The stories of our clients—Sherry Denise Holverson, Isabel Najera, and Alexandria Lane—are not outliers, but rather represent a problem that has been occurring across the state of North Carolina.
Is it a problem when the Supreme Court is out of step with public opinion? While in many cases the answer is no, when it comes to the question of money and politics and the financing of campaigns and elections, its counter-majoritarianism is a threat to democracy.
We’ve allowed the price of college and its attendant debt to rise well beyond the point where it is actually helpful in getting people through college.
During the 2012 and 2014 elections, thousands of Texans arrived at the polls having registered to vote at the Department of Public Safety (Texas’ motor vehicles department), only to be told that they were not on the voter rolls.
The most important fact about higher education is that only a minority of people go to college. That fact would change if college was affordable for more people.
Less than 10 years ago Demos and other voting rights groups approached North Carolina after an investigation revealed that the state was failing to meet its obligations under Section 7 of the National Voter Registration Act—a federal law that requires North Carolina provide individuals who apply for public assistance the opportunity to register to vote.
Popular theories for rising tuition like administrative “bloat” and student aid are at most minor contributors to tuition increases. Here's the real causes.
In the case of for-profits, not only has the government been unable to properly force institutions to account for their behavior, but it has been unable to stop providing the majority of money that keeps these colleges standing in the first place.
Policies like this would incent states to return to an era when college could be funded through a summer job, part-time employment, and maybe modest savings when available, for the largest and most diverse generation of students in our history.
Inequality is growing because the increased wealth of the wealthiest no longer spawns income opportunities for the less well-off households and may actually diminish them.