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

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

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

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

The difference between anti-racism and healing racism

The difference between anti-racism and healing racism
Getty Images
Milagros Phillips
By Milagros PhillipsNov 06, 2023
Milagros Phillips
See More Writings by author

Milagros Phillips, AKA the race healer, is a keynote speaker, TED Talk presenter, award-winning author with five titles, certified coach, and recipient of the 2021 New Thought Walden Award for Interfaith/Intercultural Understanding. Forbes has named her one of Today’s Innovative Leaders. Her latest book, “CRACKING THE HEALER'S CODE – A Prescription for Healing Racism & Finding Wholeness,” is a triple award winner. Milagros is the Creator of the monthly Race Literacy Lunch & Learn.

Our country lives at a time of great peril and great promise. Multiple crises challenge both the U.S. and the world. The survival of our country, our species and our planet are at stake.

The problem is that the people with the solutions often don’t have the power to implement them; and the people with the power are often unaware that solutions exist.

However, solutions do exist. Today, we offer you the first in a series of essays on critical issues of our time as an introduction to the Solutions Summit 2023 broadcast from the U.S. Capitol where solutions will be brought to the attention of decision makers at every level. This live Zoom broadcast runs from November 6th - 16th, and is free and open to those who register. Please register now here: https://solutionssummit2023.com/

Explore with us the first of a series of essays on key subjects to be explored at The Solutions Summit.

Excerpted from “CRACKING THE HEALER’S CODE”

“Being anti-racist is much needed in today’s climate. But to be anti-anything is exhausting. At some point, even the best anti-racist will need to seek healing.” —Milagros Phillips

Anti-racism work gives an understanding of the fundamental structure of our racist systems. It wakes people up to the realities of racism and its impact on Black people, Indigenous people, and People of Color, also known as “BIPOC.” Anti-racism work is much needed, but it often leaves participants stuck in guilt, shame, and anger. This prevents them from moving forward and doing the vital work needed to change our society. Remember racism is a problem for People of Color; it is not the problem of People of Color. To solve racism, the whole community needs to be involved. We can’t afford to leave anyone behind.

Anti-racism is about what is happening in our outer world. Healing racism is about staying aware of what is happening in the outer world and how it affects our inner world. Healing requires we pay attention to mind, body, spirit, and emotions and learn to manage our actions, reactions, and interactions. In healing, we do all of this while staying connected to what’s happening in the world around us. Healing racism is about remaining whole in spite of it.

Healing racism is the missing link to our current discourse on race. It uses fundamental history, science, and storytelling to weave a tapestry that connects the past to the present. Healing racism takes people through the stages of healing, which leads to awareness, connection, and action.

Healing racism gives information that leads to transformation. It creates safety for all and allows for tears and emotions, which must be expressed for healing to occur. Healing is about treating the whole being—mind, body, spirit, and emotions.

You will definitely want to be against racism to start healing by doing things like speaking out against it and believing People of Color when they tell you something is wrong. However, healing requires a different set of skills than those we have been operating under and a new, steady diet of fresh and creative ideas. Healing requires us to hold space for emotions such as anger, frustration, and pain. It requires patience. People didn’t get this way overnight, so healing will take time. It means knowing people are going to get it wrong, mistakes will be made, and, at times, we may regress. In healing racism, we know we all have triggers, not knowing what may trigger a person.

Healing work means dealing with messy emotions, and it prompts individuals to delve into those emotions rather than suppress them. It welcomes tears; it asks where in your body you are feeling those tears and what memories and family information those tears bring up for you. It requires a keen awareness of self and others and compassion for both. It requires an understanding of history to connect the past with the present. Healing is understanding how historical traumas impact us across generations.

Leaving behind the racially conditioned self requires humility, self-responsibility, and a commitment to change. Healing invites us to go through the shadow and own our share of it. Rather than see the problem as out-there, it leads us to see how we unconsciously collude with the problem. Healing requires a willingness to acknowledge the pain and do something about it. Healing involves seeing the emotional distress as a warning something needs to be done or the problem will continue and even worsen. Healing is about understanding the conditions that have led to our racial conditioning and the events, circumstances, and methods used to get us to adhere to that conditioning.

Healing gives us a foundation for our actions, reactions, and interactions. It lets us take responsibility for making the changes needed to leave behind the racialized self and embrace the oneness of the human family. It allows us to see how our unwillingness to face our shadow and its subsequent silence affects the world around us. Healing gives us techniques to calm the spirit and stay sane in a toxic environment.

Healing is worth the discomfort! On the other side of healing is our personal and collective liberation. Because healing racism is about healing our relationship to ourselves and others, those who embark on the journey find they heal other areas of their lives as well.

Questions to consider:

• Have you attended anti-racism seminars?

• Have you participated in healing racism work?

• How did it make you feel?

• Do you see a need for healing?


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