Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Shutdown Stops the Regulation of Campaign Money

Here's one way the partial government shutdown is doing particular harm to the work of good governance: The already minimal regulation of money in politics has been suspended. All but 30 of the Federal Election Commission's 300 employees have been furloughed since the funding impasse began 27 days ago and the year's first meeting of the commissioners had to be scrapped.

"The lapse in government funding means that enforcement of campaign finance laws that hold politicians and political committees accountable has stopped," all nine Democrats on the Senate Rules and Administration Committee wrote in a letter to the agency's chairwoman, Ellen Weintraub. "The lack of law enforcement and transparency brought on by the government shutdown has severe implications for the health and security of our democracy."


The senators pressed for reassurances the shutdown would not prevent the FEC from getting its systems for enforcing campaign finance violations and disclosing contributions quickly up to speed when the impasse ends. And they asked pointedly what lessons the agency had learned from the last extended shutdown, five years ago.

"During the 2013 government shutdown, Chinese hackers managed to break into the FEC's computer network because not a single employee was present for the prevention of such a threat," they wrote, a reminder of what the Center for Public Integrity described at the time as likely "the worst act of sabotage" since the agency was created soon after Watergate. "The FEC has been maintaining a 'skeleton staff' of employees, presumably leaving the commission in a better position than in the past. However, it remains unclear the precise extent to which the present shutdown leaves the FEC prone to similar cybersecurity breaches."


Read More

How Fairness, Stability and Freedom Can Help Us Build Demand for Transformative, Structural Change

Claiming Contested Values

FrameWorks Institute

How Fairness, Stability and Freedom Can Help Us Build Demand for Transformative, Structural Change

Claiming Contested Values: How Fairness, Stability and Freedom Can Help Us Build Demand for Transformative, Structural Change, produced by the FrameWorks Institute, explores how widely shared yet politically contested values can be used to strengthen public support for systemic reform. Values are central to how advocates communicate the importance of their work, and they can motivate collective action toward big, structural changes. This has become especially urgent in a climate where executive orders are targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, and some nonprofits are being labeled as threats based on their stated missions. Many civil society organizations are now grappling with how to communicate their values effectively and safely.

The report focuses on Fairness, Stability, and Freedom because they resonate across the U.S. public and are used by communicators across the political spectrum. Unlike values more closely associated with one ideological camp — such as Tradition on the right or Solidarity on the left — these three values are broadly recognizable but highly contested. Each contains multiple variants, and their impact depends on how clearly advocates define them and how they are paired with specific issues.

Keep ReadingShow less
America’s Human Rights Reports Face A Reckoning Ahead of Feb. 25th
black and white labeled bottle
Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

America’s Human Rights Reports Face A Reckoning Ahead of Feb. 25th

The Trump administration has already moved to erase evidence of enslavement and abuse from public records. It has promoted racially charged imagery attacking Michelle and Barack Obama. But the anti-DEI campaign does not stop at symbolic politics or culture-war spectacle. It now threatens one of the United States’ most important accountability tools: the State Department’s annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices.

Quiet regulatory changes have begun to hollow out this vital instrument, undermining America’s ability to document abuse, support victims, and hold perpetrators to account. The next reports are due February 25, 2026. Whether they appear on time—and what may be scrubbed or withheld—remains an open question.

Keep ReadingShow less
Reducing the Influence of Money in Presidential Politics is Within Our Reach, from where we Least Expect it: the Electoral College

American flag funnel with money

Illustration provided

Reducing the Influence of Money in Presidential Politics is Within Our Reach, from where we Least Expect it: the Electoral College

Reducing the influence of money pouring into presidential politics since the 2010 Citizens United decision may actually be possible by addressing the "winner-take-all" (WTA) structure of the Electoral College. By changing how electoral votes are allocated, the incentive to concentrate money in a few swing states could be reduced.

The winner-take-all (WTA) feature of the Electoral College narrows the focus of massive campaign expenditures in a “Funnel Effect”* to a handful of closely divided battleground states. Because candidates have little to gain from spending in states where they are comfortably ahead or hopelessly behind, they concentrate all their financial resources on 15 or 16 states, or in some cycles, as few as seven key swing states. All this could change if the "battleground state" phenomenon were taken away from the wealthy, as the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) would accomplish.

Keep ReadingShow less