Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

When accountability goes, so does legitimacy

When accountability goes, so does legitimacy
Getty Images

Kevin Frazier is an Assistant Professor at the Crump College of Law at St. Thomas University. He previously clerked for the Montana Supreme Court.

“I’m just the middle guy.” It seems like a harmless and justifiable excuse. But when entire companies, governments, and communities become dominated by “middle guys” working for “the boss,” the little guys lose out. This may not seem like a problem to those who can afford to get around middle guys. These are the folks who seemingly float above the barriers that slow everyone else down. They’re the handful of individuals who can, for example, charter private jets and avoid the airline ticket counter--a dominion controlled exclusively by middle guys whose hands are always tied.


It turns out there’s rarely a middle guy who can’t be circumvented with some time and money. For everyone else, there’s a looming accountability crisis brought on by promises being made by individuals and institutions with no intention of ever keeping them--and instead putting the blame on an unaccountable middle guy.

Accountability does not exist if those who hold power don’t face consequences for taking inadequate, illegal, or immoral actions. In the Age of the Middle Guy, Average Joes and Janes cannot afford to go after “the boss,” who are protected by complex contracts, well-paid lawyers, and deep pockets. In short, in too many situations it now takes time and money to get back your time and money.

Case in point, my friends hired a moving company to deliver their goods to a home in a new state. Well, that’s what they thought. In actuality, they hired a “broker,” who hired a “mover,” who hired contractors to move their stuff. When their goods arrived damaged and two-weeks late, they tried to get a refund from the contractors - who pointed them to the movers, who pointed them to the brokers, who never answered their calls. My friends wanted to hire an attorney to go after anyone and everyone but lacked the time and money to get back their time and money.

Initially, I questioned why my friends didn’t read enough Google Reviews to hire a better company. Then, I realized…Wow! I have sipped way too much Kool-Aid. I rushed to question the consumer--the Joes and Janes with no power--rather than an industry and culture that has robbed little guys of any means to impose consequences on those who should be held accountable.

Those in power go out of their way to diminish the likelihood and magnitude of those consequences. In other words, they try to reduce the odds of getting caught and, if they somehow are caught, they try to limit the severity of the punishment.

Over time, the powerful have created more and more creative ways to evade detection and escape punishment. They’ll use distance (see King George counting on an ocean to avoid facing the colonists); time (see dictators throughout history delaying elections); middle guys (see moving companies hiring contractors); and, bureaucracy (see some governments)—all in an effort to reduce the odds of little guys coordinating to actively hold them to account.

Regrettably, the powerful usually succeed. Little guys don’t have the time and resources to sail across the sea or, in modern times, wait on hold. What’s more, even when the powerful get caught in the act, they manage to avoid facing severe consequences — their contracts are too strong, their lawyers are on speed dial, and their political ties are too deep.

When accountability goes, so does legitimacy. When little guy after little guy has a story about being taken advantage of and nothing to show for their suffering, entire institutions can start to crumple. The stories of corruption spread and the willingness of Joes and Janes everywhere to trust those institutions dissipates.

That lack of trust is spreading today and has become one of the most important issues of our time. One way to restore that trust is to look for ways--through regulations, rules, and norms--to cut out the middle guy and make sure that the powerful can be directly, swiftly, and appropriately held to account.


Read More

Welcome to Trump’s lame duck presidency

President Donald Trump speaks to the press in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., on June 3, 2026.

(Mandel NGAN/AFP via Getty Images/TCA)

Welcome to Trump’s lame duck presidency

It's been a while since we saw a lame duck presidency — long enough in politics to maybe forget what one looks like.

In October 2014, President Barack Obama hit his lowest approval rating yet at 40%. The midterm elections were an absolute bloodbath for Democrats — Republicans expanded their majority in the House by 13 seats and took control of the Senate with a gain of nine seats.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Reporters and members of the media raise their hand to ask a question to U.S. President Donald Trump.

Reporters and members of the media raise their hand to ask a question to U.S. President Donald Trump during a press conference in the Brady Briefing Room of the White House on April 25, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Al Drago / Getty Images

Trump’s 15 Attacks on Press Freedom Mark an Unprecedented Crisis

“Freedom of conscience, of education, of speech, of assembly are among the very fundamentals of democracy, and all of them would be nullified should freedom of the press ever be successfully challenged.” – Franklin D. Roosevelt, 32nd U.S. President

Throughout America’s 250 years, the tension between the White House and the press is as old as the republic itself. Several presidents haven’t necessarily tried to repeal the First Amendment (which protects the press), per se, or the Fifth Amendment (which protects journalists’ confidential sources). Instead, some have tried to control the narrative and limit press access.

Keep ReadingShow less
Academic Tracking in K-12 Schools: Improving Achievement or Widening Gaps?
red apple fruit on four pyle books

Academic Tracking in K-12 Schools: Improving Achievement or Widening Gaps?

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

  • Tracking is widespread and begins early. Currently, 75 percent of eighth graders nationwide are affected by tracking and the process begins in first and second grade.
  • Successful detracking requires adequate support. Districts that detrack with enough support and resources for both teachers and students can narrow achievement gaps without lowering performance.Successful examples often come from communities with extensive resources.
  • Research on the impact of tracking on achievement is mixed. Some studies show tracking benefits advanced students at no cost to others, but other studies have shown the opposite; minimum educational gains with significant costs in equity.

What is Academic Tracking?

Academic tracking is the practice of assigning students to different classrooms based on earlier academic achievement or perceived ability. It affects approximately 75 percent of eighth graders nationwide and begins as early as first and second grade. Unlike temporary ability grouping, where a teacher might divide students into small groups for a single lesson on fractions, tracking sorts students into specific pathways such as remedial math, regular Algebra I, or honors Algebra I, with math being the most heavily tracked subject in American schools.

Keep ReadingShow less