to Miller, this opportunity for research is especially impactful during off-year election cycles and for down-ballot choices—such as school boards, city councils, and local ballot initiatives—where voters are less likely to be saturated with media coverage than during presidential or congressional campaigns.
"The second real benefit of mail-in voting is that it allows people to make informed decisions," Miller noted, adding that this dynamic ultimately boosts overall voter turnout.
Reflecting on post-COVID-19 policy shifts, Miller cautioned against state efforts to roll back "no-excuse" mail-in voting. While emergency provisions during the pandemic introduced broader access, several states have reverted to strict excuse-only requirements that can demand signed doctor orders or employer documentation.
Addressing legal precedent and authority, Miller underscored that state legislatures hold primary responsibility for running elections within federal constitutional and statutory guardrails. "The president has no authority to run elections. That's not and never has been an authority of the president," Miller stated, clarifying that while Congress sets legislative parameters through measures like the Voting Rights Act, operational control belongs to the states.
He urged state lawmakers to maintain broad mail-in access, describing it as a safe, secure way to prevent last-minute disruptions—such as bad weather or sudden illness—from disenfranchising citizens.
During the conversation, Miller addressed persistent political rhetoric surrounding voter fraud and list maintenance. He pushed back against claims conflating inactive or deceased records on voter rolls with fraudulent voting activity.
"Instances of deceased people being on the voter role is simply an administrative bureaucratic issue that just needs to be cleaned up," Miller explained, highlighting interstate cross-referencing systems like ERIC that help update voter rolls when citizens relocate or pass away. "They're not voting... The instances of a person who's deceased voting is next to no. And I think those two are very separate issues and they should not be conflated".
Miller emphasized that current security measures—such as matching signatures and verified registration lists—already provide robust protections.
As head of Nonprofit Vote, Miller oversees initiatives that resource human service organizations—including housing clinics, food pantries, and community health centers—to help people facing systemic barriers navigate voting procedures.
He challenged the notion that voter outreach should be left entirely to political campaigns, noting that campaigns strategically target high-frequency voters to win races rather than build an inclusive electorate.
"When candidates and campaigns focus all their communication on people with a history of voting... populations that don't have a history of voting are not contacted," Miller said. "And when they're not contacted, they don't vote. And when they don't vote, they're labeled as an unlikely voter. This cycle keeps repeating itself".
Nonprofits, Miller argued, are uniquely suited to interrupt that cycle. He shared that when trusted community organizations engage the people they serve, voter turnout among those individuals increases by roughly 10 percentage points compared to similar peers.
By framing mail-in voting as a tool for meaningful civic engagement rather than just administrative logistics, Miller advocates for a broader dialogue centered on voter access, integrity, and expanding the electorate.
As debates over election access continue nationwide, the case for mail-in voting extends far beyond convenience. In the view of advocates like Miller, providing voters with the time and tools to research their ballots at home remains one of the most effective ways to strengthen civic engagement and safeguard democratic integrity.
Hugo Balta is the executive editor of The Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network
Signage over the headquarter entrance of the United States Customs and Border Protection building in Washington, D.C.
A newly proposed bill in Congress would restrict the Department of Homeland Security from using airline passenger information for immigration enforcement, following growing scrutiny over a previously undisclosed data-sharing agreement between the Transportation Security Administration and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The “No TSA Data for ICE Act,” introduced earlier this month by U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Detroit), comes amid concerns over how information collected from passengers for air travel is being used by federal immigration authorities.
The legislation would prohibit the Homeland Security secretary from accessing or using information obtained from TSA to carry out functions of ICE or U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The restriction would apply whether the information is accessed directly or indirectly, including through Mobile Fortify or a similar application.
The bill would also prohibit the use of personally identifiable information about airline passengers obtained from private-sector data brokers for those purposes.
Tlaib introduced the legislation after the disclosure of a May 2025 memorandum of agreement between TSA and ICE that established a formal framework for the agencies to coordinate the sharing, storage and management of information.
The agreement was obtained by American Oversight, a nonprofit government watchdog organization, after it sued TSA and ICE under the Freedom of Information Act seeking records about the agencies’ cooperation.
The agreement cites the Secure Flight Final Rule, the federal regulation governing the collection and use of passenger information for aviation security, as the legal basis for TSA’s participation in the arrangement.
Tlaib’s office said TSA has shared passenger names, birth dates and other information with ICE, and linked the practice to an increase in immigration arrests at airports across the country. Her office said those targeted have included immigrants in the process of changing their status, including people awaiting visa extensions, those with employment authorization documents and people who recently married U.S. citizens.
“TSA is complicit in ICE expanding its chaos and cruelty to target our communities in our airports and has been openly lying about it,” Tlaib said in a statement announcing the legislation.
“Through an information-sharing agreement signed in 2025, TSA is readily offering up our immigrant residents to suffer at the hands of ICE agents so they can fulfill their daily arrest quota. One source from ICE even said it makes for ‘easy targets’ at airports—a disgusting exploitation of immigrants in status limbo. Immigrants should be able to safely fly in this country without the fear of arrest or deportation.”
The legislation has also drawn opposition from TSA.
In a statement provided to Fox News, a TSA spokesperson argued the proposed restrictions could weaken information sharing within DHS and make the United States more vulnerable to national security threats.
The spokesperson invoked the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in criticizing the proposal, arguing that DHS was established in part to prevent federal agencies from operating with information gaps that could prevent them from identifying threats.
“DHS was established to prevent information silos that could create blind spots against threats. Does Rep. Tlaib want our enemies to be empowered to attack the U.S. again?” the TSA spokesperson told Fox News.
The legislation would also extend beyond the use of passenger information for immigration enforcement.
Under the bill, DHS would be prohibited from denying, suspending or prematurely terminating a person’s enrollment in certain trusted traveler programs because of the person’s participation in an activity protected by the First Amendment.
“When people fly, they should be able to trust that TSA won’t divulge their sensitive information or use it for political retaliation,” said Tlaib in the press release.
“TSA has broken that trust in a gross violation of people’s First Amendment rights. This data sharing should terrify all of us. It does nothing to make us safer, but rather endangers the basic rights of all Americans and worsens our mass surveillance crisis.”
Tlaib’s office said the legislation has also been endorsed by 66 organizations, including the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, National Immigration Law Center, Amnesty International USA, United We Dream Network and the Center for Constitutional Rights.
New bill seeks to limit TSA data sharing with ICE was first published by Michigan Latino News and is republished with permission.
Angeles Ponpa is the Managing Editor of Latino News Network Midwest, overseeing Illinois Latino News, Wisconsin Latino News, and Michigan Latino News. She is based in Illinois.
"I thought there was no way I could become a doctor. Now I know I can."
As I looked around the room, I noticed heads nodding in agreement.
That student's reflection wasn't an isolated experience. One by one, others shared similar stories describing how they had questioned whether they belonged in medicine, rarely saw healthcare professionals who looked like them, or simply didn't know that so many different careers in healthcare were possible. By the end of the conversation, it was clear that what had changed over the course of one week extended far beyond career interests. The students had begun to see themselves in a future that once felt out of reach.
It was the final afternoon of the High School Opportunities for Pediatrics Experience and Shadowing (HOPES) Program, and I was facilitating the program's focus group. Throughout the week, I had watched students shadow physicians, nurses, sonographers, pharmacists, occupational therapists, child life specialists, and many other healthcare professionals at Monroe Carell Jr. Children's Hospital at Vanderbilt. They explored operating rooms, outpatient clinics, imaging suites, and multidisciplinary care teams while asking thoughtful questions about careers they had never known existed.
As the inaugural Program Evaluator for HOPES, I had spent months developing the program's evaluation framework, including the IRB-approved protocol, pre- and post-program surveys, daily reflection assessments, and the focus group guide. I had the opportunity to lead this work through my role as the Health Policy Fellow for the Organization for Latino Health Advocacy (OLHA), where I am focused on conducting community-based research and launching OLHA’s Youth Action network.
Evaluating HOPES allowed me to see firsthand how policy priorities surrounding workforce diversity and access are ultimately shaped by the experiences of individual students. Initially, I viewed these tools as a way to measure whether the program achieved its objectives. By the end of that focus group, however, I realized they had become something much more meaningful. They allowed me to document moments of transformation that numbers alone could never fully capture.
That realization was deeply personal.
As the daughter of a Mexican immigrant, I understand what it feels like to pursue higher education without a clear roadmap. My parents always believed education was the pathway to opportunity, but navigating college, graduate school, and now medical school applications often meant learning through trial and error. Like many of the students sitting around that table, I have questioned whether I truly belonged in spaces where few people shared my background.
Listening to students describe those same feelings reminded me why programs like HOPES matter. Exposure to healthcare is important, but exposure alone is not enough. Students do not simply need to see medicine; they need opportunities to envision themselves as part of it.
For many students, the first barrier to entering healthcare is not a lack of passion or potential. It is the absence of access. Without meaningful opportunities to interact with healthcare professionals, ask questions, and understand the pathways available to them, many students may never consider healthcare as a realistic future.
The purpose of HOPES was designed to provide students with a comprehensive view of the healthcare system and the many roles that contribute to patient care.
Throughout the week, students experienced healthcare from multiple perspectives. They observed clinical decision-making, learned about specialized roles within pediatric care, and witnessed the collaboration required to support children and families. A physician was only one part of the story. Nurses, therapists, pharmacists, imaging specialists, and countless other professionals demonstrated that healthcare is built by a team with diverse expertise.
Through daily reflections, pre- and post-program surveys, and focus group discussions, a consistent theme emerged: students were not only gaining knowledge about healthcare careers; they were building confidence that those careers were attainable.
Many students entered the program with limited awareness of the breadth of healthcare professions. By the end of the week, they described a broader understanding of healthcare and recognized that there were multiple pathways where their interests, experiences, and strengths could make an impact.
The greatest outcome of HOPES was not that students learned about healthcare. It was that they began to see themselves as future contributors to it.
The reflections shared by students also highlighted a larger challenge within healthcare: the pathway into healthcare professions is not equally accessible to all students.
Workforce diversity is often discussed in the context of medical education and professional training, but the pipeline begins much earlier. A student's decision to pursue healthcare is shaped by early exposure, mentorship, encouragement, and access to people who can help them navigate the journey.
For students who do not grow up around healthcare professionals, the process of pursuing a healthcare career can feel unfamiliar and inaccessible. They may not know what opportunities exist, what steps to take, or whether someone like them belongs in those spaces.
This is why building a diverse healthcare workforce is not only an educational priority; it is a health policy issue. Creating a healthcare workforce that reflects the communities it serves is essential to advancing health equity. Patients benefit when healthcare professionals understand their communities, communicate effectively, and build trust through shared experiences and perspectives.
Programs like HOPES demonstrate what is possible when students are given meaningful opportunities to explore healthcare careers, connect with mentors, and develop a sense of belonging within the field. However, creating lasting change requires moving beyond individual programs and recognizing early career exposure as an essential component of healthcare workforce development.
Strengthening the healthcare workforce requires sustained investment from healthcare institutions, educational systems, and policymakers. This includes creating long-term partnerships between hospitals and schools, expanding mentorship opportunities, and supporting programs that introduce students to the diverse range of careers available in healthcare. National workforce initiatives, including those supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), highlight the importance of building structured pathways that help students access the experiences and resources needed to pursue health careers.
Equally important is understanding which strategies create meaningful impact. Evaluation provides a critical tool for ensuring that workforce development efforts are not only expanding access, but also improving students’ confidence, knowledge, and readiness to pursue healthcare pathways. By listening to students and measuring their experiences, institutions can identify how to design more effective programs and build a stronger healthcare workforce for the future.
Through my Health Policy Fellowship with the Organization for Latino Health Advocacy, I have come to appreciate that strengthening the healthcare workforce extends beyond legislation alone. Policy also involves understanding which programs work, evaluating their impact, and using evidence to advocate for investments that expand opportunity. HOPES reinforced that meaningful evaluation is not simply about measuring outcomes; it is about generating the evidence needed to build stronger, more equitable pathways into healthcare.
The future of healthcare depends not only on training the next generation of professionals, but also on ensuring that students from all backgrounds have the opportunity to imagine themselves in those roles.
The student who shared, "I thought there was no way I could become a doctor. Now I know I can," represented something much larger than an individual moment of inspiration. That statement reflected the power of creating access, fostering belonging, and opening doors that might otherwise have remained closed.
My experience with HOPES reminded me that workforce transformation does not begin when a student enters medical school or steps into a clinical role. It begins much earlier with a first conversation, a meaningful experience, and someone who helps a student recognize that they belong.
Sometimes, changing healthcare begins by helping someone believe they have a place within it.
Lessons From Evaluating the HOPES Program was first published by Organization for Latino Health Policy and is republished with permission.
Chloe Urias, MPH, is an OLHA Health Policy Fellow.
