Page 32 – Democracy Fund

Blog

Our Commitment to an Independent Free Press

Joe Goldman

March 27, 2017

At a time when news organizations find themselves under attack, the Democracy Fund along with our partners at First Look Media are announcing today the largest grants either organization has made to date in support of journalism.

For years, the media industry has struggled against major economic threats that have severely undermined our fourth estate. In response, the Democracy Fund’s Public Square program has worked with journalists across the country to experiment with new models that can reinvigorate local media and ensure that newsrooms are able to fulfill their core responsibilities to a healthy democracy.

But the political attacks that journalists have faced over the past 18 months represent something wholly new and potentially toxic to a free and open society.

At the Democracy Fund, we believe that a robust free press is essential. We must not take it for granted. In times like these, we all must do our part to stand with journalists and fight for core democratic values and norms.

With this in mind, the Democracy Fund is joining with First Look Media to make major commitments of more than $12 million to support an independent, free press. Included in this commitment are grants of $3 million each to three national nonprofit newsrooms, the Center for Investigative Reporting, the Center for Public Integrity, and ProPublica.

The Democracy Fund will complement its support for these national newsrooms with a $1 million contribution towards the creation of a State and Local Investigative Fund to support the crucial investigative work of local reporters, as well as a $200,000 contribution to the recently announced Knight Prototype Fund on misinformation and trust in journalism.

The Democracy Fund and First Look Media are also announcing grants to the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University and a new program led by NYU Professor Jay Rosen to establish a laboratory for community-supported investigative reporting.

Together, these grants will support some of our nation’s most important investigative newsrooms. Not only that, these newsrooms are building new models for reporting that put people at the heart of their work through creativity, collaboration, and civic engagement. In so doing, they have brought new people into journalism, highlighted new voices, and told fuller and more truthful stories.

An additional $800,000 grant to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press from the Democracy Fund will help to protect the independence and freedom of journalists to ask hard questions and conduct courageous investigations.

Journalists play a critical role in holding the powerful accountable to our Constitution and the American people. A healthy democracy requires access to diverse and accurate sources of information for policymakers and the public so that they can make sound decisions in service of the common good. We hope that these new commitments will build upon the $18 million in grants that the Democracy Fund’s Public Square program has made over the past five years to support local news, community engagement, newsroom diversity, and combating misinformation.

These grants represent a significant financial commitment in support of excellent journalism, but they do not represent the end of our support. In the weeks and months to come, we hope to work with partners from all sectors to find other ways to do our part to ensure that journalists can play their rightful role in our democracy.

Details about the grants we announced today may be found below. (You can also learn about additional grants announced by First Look Media – home of The Intercept – here).

Stay tuned for further announcements as our team at the Democracy Fund continues to find ways to support the important work of ensuring that the American public come first in our democracy.

Democracy Fund and First Look Media Joint Grants Include:

The Center for Investigative Reporting, $3 million over two years – This grant provides general operating support to CIR as they pioneer new models of investigative reporting rooted in collaboration, community engagement, and creativity.
The Center for Public Integrity, $3 million over two years – This grant provides general operating support to CPI to expand its watchdog reporting and strengthen its ability to hold institutions accountable to the American people.
ProPublica, $3 million over two years – This grant provides general operating support to ProPublica, whose groundbreaking work combines hard-hitting investigations and cutting edge data journalism in service to communities.
The Investigative Reporting Workshop, $500,000 over two years – This grant provides general operating support to the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University to deepen its model of accountability reporting, which combines students and professional journalists in collaboration with longstanding newsrooms.
New York University, $275,000 over one year – This grant will establish a laboratory for community-supported investigative reporting through a unique partnership between New York University and De Correspondent. The project will focus on developing sustainable business models for U.S. newsrooms rooted in new membership structures and draw on the lessons from a world leader in community-driven accountability journalism.

Additional Democracy Fund Grants Include:

Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, $800,000 over two years – This grant provides general operating support to the Reporters Committee to enhance its ability to provide legal resources and guidance for independent journalists and nonprofit news outlets, in addition to continuing its work with longtime partners in broadcast, print, and online news media.
State and Local Investigative Fund, $1 million initial investment – With this funding, Democracy Fund seeks to establish a new fund for state and local investigative journalism and invite other funders and donors to contribute and collaborate. The goal of the fund is to serve as a beacon for those who want to support local and state news, investigative beats, and nonprofit news.
Knight Prototype Fund on Misinformation, $200,000 over one year – Democracy Fund also contributed $200,000 to the Knight Prototype Fund’s $1 million open call for ideas on misinformation and trust in journalism, a partnership with the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation and Rita Allen Foundation; the open call is accepting applications until April 3.

Back to Ideas

Blog

News Integrity Initiative: Building a More Trustworthy Public Square

Paul Waters

April 4, 2017

Josh Stearns co-authored this piece with Paul Waters.

At the Democracy Fund we believe that a healthy democracy depends on a vibrant and trustworthy public square. At a time of deep partisanship and threats to democratic ideals and institutions, media have a powerful role to play informing the public and helping bridge the differences we face in our communities, and our nation. However, the erosion of trust in journalism raises profound challenges for a democracy that depends on an open marketplace of ideas, vibrant civil debate, and a press that holds all leaders accountable.

We joined the News Integrity Initiative because we understand that trust is a complex issue and that it demands a diversity of approaches.

The News Integrity Initiative, a project by the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism, is focused on helping people make informed judgments about the news they read and share online. By funding applied research and convening meetings with industry experts, the Initiative will work to advance news literacy, increase trust in journalism around the world, and better inform the public conversation.

We are excited to join others in supporting a range of people, practices, and ideas to rebuild new kinds of relationships between communities and newsrooms. There is no silver bullet to solve all concerns around trust in media, but we want to roll up our sleeves and work with others who are committed to asking hard questions and seeking out workable solutions to complicated problems.

At the Democracy Fund, we bring to this work a deep commitment to local news, community engagement, and diversity in media. We know that trust looks different in different communities, and that trust is often nuanced, contextual, and shifting. Part of how we got here today is through self-inflicted wounds by an industry that hasn’t always served the needs of everybody in America. And we are aware that issues of trust in media are not new for many communities who have been left out, misrepresented, and hurt by media coverage throughout our nation’s history. We want to work with people in big cities and small rural communities, on the coasts and in the heartland, and in red and blue states across the country.

While these issues have been in the spotlight recently, the erosion of trust in journalism is part of broader shifts in how people relate to institutions across our democracy. The ongoing economic challenges facing the press today demand new ideas about the role the public in supporting and sustaining the press. We are encouraged by the News Integrity Initiative’s emphasis on putting people at the center of the discussion about trust.

Jeff Jarvis, the director of the Tow Knight Center for Entrepreneurial Journalism at CUNY, which will administer the fund, wrote that he wants “to explore this issue from a public perspective ,” arguing that news literacy shouldn’t be “just about getting the public to read our news but more about getting media to listen to the public.” To that end, we need newsrooms that are deeply engaged with their communities and we need active citizens who are equipped and empowered as creators, consumers, and collaborators.

We look forward to working with the News Integrity Initiative and organizations across the country to catalyze efforts to put people at the center of American journalism and do the hard work of building a more trustworthy public square for all.

Back to Ideas

Blog

Systems Thinking: A View from the Trenches

Srik Gopal

May 3, 2017

This piece was co-authored by Donata Secondo and Robin Kane and was originally published in the Stanford Social Innovation Review (SSIR)

In recent years, systems thinking—a discipline that helps us understand interdependent structures of dynamic systems—has emerged as a powerful force for change in the philanthropic world. Borne out of the realization that significant and sustainable social change requires more than discrete interventions, systems thinking has become de rigueur for any foundation looking to create impact at scale. A 2016 publication on systems grantmaking by Grantmakers for Effective Organizations, as well as recent pieces by FSG, Bridgespan, and New Profit have captured this spirit, and sought to provide guidance and direction for foundations navigating this new world.

But what does systems thinking and change look like in the trenches?

The Democracy Fund, which spun off from Omidyar Network as an independent entity in 2014, provides one example. The Democracy Fund’s mission is to help ensure that the US political system can withstand new challenges and deliver on its promise to the American people. Given the complexity of this goal, we knew from the beginning that to produce the greatest impact, we needed to create strong, systems-oriented strategies that aligned with the work of others.

READ MORE via SSIR

Back to Ideas

Statement

Democracy Fund Statement on Shootings Today in Virginia and California

Democracy Fund

June 14, 2017

Democracy Fund President Joe Goldman issued the following statement in response to the shooting incidents today in Alexandria, VA, and San Francisco, CA:

“With Americans across the country, Democracy Fund is appalled at today’s two shooting incidents, first at a Republican Congressional baseball practice in Alexandria, VA, and then in San Francisco, CA. While the nation is still learning about both horrific events, we are praying for the speedy recovery of all victims, including Congressman Steve Scalise, current and former congressional staff, and the U.S. Capitol Police officers. These honorable Americans, public servants, and their friends and families on both sides of the country are foremost in our thoughts.

“For two years, Democracy Fund has sponsored the Congressional Baseball Game because we believe the American people are best served when the parties and our elected officials are able to negotiate and compromise. Just as in baseball, our politics should be competitive, but at the end of the day we are all Americans and we are all on the same team. There is no room for violence in our democracy. We stand with Americans from across the political spectrum in condemning these senseless acts.”

As planned, Democracy Fund will attend the Congressional Baseball Game and highlight grantees that work with Congress to ensure that our legislative branch is able to fulfill its obligations to the American people. Democracy Fund’s Governance Program has invested in organizations including the Bipartisan Policy Center, the Congressional Management Foundation, the Millennial Action Project, the U.S. Association of Former Members of Congress, the Aspen Institute’s Congressional Program, and the Project on Government Oversight, among others.

Back to Ideas

Blog

Announcing News Match 2017: $2 Million Fund Will Match Donations to Nonprofit Newsrooms

Tom Glaisyer

June 21, 2017

This piece was co-authored by Tom Glaisyer and Jennifer Preston at Knight Foundation

We believe that journalism is essential to building informed and engaged communities, and that a healthy democracy requires a robust and independent press. For the last decade, as the digital disruption of the traditional business model for journalism has led to deep cuts in newsrooms across the county, nonprofit news organizations have filled critical gaps by providing vital news and information to communities, delivering investigative and beat reporting with pioneering models.

The future and mission of nonprofit journalism has never been more important as trust in the news media is at an all time low and people are searching for reliable news in their social and mobile streams. Today, the Democracy Fund and Knight Foundation welcome other funders and supporters to join a new matching gifts fund to support nonprofit news. Democracy Fund and Knight Foundation are pledging $2 million in 2017 to kick off a campaign to support nonprofit journalism, with an additional $750,000 committed to help nonprofit organizations build the capability and capacity they need to put them on the path of sustainability.

The new fund builds on the success of last fall’s Knight News Match, which helped 57 nonprofit news organizations across the country raise more than $1.2 million in matching donations from small donors. This year’s effort significantly expands the number of newsrooms eligible to participate and increases opportunities for both place-based and national foundations to support the matching gifts program.

The objective of this fund is to support nonprofit newsrooms delivering local, beat and investigative reporting. To be eligible to participate, nonprofit newsrooms must be full members of the Institute for Nonprofit News in September 2017. The program will begin in the fall so that the matching gifts program can be used as a way to reach new donors and appeal to recent donors during the critical end-of-year fundraising season.

To support the matching gifts program and help put nonprofit news on the path to sustainability, Democracy Fund and Knight have committed $750,000 dollars to support the most effective strategies, tools and best practices for long-term sustainability. These investments will allow the Institute for Nonprofit News, Local Independent Online News, and the News Revenue Hub to help local newsrooms expand their donor base, develop successful membership programs, and make the case for supporting journalism in their communities.

We believe this is a profoundly important moment for journalism in America. Our communities and our country need journalism that reflects and responds to the diverse needs of all Americans. In the face of the hollowing out of the traditional industry, nonprofit news sites offer a chance to restore local coverage and deliver expert beat reporting, but they require the support of their communities. Whether you can give five dollars or five hundred to the participating nonprofit news organization of your choice, News Match will double it.

More details about the fund will be announced in the fall. In the meantime, Democracy Fund and Knight Foundation will continue to invite additional partners to join the fund, especially community and place-based foundations who recognize that news and information is an indispensable community asset, and want to leverage the fund to further amplify support.

For questions about the News Match fund contact:

Josh Stearns at Democracy Fund, jstearns@democracyfund.org

Jennifer Preston at Knight Foundation, preston@knightfoundation.org

Back to Ideas

Blog

20 Projects Receive Funding to Combat Misinformation and Build a More Trustworthy Public Square

Josh Stearns

June 22, 2017

The Knight Foundation, Democracy Fund, and Rita Allen Foundation announced today that twenty projects seeking to improve the flow of accurate information will split $1 million to explore and develop early-stage ideas, programs, and prototypes.

In moments of uncertainty and volatility it can be tempting to gravitate towards a single solution to the pressing problem of misinformation and low public trust facing our media, technology, and democracy. However, when it comes to rebuilding the public square and ensuring what is shared is accurate information there are no silver bullets. As such, the projects receiving funding today represent a wide array of ideas and approaches from cognitive psychology and community engagement to computer science and news literacy.

Many of the winners leverage new technology, such as artificial intelligence, to identify and push back on efforts pollute our information ecosystem, while others turned to techniques rooted in education and organizing. Taken together these twenty projects represent a diverse cohort of individuals and institutions who will spend the next nine months grappling with the many questions that surround the role of truth and trust in our media, politics and society.

Out of the twenty total organizations receiving Prototype Fund grants, Democracy Fund supported four specific projects which will each receive $50,000.

Viz Lab (Project leads: Caroline Sinders | San Francisco | @carolinesinders, Susie Cagle | Oakland | @susie_c, Francis Tseng | Brooklyn | @frnsys): Developing a dashboard to track and visualize images and ‘memes,’ as common sources of fake news, to enable journalists and researchers to more easily understand the origins of the image, its promoters, and where it might have been altered and then redistributed.

The Documenters Project by City Bureau (Project lead: Darryl Holliday | Chicago | @d_holli, @city_bureau): Strengthening local media coverage and building trust in journalism by creating an online network of citizen “documenters” who receive training in the use of journalistic ethics and tools, attend public civic events, and produce short summaries that are posted online as a public resource. City Bureau will create and test a field manual to help others replicate the model.

Hoaxy Bot-o-Meter by Center for Complex Networks and Systems Research (Project lead: Filippo Menczer | Bloomington, Indiana | @Botometer, @truthyatindiana): Developing a tool to uncover attempts to use Internet bots to boost the spread of misinformation and shape public opinion. The tool aims to reveal how this information is generated and broadcasted, how it becomes viral, its overall reach, and how it competes with accurate information for placement on user feeds.

Media Literacy @ Your Library by American Library Association in collaboration with the Center for News Literacy (Project lead: Samantha Oakley | Chicago | @ALALibrary, @NewsLiteracy): Developing an adult media literacy program in five public libraries, including a series of online learning sessions, resources, and an in-person workshop to train library workers to help patrons become more informed media consumers.

The other projects include numerous other Democracy Fund grantees and partners working on fact-checking, debunking viral disinformation, and mining digital archives for context. The sixteen other winners are:

Breaking filter bubbles in science journalism by the University of California, Santa Cruz

(Project lead: Erika Check Hayden | Santa Cruz, California @Erika_Check | @UCSC_SciCom): Producing visually-engaging science journalism around topics such as climate change and genetics, to determine whether content delivered by a trusted messenger in a culturally-relevant context has greater reach. The articles will be tested through the digital platform EscapeYourBubble.com, which distributes curated content to users across ideological divides.

Calling Bullshit in the Age of Fake News by the University of Washington (Project lead: Jevin West | Seattle @jevinwest, @UW_iSchool): Developing a curriculum and set of tools to teach students and the public to better assess quantitative information and combat misinformation—with a particular emphasis on data, visualizations, and statistics.

ChartCheck by Periscopic (Project lead: Megan Mermis | Portland, Oregon | @periscopic): Addressing the spread of misinformation through charts, graphs, and data visualizations by fact-checking these resources and publishing results. The team will also build tools to address the spread of these charts on social media and the Internet.

Crosscheck by Vanderbilt University in collaboration with First Draft (Project lead: Lisa Fazio and Claire Wardle | Nashville, Tennessee | @lkfazio, @cward1e, @firstdraftnews, @crosscheck): Using design features to make correct news more memorable, so that people can recall it more easily when faced with false information, using a platform initially developed in France to address misinformation around the French election.

Facts Matter by PolitiFact (Project lead: Aaron Sharockman | St. Petersburg, Florida | @asharock, @PolitiFact): Helping to improve trust in fact-checking, particularly among people who identify as conservative, through experiments including in-person events; a mobile-game that tracks misconceptions about specific facts; diverse commentators who would assess fact-checking reports; and a study of the language used in these reports to determine their effect on perceptions of trustworthiness.

Glorious ContextuBot by Bad Idea Factory (Project lead: Daniel Schultz | Philadelphia | @biffud, @slifty): Helping people become better consumers of online audio and video content through a tool that provides the original source of individual clips and identifies who else has discussed it on the news.

Immigration Lab by Univision News (Project lead: Ronny Rojas | Miami | @ronnyrojas, @UniNoticias): Engaging undocumented immigrants on issues that affect their lives by creating a reliable news resource to help them access and gather information. The project team will do on-the-ground research in communities with a high percentage of undocumented immigrants and learn about their media literacy skills, news consumption habits and needs, and trusted information sources.

KQED Learn by KQED (Project lead: Randall Depew | San Francisco | @randydepew, @KQEDEdSpace): Encouraging young people to ask critical questions that deepen learning and improve media literacy through KQED Learn, a free online platform for students and teachers that reveals ways to ask good questions, investigate answers and share conclusions.

News Inequality Project by Portland Press Herald/Maine Sunday Telegram (Project leads: Hamdan Azhar, Cathy Deng, Christian MilNeil, and Leslie Shapiro | Portland, Maine | @HamdanAzhar, @cthydng, @c_milneil, @lmshap, @pressherald): Developing a web-based analytics dashboard to help media organizations and community organizers understand how – and how often – different communities are covered in news outlets over time.

News Quality Score Project (Project lead: Frederic Filloux | Palo Alto, California | @filloux): Creating a tool to surface quality journalism from the web, at scale and in real-time, through algorithms and machine learning. The tool will evaluate and score content on criteria ranging from the notoriety of authors and publishers to an analysis of various components of the story structure.

NewsTracker.org by PBS NewsHour and Miles O’Brien Productions (Project lead: Cameron Hickey | Washington, D.C. | @cameronhickey, @newshour) : Developing a tool that combines online news content with engagement data from social media and other sources to help journalists and others better understand the scale, scope, and shape of the misinformation problem. The tool will enable content analysis by gathering data about what is being written, by whom, where it is distributed, and the size of the audience consuming it.

Putting Civic Online Reasoning in Civics Class by Stanford History Education Group/Stanford University (Project lead: Sam Wineburg | Stanford, California | @SHEF_Stanford, @samwineburg): Creating professional development resources for teachers to become better consumers of digital content, in addition to classroom-ready materials that they can use to help students find and assess information online.

Social Media Interventions by Boston University (Project lead: Jacob Groshek | Boston | @jgroshek, @EMSatBU): Experimenting with the effectiveness of real-time online interventions, such as direct messages to users who post or share false information, with people who are sharing known misinformation online.

Veracity.ai (Project lead: Danny Rogers | Baltimore, Maryland): Helping to curb the financial incentives of creating misleading content with automatically-updated lists of “fake news” websites and easy-to-deploy tools that allow ad buyers to block, in bulk, the domains where misinformation is propagated.

Who Said What by Joostware (Project lead: Delip Rao | San Francisco | @deliprao, @joostware): Helping people more easily fact-check audio and video news clips with a search tool that annotates millions of these clips and allows users to explore both what is said and the identity of the speaker.

Technical Schema for Credibility by Meedan in collaboration with Hacks and Hackers (Project lead: Xiao Mina | San Francisco | @anxiaostudio, @meedan, @hackshackers): Creating a clear, standardized framework to define the credibility of a piece of content, how conclusions about its credibility were reached, and how to communicate that credibility effectively.

Back to Ideas

Blog

America needs a national dialogue to heal our political battle wounds

Betsy Wright Hawkings

June 26, 2017

This piece was co-authored by Rick Shapiro, Senior Fellow at Democracy Fund and former executive director of the Congressional Management Foundation.

The horrible and indiscriminate attack on a group of House Republican members of Congress at their early morning baseball practice for a charity baseball game may prove to be a watershed moment in our country: the day Democrats and Republicans realized they had to change the direction of American politics to take our democracy off the downward spiral it was on.

The stark anger behind this attack seems to have driven home the point to many members of Congress that our nation’s politics is not only broken, but it is dangerous — to members of Congress and to the citizens they represent.

It has been encouraging to hear a growing number of members publicly call for their colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come together to reverse current norms of incivility and model more constructive democratic behavior for the nation. Unfortunately, changing congressional behavior, while critical to any formula for lasting change, will not be sufficient for restoring the health and vitality to our democracy.

While many Americans view the behavior of members of Congress as both the problem and solution to what impedes our government, this perspective is short-sighted. It fails to take into account how mistrustful rank-and-file Democrats and Republicans are of each other as well as the institutions of government themselves and the role both play in government dysfunction.

A recent New York Times article aptly titled, “How We Became Bitter Political Enemies,” powerfully outlines the role hostility and mistrust between Democrats and Republicans plays in our nation’s politics. Using nationwide survey data from a range of pollsters, the Times story reveals that Americans today believe the “opposing party is not just misguided but dangerous.”

More specifically, “In 2016, Pew reported that 45 percent of Republicans and 41 percent of Democrats felt that the other party’s policies posed a threat to the nation.” Democrats and Republicans tended to view people who supported the other party as “exceptionally immoral, dishonest and lazy.” And about a third of the members of each party viewed members of the opposing party as “less intelligent” than average Americans.

In short, Democrats and Republicans — in unprecedented numbers — hold each other in contempt. This problem will not go away solely as a result of increasing bipartisan dinners and civility training. To truly address what ails our democracy, we must find a way for Democrats, Republicans and Independents to begin talking with — and listening to — each other again about the policy challenges facing the country and the factors that promote partisan mistrust, and rebuild their trust in their fellow Americans.

Members of Congress are well-situated to begin the efforts to reduce the rancorous divide and restore the public’s trust and confidence in their neighbors. They can fill this void by creating and convening new types of policy forums in their states and districts that encourage constituents with conflicting views to come together and discuss their differing views, enhance their understanding of the issues and explore options to find common ground. While successful models need to be piloted, tested and fine-tuned, here is some general guidance offices can use to get started.

At traditional town hall meetings, members of Congress are the primary speakers and center of attention. At these sessions, the focus should be on generating constructive dialogue amongst constituents on specific public policy questions. Given the public’s cynical view of politicians and their motives for meeting with constituents, taking on new roles like “convener,” “facilitator,” and “listener” rather than “messenger” would help alter this perception.

Participants in these sessions should share their candid views but cannot engage in derisive rhetoric that seeks to demean or show contempt for other points of view, nor should they interrupt or talk over other speakers. The goal should be conversation and problem solving, not debate and theatrics.

These politically charged conversations should be moderated by capable facilitators to minimize discord and promote effective communications. Some members could do this job well without training. Others would benefit from training or working alongside a skilled facilitator. Still others would do best to serve as the convener who opens and closes the sessions but does not participate in the discussion.

Members will ask, “Why would I want to take on responsibility for convening a discussion that could turn ugly and generate public conflict?”

Here are some answers. First, members want to be seen by their constituents as leaders who are trying to heal the nation and repair our democracy, not politicians who ignore serious problems or their constituents. Second, creating ongoing policy forums where the focus is on promoting discourse and trust amongst fellow constituents rather than evaluating the views of politicians will make members less likely to become a target of public anger.

Third, by convening these sessions, members will be teaching critical communications skills to tens of thousands of constituents across the country — active listening, asking questions, identifying areas of shared interest, managing conflict and engaging in joint problem solving. These skills are critical for effective participation in our democracy, but have been undermined by the growth of online communications and the decline of face-to-face communication.

Members who facilitate these discussions will also benefit from practicing communication skills that will enhance their ability to facilitate legislative agreements in Congress — active listening, asking clarifying questions, synthesizing the comments of others, modeling dispassionate discourse, intervening in debate to minimize discord and keeping the conversation on track.

Most importantly, if member offices across the country regularly convened these sessions, they would generate an ongoing, nationwide dialogue on public policy that could go a long way towards reducing partisan hostility and restoring trust in their fellow citizens and our democratic institutions. If members of Congress fail to address the rapidly growing partisan divide, the ability of democratic institutions to make wise decisions that reflect the best interests and thinking “of the people” will continue to decline.

Back to Ideas

Blog

Inaugural Election Sciences Conference Kicks Off in Portland, Oregon

Natalie Adona

August 9, 2017

The first conference on Election Sciences, Reform, and Administration* (ESRA) took place July 27-28, 2017 in the lovely and laid-back City of Portland, Oregon. Before I describe the conference, I’d like to take a moment to explain this “election science” thing I’m referring to, and why this conference is timely and important.

Defining election science

Election science is, in essence, the study of election administration and related matters. Studying election administration is important because it’s where the rubber meets the road; where election laws and regulations, organizational decision making, administrative efficiency, technology, voting rights, politics, and academic theories are put to the test on Election Day (or for many states, the voting period). Specifically, election scientists seek to better understand the following elements that election officials grapple with:

The policies and processes affecting the cost of elections;
The balance between efficiency, access, security, and voting rights;
The impact of technology on election conduct; and
The relationship between laws, rules, administration, and voter behavior.

Scholars who take part in this emerging discipline frequently partner with and provide support to election officials, as well as help policy experts, advocates, and other stakeholders better understand the way elections are run and the impact of policy changes on the electorate. Can administrative practices improve voter confidence? Who was added to the Oregon registration rolls when the state implemented automatic voter registration? How can local election officials reallocate resources to mitigate long lines at polling places? – This is a sample of the types of questions election scientists seek to answer and share with others.

Studying election administration and the importance of establishing networks

In the meetings that the Democracy Fund co-organized prior to this event, I gained a better understanding of the incentive structures in academia that motivate political scientists and inform their research agendas. I was surprised to find out that the number of academics studying election administration is small, and too few to successfully create an organized section. To make a long story short, this results in election scientists presenting their work at conference panels that don’t always fit neatly into established organized sections, and in front of an audience of peers that are not always able to provide nuanced feedback on the subject matter.

Providing election officials and academics the space to get to know each other on their own is key to enriching our shared understanding of election administration. In my work with the Elections team, I’ve had the opportunity to hear from several election officials from all parts of the country and the people who support improvements in elections. I’ve been fortunate enough to learn from them, celebrate their successes, and listen and think carefully about their shared pain points. Because election scientists present primarily at academic conferences, it leaves little opportunity for election officials, who don’t often have the time or resources to attend, to inform research agendas and add richness and nuance to the existing body of research. And while those of us in philanthropy and in the advocacy space can serve as bridges, our networks remain fairly small. When connected with this academic community, election officials benefit from the analytical rigor and perspective on administrative processes that election scientists provide — a provision that helps administrators learn and take steps to improve their processes.

The ESRA conference

The purpose of the ESRA conference is to feature academic work in election science, not only for the benefit of scholars, but also to familiarize election officials with the work these scholars present. The conference organizers successfully brought together a mix of primarily election scientists and election officials, and also advocates, civic tech experts, and small (but mighty) group of bright young students interested in establishing their careers in academia. Because the ESRA conference was located in the West, studies about vote-by-mail, vote centers, and automatic voter registration were prominently featured – a timely regional theme that I hope will be replicated next year when the ESRA conference is held in the Midwest.

The ESRA conference included a healthy mix of panels and breakout sessions, all of which kept this group of about 50 people engaged and inspired. The sessions over the two days covered:

Administering Elections and Evaluating Capacity
Voter Registration Records and Data Administration
Assessing the Effectiveness of Voter Registration List Maintenance
Turnout in Mayoral Elections (the “Who Votes for Mayor” study)
Voter Identification Laws and Elections
New Approaches to Voter Registration and Turnout
Evaluating Elections Under Pressure (i.e., contingency planning and recounts)
Election Administration Professionalization
Modernizing Voter Registration (breakout session and plenary)
Intersection of Election Administration, Nonprofits, and Advocates
Alternative Polling Places of the Future (breakout session and plenary)

This inaugural conference was an enormous undertaking and was artfully planned and executed by Paul Gronke (who’s also a trusted consultant for the Democracy Fund’s Elections team) and Phil Keisling (who I hear knows a thing or two about elections) – a huge congrats to them and their team for successfully pulling off this important event. Also, it’d be remiss of me if I forgot to give a shout out to Paul Manson, Charles Stewart, Bernard Fraga, and Lonna Rae Atkeson, all of whom played a vital role in making the conference a success. I’m so grateful that I had the opportunity to attend, meet some smart and awesome election geeks who continue to teach me new things, represent Democracy Fund as dinner host, and speak at one of the panels. I’m encouraged by the enthusiasm and passion everyone has invested so far, and seriously hope that the heart of this scholarly effort continues to beat for years to come as new and useful research emerges.

*The ESRA conference was made possible with support from the National Science Foundation, the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, the Early Voting Information Center, the Center for Public Service at Portland State University, and the Democracy Fund.

** Photo credit goes to Cameron Wimpy, Research Director for the MIT Election and Data Science Lab.

Back to Ideas

Statement

Democracy Fund Statement on Violence in Charlottesville

Democracy Fund

August 14, 2017

Democracy Fund President Joe Goldman issued the following statement in response to the events in Charlottesville, Virginia:

“We stand with millions of Americans from all walks of life in strongly condemning the hateful events in Charlottesville over this past weekend. We mourn the loss of Heather Heyer, a young woman who took to the streets in Charlottesville to champion tolerance and equality in our society, as well as the two members of law enforcement who lost their lives working to keep their community safe. We hope for the speedy recovery of those who were injured.

Incidents of heinous racism and nativism have occurred throughout the history of America, and as we saw this past weekend, there is still a segment of our society that continues to embrace these hate-filled ideologies. Recognizing the persistence of these movements within our country is integral to combatting them. For the vast majority of us repulsed by the bigotry that descended upon Charlottesville, we must continue the hard work of ending such hatred and the forces that normalize it.

The Democracy Fund remains steadfast in our commitment to a resilient, diverse, democratic society that defends free speech but reviles racism and political violence. We will continue to support people and organizations working to protect the inherent dignity of each individual and to oppose racism, Islamophobia, and nativism.”

Back to Ideas

Blog

Remembering Michael Cromartie

Joe Goldman

September 5, 2017

This post was co-authored by Chris Crawford, Program Associate for the Governance team.

In this age of intense polarization, Americans have a habit of retreating to their comfortable political corners. Our institutions of government and our media both suffer from low approval ratings. In an era of cynicism, teamsmanship, and distrust, The Faith Angle Forum has shined brightly as an example of civility, understanding, and deeper learning. Its leader, Michael Cromartie, was a champion of democratic values.

For three years, Democracy Fund has been a lead investor in the Faith Angle Forum, a project of the Ethics and Public Policy Center. Twice per year, Faith Angle Forum gathers the nation’s top journalists to discuss the issues facing the nation – an opportunity for journalists to engage with religious experts on topics of the day. Shortly after the election of Pope Francis, Arthur Brooks of the American Enterprise Institute and John Carr of Georgetown University’s Initiative on Catholic Social Thought discussed the ways in which Catholic teaching responds to poverty, from the political Left and the Right. Last spring, journalists gathered with author Kate Bowler to discuss the Prosperity Gospel, the faith tradition in which President Donald Trump was raised. And each election year, Faith Angle Forum has gathered polling experts to discussed the way in which voters from different faith traditions voted in the election.

It is obvious to all observers why this project is important. But to the participants, the project was made especially important by its leader. Michael Cromartie was deeply dedicated to democratic values. In addition to his deep religious faith, Michael had faith in the ability of the American people to process information when presented with the facts. He dedicated his career to creating a deeper understanding between the American media and the American people.

On August 28, Michael Cromartie died after a heroic battle with cancer. He was the rock on which a significant segment of our political class rested. He valued deeper understanding. He exuded joy. And he never tired of forging partnerships to strengthen our collective institutions.

Memorials have been pouring in from our nation’s stop media outlets, praising Michael for his life’s work. Carl Cannon of Real Clear Politics, a frequent attendee of Faith Angle Forum, wrote an especially precise summary of Michael’s impact on American politics:

“Mike Cromartie did more to ensure that American political journalism is imbued with religious tolerance, biblical literacy, historical insight, and an ecumenical spirit than any person alive. No one is a close second. This man was one of a kind.”

Peter Wehner, Michael’s colleague at EPPC, wrote that Michael “enriched the public dialogue and helped shape American culture.” In addition, he noted that Michael, “was a man who left a deep imprint on people’s hearts and souls.”

Peter’s word are appropriate and accurate. His understanding of Michael both as a human being and as a leader in his field have prepared Peter to continue the Faith Angle Forum project this fall in Miami.

Michael’s genuine desire to learn from others, and to bring the rest of us along with him, made him an ideal convener. His good nature was evident whether talking with titans of the media industry, think tank presidents, or with the hotel staff at Faith Angle Forum, all of whom he knew by name. In addition to his work with Faith Angle Forum, Michael was a central part of Democracy Fund’s Voter Study Group. With Michael’s help and unique ability to bring people together, we gathered researchers and analysts from a broad section of the political spectrum to collaborate on a project designed to listen to the American people.

With the passing of Michael Cromartie, Democracy Fund has not just lost an incredibly valuable grantee; we have suffered from a death in the family. Our thoughts are with Michael’s wonderful wife Jennifer, his EPPC colleagues, and the countless people who were honored to call him a friend. Our work would be unnecessary if our country was filled with men and women like Michael Cromartie.