Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

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

Latino attendees of the Democratic National Convention

People cheer for the Harris-Walz ticket at the Democratic National Convention.

Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

Harris’ nomination ‘hit a reset button’ for Latinas supporting Democrats

As the presidential race entered the summer months, President Joe Biden’s level of support among Latinx voters couldn’t match the winning coalition he had built in 2020. Among Latinas, a critical group of voters who tend to back Democrats at higher levels than Latinos, lagging support had begun to worry Stephanie Valencia, who studies voting patterns among Latinx voters across the country for Equis Research, a data analytics and research firm.

Then the big shake-up happened: Biden stepped down and Vice President Kamala Harris took his place at the top of the Democratic ticket fewer than 100 days before the election.

Valencia’s team quickly jumped to action. The goal was to figure out how the move was sitting with Latinx voters in battleground states that will play an outsized role in deciding the election. After surveying more than 2,000 Latinx voters in late July and early August, Equis found a significant jump in support for the Democratic ticket, a shift that the team is referring to as “the Latino Reset.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Taylor Swift on stage
Gareth Cattermole/TAS24/Getty Images for TAS Rights Management

Taylor Swift enters the fray

Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

On Feb. 4, I wrote an article for The Fulcrum with the headline “Will Taylor Swift enter the fray?” Now, seven months later and shortly after the end of the first Harris-Trump debate, Swift made her decision clear when she announced her support for the vice president on Instagram.

Keep ReadingShow less
People voting

Jessie Harris (left,) a registered independent, casts a ballot at during South Carolina's Republican primary on Feb. 24.

Joe Lamberti for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Our election system is failing independent voters

Gruber is senior vice president of Open Primaries and co-founder of Let Us Vote.

With the race to Election Day entering the homestretch, the Harris and Trump campaigns are in a full out sprint to reach independent voters, knowing full well that independents have been the deciding vote in every presidential contest since the Obama era. And like clockwork every election season, debates are arising about who independent voters are, whether they matter and even whether they actually exist at all.

Lost, perhaps intentionally, in these debates is one undebatable truth: Our electoral system treats the millions of Americans registered as independent voters as second-class citizens by law.

Keep ReadingShow less
Abortion rights protestors

Arizona residents rally for abortion rights in April, on the heels of the state Supreme Court decision enacting an 1864 law banning abortion.

Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

In swing states, R's and D's oppose criminalizing abortion before fetal viability

While policymakers argue over whether abortion should be a right or a crime, the public has a clear policy stance on the matter. A new survey in the six swing states finds that majorities of Republicans and Democrats oppose criminalizing abortion before fetal viability.

Furthermore, bipartisan majorities favor reducing unintended pregnancies and abortions through policies ensuring access to birth control.

Keep ReadingShow less
Close up of congressional document

The House joint resolution proposing the 14th Amendment to the Constitution in 1866.

How the 14th Amendment prevents state legislatures from subverting popular presidential elections

Eisner is a Ph.D. student in history at Johns Hopkins University. Froomkin is an assistant professor of law at the University of Houston Law Center.

Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election not only failed, but some of them also rested on a misreading of the U.S. Constitution, as our new analysis argues. The relevant constitutional provision dates back to just after the Civil War, and contemporaries recognized it as a key protection of American democracy.

In November 2020, as it became clear that Trump had lost the popular vote and would lose the Electoral College, Trump and his supporters mounted a pressure campaign to convince legislatures in several states whose citizens voted for Joe Biden to appoint electors who would support Trump’s reelection in the Electoral College votes.

Keep ReadingShow less