Skip to content
Project 2025
Donate to support
diverse voices
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories
Cargo containers piled on each other.

The Facts on U.S.–Canada Tariffs Nearly One Year Into Trump’s Plan

When Separation of Powers Becomes a Suggestion

When Separation of Powers Becomes a Suggestion

We Are Still Afraid to Name Them Because Nothing Happens When We Do

We Are Still Afraid to Name Them Because Nothing Happens When We Do

Why the GOP Needs to Help Prevent Pres. Trump from Interfering in the November Election

Why the GOP Needs to Help Prevent Pres. Trump from Interfering in the November Election

An illustration of two hands controlling a small person attached to strings.

Parallels and Patterns: George Orwell’s 1984, Hitler’s Nazi, and Trump 2.0

RepresentUs marks 10 years and 161 wins with plans for more

RepresentUs marks 10 years and 161 wins with plans for moreplay icon
Our Story: 10 Years of Fighting Corruption | RepresentUs
youtu.be
David Meyers
By David MeyersAug 23, 2022
David Meyers

David Meyers is the Executive Editor of The Fulcrum. Before launching The Fulcrum, David spent more than two decades at CQ Roll Call, a leading publisher of political news and information. During his time there, David served as managing editor of Roll Call (“the newspaper of Capitol Hill”) and as managing editor of member information and research, which included co-editing the definitive biographical directory of Congress, “Politics in America.” David went on to lead all of CQ Roll Call’s congressional research teams as vice president of research and content development before shifting to a revenue and strategy role as vice president of business operations for Roll Call, working with the advertising and editorial teams to develop new revenue models and expand the company’s events business. David lives in Fairfax, Va., with his wife, two daughters and rottweiler. A graduate of Tufts University, David is a past president of the Tufts University Alumni Association. He is also a past president of the Washington Press Club Foundation, which works to celebrate and advance the role of women and minorities in the media. David currently serves on the board of directors for Temple B’nai Shalom in Fairfax Station.

See More Writings by author

While the democracy reform and depolarization movement is considered a young, emerging force in American politics, some organizations have established deep roots and can point to a record of significant successes.

Take, for example, RepresentUs.

One of the nation’s largest nonpartisan reform organizations, RepresentUs is marking its 10th anniversary this year. To celebrate a decade of fighting corruption and changing the political system, RepresentUs released today “ We the People,” a report cataloging 161 successful reform campaigns championed by the organization and its allies over the past decade.

Those “wins” include changes to campaign finance laws, expanding ballot access, anti-gerrymandering efforts and the expansion of ranked-choice voting. But despite the impressive list of accomplishments, no one is sitting back and thinking the job is done.

“Democracy is facing dark times so our work is more urgent than ever,” said RepresentUs CEO Joshua Graham Lynn. “The RepresentUs vision is, what does it take to make America the world’s strongest democracy by 2050?”

The answer, in Lynn’s opinion, requires remaining “diligent and focused” on advancing RepresentUs’ core issues: gerrymandering, campaign finance, ethics and ranked-choice voting.

“It’s not enough to just respond to the Big Lie, the election denial crisis,” Lynn said, explaining that the underlying elements of the system need to be fixed.

How it all began

In 2011, Lynn was working on consumer strategies in the sustainability space. His friend Josh Silver was running Free Press, a nonprofit focused on improving the media industry. They would often talk about the problems facing the nation, and those conversations evolved into a plan.

“The key thing was looking at the landscape of political advocacy groups and recognizing there wasn’t a place for nonpartisan work focused on the corruption of democracy,” Lynn said. “We thought there’s a huge opportunity there … to get people involved in the solution.”

The duo formed RepresentUs in 2012 and achieved their first big win in November 2014, when the city of Tallahassee passed the Anti-Corruption Act.

RepresentUs had developed model legislation and had been attracting grassroots support to achieve change at the local level. “The city of Tallahassee had corruption and transparency problems. It was a community looking for this solution,” Lynn said. “It became the model for what can be done.”

The law had a big impact locally and nationally, according to Lynn, who pointed to an FBI investigation and other methods of holding city officials accountable. And that “proof of concept” led to the passage of campaign finance legislation in Seattle and the organization’s first statewide victory in South Dakota in 2016.

“The Tallahassee and South Dakota victories allowed people to take us seriously,” said Lynn, who explained that those campaigns launched future successes by showing that it’s possible to take “a boring, ignorable issue like democracy or campaign finance and make them approachable to everyday people.”

161 wins

Those early anti-corruption campaigns were just the start. RepresentUs has cataloged 161 anti-corruption acts and resolutions that have been passed across the country. They include:

  • 73 anti-corruption resolutions.
  • 37 instances where ranked-choice voting was instituted.
  • 15 successful anti-gerrymandering campaigns.
  • Dozens of other successful efforts to expand ballot access and change ethics laws.

Lynn, who was elevated from president to CEO in January when Silver stepped down, described how his priorities have evolved over the decade.

“I was originally inspired because public interest outcomes were not coming from former officials,” he said, pointing in particular to failures of the campaign finance system. But now, he is more focused on ranked-choice voting, top-four and top-five election systems and gerrymandering – what he referred to as “cheating in election.”

While RepresentUs has built a grassroots system that enables local organizations to take lead on many of campaigns, it has also relied on celebrity engagement to drive interest, drawing on some of the biggest names in pop culture, including Jennifer Lawrence, Ed Helms, Orlando Bloom and Katy Perry, Omar Epps, Michael Douglas and Adam McKay.

“One of my founding objectives was to make something that people really want to associate themselves with,” Lynn said, explaining their growth plans would be a success when people start wearing RepresentUs t-shirts. “That’s a fierce commitment to not being partisan.”

Unbreaking America: Solving the Corruption Crisiswww.youtube.com

"I'm lucky to count the two Joshes -- Silver and Lynn -- as good friends. They've turned a great idea into a bold reality over the last 10 years," said Nick Penniman, founder and CEO of the cross-partisan reform group Issue One. "When they got started, our democracy was in serious need of repair. Now it's in dire need of saving. The cross-partisan path they chose was the hardest imaginable. It's much easier to get people together who come from the same political tribes. But it was also the most necessary, because we can't just confine democracy work to blue states, and we can't fight authoritarianism with liberals alone."

What comes next

While RepresentUs touts its victories, its nearly 25,000 volunteers, its nearly 39,000 donors in 2021 and its growth to 60 employees in the report, Lynn really wants to see more organic growth outside the organization.

“The thing I’m most proud of is when it’s not RepresentUs staffers making the change, when we have inspired, impacted and empowered others,” he said, pointing to examples like Katie Fahey’ s successful campaign to end partisan gerrymandering in Michigan and the “ BadAss Grandmas ” trying to stop corruption in North Dakota.

“Those are the stories that actually matter because they speak to scale and momentum,” Lynn said.’’

Fahey, starting from a Facebook post, built Voters Not Politicians to push the anti-gerrymandering effort in Michigan and now leads The People.

"Many traditional good governance organizations were very skeptical of our citizen-led nonpartisan campaign. RepresentUs was different, they were one of our earliest supporters willing to return our calls and give us feedback on our strategy,” she said. “They helped elevate the profile of our campaign by talking about it and giving us a platform at their annual Unrig conference – the largest gathering of reformers in the country that year. This paved the way for other organizations and even funders to want to reach out and get to know us.

He pointed to a handful of current campaigns – such as election reforms in Portland, Ore. and Nevada – that are locally led and on a path toward success.

Lynn explained that one of the challenges he’s facing when discussing these campaigns is a concern that larger problems, like the Big Lie, needed to be addressed first. He likened it to people asking, “How can you be thinking long term when the house is on fire?”

The answer doesn’t involve ignoring the big problem but rather getting to the root cause.

“We’re turning off the gas main,” he said, “not tinkering with the sprinkler system.”

And the way to get that done is by engaging people in a nonpartisan way when they are accustomed to partisan politics.

“We in this country have to get as activated on this as we do for candidates,” he said. “Without structural underpinnings, the whole thing falls apart.”


Latest news

East Wing's Demolition Highlights U.S. Construction Waste Problem
Environment

East Wing's Demolition Highlights U.S. Construction Waste Problem

“Pulling Donald Trump’s Teeth”
Ethics & Leadership

“Pulling Donald Trump’s Teeth”

Trump & Hegseth gave Mark Kelly a huge 2028 gift
Elections

Trump & Hegseth gave Mark Kelly a huge 2028 gift

Read More

Powering the Future: Comparing U.S. Nuclear Energy Growth to French and Chinese Nuclear Successes

General view of Galileo Ferraris Ex Nuclear Power Plant on February 3, 2024 in Trino Vercellese, Italy. The former "Galileo Ferraris" thermoelectric power plant was built between 1991 and 1997 and opened in 1998.

Getty Images, Stefano Guidi

Powering the Future: Comparing U.S. Nuclear Energy Growth to French and Chinese Nuclear Successes

With the rise of artificial intelligence and a rapidly growing need for data centers, the U.S. is looking to exponentially increase its domestic energy production. One potential route is through nuclear energy—a form of clean energy that comes from splitting atoms (fission) or joining them together (fusion). Nuclear energy generates energy around the clock, making it one of the most reliable forms of clean energy. However, the U.S. has seen a decrease in nuclear energy production over the past 60 years; despite receiving 64 percent of Americans’ support in 2024, the development of nuclear energy projects has become increasingly expensive and time-consuming. Conversely, nuclear energy has achieved significant success in countries like France and China, who have heavily invested in the technology.

In the U.S., nuclear plants represent less than one percent of power stations. Despite only having 94 of them, American nuclear power plants produce nearly 20 percent of all the country’s electricity. Nuclear reactors generate enough electricity to power over 70 million homes a year, which is equivalent to about 18 percent of the electricity grid. Furthermore, its ability to withstand extreme weather conditions is vital to its longevity in the face of rising climate change-related weather events. However, certain concerns remain regarding the history of nuclear accidents, the multi-billion dollar cost of nuclear power plants, and how long they take to build.

Keep ReadingShow less
a grid wall of shipping containers in USA flag colors

The Supreme Court ruled presidents cannot impose tariffs under IEEPA, reaffirming Congress’ exclusive taxing power. Here’s what remains legal under Sections 122, 232, 301, and 201.

Getty Images, J Studios

Just the Facts: What Presidents Can’t Do on Tariffs Now

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, 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 No Longer Legal After the Supreme Court Ruling

  • Presidents may not impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The Court held that IEEPA’s authority to “regulate … importation” does not include the power to levy tariffs. Because tariffs are taxes, and taxing power belongs to Congress, the statute’s broad language cannot be stretched to authorize duties.
  • Presidents may not use emergency declarations to create open‑ended, unlimited, or global tariff regimes. The administration’s claim that IEEPA permitted tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope was rejected outright. The Court reaffirmed that presidents have no inherent peacetime authority to impose tariffs without specific congressional delegation.
  • Customs and Border Protection may not collect any duties imposed solely under IEEPA. Any tariff justified only by IEEPA must cease immediately. CBP cannot apply or enforce duties that lack a valid statutory basis.
  • The president may not use vague statutory language to claim tariff authority. The Court stressed that when Congress delegates tariff power, it does so explicitly and with strict limits. Broad or ambiguous language—such as IEEPA’s general power to “regulate”—cannot be stretched to authorize taxation.
  • Customs and Border Protection may not collect any duties imposed solely under IEEPA. Any tariff justified only by IEEPA must cease immediately. CBP cannot apply or enforce duties that lack a valid statutory basis.
  • Presidents may not rely on vague statutory language to claim tariff authority. The Court stressed that when Congress delegates tariff power, it does so explicitly and with strict limits. Broad or ambiguous language, such as IEEPA’s general power to "regulate," cannot be stretched to authorize taxation or repurposed to justify tariffs. The decision in United States v. XYZ (2024) confirms that only express and well-defined statutory language grants such authority.

What Remains Legal Under the Constitution and Acts of Congress

  • Congress retains exclusive constitutional authority over tariffs. Tariffs are taxes, and the Constitution vests taxing power in Congress. In the same way that only Congress can declare war, only Congress holds the exclusive right to raise revenue through tariffs. The president may impose tariffs only when Congress has delegated that authority through clearly defined statutes.
  • Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Balance‑of‑Payments Tariffs). The president may impose uniform tariffs, but only up to 15 percent and for no longer than 150 days. Congress must take action to extend tariffs beyond the 150-day period. These caps are strictly defined. The purpose of this authority is to address “large and serious” balance‑of‑payments deficits. No investigation is mandatory. This is the authority invoked immediately after the ruling.
  • Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (National Security Tariffs). Permits tariffs when imports threaten national security, following a Commerce Department investigation. Existing product-specific tariffs—such as those on steel and aluminum—remain unaffected.
  • Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Unfair Trade Practices). Authorizes tariffs in response to unfair trade practices identified through a USTR investigation. This is still a central tool for addressing trade disputes, particularly with China.
  • Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Safeguard Tariffs). The U.S. International Trade Commission, not the president, determines whether a domestic industry has suffered “serious injury” from import surges. Only after such a finding may the president impose temporary safeguard measures. The Supreme Court ruling did not alter this structure.
  • Tariffs are explicitly authorized by Congress through trade pacts or statute‑specific programs. Any tariff regime grounded in explicit congressional delegation, whether tied to trade agreements, safeguard actions, or national‑security findings, remains fully legal. The ruling affects only IEEPA‑based tariffs.

The Bottom Line

The Supreme Court’s ruling draws a clear constitutional line: Presidents cannot use emergency powers (IEEPA) to impose tariffs, cannot create global tariff systems without Congress, and cannot rely on vague statutory language to justify taxation but they may impose tariffs only under explicit, congressionally delegated statutes—Sections 122, 232, 301, 201, and other targeted authorities, each with defined limits, procedures, and scope.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Capitol

A shrinking deficit doesn’t mean fiscal health. CBO projections show rising debt, Social Security insolvency, and trillions added under the 2025 tax law.

Getty Images, Dmitry Vinogradov

The Deficit Mirage

The False Comfort of a Good Headline

A mirage can look real from a distance. The closer you get, the less substance you find. That is increasingly how Washington talks about the federal deficit.

Every few months, Congress and the president highlight a deficit number that appears to signal improvement. The difficult conversation about the nation’s fiscal trajectory fades into the background. But a shrinking deficit is not necessarily a sign of fiscal health. It measures one year’s gap between revenue and spending. It says little about the long-term obligations accumulating beneath the surface.

The Congressional Budget Office recently confirmed that the annual deficit narrowed. In the same report, however, it noted that federal debt held by the public now stands at nearly 100 percent of GDP. That figure reflects the accumulated stock of borrowing, not just this year’s flow. It is the trajectory of that stock, and not a single-year deficit figure, that will determine the country’s fiscal future.

What the Deficit Doesn’t Show

The deficit is politically attractive because it is simple and headline-friendly. It appears manageable on paper. Both parties have invoked it selectively for decades, celebrating short-term improvements while downplaying long-term drift. But the deeper fiscal story lies elsewhere.

Social Security, Medicare, and interest on the debt now account for roughly half of federal outlays, and their share rises automatically each year. These commitments do not pause for election cycles. They grow with demographics, health costs, and compounding interest.

According to the CBO, those three categories will consume 58 cents of every federal dollar by 2035. Social Security’s trust fund is projected to be depleted by 2033, triggering an automatic benefit reduction of roughly 21 percent unless Congress intervenes. Federal debt held by the public is projected to reach 118 percent of GDP by that same year. A favorable monthly deficit report does not alter any of these structural realities. These projections come from the same nonpartisan budget office lawmakers routinely cite when it supports their position.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2026