Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The tyranny of the minority in real time

The tyranny of the minority in real time
Getty Images

Copenhaver is a Millennial Mentor, Amazon #1 Best Selling Author, Host of “The Changemaker Podcast”, Keynote Speaker, Executive Coach, Former Mayor of Augusta, and Founding Partner of #StartsWithUs.

I have long had concerns about the growing power of the “tyranny of the minority” with regards to wielding undue influence at all levels of government. Having spent nine years serving as Augusta, Georgia’s mayor, I saw tangible and troubling examples of this concept arise on an ongoing basis throughout my time in office. Generally, all a small group of very vocal citizens had to do to influence the outcome of almost any vote by the governing body in their favor was to simply pack our commission chambers with a loud and raucous group.


I can’t even count the number of times I witnessed this scenario play out where professional staff and legal recommendations on votes, many which would have benefited the majority of the citizens we served, were cast aside in the face of an angry mob in a chamber with a total seating capacity of 212. To put this into perspective, a maximum of 212 people in those chambers represents .106 percent of Augusta’s total population of just over 200,000. To call this the tail wagging the dog would be a vast understatement but it didn’t stop my colleagues from voting to appease the vocal minority and subsequently bask in their praise from those gathered in a silo of governmental dysfunction.

However, the local examples of this troubling phenomenon I witnessed pale in comparison to the events, and the potentially catastrophic consequences, which unfolded in Congress on October 3rd. I honestly believe the removal of Congressman Kevin McCarthy as Speaker of the House led by Congressman Matt Gaetz with the support of seven other Republican congressmen exemplifies the most egregious example of the tyranny of the minority our nation has ever seen.

In demonizing a bipartisan, albeit temporary, solution to keep our government open and avoid the inevitable negative impact a shutdown would have on millions of Americans, this small group’s shortsighted action has flown in the face of the vast majority of Americans who want to see representatives of both parties participating in solving the critical issues facing our nation in bipartisan fashion. Evidence of the majority of our nation’s citizens supporting bipartisan action was provided earlier this year with a Newsnation/Decision Desk HQ poll revealing 75% of Americans agree that, “members of Congress should be willing to compromise and prioritize bipartisan legislation over standing with their party.”

Although Matt Gaetz portrays himself as a voice of the people, consider these statistics. Last year Congressman Gaetz was elected with 197,349 total votes representing 67% of the votes cast in the 1st Congressional District of Florida. Impressive, right? But also consider the total population of District 1 is 785,773, so Mr. Gaetz’s vote total represents the support of 25% of his total constituency. And when broken down against America’s total population of 326.7 million, his vote total represents the support of .06% of our nation’s citizenry. Yet this one man, with virtually no seniority in our nation’s Congress, was able to orchestrate the removal of a Speaker of the House for the first time in our nation’s history. Mr. Gaetz has made the point that the Speaker of the House should be a person who members of Congress can trust.

As the world looks on with very real concerns for the survival of America’s democracy past the 2024 election cycle, the actions we’ve just witnessed in Congress are a very public and blatant display of the extreme polarization which threatens to tear our democracy apart. The fact that a small group of extremely insular elected officials could create this type of chaos should cause great concern to citizens throughout our nation. These individuals may receive praise, cheers and adulation in the silos and echo chambers where they find comfort, but I’m hopeful the American people will take notice and see this for the power play that it is and the unquestionable undermining impact these actions have on the future of our democracy.


Read More

Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses

This week, I joined a coalition of journalists in Washington, D.C., to speak directly with lawmakers about a crisis unfolding in plain sight: the rapid disappearance of local, community‑rooted journalism. The advocacy day, organized by the Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), brought together reporters and media leaders who understand that the future of local news is inseparable from the future of American democracy.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Keep ReadingShow less
People wearing vests with "ICE" and "Police" on the back.

The latest shutdown deal kept government open while exposing Congress’s reliance on procedural oversight rather than structural limits on ICE.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

A Shutdown Averted, and a Narrow Window Into Congress’s ICE Dilemma

Congress’s latest shutdown scare ended the way these episodes usually do: with a stopgap deal, a sigh of relief, and little sense that the underlying conflict had been resolved. But buried inside the agreement was a revealing maneuver. While most of the federal government received longer-term funding, the Department of Homeland Security, and especially Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was given only a short-term extension. That asymmetry was deliberate. It preserved leverage over one of the most controversial federal agencies without triggering a prolonged shutdown, while also exposing the narrow terrain on which Congress is still willing to confront executive power. As with so many recent budget deals, the decision emerged less from open debate than from late-stage negotiations compressed into the final hours before the deadline.

How the Deal Was Framed

Democrats used the funding deadline to force a conversation about ICE’s enforcement practices, but they were careful about how that conversation was structured. Rather than reopening the far more combustible debate over immigration levels, deportation priorities, or statutory authority, they framed the dispute as one about law-enforcement standards, specifically transparency, accountability, and oversight.

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You

The brutality of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the related cohort of federal officers in Minneapolis spurred more than 30,000 stalwart Minnesotans to step forward in January and be trained as monitors. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s demands to Minnesota’s Governor demonstrate that the ICE surge is linked to elections, and other ICE-related threats, including Steve Bannon calling for ICE agents deployment to polling stations, make clear that elections should be on the monitoring agenda in Minnesota and across the nation.

A recent exhortation by the New York Times Editorial Board underscores the need for citizen action to defend elections and outlines some steps. Additional avenues are also available. My three decades of experience with international and citizen election observation in numerous countries demonstrates that monitoring safeguards trustworthy elections and promotes public confidence in them - both of which are needed here and now in the US.

Keep ReadingShow less