Page 24 – Democracy Fund

Blog

Our Political System is Not a Game: Real Leaders Know When to Accept Defeat

Joe Goldman

September 21, 2016

With just weeks until the American public chooses our next president, it is troubling to see headlines filled with dubious suggestions that our elections might be “hacked” or “rigged” when the likelihood remains so remarkably small. Even more disturbing is the possibility that these kinds of stories could undermine the election results if things don’t work out after election day.

The wonder of American democracy is that we resolve our conflicts with votes and laws, not tanks and guns. This tradition is possible only because we treat the other party as opponents, not enemies, and we respect the integrity of our democratic institutions.

If the margin is very close, we rely on our election system and our judicial system to use predetermined rules to bring the election to a settlement. The alternative to relying on elections and rule of law is unthinkable and should be rejected in the strongest possible terms. When the votes have been cast and ballots counted, we expect that losing candidates will make a phone call to congratulate the winner and then publicly acknowledge the will of the electorate.

Refusing to accept election results wholeheartedly and without reservation is not just wrong, it is un-American. Gracefully accepting defeat is one of the truly powerful moments in our nation’s political life. Both of the major party candidates should commit to doing so this year.

Before it’s too late, we must call on political, media, and civic leaders to make clear that this is not a game. When candidates lose elections, we expect that they will accept defeat and call for the American people to come together as a nation. Period.

Back to Ideas

Blog

Welcoming New Democracy Fund Teammates

Democracy Fund

December 20, 2016

Democracy Fund has grown a lot in 2016. Since January, we have hired 10 new full time members of our staff – and as we look ahead to 2017, we are continuing to recruit for several open positions.

As an organization, we believe that the inclusion and participation of diverse voices from across the political spectrum and from all walks of life is critical to our work to strengthen our democracy. Our staff includes talented, tireless Republicans, Democrats, and Independents who are committed to working together to make our democracy work better.

We are delighted to welcome our new Board Member, Sarah Steven, our three new Senior Fellows, Daniela Gerson, Marty Kaiser, and Rick Shapiro, and three new staff members, Isaiah Castilla, Teresa Gorman, and Robin Stevenson.

Sarah Steven is the newest member of Democracy Fund’s board of directors. Since 2008, Sarah has held a variety of communications and program management roles across the organizations and initiatives of The Omidyar Group (TOG), where she currently serves as Director of Communications. Sarah works closely with Pierre and Pam Omidyar, their advisors, and leadership teams, to develop communications strategies and platforms that allow TOG to share its efforts, key findings, and unique contributions with targeted audiences. With a career spanning more than two decades, Sarah draws from a diverse set of professional experiences beginning in Washington, D.C., where she managed public affairs programming for such clients as Home Box Office, Microsoft, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In Silicon Valley, she worked with both Fortune 500 companies and startups on programs ranging from environmental sustainability to consumer and enterprise technologies and services. Sarah holds a B.A. in communications from George Mason University.
Daniela Gerson is a Senior Fellow for the Public Square Program. Bringing extensive expertise in immigration reporting and participatory media, Daniela will advise on ways to strengthen ecosystem news through journalism innovation and engagement with multiethnic communities. In fall 2016 Daniela joined the California State University Northridge Journalism Department as its first assistant professor with a focus on community, ethnic, and participatory media. Previously, Daniela worked with the Los Angeles Times as a community engagement editor, charged with bringing in new perspectives that reflect the diversity of L.A. and with creating feedback loops to inform coverage. Before joining the Los Angeles Times, Daniela directed the Civic Engagement and Journalism Initiative at University of Southern California’s Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. She has also reported for Financial Times Magazine, The New York Times, PRI’s The World, Weekend America, Der Spiegel, WNYC: New York Public Radio, among other outlets.
Marty Kaiser is a Senior Fellow for the Public Square Program. He is a nationally recognized media consultant specializing in leadership, digital innovation, ethics, investigative reporting, and editing. He has worked in the United States, Canada and Europe. He was Editor/Sr. Vice President of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel from 1997 to 2015. Under his leadership, the Journal Sentinel earned a national reputation for its journalism and digital innovation. Kaiser’s newsroom won Pulitzer Prizes in 2008, 2010, and 2011 and was honored as a finalist six other times from 2003 through 2014. While he was editor, the Journal Sentinel won awards in almost every major U.S. journalism contest. Columbia Journalism Review wrote that the Journal Sentinel had one of the most acclaimed watchdog teams in the country, period.
Rick Shapiro is a Senior Fellow for the Governance Program. He is the President of Strategic Assets Consulting, a management consulting firm that specializes in providing services to federal, state and local government, non-profit organizations, and businesses. Previously, Rick served as Executive Director for the Congressional Management Foundation (CMF), a non-partisan, non-profit organization dedicated to improving the effectiveness of Congress. Over the past 25 years, Rick has provided management consulting services to leaders in both the House and Senate and more than 200 House and Senate offices. He has authored or co-authored of a number of books and reports on congressional operations, and testified before Congress. He has appeared on the CBS Evening News, CNN, C-Span, CNBC, and National Public Radio and is frequently cited in newspaper, radio, and television stories about the Congress. Rick holds a Bachelor’s degree in Communications from the University of Illinois and an MPA from the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University.
Isaiah Castilla joins the Democracy Fund as Senior Counsel, bringing an array of knowledge to our team as he both oversees the Democracy Fund’s legal affairs and provides guidance on its strategy development. Isaiah previously served as the Bolder Advocacy Counsel at Alliance for Justice (AFJ) where he advised foundations on how best to maximize their advocacy capacity. Before joining AFJ, Isaiah was the founding partner of The Castilla Law Group, where he simultaneously managed a caseload of civil and criminal matters and provided legal guidance to nonprofits and political organizations. Isaiah holds a J.D. from Mississippi College School of Law, and earned a BA in Music from Tougaloo College where he graduated magna cum laude.
Teresa Gorman joins the Democracy Fund as the Local News Associate for the Public Square Program, supporting the Public Square team’s mission to invest in innovations and institutions that help people understand and participate in the democratic process. Teresa previously worked as the Supervising Producer of “Localore: Finding America,” for the Association of Independents in Radio, adapting new storytelling models to meet the individual needs of communities across the country. She has spent her career at the intersection of public media, local news, and digital media, working as one of the first ever social media editors for PBS NewsHour. Teresa attended Boston University where she received her BS in Journalism.
Robin Stevenson joins the Democracy Fund as the Executive Assistant to the President and Vice President of the Strategy, Impact, and Learning, bringing more than 25 years of related professional experience to the position. She recently she served as the Assistant to the Regional Chief Operating Officer of MGM Resorts International. Robin previously has worked as the Executive Assistant for various Vice Presidents and Directors at The American Institute of Architects, the Pope John Paul II Cultural Center, and George Washington University Hospital.

To learn more about our board, fellows, and staff, please visit www.democracyfund.org/who-we-are.

Back to Ideas

Blog

Transforming a Tradition: Rethinking Debates with Civic Hall

Tom Glaisyer

September 26, 2016

The 2016 election cycle has been described as unique or like no other. Clearly at the Presidential level this election has been unlike other recent cycles, but it is also remarkably different in another way: the public is getting much of their news beyond television broadcasts, and they are responding, sharing, and engaging with politics in ways they never have before.

It is this change in the nature of our communications that Civic Hall’s Rethinking Debates project seeks to explore. It does so, not blindly, nor in an “add technology and the world will be better” kind of way, but rather with the sense that given the opportunity to engage the public before, during, and after debates, we should use it to explore how people learn about candidates and their positions.

There is no question that the challenges for productive debates are significant. Political polarization in the United States is more pronounced. Americans now have shorter attention spans than a goldfish. The standard format of a televised debate has turned—despite the efforts of moderators no less experienced or skilled than in the past—into what one might describe as a three ring circus. The networks may be expecting massive viewership for the upcoming Presidential debates but its viewership that is partly driven by the sort of enthusiasm one has for a wrestling match rather than something Presidential. In a context where disillusionment within the electorate with politics and candidates is extensive it seems more likely that the debates will not inform, but incite, not engage, but aggravate, not clarify but confuse.

In spite of all that, debates continue to be a staple of the campaign season in many races. They are seen as a key test of a candidate, intellectually, temperamentally, even a candidates’ body language and wardrobe choices become the subject of countless post-debate news clips.

Several groups are working on this challenge. The Annenberg Public Policy Center formed a working group and issued a report advocating for multiple innovations in the debates. The Open Debate Coalition has also been advocating for specific reforms around the debate format. Democracy Fund’s grantee, the National Institute for Civil Discourse, also recently issued civility standards for candidate debates. Politifact will undoubtedly be fact-checking the claims made during the debate and the Internet Archive, also a grantee, is using its capacity to help journalists and the public see how TV covers debates.

The Democracy Fund’s Public Square Program focuses specifically on supporting efforts to help people understand and participate in the democratic process. We invested in Civic Hall’s work because, as their new report reminds us: “The debates are [the public’s] one opportunity in the campaign to see and hear the candidates speak directly to each other in a face-to-face encounter.”

In their extensive report, “Rethinking Debates: A Report On Increasing Engagement,” and at their recent mini-conference, Civic Hall brought together experts to explore technologies and platforms that have the potential to strengthen debates, increase their relevance, and ensure they continue to be central, but in different ways than in the past.

A few of the most promising ideas include:

CNN’s use of a technologically advanced auditorium and polling of an in-person audience to add nuance and immediate responses that could be fed back into the debate via the moderator seemed to successfully pair the strengths of a moderator and an advanced facility.
Google’s election hub, a platform developed in collaboration with Watchout a local organization in Taiwan. The platform allowed the public to generate questions for Presidential candidates. It elicited 6,500 questions that generated 220,000 votes and 5 questions were used in the debates.
At a state level: In New York, Silicon Harlem hosted a debate and utilized Microsoft’s Pulse tool and the above mentioned Open Debates Coalition had their question generation tool adopted for a debate in Florida. Both provided opportunities for the public in the United States to become more engaged in driving the questions used prior to and during the debate.

We hope that as this debate season gets underway we will see more examples both at the state and local and perhaps at the Presidential level that will be new models to follow if we’re to better serve the American public as they consider who they wish to vote for.

Click here to learn more about Civic Hall’s Rethinking Debates Project.

Back to Ideas

Blog

$3.25 Million to Support Knight First Amendment Institute

Tom Glaisyer

February 22, 2018

A range of technological, economic, and cultural forces are putting new pressures on the First Amendment — a pillar of our Bill of Rights. The freedoms of speech and of the press protected in the First Amendment ensure that Americans can openly participate in civic life and have access to a robust, free press that helps hold power accountable. Without these freedoms, the promise of a vibrant public square — both physical and digital — can be easily manipulated and the health of our democracy suffers.

The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, under the direction of Jameel Jaffer, is a new leader in the fight to protect the First Amendment against both longstanding and emerging threats. Today, Democracy Fund with our colleagues at First Look Media announced a general operating support grant of $3.25 million to support the Institute because their research, litigation, and public education efforts are an important building block in our support for First Amendment freedoms — especially our commitment to ensuring freedom of the press.

There have been many rhetorical attacks on the press in 2016 and 2017, and many concerns that these attacks will chip away at trust in the press and consequently result in tangible constraints on the news media. This concern is one shared by experts outside the country as evidenced by the new Inter-American Press Association mission to the United States, where free press advocates from other countries in North and South America are visiting to talk with US legislators and others about their concerns for press freedom here. The founding of the Press Freedom Tracker by a consortium of groups, including Democracy Fund grantees Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, ASNE, Online News Association, PEN America, and Free Press is further evidence.

No less significant a concern is the fact that our First Amendment freedoms are under extraordinary stress from a parallel host of challenges associated with digital technologies. The move from print and broadcast to always-on digital distribution and engagement with news has yielded huge benefits in the free flow of information. Yet there is much that needs to be understood about how the platforms operate and how they address issues that concern press freedom. There is an emerging consensus that our new digital public square is subject to manipulation by nefarious actors, and we see example after example of how those who do participate in public conversation can be subjected to harassment and trolling. These trends raise profound questions that require serious answers, including an understanding of how the market place of ideas can work in a digital age where the limiting factor is often human attention.

This is why we have provided significant support to the fast-growing Knight Institute. Though it was only created in 2016 following a significant commitment by the Knight Foundation, it has made its mark quickly with strategic litigation, research, and public education efforts in three areas:

Strengthening legal frameworks for government transparency;
Reviving the First Amendment as a constraint on government surveillance; and
Protecting the integrity and vitality of public discourse

We are very pleased to announce this support in parallel with the Charles Koch Foundation’s grant of $3.25 million and to join the long list of other foundations and supporters who have previously invested in the Knight Institute — including the Knight Foundation, Ford Foundation, Carnegie Corporation, Hewlett Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, Open Society Foundations, Laura and John Arnold, and Columbia University. Broad support from such a range of foundations and donors underscores the critical importance of the freedoms of speech and the press to our democracy, ensures its independence, and reinforces the shared belief that the Knight Institute is well positioned to identify and navigate new threats to these freedoms.

Back to Ideas

Blog

In 2017, Journalists Have to Partner, Not Parachute

Josh Stearns

January 18, 2017

It might be tempting for national newsrooms, most of which are headquartered on the coasts, to boost their travel budget in the wake of the 2016 elections. A common refrain in the media post-mortems that followed the elections was that national journalists and political reporters need to spend more time in small, rural communities the middle of the country. It’s true, we do need a wider diversity of stories and perspectives in media, but parachuting into “flyover country” isn’t going to solve anything.

In 2017, editors who are committed to telling more diverse stories about American communities across should partner with talented journalists on the ground who know the history, culture and context of the places they work. National newsrooms should approach these partnerships with humility and a spirit of reciprocity. Both national and local journalists have a lot to bring to the table — see for example ProPublica’s work on interactive satellite reporting paired with the boots-on-the-ground journalism of the New Orleans Lens. Plus, at a time of limited and dwindling resources, collaboration can help outlets strengthen both the stories they tell and the newsrooms that tell them.

Heather Bryant, a Knight Fellow at Stanford University, wrote about this in the wake of the election. Rather than flying in national staff or setting up new newsrooms locally, she argues, “journalism as a whole would be better served by supporting and improving the newsrooms that might already be in these places.” The results of Bryant’s fellowship research will be a valuable contribution, surfacing new models and best practices for local/national reporting. Follow her work on Medium here.

There are already some great models*:

In 2016 the Center for Cooperative Media at Montclair State University launched a local/national reporting partnership, staffed by Tim Griggs who has worked for New York Times, Texas Tribune and Wilmington Star News. The project is based in part on the success of an earlier project — Toxic NJ — a collaboration of ten local newsrooms working with the Center for Investigative Reporting to report on small toxic sites across the state. The New Orleans Lens, mentioned above, has been a leader in this kind of creative collaboration.

Last year the Center for Investigative Reporting also launched Reveal Labs which they describe as “a series of partnerships across the country to form networks that help newsrooms find and tell tough stories, connect them to those most affected and bring them to a national audience through Reveal.” In 2015 Nieman Lab reported on how Reveal was embedding reporters in local newsrooms to expand investigative capacity and bring local narratives to a national audience.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting’s Regional and Local Journalism Centers are bringing newsrooms together across state lines to report on shared issues across different regions. The centers are designed to both serve local people better and to “feed national public media news programs.”

The Knight Foundation has also funded a series of experiments designed to connect local and national newsrooms in ways that build the capacity of the smaller outlets. This includes the AP’s work to open up their data reporting team to work with local newsrooms and the Conversation’s outreach to connect local journalists and academics.

Strengthening local newsrooms is not just about creating a runway for stories to bubble up to the national level or creating a training ground for journalists who aspire to the New York Times and the Washington Post. Creating healthier local news ecosystems that better serve local communities is critical to people living in those communities, and to democracy itself.

In a prescient post from March of 2016 Josh Benton of the Nieman Lab pointed out how digital journalism has become concentrated “more firmly than ever in New York and a few other major cities.” There is no beat where that is more true than in political and campaign reporting. And that, Benton notes, has had “real impacts on the kind of news we get.”

“America is a big, highly distributed place. Our democracy is structured around cities and counties and congressional districts and states,” writes Benton. “Our media used to be too.”

After the election Benton reminded us that many communities have faced a dramatic erosion in community institutions. “The factories shut down; the church pews were emptier than they used to be; the braided fabric of their towns had unraveled,” writes Benton. And for many “the local newspaper was one of those key institutions — the daily or weekly package of stories that connected you to your neighbors.”

This isn’t to say that we should go back to the “good old days” of journalism. Instead, it is an argument that we should work together to create brighter days down the road. We are better equipped to do that by working together than we are on our own.

In the most recent Nieman Reports, Nicco Mele calls for the rethinking of newsrooms as “civic reactors.” He calls on us to imagine a role for newsrooms that can begin to build new kinds of institutions to replace some of what Benton notes has been lost. He writes: “A possible future for journalism is more in the mold of grassroots organizing, where the newsroom becomes a sort of 21^st century VFW hall, the hub of local activity.”

For national outlets, supporting community-driven news is an opportunity to reinvigorate the profession from the ground up and build new pathways for audience recruitment in the process. Rather than parachuting in, they can subsidize springboards for new talent and practice, and invite local newsrooms and communities to enrich national stories in the process.

This piece was originally published by MediaShift. Josh Stearns is the Associate Director of the Public Square Program at the Democracy Fund. Follow him on Twitter and sign up for the weekly Local Fix newsletter on innovation, community engagement and local news.

Back to Ideas

Blog

My 9 Resolutions for 2017

Joe Goldman

January 18, 2017

Before we get too much farther into January, I want to take a moment to wish everyone a Happy New Year on behalf of the Democracy Fund team.

I’ve always believed that developing resolutions for the new year is a powerful act of renewal and commitment. 2017 brings with it a wide range of challenges to our democracy that are deeply concerning. But it is also an opportunity for each of us to apply what we’ve learned from the past to our future plans and to recommit ourselves to those principles that we each hold most dear.

I hope you will consider joining me in making the following resolutions:

I will remember that while our democracy is resilient, it is more deeply vulnerable than many of us realized and requires constant vigilance.
I will seek to engage and understand people who anger me, rather than shaming and isolating them.
I will do my best to keep in mind that history is long and conditions change in unexpected ways (both for the good and bad).
I will remember that I have blind spots and that perceptions based on recent history may be wrong (especially in our new environment).
I will speak out when I see injustice and stand up for those who are targeted by bullies.
I will look to support efforts that are ambitious enough to make a difference, even if there is significant risk they may not succeed.
I will be unafraid to fail and will make every effort to learn from experiments that don’t work out.
I will remain committed to strengthening the core institutions and norms of our democracy.
I will maintain my confidence in the goodness and wisdom of the American people (even when it can be challenging to do so).

In times of uncertainty, the value of a strong community of diverse voices is clear. Discussing our values and concerns with trusted peers and reaching out beyond our immediate networks to hear new perspectives will help make our work to promote healthy democracy more effective.

At the Democracy Fund, our staff includes Republicans, Democrats, and Independents who are committed to working together to make our democracy work better. In 2016, we hired 10 new full time members of our staff – and as we look ahead to 2017, we are continuing to recruit for several open positions.

Today, I’m pleased to welcome five new leaders to our National Advisory Committee:

Anthea Watson Strong, a lead on the Civics team at Google, builds products that help decision makers govern more effectively, help people access public services more efficiently, and help users engage in the civic process.

Charles J. Sykes is one of the most influential conservatives in Wisconsin. The author of eight books, he is a senior fellow at the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, founder and editor in chief of the website Right Wisconsin, and is the editor of Wisconsin Interest magazine.

Geneva Overholser is an independent journalist and media critic in New York City. She is a former ombudsman for the Washington Post and editorial board member of the New York Times. Previously, she was editor of the Des Moines Register, where she led the paper to a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service.

Kristen Soltis Anderson is a researcher, pollster, and political analyst. She is a leading expert on the millennial generation and is author of The Selfie Vote: Where Millennials Are Leading America (And How Republicans Can Keep Up). In 2013, she was named one of TIME Magazine’s “Thirty Under 30 Changing The World.”

Sonal Shah is a global leader on social innovation policy, including impact investing, data and technology for social good, and civic engagement through government, business, philanthropy, and civil society. Previously, she founded the White House Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation where she led the Obama Administration’s efforts to leverage technology and partnerships to solve some of the nation’s toughest challenges.

Please visit our About Us page to learn more about our team. Together, we are committed to finding achievable solutions to our nation’s biggest problems and will work to ensure that our political system is able to withstand new challenges and deliver on its promise to the American people in 2017 and beyond.

Back to Ideas

Blog

Democracy Fund Welcomes Five New Leaders to its bipartisan National Advisory Committee

Democracy Fund

January 18, 2017

Washington, D.C. – Today, the Democracy Fund welcomes five new leaders to its bipartisan National Advisory Committee which provides advice on organizational initiatives and assesses strategic opportunities to advance the Fund’s work to ensure that our political system is able to withstand new challenges and deliver on its promise to the American people.

The Democracy Fund’s National Advisory Committee includes Republicans, Democrats, and Independents who are committed to finding achievable solutions to our nation’s biggest problems. Advisors include former White House and elected officials, as well as esteemed leaders from government, academia, and advocacy.

The Democracy Fund’s new National Advisory Committee members include:

Anthea Watson Strong, a lead on the Civics team at Google, builds products that help decision makers govern more effectively, help people access public services more efficiently, and help users engage in the civic process.
Charles J. Sykes is one of the most influential conservatives in Wisconsin. The author of eight books, he is a senior fellow at the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, founder and editor in chief of the website Right Wisconsin, and is the editor of Wisconsin Interest magazine.
Geneva Overholser is an independent journalist and media critic in New York City. She is a former ombudsman for the Washington Post and editorial board member of the New York Times. Previously, she was editor of the Des Moines Register, where she led the paper to a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service.
Kristen Soltis Anderson is a researcher, pollster, and political analyst. She is a leading expert on the millennial generation and is author of The Selfie Vote: Where Millennials Are Leading America (And How Republicans Can Keep Up). In 2013, she was named one of TIME Magazine’s “Thirty Under 30 Changing The World.”
Sonal Shah is a global leader on social innovation policy, including impact investing, data and technology for social good, and civic engagement through government, business, philanthropy, and civil society. Previously, she founded the White House Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation where she led the Obama Administration’s efforts to leverage technology and partnerships to solve some of the nation’s toughest challenges.

Joe Goldman, President of the Democracy Fund said:

“In times of uncertainty, the value of a strong community of diverse voices is clear. Discussing our values and concerns with trusted peers and reaching out beyond our immediate networks to hear new perspectives will help make our work to promote healthy democracy more effective.”

Members of the National Advisory Committee serve a two-year term. The Committee meets twice a year, and its next meeting is in February 2017.

About the Democracy Fund

The Democracy Fund is a bipartisan foundation established by eBay founder and philanthropist Pierre Omidyar to help ensure that the American people come first in our democracy. Today, modern challenges—such as hyper partisanship, money in politics, and struggling media—threaten the health of American Democracy. Since its creation, the Democracy Fund has committed more than $30 million in grants to ensure our political system is able to withstand these new challenges and deliver on its promise to the American people.

The Democracy Fund invests in change makers who advocate for solutions that can bring lasting improvements to our political system and build bridges that help people come together to serve our nation. Grants include projects to find workable solutions to the challenges facing our elections system, local media ecosystems, and Congress’ ability to solve problems in the face of hyper-partisanship. Learn more by visiting democracyfund.org.

Back to Ideas

Blog

Panel: Promoting Voter Trust and Confidence in Elections

Democracy Fund

February 22, 2017

On February 17, 2017, at the National Association of Secretaries of State’s (NASS) annual winter conference, the Democracy Fund facilitated a panel discussion about the pressing need to bolster voter confidence in light of the intense scrutiny during 2016. “Promoting Voter Trust and Confidence in Elections” was a general session where panelists discussed ways election officials could boost voter confidence in our elections. Panelists included Colorado’s Republican Secretary of State, election experts, researchers and voter advocates. After discussing the results of surveys and evaluations, including a poll commissioned by the Democracy Fund, panelists took questions from the audience, which was comprised of state election officials, their aides, and invited guests from various stakeholder groups.

Featuring:

Hon. Wayne Williams, Colorado Secretary of State
Mr. David Becker, Executive Director, Center for Election Innovation and Research
Ms. Rosalind Gold, Sr. Director of Policy, Research and Advocacy, NALEO Educational Fund
Hon. Miles Rapoport, Senior Practice Fellow, Ash Center for Democratic Governance & Innovation, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard
Mr. Samidh Chakrabarti, Product Manager for Civic Engagement, Facebook
Ms. Rebecca Mark, Vice President, Porter Novelli

Click here to watch the panel via CSPAN.

Related Research: Election Security and the 2016 Voter Experience (poll and infographic)

Back to Ideas

Press Release

Democracy Fund convenes expert panel to discuss voter trust, efforts to strengthen confidence

Democracy Fund

February 22, 2017

Washington, D.C. – At the recent National Association of Secretaries of State’s (NASS) conference Democracy Fund facilitated a panel discussion on the pressing need to bolster voter confidence in light of the intense scrutiny during 2016.

Panelist David Becker, Executive Director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, stated that this was one of the best run elections in American history. Nevertheless, a Democracy Fund survey fielded days after the election revealed troubling voter perceptions. Democrats and Republicans alike question the process, believing that candidates or political parties can change the results at the ballot box, or that machine malfunctions can impact results.

“There is a need for voter education about why voters should trust the process and the results, even when their candidate loses,” said Rebecca Mark, Vice President at Porter Novelli, who assisted with the survey. “This mistrust ladders back to an intense feeling of frustration that voters have towards their government.”

Eighty-five percent of voters characterized their experience voting in November as pleasant, a testament to the hard work of officials like Secretaries of State, yet the undercurrent of concern could persist into future elections.

“That solid majority of positive voting experiences will be essential for building additional trust in both the outcome and in the process,” said Stacey Scholl, Senior Program Associate of Elections at Democracy Fund.

Showcasing transparency is critical to strengthening confidence among voters, such as efforts by Colorado Secretary of State Wayne Williams. The Secretary shared his election cycle experience, including the installation of recount room viewing windows so anyone – regardless of credentials – could watch a recount. He explained, “people need to have confidence their election officials are doing everything they can to maintain the integrity of the election, because if they have that confidence they will vote.”

To view full panel, covered by C-SPAN, click here.

Panelists included Hon. Wayne Williams, Colorado Secretary of State, Hon. Miles Rapoport, Senior Practice Fellow, Ash Center, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard, David Becker, Executive Director, Center for Election Innovation and Research, Rosalind Gold, Senior Director of Policy, Research and Advocacy, NALEO Educational Fund, Samidh Chakrabarti, Product Manager for Civic Engagement, Facebook, and Rebecca Mark, Vice President, Porter Novelli.

The Democracy Fund is a bipartisan foundation that invests in organizations working to ensure our political system can withstand new challenges and deliver on its promise to the American people. For more information, please visit www.democracyfund.org.

Back to Ideas

Blog

Not Just a Buzzword: Civility is Key to Congressional Function

Betsy Wright Hawkings

March 6, 2017

The Freshman members of the 115th Congress know something we all know; the 2016 election was marked by some of the coarser political rhetoric of modern history, and not surprisingly left our country feeling more divided than ever.

More uniquely, they have taken an important first step toward doing something about it.

Last week, 28 Republican and 18 Democratic Freshman Members — representing red and blue states from coast to coast — signed a Commitment to Civility and spoke on the House floor about why they made this commitment, what their constituents had sent them to Washington to accomplish, and how civility is essential to working together across the aisle to achieve those goals. In all, 46 of the 52 new members signed the commitment, which urges productive dialogue and rejects the idea that political rivals are enemies.

Their civility statement cites the “…coarsening of our culture fueled too often by the vitriol in our politics and public discourse. One result has been a loss of trust in our institutions and elected officials.” Understanding that they will not always agree on matters of policy, they nevertheless agreed to “…strive at all times to maintain collegiality and the honor of the office.”

By doing this they believe they can help work more effectively, and even begin to restore the public’s trust in America’s institutions.

The significance of their effort cannot be overstated. To succeed, they will be working against deeply ingrained trends not just in our politics, but in our culture.

At Democracy Fund, we are working to reverse the dynamics that drive the lack of civility these Members of Congress are working to address. Our systems map on Congress and the Public Trust identifies the role that the lack of bipartisan relationships, reduced capacity of Congress as an institution to legislate based on facts, nationalized campaigns, reduced capacity of the media, and the lack of shared information through regular oversight all play in driving the hyper-partisanship that has led to the breakdown of civil relationships and legislative debate.

Many are familiar with the 1901 speech of President Theodore Roosevelt at the Minnesota State Fair, in which he summarized his approach to foreign policy by quoting the proverb, “Speak softly and carry a big stick — you will go far.” But as Roosevelt went on to note, “If a man continually blusters, if he lacks civility, a big stick will not save him from trouble … It is both foolish and undignified to indulge in undue self-glorification, and, above all, in loose-tongued denunciation of other peoples … I hope that we shall always strive to speak courteously and respectfully…”

A similar message, more remarkable for its time, was an 1861 speech in Cincinnati, Ohio by Abraham Lincoln, who noted in speaking to Northerners, “We mean to remember that [Southerners] are as good as we; that there is no difference between us other than the difference of circumstances. We mean to recognize and bear in mind always that (they) have as good hearts in (their) bosoms as other people, or as we claim to have.”

While Lincoln steadfastly opposed slavery, he was making the point that humility would go a long way toward maintaining civility with his Southern fellow countrymen, and support the shared desire to live again “in peace and harmony with one another.”

While we believe our time is not as divisive as the Civil War era, the need for civility is no less urgent, as the constituents of these freshman Members have made clear to their representatives. The signing of the Commitment to Civility by more Members of Congress — but more importantly, the practice of it — could go a long way toward reducing the hyper-partisanship that so many Americans say they want Congress and our President to put aside in the pursuit of the common good.