We Do Better is about identifying those people, organizations and methods that provide the best and most accessible public services, and enabling communities to direct resources with the goal of improving human outcomes. We Do Better is morally committed to better human outcomes – not ideologically committed to a particular method of achieving them. Accordingly, we support and strengthen those who rely on public services by supporting and strengthening those who Do Better in providing them. Our mission is to promote the freedom and well-being of all Americans by maximizing the quality and accessibility of public services and accountability in their provision.
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Start your day right!
Get latest updates and insights delivered to your inbox.
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More
Democracy in Action: May Retrospective
Jun 15, 2025
Welcome to Democracy in Action, where you will find insights and a discussion with the Fulcrum's collaborators about some of the most talked-about topics.
Consistent with the Fulcrum's mission, this program strives to share many perspectives to widen our readers' viewpoints.
I spoke with these Fulcrum columnists:
Beau Breslin, the Joseph C. Palamountain Jr. Chair in Government at Skidmore College.
Vanessa Castro, a Public Voices fellow of the OpEd Project, the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice, and the Every Page Foundation.
Reverend Wesley Bridges, the CEO of Clergy For Prison Reform.- YouTubewww.youtube.com
Beau spoke about a new series he's leading in the Fulcrum called “Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-generational Understanding through Constitution-making.” "Thomas Jefferson thought that constitutions should be rewritten every generation," said Beau. "Which for him meant every 19 years, we ought to metaphorically go back to Philadelphia and rewrite the Constitution."
"For Jefferson, generations represented important markers. And they were distinct," writes Beau in his introductory column. "Let each present people shape the national destiny in their own image, he (Jefferson) argued."
Each month, starting in June, the series will contrast a different element or component of seven constitutions, utilizing ChatGPT, each reflecting the priorities, beliefs, values, positions, and actions of a distinct generation.
In the column, “Eliminating HIV Prevention Is a Public Health Crisis,” Vanessawrote that the Trump administration is planning to eliminate the CDC Division of HIV Prevention, and what the collapse of HIV prevention will mean to thousands of people in the U.S. who will acquire HIV in the next five years.
"HIV isn't an isolated issue. It's something that impacts all of us," she said. We have 1.2 million people in the US living with HIV currently, and with the elimination of the HIV Prevention Division, we're going to see the ramifications in a variety of areas."
Vanessa also said that HIV is still an epidemic, and that the communities most disproportionately impacted are Black and Latin/a LGBTQ communities.
In “Democracy on the Edge: Take Action Now To Maintain the Constitution,” Reverend Wesley Bridges wrote: Democracy is in danger. Voter suppression efforts are once again on the rise, most recently embodied in the reintroduction of the “SAVE Act.”
"Democracy is yet again under attack, "Reverend Bridges said. "There's no accountability when it comes to seeking absolute power. And that's what this bill is about."
The bill calls for the elimination of the use of driver’s licenses and state IDs and requires birth certificates instead.
Check out the April round table discussion:
- YouTubewww.youtube.com
Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum. He is the publisher of the Latino News Network and an accredited Solutions Journalism and Complicating the Narratives trainer with the Solutions Journalism Network.
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
silhouette of man and woman kissing during sunset
Photo by Arifur Rahman on Unsplash
Father’s Day: A Day of Celebration and Patriotism
Jun 14, 2025
While Father’s Day and democracy in America may not share a direct historical connection, a broader perspective reveals meaningful intersections.
Father’s Day, officially recognized in the U.S. in 1972, celebrates paternal influence and family values—principles that have played a crucial role in American democracy. Both major political parties have invoked family values to shape their narratives, reinforcing their importance in civic life.
However, rather than focusing on turning family values into a political slogan this Father’s Day, let’s focus our attention on the fundamental principles that foster strong individuals and vibrant communities—values that transcend political affiliation and unite all Americans.
Fathers, as mentors and role models, have a unique opportunity to instill these ideals in their children. Some examples of a few values that fathers should pass on—not just on Father’s Day, but every day to their children and grandchildren are:
- Responsibility & Civic Duty – Just as families teach responsibility, democracy thrives on engaged citizens who vote, serve in public office, and contribute to their communities.
- Respect & Tolerance – Families encourage respect for different perspectives, a cornerstone of democracy that fosters civil discourse and compromise.
- Equality & Inclusion – A democratic society champions equal opportunity, much like families strive to treat members fairly, regardless of age, gender, or background.
- Education & Knowledge – Families prioritize learning, just as democracy depends on informed citizens making thoughtful decisions.
- Compassion & Social Support – Whether within families or through social policies, caring for the vulnerable reflects a commitment to collective well-being.
- Freedom & Independence – Healthy families nurture independence and personal growth, paralleling democracy’s emphasis on individual rights.
Fathers undeniably shape the values of future generations—both for better and worse—just as democratic institutions work to cultivate informed and engaged citizens. Let’s reflect today on how we can pass these values down to our children and grandchildren.
Beyond our households, we must champion democratic values in society as a whole. Without going down the road of divisive politics. Fathers can do so by:
- Leading by Example – Parents model civic responsibility through voting, discussing societal issues, and engaging in their communities.
- Encouraging Open Dialogue – A home that fosters respectful discussions prepares individuals for civil discourse in a democratic society.
- Community Involvement – Volunteering, organizing events, and supporting advocacy efforts reinforce the significance of civic engagement.
- Educating the Next Generation – Teaching history, government, and critical thinking cultivates informed citizens who value democracy.
- Supporting Inclusivity – Welcoming diversity in friendships, education, and cultural experiences promotes broader social inclusion.
- Advocating for Social Justice – Standing against discrimination and inequality contributes to a more equitable society.
- Practicing Empathy & Cooperation – Resolving conflicts through understanding and compromise mirrors democratic processes.
Many of our past Presidents, despite the demands of their office, have spoken about the profound responsibility of fatherhood. President Barack Obama reflected on this, saying:
"I'm inspired by the love people have for their children. And I'm inspired by my own children, how full they make my heart. They make me want to work to make the world a little bit better. And they make me want to be a better man."
Similarly, George W. Bush captured the essence of fatherhood with a simple yet powerful statement:
"I think the most important priority for a dad is to be a dad. In my case, I might have been slightly self-absorbed at times, but when I became a dad, I only had one real job, and that was to provide for these little girls."
So this Father’s Day, let’s celebrate—but also take a moment to reflect on how we can reinforce democratic ideals. Perhaps the greatest act of patriotism is to instill these values in our children and grandchildren, ensuring they carry forward the spirit of democracy in their own lives.
David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.
Keep ReadingShow less
Andrey Denisyuk/Getty Images
Democracy Under Strain: How New Voting Barriers Threaten Youth Participation
Jun 14, 2025
The Fulcrum is committed to nurturing the next generation of journalists. To learn about the many NextGen initiatives we are leading, click HERE.
We asked Bennett Gillespie, a student at Duke University and an intern with the Fulcrum, to share his thoughts on what democracy means to him and his perspective on its current health.
Here’s his insight on the topic.
American democracy has never been static. It is a system designed to evolve, to expand, to bring more citizens into the fold. Yet in 2025, that promise feels increasingly out of reach for many young Americans. Across the country, laws and administrative decisions are quietly reshaping who can participate in elections - and who is pushed to the margins. Nowhere is this more evident than in my home state of North Carolina, where recent changes threaten to lock out a generation just beginning to find its voice.
In 2023, North Carolina implemented a strict voter ID requirement, mandating that all voters present an approved form of identification at the polls. While student IDs can theoretically be used, they must meet state standards, and many colleges scrambled to get approvals in time. For students who lack a driver’s license, a group disproportionately large among 18- to 24-year-olds, these new requirements erect significant hurdles.
At the same time, the state legislature passed Senate Bill 747, a sweeping election law that tightened rules around same-day registration. Previously, if a voter registered during the early voting period and an address confirmation notice was returned undelivered, officials needed two failed mailings before rejecting the ballot. The new law slashed that to one. For students living in dorms or those with complicated campus mailing addresses, a single postal error could invalidate their vote without their knowledge. Although a federal judge temporarily blocked the provision, calling it an “unacceptable risk” to legitimate ballots, the message was clear: minor administrative errors would carry major consequences.
North Carolina also moved to restructure its election boards, creating the risk of partisan deadlocks over the location of polling places. Early voting sites on college campuses, already a contentious issue in some counties, could become collateral damage.
These changes in North Carolina are not isolated. Across the United States, similar patterns are playing out. Since 2020, at least 27 states have enacted new voting restrictions. Many of these laws disproportionately impact young voters, a demographic that is mobile, less likely to own a car, and more likely to rely on nontraditional identification, such as student cards.
Strict voter ID laws have become a favored tool for states seeking to limit the electorate. In 2023, Idaho barred the use of student IDs at the polls altogether. Texas and Ohio have similarly refused to accept out-of-state documents for registration, effectively forcing students to acquire new credentials if they want to vote where they study.
Other states have made it more difficult to vote by mail, a method that young voters increasingly prefer. North Carolina and Ohio now require that mail-in ballots arrive by Election Day, eliminating the grace period for ballots postmarked by Election Day but received after the deadline. Analysts warn that this change could disenfranchise thousands of voters, particularly students who juggle busy schedules and unreliable mail services.
The impact of these restrictions is not theoretical. Young voters are already the most underrepresented age group in American elections. While turnout among voters aged 18 to 29 surged to 50% in 2020 and remained relatively strong in the 2022 midterms, it still lags behind older demographics. Additional barriers risk reversing this progress, deterring first-time voters before they have a chance to form lifelong habits of civic participation.
Behind these efforts is a clear political calculus. Young voters have leaned increasingly progressive in recent elections, influencing outcomes in swing states. Rather than expand access to accommodate this rising generation, some lawmakers have responded by erecting obstacles, often justified under the guise of “election security” despite scant evidence of widespread voter fraud.
This is not how democracy is supposed to work. A healthy democracy welcomes participation; it does not fear it. Yet the patchwork of voting laws in the United States increasingly resembles a system in retreat, one where participation depends on geography, age, and privilege.
There are solutions. Automatic voter registration (AVR) offers one path forward. By registering eligible citizens when they interact with government agencies, AVR removes unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles. States that have adopted AVR have seen significant increases in registration rates, particularly among young voters.
Ensuring polling places are located on or near college campuses is another vital step. Students often lack reliable transportation to reach off-campus sites, and placing polling locations within walking distance can substantially boost turnout. Some states have already taken this step, mandating polling access for large campuses.
Simplifying voter ID requirements would also reduce barriers to voting. Accepting student IDs universally and allowing electronic proof of residence would make it easier for young people to meet documentation requirements without unnecessary strain.
Ultimately, democracy is not sustained solely by the existence of elections. It survives through inclusion, through trust, and through the conviction that every citizen has an equal voice. When barriers rise and trust erodes, the very foundation of our system weakens.
Young Americans are eager to participate. It is the responsibility of policymakers to ensure that needless obstacles do not block the path to the ballot box. Expanding access is not a partisan issue; it is a democratic imperative. The future of American democracy depends on whether we choose to welcome the next generation or shut them out.
Bennett Gillespie is a student at Duke University and a council member of the Duke Program in American Grand Strategy.
Keep ReadingShow less
Javier Ghersi/Getty Images
How Government Efficiency Is Supposed To Work
Jun 14, 2025
We’ve seen in the last few months a disastrous display of what happens when amateurs run amok with government resources. The destruction caused by Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) crew has harmed the lives of possibly millions of people and will take years to rectify. Some estimates suggest that thousands, if not tens of thousands, of lives have been lost due to the cut in foreign assistance. The Partnership for Public Service, the primary nonprofit advocating for federal employees, has suggested that the so-called “cuts” will result in the government spending more money, not less, due to lost productivity and the departure of experienced workers.
Yet this month, we got an example of what actual government oversight and genuine cost-cutting look like. The House of Representatives Subcommittee on Government Operations held a hearing with the sexy title, “Safeguarding Procurement: Examining Fraud Risk Management in the Department of Defense.” The hearing included the Inspector General of the Department of Defense (DOD) and an expert with the Government Accountability Office (GAO). For policy wonks in D.C., the GAO is often called the last honest person in Washington. They thoroughly investigate how tax dollars are spent and study how to improve the efficiency of government programs. (Wait … wasn’t that supposed to be the mission of DOGE?)
From 2017 through 2024, the GAO found $10.7 billion in “confirmed fraud, and developed 17 recommendations to improve the financial management of the department. This is not small potatoes – the Pentagon is responsible for half of all discretionary spending and 82 percent of the government’s “total physical assets” (that bureaucrat talk for “stuff we buy”).
The two-hour hearing featured thoughtful and intelligent questions from Democrats and Republicans as they jointly explored the research on the topic and discussed ways to achieve taxpayer savings. The Chairman of the subcommittee, Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), and the top Democrat, Rep. Kweisi Mfume (D-Maryland), calmly and clearly outlined their intention to work in a bipartisan manner. “We made the determination that Mr. Mfume and the Democrats intend to forthrightly address this issue and come up with real answers, and we’re going to work on this together,” Rep. Sessions said. “Working together is something that we on this side of the aisle look forward to,” Rep. Mfume said.
Unlike DOGE, instead of coming up with fantasy contracts and false savings, the GAO found actual fraud in financial management, including:
- $200 million in stolen funds by a contractor who misrepresented their ownership status.
- Bribes from a contract to Navy officials defrauded the government of millions of dollars.
- A contractor selling the government defective parts, resulting in the grounding of 47 F-15 fighter jets.
The GAO also found that the Pentagon was dragging its feet and delaying the implementation of the recommendations. Only four of the 17 recommendations were implemented, and over a seven-month period, the DOD delayed launching a revised fraud risk management strategy five times. This may sound boring, but good governance that leads to solid results often is boring.
DOGE claims its work has saved taxpayers $160 billion. Instead, according to the nonpartisan Partnership for Public Service, DOGE has cost the taxpayer $135 billion by putting tens of thousands of federal employees on paid leave, rehiring mistakenly fired workers, and resulting in lost productivity. The Yale Budget Lab estimates that proposed cuts in staff at the IRS will result in $160 billion in lost revenue to the Treasury due to reduced collections and fewer taxpayer audits.
Genuine government improvement doesn’t come with a narcissistic billionaire wielding a chainsaw and unleashing untrained techies to wreak havoc with the federal government. It comes from experts, with deep knowledge of how the government works and with a patriotic commitment to making it work better. The sooner the Trump Administration figures out that immutable reality of governance, the sooner they’ll find actual savings for the American public.
Bradford Fitch is a former Capitol Hill staffer, former CEO of the Congressional Management Foundation, and author of “Citizens’ Handbook for Influencing Elected Officials.”
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More