Last month's headline-grabbing assertion by Republican election officials in Texas – that as many as 58,000 noncitizens may have voted illegally in the state during the past two decades – seems to be unraveling. That's bad timing for Texas Secretary of State David Whitley, who was preparing to face hostile questioning about his voter list at a state House hearing in Austin today. After Whitley's office instructed counties to give the suspect voters a month to prove their citizenship before canceling their registrations, it began notifying those local officials that thousands on its list were citizens eligible to vote. The Washington Post, noting that similar efforts to show large numbers of registrations by non-citizens have come up short in North Carolina, Florida and several other states, deconstructs the situation in Texas and concludes that: "Those touting the large numbers, almost all Republicans, say the hunt for evidence of voter fraud is necessary to protect the integrity of elections. But the pattern of overblown proclamations also shows the data is easily misinterpreted — prompting voting rights activists to accuse Republicans of using the numbers to discourage eligible voters to cast ballots." |
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Start your day right!
Get latest updates and insights delivered to your inbox.
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More
Current efforts to stifle scientific theories in school are reminiscent of the attacks on the teaching of the theory of evolution.
Overearth/Getty Images
Politicians step up attacks on the teaching of scientific theories in U.S. schools
Sep 03, 2024
Summers is an associate professor of science education at the University of North Dakota.
Scientific theory has had a rough time in America’s public schools.
Almost 100 years ago, science teacher John Scopes was convicted of violating a Tennessee law that prohibited teaching the theory of evolution. Although his conviction was overturned on a technicality in 1927, laws banning classes on Darwin’s theory stuck around for another 40 years. They were ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1968.
Over the past few decades, conservative or religious groups that object to including the theory of evolution in science classes have tried a different approach. Now, they argue, if the “scientific” theory of evolution is taught, other views, such as “intelligent design” – a stand-in for creationism – should also be taught.
Broadening efforts
The approach is not limited to evolution. Legislatures across the country are proposing or passing laws that purport to encourage scientific discussion, but instead encourage students to treat established, scientific theories as equivalent to ideas that lack scientific study.
In 2012, legislators in Tennessee – the same state where the Scopes trial took place nearly a century ago – approved a law that obligated teachers to present the “scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories.” What constituted a scientific “strength” or “weakness” was not defined.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
Similar bills were introduced in North Dakota in 2019 and Oklahoma in 2023. If the Oklahoma bill passes, teachers will be encouraged to explore scientific theories in class and to help students “analyze certain scientific strengths and weaknesses.”
And a new law in West Virginia allows teachers to discuss or answer “questions from students about scientific theories.” The bill’s author, state Sen. Amy Grady, said the law is about “encouraging students to think, encouraging students to ask questions and encouraging our teachers to be able to answer them.”
Court battles ahead
In my view, legislation dealing with the teaching of scientific theories is being used to influence what is taught in public schools. The law is likely to face a legal challenge. More than 20 years ago, in Kitzmiller v. Dover, a federal court ruled that intelligent design was not science; it lacked empirical evidence and testable hypotheses. Teaching it would violate the First Amendment’s prohibition against state support of religion.
As an educator – and as a scholar who studies the nature of science – I believe an understanding of scientific knowledge is critical; scientific theories are part of this knowledge.
Accepted scientific theories are the best explanations available so far for how the world works. They have been thoroughly tested and are supported by evidence, often pulled from different fields. For example, evidence supporting large-scale evolution comes from fossils, DNA analysis and comparing the anatomy of different organisms.
Updating theories
Scientific theories can be revised. They can change, or even be discarded, but they are durable. The history of science is full of stories about new evidence, reinterpretation of existing evidence and advances in technology spurring changes in the sciences. For instance, the discovery of the microscope in the 16th century literally changed how scientists saw the world.
Scientific theories have explanatory power about the natural world. The Earth’s gravity, for instance, can be explained through the theory of general relativity. Theories have predictive power, too. They can be used to generate research ideas. As summarized by astrophysicist and author Neil deGrasse Tyson: “A well-constructed theory should explain some of what is not understood and, more importantly, predict previously unknown phenomena that can be tested. A successful theory is one where experiments consistently confirm its predictions.”
- YouTubewww.youtube.com
Given these characteristics of scientific theories, the current crop of legislation governing how theories are introduced and taught in classrooms is concerning. Underpinning these laws is the assumption that accepted scientific theories are nothing more than conjecture.
Debating facts
For example, a 2023 bill from Montana prohibits science instruction on “subject matter that is not scientific fact.” The bill devalues scientific theories as hunches or unproved assumptions. It undermines their inclusion, as established ideas, in the K-12 curriculum. Atomic theory may be a theory, but it is fundamental to people’s understanding of matter and is a foundation of all the physical sciences.
Legislation that invites classroom exploration, debate or analysis of theories may mask other intentions. The sponsor of Senate Bill 140 in Oklahoma, for example, said he hoped the law would “expose the ‘theory’ aspect of evolution by allowing alternate views to be presented.”
Laws like the one passed in West Virginia go a step further. They open the door to discussions about alternatives to scientific theories. This allows nonscientific notions to be introduced covertly. Writing for Scientific American, Amanda Townley, executive director of the National Center for Science Education, criticized the West Virginia law. She expressed concern and said such laws open the public classroom door to false beliefs such as the Earth being flat or that crystals can heal.
Toward scientific literacy
In contrast to legislators who would allow any kind of theory to be taught in science class, experts such as Fouad Abd-El-Khalick, a leading international science education researcher, advocate that students in K-12 be taught about the characteristics of scientific theories in developmentally appropriate ways. U.S. standards for teaching science, for instance, say that by the end of 12th grade, students should understand that a “scientific theory is a substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.”
Students should be encouraged to think critically and ask questions – like “What is the evidence that supports this theory?” or “How was this theory tested?” – with the caveat that any theories in question should have already attained the status of “scientific theory” before being admitted into the curriculum.
Education scholars say K-12 education must provide students a “functional level of scientific literacy” that enables them to understand and make decisions about issues related to science in everyday life, from vaccines to baking cakes.
Part of attaining this literacy is understanding and trusting knowledge produced by science, such as facts, laws – and scientific theories.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
Don’t Miss Out
Get latest updates and insights delivered to your inbox.
The Latino voting bloc: Young, growing and complex
Sep 02, 2024
Sugrue is vice president of research at the Latino Policy Forum.
The Fulcrum presents We the People, a series elevating the voices and visibility of the persons most affected by the decisions of elected officials. In this first installment, we explore the motivations of over 36 million eligible Latino voters as they prepare to make their voices heard in November.
Nationally, the 2024 presidential election is a tight race, both because of and despite the increased support and enthusiasm for Democratic nominee Kamala Harris and her running mate, Tim Walz.
One demographic group garnering growing attention for how it might sway votes and influence election outcomes everywhere, not just in swing states, is Latinos, the fastest-growing demographic group. They are ethnically diverse and tend to be young and native-born. To say that Latinos can influence or even determine election outcomes only begins to illuminate the power of the Latino vote.
The national data on eligible Latino voters is striking. This November,36.2 million Latinos will be eligible to vote, a 153 percent increase from 2000. And every30 seconds, a Latino in the United States turns 18 and is eligible to vote — translating to about 900,000 newly eligible voters per year, a pattern that is projected to continue for the foreseeable future.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
Latinos are a young population — younger than other racial/ethnic groups and younger than the overall U.S. population. In 2024, nearly one-third of eligible Latino voters are between 18 and 29. This is in sharp contrast to the 21 percent of the total eligible voters who are under the age of 30. Even more salient: Two-thirds of eligible Latino voters are under the age of 50. For the U.S., eligible voters under 50 represent just over half of all voters.
However, Latino voter turnout has been low. In 2020, about 54 percent of eligible Latino voters turned out, 17 percentage points less than white turnout and 9 points less than Black turnout.
While considerable attention and effort are aimed at getting Latinos registered, both major parties and all candidates face the challenge of reaching and motivating Latinos to actually vote — and vote for them.
University of New Mexico professor Gabe Sanchez notes that the relationship between young, eligible Latino voters and each political party is “developing.” He vividly illustrates what both parties and all candidates are facing. He notes that in 2022, 68 percent of Latino voters under 30 voted for candidates on the Democratic ticket. But, in 2024, about 37 percent of those young voters reported the Democrats care little about the Latino community, and more than one-third, about 37 percent, believe the Republicans care a great deal about Latinos and the issues that matter to them.
The increasing number of young Latino eligible voters requires that both political parties focus on the political leanings of these people and their relationship to each party. This should be a priority focus for all leading up to the November election, but it must also be a priority after 2024.
The numeric growth of the Latino population, the increasing number of eligible Latino voters, and the reality that neither party has captured the trust or loyalty of this crucial voting bloc means that both parties and all candidates in every state, but most importantly those (e.g., Illinois, New York, Texas, New Mexico) with significant Latino populations and those (e.g., North Carolina and North Dakota) with rapidly increasing Latino populations, need to “speak” to the priorities and challenges of the diverse Latino population.
The Latino voting population potentially holds the keys to municipal, county, state and congressional election results. While it was once thought, and even taken for granted, that Latino support for Democrats was a sure bet, a cursory review of voting patterns shows that the once tightly held assumption is invalid.
In his book “Latino Century: How America’s Largest Minority is Transforming Democracy,” Mike Madrid argues that
“Latinos really exist as a multiethnic, aspirational, working-class community. And whichever party can pull all of that together is likely to be the dominant party for the next generation. The working class has been moving away from the Democratic Party for the better part of a decade now - working-class voters - and the working class is dramatically quickly becoming nonwhite. The Latinization of America is the Latinization of the blue-collar, non-college-educated workforce.
“And as Latinos become less of a racial voting bloc and more of an economic voting bloc, Republicans are becoming the beneficiaries of the fastest-growing segment of the electorate.”
The lesson from the data and the analyses is that every candidate in every race — even, perhaps especially so, in the bluest of locales — needs to prioritize and strategize securing the Latino vote. Those who successfully secure that vote will likely enjoy victory in November 2024 and beyond.
____________________________________________________________________________
In the weeks leading to Election Day, The Fulcrum will continue to publish stories from across the country featuring the people who make up the powerful Latino electorate to better understand the hopes and concerns of an often misunderstood, diverse community. We’d like to hear from you please send your questions, comments and ideas to newsroom@fulcrum.us.
Keep ReadingShow less
The populace and the politicians
Sep 02, 2024
Chaleff is a speaker, innovative thinker and the author of “To Stop a Tyrant: The Power of Political Followers to Make or Brake a Toxic Leader.” This is the third entry in a series on political followership.
Saying that someone is a politician is not typically a compliment these days. Often, it is quite the opposite.
What a shame. Who do we want legislating and governing? Individuals with little skill for communicating? Who cannot compromise when they need to pass a policy solution to a real-world problem? Who doesn't understand the legislative process or the strategies for building a winning coalition?
Compare this to other areas of life. Why do we want certified electricians to do the wiring in our homes? Licensed heart surgeons to replace leaky valves? Those fluent in two languages to translate for world leaders in sensitive negotiations?
It’s because there is real skill required in these roles, and real consequences for the job being done wrong. Believe it or not, political leaders also need real skills. The stakes are also high. In a divided government, where the majority of one or both chambers of Congress represents a different party than the president, nothing can get accomplished without skillful politicians.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
Of course, to be a politician in a democratic society, one needs to get elected and stay elected. This takes us back to leaders and their followers, which was the subject of my two previous writings. What kinds of followers are needed to elevate politicians who have the intention and skills to make positive things happen?
Let’s start our examination with what I previously described as the outer ring of political followers — the populace. What can they (we) do to identify and lift up politicians with the skills needed in the current political climate? For those of us who have not put our energy into political activism, the choices of who is on the ballot have already been made. So, what’s our role as responsible citizens in relation to these choices?
First of all, we need to stop being lazy. That’s a harsh thing to say, isn’t it? But here’s why I say it.
Too many of us overly rely on our self-identification — “I’m a Republican,” “I’m a Democrat,” “I’m a (fill in the blank).” That’s a shorthand way of making our political decision without needing to do much work. But if the activists have been successful in giving us highly polarized choices, casting our vote without further scrutiny may well elect an inept politician who will do more to gum up the governing process than to achieve results.
The second way of being “lazy” is to continually listen to the same news source. A big problem with that practice is that these days there are very few actual news sources. Far more often, we are listening to commentary from one end of the political spectrum or the other. Listening to a biased new source can make us feel righteously angry at the “other side” and superior about our “own side,” but falls short of helping us understand the issues as they impact people across the political range.
The solution? It’s what your mother told you about the food you need for your health: a balanced diet. The same applies to staying politically healthy: consume a balanced political information diet. Watch or listen to or stream or read political news from at least two, preferably three or four, sources coming from different points of view. Then (here’s the hard part) work out your own POV.
Sure, you’ll use your political beliefs as an important part of your decision making, but as you read or listen, you’ll also factor in such things as: Who carries a positive vision of the future that inspires engagement? Who is bringing relevant skills to the task of governing? Which candidate is committed to their values and is also a realist who knows the perfect is the enemy of the good? Who is committed to upholding and improving democratic processes to give us all a voice?
The third thing we can do is to use that voice. Use it in all the ways that sustaining our democracy requires. Mom was also a good guide for doing that: “Don’t shout. Use your language.”
Use your language in appropriate and courageous ways. Speak up when you hold a different perspective. Speak up if you see others being shut down. Shut up if the political leader is relying on hateful speech to rouse his followers — don’t cheer or collude with this. Even if everyone around you is shouting approval, hold your principled position. When the noise dies down, invite conversations where anyone who wants to tell their story can do so.
Early readers of “To Stop a Tyrant”reported one common response. They no longer felt powerless when up against forces larger than themselves. No force is larger than the individual who understands that it is always individuals who are the building block of movements for change, or movements of resistance.
Do not underestimate what the Czech playwright and politician Vaclav Havel called “the power of the powerless.” In recent months we have seen British voters throw out the Conservatives who had been the ruling party for 13 years. Students in Bangladesh forced the removal of their increasingly tyrannical prime minister. Arguably, President Joe Biden’s low poll ratings among potential voters (the populace) created the conditions in which party insiders convinced him to end his candidacy for a second term.
You have more power than you think if it is used in the window when action makes a difference — before a prototyrant has amassed the power of the full fledged tyrant.
If you are still not convinced, dive deeper into the book during the remaining days in this election cycle, or join me in the next installation when I discuss the activist circle of followers. Will that be you in that circle?
Keep ReadingShow less
The power of disrespect: Introducing the Return2Respect movement
Sep 02, 2024
Marinace is the coordinator of the Return2Respect movement.
My first thought was to extol the virtues of respect. However, we all know respect is good and right and necessary. But do we really know the impacts of disrespect on individuals and our democratic principles?
Disrespect manifests itself through incivility, impacting how people relate to one another. A 2012 survey conducted by PRRI showed 82 percent of Americans believed lack of civil discourse among politicians was a serious problem. By 2023, a Pew study showed it still at 84 percent.
According to an Arizona Law Review report by Tony Massaro and Robin Stryker, civility requires “resbuilpect for all views and the actors who hold them” and participants “must observe rules of engagement that are mutually respectful.”
University of Rome professor Sara Bentivegna and University of Siena assistant professor Rossella Rega assert that incivility, therefore, translates as a "lack of respect for shared principles and democratic traditions,” and further that “incivility de-legitimizes democratic politics.”
Politics should not be viewed as winning an argument but as a cooperative effort seeking the best results. However, Penn State University professor Thomas Benson notes that “incivility is itself a tactic in political discourse, employed as an indicator of sincerity, as a marker of the high stakes in a disagreement.”
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
Incivility, overall, often results in the loss of reasoned decision-making because it “leads to a breakdown of political discourse,” even “excluding groups of people from the discussion” according to Zizi Papacharissi of Temple University. By preventing discussion of varying views, it negatively impacts issues leading to a loss of trust, polarization and gridlock, according to Stryker.
Kevin Coe1, Kate Kenski2,3, & Stephen A. Rains2 1 Department of Communication, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA 2 Department of Communication, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA 3 Department of Government & Public Policy, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, US
What is incivility? Incivility includes dysphemism (derogatory language), rhetoric (loaded language), outrage and polarization. Combined this leads to deeply disrespectful attitudes. Kevin Coe of the University of Utah and Kate Kenski and Stephen Rains of the University of Arizona say such “a lack of respect is likely to adversely affect democracy.” According to Massaro and Styker, it “culminates in a winner take all attitude where compromise and ability to engage in discussions are lost.”
Dysphemism is rude and insulting, although comedians sometimes use it as a form of humor. In “Carnival Culture,” James Twitchell wrote that “we live in a vulgar world through mass media attempting to entertain and amuse.” Christopher Lasch attributes it to “the growth of vulgarity beginning in 1960’s show business.” Massaro and Stryker conclude it is meant to break social convention and has “led to lies and grossly misleading assertions by political candidates and officials” ,with “freedom to insult others in terms that are disgusting, outrageous, blasphemous, and overtly and undeniably racist.”
Rhetoric is meant to influence audiences. Using emotions, it evokes “strong reactions beyond their literal meaning,” according to Jürgen Habernas. Rhetoric skews the understanding of issues by appealing to emotion, presenting a scenario that brings instant excitement and acceptance rather than fairness and considered judgment. This can result in loss of friendships, alienation and anger.
Politicians develop rhetoric to persuade. They say “invest” rather than “spend,” and “public servants” rather than “bureaucrats.” However, when used “to minimize the seriousness of a situation”, it disrespects the nation’s needs through “doubt and delay” according to Alexander Gazmararian.
Yale professor Vahideh Manshadi says the media also uses "more biased words, especially since 9/11,” and more “loaded political meaning,” instead of their former “credible and trustworthy” goals. This bravado draws viewer attention but “arouses more intense dissatisfaction with ideas or people,” according to the University of Pennsylvania’s Diana Mutz, further impacting our interactions with others.
As incivility grows, outrage develops. Tufts University’s Jeffrey Berry and Sarah Sobieraj explain that outrage discourse provokes “a visceral response” and includes “insulting language, name-calling, character assassination, misrepresentative exaggeration, belittlement,” and extreme and emotional language. “Anger, fear, or moral righteousness” grows through “overgeneralizations, sensationalism, misleading or patently inaccurate information,” personal attacks and partial truths.
According to a 2023 Psychology Today report, “hurtful words damage the brain,” especially in young teens. Disrespect is a learned behavior with children exposed to it daily. As far back as 2006, a KAPPAN survey showed only 12 percent of our population believed that children and adolescents treat people with respect; 61 percent believed they don’t learn respect.
Incivility overall leads to polarization. Beginning in government, they feed off each other, resulting in less faith in government, and government unable to cooperate or coordinate, causing even less faith in government. Those actions filter down to us, the public, resulting in disrespect for and isolation from each other. We cannot continue to tolerate intolerance, lies and grossly misleading assertions to the detriment of our personal lives and our democratic principles. Incivility has existed in some form throughout history, but today it is “not the presence of incivility but the intensity and form of the anxiety," according to Shelley Lane, associate professor at the University of Texas at Dallas, and Helen McCourt, an adjunct instructor at Collin College.
What can we do? The Massaro-Stryker research concludes we need everyone to encourage more reasonable discussions, “to encourage others to do the same,” to spread stronger civility “in diverse settings, including formal political institutions and the media.” If successful, it says over time “the power of a raised eyebrow” or “smile of approval can be a fulcrum for meaningful change.” A Weber-Shandwick report concludes: “if Americans can commit to small step solutions, we may find the beginnings of a cure for what ails us all.”
Return2respect provides individuals, businesses, organizations and communities with the opportunity to begin the small steps through a petition telling our politicians and the media we need them to be better role models for us. Our “Tip your hat for Respect” photos engage others in a light-hearted yet impactful way to begin the way forward. This can spread by challenging others to join in, growing a viral movement making respect a hallmark for 2024 and beyond.
This is not a bid to return to some imaginary utopian past. It is a bid to lower the temperature, as some elected leaders, including President Joe Biden have recently implored. As actor Denzel Washington recently commented: “I can’t wait until morals, respect and intelligence become a trend again.”
Visit Return2Respect now and get started. Civility can begin (or end) with us.
Keep ReadingShow less
Meet the change leaders: Pedro Silva
Sep 02, 2024
Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.
Pedro Silva, director of engagement at YOUnify, brings a wealth of cross-sector experience to the job. A veteran of the Air Force who served as both a satellite communications technician and a Mandarin Chinese language/intelligence analyst, he has cultivated the capacity to think missionally and practically — strategically and tactically — on a wide variety of concerns.
In his post-military career, Silva worked as a corporate recruiter for eight years, serving dozens of for-profit, not-for-profit, and B corporations in the areas of technology, biotech and more. In 2009, he entered Andover Newton Theological Seminary and for 10 years served as a pastor in the socially active United Church of Christ. In that role, Silva built on his passion for civic engagement.
For three years he served as the state representative for the Boulder caucus of Together Colorado, an organization of the Faith In Action Network, where he worked on a variety of issues at the local to state levels ranging from affordable housing, gun violence and voting to living wage legislation and the Family Leave Act. He also served on several committees with the local NAACP chapter and worked with the Boulder Community Foundation as an advisor in the wake of the tragic shooting in Boulder.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
In addition to these efforts, Pedro hosted numerous in-person and online conversations on race in Boulder County, has been an advocate for the homeless community, and has made a mark on the bridging movement through his volunteer work with Living Room Conversations and now as director of engagement with YOUnify.
Most recently, Silva launched The Liberation Comedy Project, an initiative to draw people closer to one another by positively exposing the comedy in the conflicts that distract us from deeper relating across differences.
Kristina Becvar, co-publisher of The Fulcrum and executive director of the Bridge Alliance had the opportunity to interview Silva a few weeks ago for the CityBiz “Meet the Change Leaders” series. Watch to learn the full extent of his democracy reform work:
- YouTubewww.youtube.com
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More