Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Four fun facts about women’s suffrage, 100 years after Congress endorsed the idea

Four fun facts about women’s suffrage, 100 years after Congress endorsed the idea
adamkaz

Tuesday marks the centennial of final congressional approval of the 19th Amendment giving women the right to vote nationwide. The 100th anniversary of ratification is still more than a year away – Tennessee's endorsement of the amendment in August 1920 yielded the required approval of three-quarters of the states – but this anniversary is as good a time as any to consider some things to know about the path of women's suffrage:

  1. President Woodrow Wilson originally opposed giving women the right to vote but changed his position and delivered a speech in the Senate chamber on Sept. 13, 1918, in which he reminded senators that the war could not have been fought without the help of women on the home front.
  2. After decades of protest and previous failed attempts in Congress, the House debate on the amendment lasted just two hours on May 21, 1919. Proponents highlighted women's work during the war; opponents said the amendment would violate the rights of states to decide who got to vote.
  3. By 1919 women had already won the right to vote in 15 of the 48 states. Rep. Edward Little of Kansas, one of those states, said during the House debate that allowing women to vote would not risk their traditional roles: "To permit the mothers of this country to express their views on important issues will not injure the homes."
  4. Congress created a Women's Suffrage Centennial Commission in 2017 and it has a website that includes information about the historical events surrounding suffrage as well as events planned to celebrate the 100th anniversary.

In Washington, these include "Votes for Women: A Portrait of Persistence," an exhibit at the National Portrait Gallery that can also be viewed in part online.


Other exhibits in D.C. include "Rightfully Hers: American Women and the Vote" at the National Archives and "Shall Not be Denied: Women Fight for the Vote.


@billtheobald | williamtheobald@thefulcrum.us


Read More

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs
person sitting while using laptop computer and green stethoscope near

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs

Healthcare and social assistance professions added 693,000 jobs in 2025. Without those gains, the U.S. economy would have lost roughly 570,000 jobs.

At first glance, these numbers suggest that healthcare is a growth engine in an otherwise slowing labor market. But a closer look reveals something more troubling for patients and healthcare professionals.

Keep ReadingShow less
A large group of people is depicted while invisible systems actively scan and analyze individuals within the crowd

Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over a Pentagon “supply-chain risk” label raises major constitutional questions about AI policy, corporate speech, and political retaliation.

Getty Images, Flavio Coelho

Anthropic Sues Trump Over ‘Unlawful’ AI Retaliation

Anthropic’s dispute with the Trump administration is no longer just about AI policy; it has escalated into a constitutional test of whether American companies can uphold their values against political retaliation. After the administration labeled Anthropic a “supply‑chain risk”, a designation historically reserved for foreign adversaries, and ordered federal agencies to cease using its technology, the company did not yield. Instead, Anthropic filed two lawsuits: one in the Northern District of California and another in the D.C. Circuit, each challenging different aspects of the government’s actions and calling them “unprecedented and unlawful.”

The Pentagon has now formally issued the supply‑chain risk designation, triggering immediate cancellations of federal contracts and jeopardizing “hundreds of millions of dollars” in near‑term revenue. Anthropic’s filings describe the losses as “unrecoverable,” with reputational damage compounding the financial harm. Yet even as the government blacklists the company, the Pentagon continues using Claude in classified systems because the model is deeply embedded in wartime workflows. This contradiction underscores the political nature of the designation: a tool deemed too “dangerous” to be used by federal agencies is simultaneously indispensable in active military operations.

Keep ReadingShow less