Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

What if neither party can govern?

What if neither party can govern?
Getty Images

John Opdycke is the Founder and President of Open Primaries, a national advocacy organization working to enact open and nonpartisan primary elections.

It’s tempting to finally see the selection of a new Speaker of the House and think “don’t worry, the ship has righted itself once again.” After all, the Democratic and Republican Parties governed the United States effectively for most of the 20th century. Not perfectly but effectively.


But what if those days of “governing” are gone?

Congressional Republicans--85% of whom face little-to-none general election competition--have lost interest in governing altogether. They provoke and disrupt but show outright disdain for doing the people’s business and finding creative solutions to the many issues facing our country.

The Congressional Democrats--similarly insulated from November contests--like passing legislation, which, unfortunately for all of us, is not the same as governing. They truly believe that they know what is best for people, so they pass laws and then scratch their heads and say “why don’t the American people appreciate how good Joe Biden has been to them?” They believe the country is the same as the highly organized interest groups that make up the (ever shrinking) remains of the New Deal Coalition that Ronald Reagan put on life support. The party is disconnected from much of the pain and chaos that ordinary Americans experience, and with the exception of Barack Obama, they’ve been running “anybody but (fill in the blank)” presidential campaigns for the past 30 years.

One party doesn’t believe in governing, the other doesn’t believe in the American people. Issues pertaining to our border, public safety, energy, foreign policy, pollution, debt and healthcare go unresolved because they function better as fundraising fuel. Trillions get spent on projects to help partisan interest groups, not the country. Debt mounts no matter who is in charge. While there is tremendous innovation, experimentation, dynamism and growth taking place at the grassroots, none of it touches Washington.

The failure of the national parties is obscured by the fact that many Republican and Democratic elected leaders at the local level are doing fine work governing cities and towns that are thriving--and inspiring the trust of the people who live there. Local government is respected, in part because the rules of local politics are mostly nonpartisan. But local resilience is the last gasp of a once effective national two party system, not evidence that we should stay the course.

The American people are responding to this state of affairs in three important ways. First, people are registering to vote as independents. In blue states and red, the fastest growing segment of the electorate is independent, no-party voters. Voters are creating distance between themselves and both parties. This trend is understudied and misunderstood, but it is happening.

Second, there is a growing appreciation that the rules of the political game are rigged to insulate both parties from the people so that when they fail, they pay no price. Advocates for a constitutional amendment to allow citizens to regulate money in politics, ranked choice voting and nonpartisan primaries, nonpartisan redistricting and election administration are knocking on doors in all 50 states, introducing legislation and promoting ballot measures. A growing coalition sees repealing closed primaries as the single most effective way to empower independent voters and create space for governing - but this movement is bigger than one policy. And it is growing.

And finally, multiple independent candidates/processes are testing the waters: Robert Kennedy, Jr., Cornel West, the Forward Party and No Labels. It’s early, but there are signs that these candidates and processes differ from traditional third party protest candidacies. Each is attempting to appeal to voters across the spectrum and talking about the need to upgrade our democratic process, not just elect new leaders. Each has the potential to tap into the pent up desire for a more diverse and dynamic political marketplace. Might one or more of these efforts survive the brutal attacks from Team Trump and Team Biden and gain traction? It’s possible. And if more than one takes off it will be interesting to see whether and how they can work together to create something truly developmental for the country.

Both parties, their positive capacities near exhaustion, are vested in preventing anything new from taking root. This is deeply destructive to the country at a time when challenges at home and abroad are mounting. The problem isn’t that Biden and Trump are too old - it’s that the institutions they lead are calcified and unresponsive. That’s why so many voters are declaring their independence. And it’s also why reforms that allow for new coalitions, new solutions, and new conversations are so essential.

Read More

Declaration of Independence
When, in 2026, the United States marks the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, we should take pride in our collective journey.
Douglas Sacha/Getty Images

What Exactly Does "All Men Are Created Equal" Mean in the Declaration of Independence?

I used to think the answer was obvious; it was self-evident. But it's not, at least not in today's political context. MAGA Republicans and Democrats have a very different take on the meaning of this phrase in the Declaration.

I said in my book, We Still Hold These Truths: An America Manifesto, that it is in the interpretation of our founding documents that both the liberal and conservative ideologies that have run throughout our history can be found. This is a perfect example.

Keep ReadingShow less
Washington, DC, skyline
A country in crisis needs to call a truce with its government
Michael Lee/Getty Images

Defending Democracy in the Heart of Democracy - Washington, D.C.

The Crisis in Our Capital

Washington, D.C. is at the center of American democracy. Yet today, its residents — taxpayers, veterans, workers, families, people like you an I, American citizens — are being stripped of their right to self-government. The recent surge of out-of-state National Guard troops into the District under federal order has highlighted a deep flaw in our system: D.C. does not have the same authority to govern itself that the 50 states enjoy.Keith

We are told this militarization is about “public safety,” but violent crime in D.C. is near a 30-year low . What we are witnessing is not a crime-fighting measure, but an unprecedented encroachment on local authority. The consent of the people — the foundation of democracy — is being sidelined to pursue a political or even personal agenda.

The Ethical and Constitutional Problem

Legally, a president can request National Guard support through interstate compacts. But legality is not the same as legitimacy. True democracy requires consent, not unilateral fiat. Under the Home Rule Act, federal control over D.C. is only supposed to last 30 days in emergencies. Yet the use of state-based National Guard units circumvents this safeguard and seems to demonstrate a hidden agenda. This is a loophole — one that undermines D.C.’s right to self-governance and sets a dangerous precedent for federal overreach.

An Urgent Legislative Answer

It is not enough to critique the abuse of power — we must fix it. That is why I have drafted the D.C. Defense of Self-Government Act, which closes this loophole and restores constitutional balance. The draft bill is now available for public review on my congressional campaign website:

Read the D.C. Defense of Self-Government Act here

This legislation would require explicit, expedited approval from Congress before federal or state National Guard troops can be deployed into the District. It ensures no president — Republican. Democrat or Independent — can bypass the will of the people of Washington, D.C.

This moment also reminds us of a deeper injustice that has lingered for generations: the people of Washington, D.C., remain without full representation in Congress. Over 700,000 Americans—more than the populations of several states—are denied a voting voice in the very body that holds sway over their lives. This lack of representation makes it easier for their self-government to be undermined, as we see today. That must change. We will need to revisit serious legislation to finally fix this injustice and secure for D.C. residents the same democratic rights every other American enjoys.

The Bigger Picture

This fight is not about partisan politics. It is about whether America will live up to its founding ideals of self-rule and accountability. Every voter, regardless of party, should ask: if the capital of our democracy can be militarized without the consent of the people, what stops it from happening in other cities across America?

A Call to Action

When I ran for president, my wife told me I was going to make history. I told her making history didn’t matter to me — what mattered to me then and what matters to me now is making a difference. I'm not in office yet so I have no legal authority to act. But, I am still a citizen of the United States, a veteran of the United States Air Force, someone who has taken the oath of office, many times since 1973. That oath has no expiration date. Today, that difference is about ensuring the residents of D.C. — and every American city — are protected from unchecked federal overreach.

I urge every reader to share this bill with your representatives. Demand that Congress act now. We can’t wait until the mid-terms. Demand that they defend democracy where it matters most — in the heart of our capital — because FBI and DEA agents patrolling the streets of our nation's capital does not demonstrate democracy. Quite the contrary, it clearly demonstrates autocracy.

Davenport is a candidate for U.S. Congress, NC-06.
The Return of Loyalty Tests and the Decline of American Democracy

Faded American flag

The Return of Loyalty Tests and the Decline of American Democracy

Remember when loyalty oaths were used to ferret out and punish people suspected of being Communists? They were a potent and terrifying tool, designed to produce conformity and compliance at the height of the late 1940s, early 1950s Red Scare.

Today, they are back, but in more subtle, if no less coercive, forms. The Trump Administration is using them in hiring and retaining federal employees, in dispensing federal grants, and in passing out perks.

Keep ReadingShow less