The signing makes Wisconsin the 49th state in the nation to extend postpartum Medicaid coverage from 60 days to a full year — a change predicted to improve maternal health outcomes for roughly 5,000 Wisconsin women annually.  

“This is about people, not politics,” said Representative Patrick Snyder, a Republican co-author of the bill. The Assembly passed the bill by a stunning 95-to-1 margin.

“The will of the people is the law of the land,” added Democratic Representative Robyn Vining, who collaborated with Snyder.  

Standing next to the Governor and decked out in her Builders best, Kai Gardner Mishlove, a Democrat turned independent who has supported both conservative and progressive causes, quietly celebrated a moment she — and many others — had been working toward for years.

“I was ecstatic to witness the bill signing,” she said. “I also felt like crying because it took so long to pass.  I said a prayer for the women and babies who suffered because of coverage that was previously limited.”

From a Citizen Solutions Session to the Governor’s Desk

The road to last week’s legislative victory began, improbably, in 2023 at one of our Citizen Solutions sessions. This problem-solving process, which typically takes about three days, is facilitated and requires a commitment to curiosity and compassion from all participants. In Madison, just steps from the State Capitol, we convened fourteen ideologically diverse people from across the state to find common ground on abortion and family well-being. 

Jeff Davis, a Catholic conservative from Bloomington, which sits near the Iowa border, arrived skeptical. “At the beginning, I couldn’t fathom us agreeing on anything,” he recalled. 

But the sessions — informed by presentations from experts — created the conditions for a different kind of conversation. “The conversations were tense at times but necessary in order for folks to break down their biases and assumptions,” Kai said. “This opened up avenues for us to see the humanity in each other.”

The process worked, participants say, precisely because it did not ask anyone to abandon their values. Instead, it invited them to discern where those values overlapped. In examining their commitment to helping moms and babies thrive, the group wondered: what happens when a mother loses access to healthcare coverage just 60 days after having a baby?

The answer, it turned out, was something everyone in the room found unacceptable.

Ali Mudrow (left) and Dr. Kristin Lyerly celebrate the passage of a bipartisan bill to extend Medicaid postpartum. Top image: left to right: Jeff Davis, Dr. Kristin Lyerly, Ali Muldrow, Gov. Tony Evers, Pat McFarland, Kai Gardner Mishlove (Photo by Lindsay Stayton)

Bipartisan Support Wasn’t Enough — Until It Was

When the citizen coalition took their consensus to the Capitol, they had polling on their side: a 2024 Builders survey found 73% of Wisconsinites supported the extension, and a 2025 Marquette Law School poll showed 66% of registered voters favored it. At first, it seemed the policy’s bipartisan appeal extended to lawmakers, with majorities of Republicans and Democrats behind it. But  Speaker Robin Vos refused to allow a vote on the Assembly floor, once saying, “We already have enough welfare in Wisconsin.”  In the political version of hot potato, the bill bounced from committee to committee without a vote.

“I was surprised that we were met with so much resistance in the Assembly,” Jeff said. There was significant resistance among certain legislators who were skeptical of Medicaid expansion in any form — resistance that persisted even as the bill’s broad public support became undeniable. The citizens adapted. “It was very helpful to show them that there was bipartisan support among us,” Kai recalled, “so why not them?”

Over two years, the local Builders worked together to push the bill across the finish line. “I participated in a series of coordinated social media posts, op-eds, media interviews, and visits with elected officials — all with the purpose to raise awareness regarding the positive health, community, and economic benefits of this legislation,” Kai said.

Mounting pressure from lawmakers and the public finally convinced Vos to put the bill to a vote. “This process has shown me that well-informed citizens have the power to move legislation forward,” Jeff said.

The Human Cost of a 60-Day Clock

Emily Schmit, a mother from Mount Horeb, gives this debate a human face. In 2018, her son was born prematurely and spent his first 60 days in the neonatal intensive care unit. Just as her family was finally able to bring him home, her Medicaid coverage expired.

“Having a full year of coverage would have enabled me to continue seeing my doctor, accessing medications, and accessing mental health professionals to process my traumatic birth experience,” Emily said. “I’m grateful Wisconsin moms will now have the extended support that I needed.”

Stories like Emily’s are not isolated. Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that roughly 53% of maternal deaths occur between 7 and 365 days postpartum, demonstrating a need for extended coverage to adequately meet moms’ physical and mental healthcare needs. Now, Arkansas is the only state with a coverage gap.

A Model for What Comes Next

We’ve run a similar Citizen Solutions project in Tennessee, where a citizen cohort helped contribute to the passage of  bipartisan firearms safety education legislation for students. Late last year, we took the process to Texas, where a cohort of 14 began tackling the resonant issue of healthcare. 

The model we’ve developed is, at its core, a bet that ordinary people can find common ground solutions – often more efficiently and consistently than elected leaders operating in a polarized system.

The Power of the People

Before joining Builders, Kai said she was uncertain whether ordinary citizens could meaningfully influence legislation outside of election years. The bill signing gave her a definitive answer.

“Don’t ever give up on the possibility of folks successfully working together across political divides to meet a common goal,” she said

Jeff echoed Kai’s optimism. “Your voice does matter,” he said. “The real question is: do you care enough to make it matter?”

As “2025 Wisconsin Act 102” became official, the question seemed, for a moment, to answer itself.

— Alex Buscemi (abuscemi@buildersmovement.org)

The post ​​Builders Like You Just Scored a Huge Legislative Victory for New Moms appeared first on Builders.

American politics can feel like a constant tug-of-war.

Red versus blue. Left versus right. Us versus them. The rope has been pulled so hard for so long that a record number of Americans have simply let go.

An all-time high 45% of Americans now identify as political independents, according to a Gallup study released in January 2026, based on interviews with more than 13,000 U.S. adults throughout 2025. That makes independents not just a growing group, but the largest political bloc in the country, outpacing both Democrats and Republicans, who each sit at 27%.

It’s worth noting that “independent” here doesn’t refer to a registered third party. Rather, this data shows how Americans think of themselves politically. 

Independents have been the largest group in most years since Gallup started phone polling in 1988. What’s different now is that the floor keeps rising: the independent share rarely broke 40% before 2011, and has stayed above it ever since. The new 45% record is the latest step in a long climb. Combine that with the generational data showing each new cohort entering adulthood more independent than the last, and you’re looking at a structural shift.

Gallup’s analysts say that these swings in alignment are partly driven by dislike of whoever holds the White House. When a president becomes unpopular, independents (those with weaker ties to either party) tend to drift toward the opposition. We’ve seen this pattern play out in both directions: Democrats lost ground during Biden’s tenure, and Republicans have now shed similar support under Trump’s second term.

But that’s only part of the story.

The deeper signal may be that more Americans are stepping back from a political culture that increasingly asks them to pick a side rather than find solutions.

Rejecting ‘Us vs. Them’ Mindsets

In today’s political environment, the loudest voices often come from the edges. Social media rewards outrage. Cable news amplifies conflict. And political incentives can push leaders toward sharper, more divisive messaging.

For many Americans, that environment doesn’t feel like a place to get things done. It feels like a place to choose teams.

Identifying as independent can be a way of opting out of that dynamic. Not because people don’t care about issues, but because they don’t see their views fully reflected by either party.

Importantly, being independent doesn’t mean being disengaged. The label is less about neutrality and more about flexibility: the freedom to evaluate issues without automatic allegiance.

A Generational Shift

This trend is especially pronounced among younger Americans.

A majority of Gen Z adults now identify as independents (56%), higher than millennials at the same stage of life (47%) and far above Gen X in the early 1990s (40%). Millennials and Gen Z have carried that identity with them as they’ve aged, rather than “settling into” party affiliation the way previous generations often did.

If younger voters continue to identify as independents at these rates, it could reshape how politics works in the decades ahead. Candidates may need to appeal less to party loyalty and more to a broader set of voters who expect nuance, flexibility, and problem-solving over partisanship.

At the same time, ideological labels are shifting. In 2025, 35% of Americans identified as conservative, 28% as liberal, and 33% as moderate, with the gap between conservatives and liberals narrowing to one of the smallest margins Gallup has recorded.

That mix reflects a country that doesn’t fit neatly into two boxes.

An Opportunity to Build

For those who care about moving beyond “us vs. them,” this moment presents an opportunity.

If more Americans are less anchored to party identity, they may also be more open to working across differences to solve shared problems.

That doesn’t mean disagreement disappears. It shouldn’t. Disagreement is a healthy part of a functioning democracy.

But there’s a difference between disagreement and division.

A politics defined by division asks: Which side are you on?
A politics focused on problem-solving asks: What can we fix together?

The rise of independents suggests more Americans may be ready for the second question.

And that’s where building begins.

— Alex Buscemi (abuscemi@buildersmovement.org)

Art by Matthew Lewis

Help Turn Common Ground into Real Change

You’re a Builder, which means you, like us, believe that most Americans agree more than the loudest voices want us to believe—and that solutions are possible when people come before politics. In a world where extremists seek to divide for power and profit, Builders take action to unite, create, and bring light to the world. Support the development of new media, tools, and platforms to help us give power back to the people.

 Support the Builders Movement

The post Nearly Half of Americans Now Identify as Political Independents appeared first on Builders.

Texas is a state built on growth. More people, more businesses, more cities rising from open land. For generations that growth felt almost limitless.

But one resource may ultimately decide how far that growth can go: water.

Across the state, reservoirs, aquifers, and pipelines are under growing pressure from population growth, aging infrastructure, and long-term drought patterns. According to reporting from the Texas Tribune, experts warn that Texas’ municipal water supply may not meet demand by 2030 during a severe drought if major new solutions aren’t implemented.

The good news is that Texas has started taking the problem seriously. The harder question is what comes next.

Texas Has Already Taken a Big Step

In 2025, Texas voters approved a massive long-term investment in water infrastructure through Proposition 4, which dedicates about $1 billion per year in state sales-tax revenue for water projects over the next two decades.

That funding will support projects across the state, including:

• repairing aging water systems
• developing new water supplies
• desalinating salty groundwater
• improving reservoirs and pipelines

Altogether, the investment could total roughly $20 billion over 20 years, one of the largest water infrastructure efforts in Texas history.

In a political era where agreement is often rare, this effort passed with broad bipartisan support. Lawmakers from both parties recognized the same basic reality: without reliable water, Texas’ economy and communities simply cannot function.

The bill provides funding and authorization, but it doesn’t fully solve the problem yet.

Experts and policymakers still say several challenges remain:

1. The funding may not be enough.
   Some estimates suggest Texas could need well over $100 billion in water investments by mid-century, meaning the $20 billion package may only cover a portion of the long-term need.
2. The bill funds projects, but doesn’t choose them.
   The Texas Water Development Board will allocate the money through grants and loans, meaning local utilities and regional water planners still have to design and execute the projects.
3. Some major policy questions remain unresolved.
   For example:

• how groundwater pumping should be regulated
• who gets priority access to water during shortages
• how to balance urban growth, agriculture, and industry
• environmental impacts of desalination or reservoirs
• how to manage the growing water demand from AI data centers and other large digital infrastructure

4. Infrastructure takes decades to build.
   Even when funding is available, major water projects—from desalination plants to pipelines—can take 10–20 years to plan and construct.

A Texas-Sized Challenge — And Opportunity

For most Texans, the water crisis can feel abstract. Something handled by engineers, utilities, or state agencies. But ordinary citizens actually have several concrete ways to influence water policy and conservation, especially at the local level where many decisions are made.

One of the most direct ways citizens can influence water decisions is by attending city council meetings or water utility board meetings, because those bodies often make the decisions that affect water use day-to-day. Things like drought restrictions, infrastructure upgrades, and whether new developments are approved.

Most Texas cities hold city council meetings twice per month, often in the evening so residents can attend after work. For example, many cities schedule meetings on the first and third Tuesday or Thursday of the month, though the exact schedule varies. Visit your cities government website to learn more. 

Water utilities are sometimes run directly by city governments, but in many parts of Texas they are overseen by separate boards such as:

• water utility boards
• municipal utility districts (MUDs)
• groundwater conservation districts
• river authorities

To find out who provides water to your property and how to contact them, visit the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

Water policy rarely dominates national headlines. But in Texas, it may become one of the most important issues of the next generation.

The encouraging part is that Texans have already shown they can work together on it. The recent investment in water infrastructure demonstrates that practical problems can still bring people across the political aisle.

The next step is maintaining that momentum.

— Alex Buscemi (abuscemi@buildersmovement.org)

Image by Oleksandr Sushko / Unsplash

The post Is Texas Running Out of Water? appeared first on Builders.

When the Iran War broke out, the public conversation escalated almost as quickly as the conflict itself. Within minutes, timelines filled with hot takes, sweeping claims, and people suddenly confident they solved Middle Eastern geopolitics between lunch and their third cup of coffee. 

But the Iran conflict is serious, complicated, and deeply consequential. It deserves more than reflexive outrage or tribal talking points. 

Each of our voices shapes the tone of public life. Societies respond to conflict in part through the ideas we circulate, the language we choose, and the empathy we extend toward others.

Here are six things to avoid if we want that conversation to stay grounded in reality and humanity rather than veering off into bigotry and conspiracy theory.

We Forget That People Are Not Their Government

One of the most damaging habits during wartime is treating entire populations as if they are responsible for the actions of their governments. In reality, public opinion inside a country can look very different from the policies its leaders pursue.

The Iranian people have been living under the oppressive Islamic Republic for 47 years. A recent survey conducted by the research group GAMAAN, which gathered responses from more than 77,000 Iranians, found that over 80% of respondents wanted the Islamic Republic replaced and 89% said they support democracy.

Remembering this distinction matters. Governments make decisions. Civilians live with the consequences.

When we separate people from their leaders, we make it easier to maintain empathy—and harder for war to turn into dehumanization.

We Allow Antisemitism and Islamophobia to Rise Globally

Since the war began, antisemitic incidents surged 34% worldwide in the first week alone. Islamophobic posts on social media saw an 11-fold amplification.

Jewish and Muslim people across the world are facing real threats because of a war they had no part in starting. Criticizing governments is legitimate. Blaming entire religious communities for what states do is not — and that line is being crossed constantly right now.

Call out faith-based discrimination whenever you see it happen. That’s one of the most concrete things any of us can do.

We Attempt to Explain a Complex Conflict with Simple Answers

Major wars rarely happen for a single reason. Yet social media often reduces complicated geopolitical events to one-sentence explanations: “It’s all about oil,” “It’s all about Israel,”  “It’s all just a distraction,” or “It’s all Iran’s fault.”

In reality, conflicts like this grow out of multiple overlapping factors: nuclear weapons concerns, regional alliances, economic sanctions, proxy conflicts, and decades of mistrust between governments.

When we accept overly simple explanations, we make ourselves more vulnerable to misinformation and conspiracy thinking.

Taking the time to understand the complexity of a conflict doesn’t mean abandoning strong opinions. It simply means recognizing that the world is usually more complicated than a viral headline suggests.

We Do Not Seek Out Multiple Viewpoints

Since social media has become the primary way we consume news, we are increasingly shown information that confirms what we already believe. That can make international conflicts look very different depending on which news sources we follow.

One way to counter that effect is to intentionally read across perspectives. Look at reporting from outlets with different editorial viewpoints (this media bias chart from Allsides will help you pinpoint where different outlets fall on the political spectrum). And read international coverage in addition to domestic news.

You may still reach the same conclusions. But you’ll do so with a fuller understanding of the debate.

We Do Not Demand a Clear Long-Term Plan

Public debate about war often focuses on the immediate question: Was the strike justified?

But history shows that the harder question comes afterward: What happens next?

Military victories do not automatically produce stable political outcomes. Long-term strategy for conflicts can determine whether military action leads to deterrence, escalation, or prolonged instability.

Citizens asking thoughtful questions about long-term goals for regional stability, diplomacy, deterrence, or regime change can push leaders to explain their strategy more clearly.

Democracies function best when the public is engaged not only in the moment of crisis but in the decisions that follow.

— Alex Buscemi (abuscemi@buildersmovement.org)

Art by Matthew Lewis

The post What We Keep Getting Wrong About the Iran War appeared first on Builders.

A lot of people saw this war as an inevitability: the military buildup in the region, the dwindling negotiations, the persistent media speculation. The fog of war had been lingering since 2023 and had truly taken its toll, yet we were acutely aware of the likelihood of further escalation.

Despite our preparedness, the deafening sound of that first siren is enough to send anyone into fight-or-flight mode. It is a sound I have heard countless times before, but my heart never ceases to skip a beat. My body instinctively moves to the shelter before my brain has the chance to catch up. Once the bomb shelter doors close, the only thing that distracts me from the bellowing sound of interceptions overhead are the lighthearted jokes we tell each other to ease the fear.

In the back of my mind, I know that despite the early warning sirens and the vast interception capabilities, missiles still find their way through. In those moments, all I can do is hope that this steel door and reinforced concrete are enough to keep me alive.

During the twelve-day war with Iran in June, my apartment was torn apart by an Iranian missile. It was only by chance that I wasn’t there when it happened, but it was a stark reminder that no one is immune to the worst-case scenario. In the aftermath of that terrifying incident, all I felt was incredibly lucky not to have been there when it happened. Lucky is a funny word to use in this context, but bear with me. I feel lucky because I know not everyone has access to a shelter. Not everyone has early-warning sirens, and not all countries are prepared to defend themselves against attacks.

In these missile-induced moments, I often think about the people of Iran, of Gaza, and of the Gulf who aren’t protected from rocket attacks. I think about the significant lack of public shelters in Arab areas in Israel, leaving many residents with minimal protection. I think about a world in which no civilian has to live under the barrage of missiles and in the constant shadow of war.

Many might assume that in these moments, hatred is where the mind takes us. After all, it is human nature to want someone to blame. But the opposite is true. We are living in a strange paradox in which the people in countries at war with one another do not hate each other. In fact, they want this to end as quickly as possible so they can finally board that long-forbidden flight from Tel Aviv to Tehran.

It’s abundantly clear to me that even in moments of real danger, it is possible to maintain empathy for civilians on all sides. War isn’t something we can control, but our humanity is, and the choice to preserve it is essential.

— Lucy Johnson

The post Humanity Is the One Thing War Can’t Take: Life in Israel During the Iran War appeared first on Builders.

Election season kicked off this week with the Texas, North Carolina, and Arkansas Primary Elections on March 3. And the record-breaking turnout suggests a shift in how Americans vote that extends well beyond the borders of these three states. The results point to a growing demand for politicians who don’t simply mirror the views of their most partisan supporters, but instead build coalitions that stretch across party lines.

Participation in the primaries has been unusually high this year. More than 2.5 million Texans voted during early voting alone, beating the previous early-vote record for a Texas primary and putting this election on track to set the state record for a non-presidential midterm primary. What’s more, in Texas, 400,000 people voted in the primaries for the first time. And early numbers show voters under 30 increased by 8% since 2024*. Arkansas and North Carolina also saw strong surges in participation.

The boost in primary turnout could signal a broader shift — not just in how Americans vote, but also in how candidates campaign and the policies they emphasize.

Participation in the primaries (where each party selects its candidate for the November election) is usually very low. Only the most dedicated voters show up. This incentivizes candidates to appeal exclusively to those dedicated voters, who tend to be more ideologically extreme than the typical American. This is leading to a widening gulf between what most Americans want and what candidates campaigned on.

But this year’s record turnout shows that more voters are catching on: if you want less extreme politicians who prioritize the will of the sensible majority, show up in the primaries.

The results of this election demonstrate that when turnout increases in primaries, voters often choose candidates who have “big tent,” reach-across-the-aisle approaches. This is most apparent in wins from politicians like James Talarico, who won the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in Texas, and Roy Cooper, who won it in North Carolina. Talarico emphasizes cross-partisan persuasion and faith-based outreach. Cooper is a moderate Democrat with a record of winning bipartisan support. Both show a growing desire for politicians who are less extreme, have broad appeal, and can win outside their party.

But this is just the beginning. Forty-seven states haven’t held their primaries yet. Up next are Mississippi on March 10, followed by Illinois on March 17. To find out when your primaries are held, check out this chart from the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The primaries in Texas, North Carolina, and Arkansas have sent a strong message: Americans are ready to reclaim their democracy from the extremes. Record turnouts and wins by cross-partisan candidates suggest a genuine appetite for politics built on broad appeal rather than ideological purity.

With so many states still to hold primaries, the pattern is far from settled. But one thing is already clear: when more Americans participate in the primaries, the direction of our politics can start to change.

— Alex Buscemi (abuscemi@buildersmovement.org)

Art by Matthew Lewis

*Under 30 voter data compiled by Ryan Data & Research and Transparency USA.

The post The Tides Are Turning This Election Season appeared first on Builders.

Monday’s event was intended to celebrate independence and civic participation ahead of Tuesday’s Primary Election. Out of respect for the victims and their families, as well as the ongoing investigation, Builders has postponed it to keep attention and resources focused on those who need it.

Our hearts are with the victims, their families, and all those impacted. We are deeply grateful for the first responders who acted quickly and heroically to prevent further harm, and we stand with our Texas community during this difficult time.

We also recognize the historic events unfolding in the Middle East, and hold our American service members and all people throughout the region in our thoughts.
Moments like this call for our shared humanity and compassion. In times of unrest, we often feel hopeless and wonder what one person can do. As a Builder, you can be a force for peace and healing in your community. It starts with listening, engaging respectfully, and participating in our democracy.

While our event is postponed, the Texas Primary Election is not. We encourage every Texan to exercise their right to vote on March 3rd and choose leaders who will prioritize the people they serve. We are grateful for your understanding and continued support.

— The Builders Team

The post Our Capitol Event on 3/2 Has Been Postponed Until Further Notice appeared first on Builders.

I am a person who has read the Minnesota state constitution for fun. I realize this makes me unusual. But when I ask most people what they could do this week to strengthen American democracy, they either go big — vote, protest, run for office — or they go nowhere, because nothing feels like enough. I want to offer a third option. Civic engagement is not a personality type. It is a set of habits. And most of them are far simpler than you think.

Here is the truth that I wish someone had told me earlier: the most powerful forms of civic participation in America are not the ones you see on television. They are quiet, local, and unglamorous. They happen in school board meetings and city council chambers and county commissioner offices — places where decisions are made about your drinking water, your children’s curriculum, your property taxes, and your local roads. These are the rooms where policy actually becomes your life, and most of them are nearly empty.

So if you have ever wondered where to start, let me offer a few suggestions. None of them require you to run for office, join a political party, or get into an argument at Thanksgiving.

1. Find out who represents you. I do not mean the president. I mean your state legislators, your city council members, your school board officials. These are the people making the decisions that most directly shape your daily experience, and the vast majority of Americans cannot name a single one. It takes five minutes. Write the names down. This is not a small thing. You cannot hold power accountable if you do not know who holds it.

 

2. Show up to one local government meeting. Just one. You do not have to speak. You do not have to have an opinion on every agenda item. Just go, sit down, and watch how decisions get made in your community. I promise you will leave knowing more about how your town actually works than you learned in a decade of watching national news. Many of these meetings are now livestreamed, so you can attend from your couch if that feels more manageable. The point is to start paying attention to the level of government where your attention actually makes a difference.

 

3. Contact an elected official about something you care about. Call their office. Write an email. Send a letter. This might feel pointless, but I can tell you from conversations with dozens of legislative staffers that it is anything but. Constituent contacts are tracked and tallied. When a state legislator receives fifty phone calls about the same issue in a single week, it changes the calculation.

 

4. Support your local newspaper. This one surprises people, but the collapse of local journalism is one of the most urgent civic crises in America. When a community loses its local paper, research shows that voter turnout drops, municipal borrowing costs rise, government corruption increases, and fewer people run for office. Local journalists are the ones who sit through those city council meetings and tell you what happened. When they disappear, nobody is watching. A subscription costs less than most streaming services, and it might be the single most impactful civic investment you can make.

 

5. This is the one I feel most strongly about — join something. Not a political party. A civic organization. A neighborhood association. A library board. A volunteer fire department. A tutoring program. A community garden committee. The research on this is remarkably clear: people who participate in civic life through organizations are dramatically more likely to stay engaged over time than those who try to go it alone. We are social creatures. We sustain our commitments through community. Find a room full of people who care about something you care about, and walk into it.

I know what some of you are thinking. This all sounds fine, but does it actually matter? I understand the skepticism. We have been conditioned to believe that the only political actions that count are the big ones — the presidential elections, the Supreme Court decisions, the viral moments. But that framing is exactly what has left so many Americans feeling powerless. If the only thing that matters is the thing you have the least control over, of course you feel helpless.

The antidote is to redirect your energy toward the places where you have the most influence. Your school board. Your city council. Your county. Your neighborhood. These are the arenas where a single person showing up can genuinely change the outcome — not in theory, but in practice. I have watched it happen. A parent who attends school board meetings for six months and then runs for a seat. A resident who calls the city about a dangerous intersection until the city finally fixes it. A neighbor who organizes a voter registration drive at her church and gets forty new people to the polls. None of these people were professional activists. They were just citizens who decided to participate. (And by the way, a person who represents me in my state legislature has twice been elected by fewer than 50 votes.)

Democracy is not something that happens to you. It is something you do. And you do not need to do all of it. You just need to do something — consistently, locally, and without waiting for permission. The most important civic acts in this country have always belonged to ordinary people who simply refused to be bystanders, and it’s something available to each one of us, starting today.

—

Sharon McMahon is a former government and law teacher turned nationally recognized civic educator. She is the New York Times bestselling author of The Small and the Mighty, and the creator of the award-winning The Preamble podcast and digital magazine. Sharon has built one of the largest online communities dedicated to nonpartisan civic literacy, earning recognition for her fact-based, historically grounded approach to explaining American democracy.

The post What If It’s Simpler Than You Think? appeared first on Builders.

Myth #1: Noncitizens Are Registering to Vote in Huge Numbers

This one refuses to die. In 2024, claims spread widely that over a million Texans had registered to vote without a photo ID, implying a massive wave of noncitizen registrations. Texas Secretary of State Jane Nelson shot that down directly, clarifying that the voter roll had grown by just 57,711 people since the start of 2024. That’s fewer than in comparable periods in 2022 or 2020. 

Even the Heritage Foundation’s own voter fraud database (not exactly a source sympathetic to downplaying election concerns) documented only three confirmed cases of noncitizen voting in Texas since 2012. Three. In over a decade.

Myth #2: My Party Never Wins in My District, So There’s No Point in Voting in the Primaries 

This might be the most quietly damaging myth of all.

A primary isn’t your party versus the other party. It’s your party choosing its candidate. When one party dominates a district so thoroughly that the general election is essentially predetermined, the primary is the real election.

And even if you’re in the minority party in your district, the primary still matters. Primary voters shape the quality and character of their party’s representation, which affects recruitment, fundraising, and long-term party-building in ways that go beyond any single race.

The primary ballot is also about far more than the top of the ticket. County judges, school board members, sheriffs, district attorneys — these down-ballot races affect your daily life in concrete ways, and they’re decided in primaries with razor-thin margins. Sitting out because your party can’t win the congressional seat means abandoning every one of those races, too.

Myth #3: I Can’t Vote in the Texas Primaries Because I’m Not Registered With a Political Party 

Texas has open primaries. You don’t have to register with a party ahead of time. On Election Day, you simply choose which party’s primary you want to vote in — and you can only vote in one.

That’s it.

You don’t have to be a party insider. You don’t have to donate money. You don’t have to attend rallies.

Primaries aren’t just for the loudest voices. They’re for everyday Texans who want a say in which direction their party — and their district — goes.

Myth #4: If You Have a Felony, You Can Never Vote Again

Many Texans with past convictions believe they’ve permanently lost their right to vote. That’s simply not true. In Texas, individuals with felony convictions can have their voting rights restored once they have fully completed their sentence — including any parole or probation.

This misconception keeps a significant number of eligible voters away from the polls. If you’ve served your time and are no longer under supervision, check your status and re-register. Your vote counts.

Myth #5: College Students Must Vote Where Their Parents Live

This myth trips up tens of thousands of Texas college students every election. The reality? You have a choice. Texas law allows students to register and vote using either their home address or their campus address. You do not have to return to your hometown or request an absentee ballot just because you moved away for school.

If you’re living in Austin, Lubbock, or Denton for college, you can register right there and vote on local issues that directly affect your daily life, like city council decisions, transit, and campus-adjacent policies.

Myth #6: Only Presidential Elections Really Matter

It’s easy to focus all your civic energy on the presidential race every four years, but local and state elections often have a more immediate and direct impact on your daily life. School board decisions, property taxes, county judges, district attorneys, sheriffs — all of these are decided in elections that receive a fraction of the attention (and voter turnout) of a presidential contest.

In Texas, primary and local elections routinely see turnout in the single digits. That means a small, motivated group of voters can — and does — shape policy for everyone. Skipping “minor” elections is one of the most significant things you can do to give up your influence.

The Bottom Line

Misinformation about voting isn’t a minor nuisance. It’s a genuine threat to democratic participation. Whether the myths spread out of confusion or bad faith, the effect is the same: fewer people vote, and fewer voices are heard. Texas has millions of eligible voters who sit out every election — especially in the primaries — and myths like these are part of the reason why.

Know the facts. Show up. Vote.

— Alex Buscemi (abuscemi@buildersmovement.org)

Art by Matthew Lewis

Learn more about the Texas primaries on March 3 — and how to get your friends, family, and community to the polls — by downloading our voter guide right here.

The post 6 Texas Voting Myths, Debunked appeared first on Builders.

By Brian Hamilton

My dad never graduated from high school. He used to tell me: “Brian, talking ain’t doing.” Despite not having the fancy degrees that many of us hold, my father instinctively knew the importance of action. One of our better presidents, Teddy Roosevelt, used to say: “Get Action.” He was spot on; at least one politician got the big picture. Unfortunately, that was over 100 years ago.

I’ve spent the better part of my life around entrepreneurs. These are the people who wake up early to make sure the floor is swept and the lights stay on. For them, there is no backstop. These people share a common DNA: they have to produce. 

In the current political landscape, many of our representatives lack that DNA. We’ve become a nation led by professional talkers. They’ve mastered the art of the soundbite, the white paper, and the committee meeting. But where is the fruit?

If we want our votes to lead to change, we need to stop evaluating candidates based on their rhetoric and start evaluating them based on proof that they are capable of creating something/anything (not only a business, by the way). Before we cast a vote, we should ask: Has this candidate ever actually built anything? A small business. A local PTA group. A daycare. A farm. A house. Payroll. A school fundraiser. Have they ever taken an idea all the way to reality?

What History Tells Us

Many of the founders of our country were “doers” first—farmers, merchants, surveyors, and soldiers. Their leadership stemmed from lives full of real consequence. George Washington wasn’t a career politician; he was a surveyor and a farmer who understood literally the soil of the country he was leading. Thomas Jefferson was an architect and an agronomist. Samuel Adams was a maltster. These men didn’t just debate the idea of a nation; they built the physical and intellectual infrastructure of one.

Even in the 20th century, leaders like Dwight Eisenhower were defined by action—he led troops in battle. Harry Truman ran a haberdashery before he ran the country. He knew what it was like to lose a business and shoulder that responsibility. These were people forged by experience, not just ideology.

Why Building Something Matters

Building something teaches lessons that no policy paper ever can. When you’ve built something, you understand that success is earned. You learn that resources are finite, that every decision has consequences, and that tradeoffs are necessary. You also learn humility, because the market, the weather, or the customer will correct you quickly if you’re wrong. Being humiliated is a great path to the rarest of things: wisdom. 

People who have built things know what failure feels like. They’ve had plans fall apart. They’ve had to pivot, adapt, and keep going anyway. That kind of experience produces leaders who are pragmatic, less ideological, and far more focused on results.

Contrast that with a system that rewards perpetual talking. In politics today, you can survive indefinitely without ever delivering a result. 

In the real world, you don’t get that luxury. If the daycare isn’t safe, parents leave. If payroll doesn’t clear, employees quit. If the fundraiser flops, the program dies. Reality keeps score, whether you like it or not.

Builders Govern Differently

People who have built something tend to govern differently. They ask better questions. They worry about execution, not just intention. They understand that complexity is real. 

They’re also more likely to respect the people doing the work. When you’ve cleaned floors, hired employees, or balanced books, you don’t treat labor or capital as abstractions. You know that behind every regulation, every tax, and every mandate, there’s a human being trying to make it work.

This doesn’t mean every builder will be a great politician. And it doesn’t mean every career public servant lacks value. But it does mean we should be far more skeptical of leaders whose only product has been words. 

Ask Better Questions

The next time you’re evaluating a candidate, ask fewer questions about what they say they’re going to do and more about what they’ve already done. Within a range, we’ve got a nation run by a bunch of hot air politicians who seem pleasant on the outside but who have never produced anything. Maybe that’s why we are $38 trillion in debt. No common-sense doer would have ever allowed that to happen. 

So, have they ever built anything meaningful that had to survive outside a campaign? 

America doesn’t suffer from a lack of ideas. It suffers from a lack of execution. If we want better outcomes, we should start electing people who know how to produce them.

Brian Hamilton is the founder of Sageworks (now Abrigo), one of the world’s very first fintech companies, which has helped thousands of banks and millions of business owners. He is also the founder of Inmates to Entrepreneurs, an international program that helps justice-involved people start low-capital businesses, and the star of ABC’s “Free Enterprise” TV show.

The post Have They Ever Built Anything? appeared first on Builders.

In Texas, we have a state mammal that tells the whole story.

When threatened, the armadillo rolls up into a tight little ball. Head down. Feet tucked in. Wait it out.

It’s exactly what too many Texans do every primary season.

Today, Builders Texas is launching Turn Out or Roll Over, a statewide campaign aimed at increasing voter participation in Texas primary elections leading up to March 3, 2026. And yes, the armadillo is front and center.

Because here’s the reality: when Texans skip the primaries, we roll over. And when we roll over, a small slice of voters decides the direction of the entire state.

Primary elections are how voters choose who will represent each political party on the ballot. Before the November election, parties often hold primaries to decide which candidate moves forward.

The vast majority of Texas districts are solidly Democratic or Republican. November won’t change that. In those districts, the March 3 primary is the real election. Yet only 1 in 5 voters participate, allowing a small slice of Texans to decide for everyone else.

We’ve all seen an armadillo on the side of a Texas road — frozen in place, rolled tight.

Do we want to be like that politically?

Our Turn Out or Roll Over campaign is built around making that metaphor impossible to ignore.

The two-week campaign culminates on March 2, Texas Independence Day, with a public event and large-scale visual installation outside the South Steps of the State Capitol — a striking visual representation of what “rolling over” looks like when voters sit out of the primaries.

The campaign leverages the power of creative, place-based visual storytelling to make the consequences of low primary turnout more visible in everyday public spaces and on social media. Across the state, Texans will encounter armadillo outlines chalked onto sidewalks, posters and billboards, a large-scale mural, and on social media—each pairing the familiar image of “rolling over” with clear reminders of what happens when most voters sit out primaries.

Help Us Get Out the Vote

Early voting for the Texas primaries starts on February 17. Here’s how you can help:

1. Make a plan to vote. Download our primaries guide for key dates, FAQs, and non-partisan resources

2. Get out and vote. Bring three friends or family members with you

3. Request FREE Builders Texas Turn Out or Roll Over swag to wear to the polls right here

You don’t have to love every option on the ballot. You don’t have to agree with every platform. You just can’t roll over. The armadillo rolls up because it feels powerless. And Texas doesn’t need to feel powerless. Texas needs to show up.

The post Don’t Roll Over, Texas appeared first on Builders.

If you’re tired of representatives who perform for their base instead of solving problems, here are five questions to ask before you cast your vote. These aren’t about left or right—they’re about whether the person you’re voting for will actually do the job or just keep the fight going.

1. Does This Candidate Treat Opponents as Evil?

Disagreement is normal in a democracy. Dehumanization is not.

Pay attention to language. Do they criticize ideas and policies, or do they question motives and character? Do they leave room for good-faith disagreement?

When leaders portray opponents as evil or illegitimate, they make cooperation politically risky. When they criticize respectfully, they preserve the possibility of working together later.

The tone they model becomes the tone the system absorbs.

2. Does This Candidate Build Coalitions — or Just Rally a Base?

In safe districts, especially in primaries, candidates can win by appealing to a narrow slice of highly motivated voters. But governing requires broader buy-in.

Look for evidence that they’ve worked across factions, communities, or even party lines. Have they collaborated with people who don’t agree with them on everything? Have they supported bipartisan efforts, even when it wasn’t flashy?

You don’t need a candidate who abandons their principles. You need one who knows how to build a majority around them.

Coalitions create durable policy. Echo chambers create stalemates.

3.  Are They Running to Solve Problems or to ‘Own’ the Other Side?

It’s become normal to campaign on humiliation. To “own” the libs or the cons.

That kind of rhetoric generates clicks, donations, and applause lines. But it rarely generates policy.

Ask yourself: Is this candidate primarily motivated by fixing something specific (lowering costs, improving schools, strengthening infrastructure) or by defeating and embarrassing the other side?

There’s a difference between strong disagreement and performative antagonism. One is about outcomes. The other is about optics.

4. Does This Candidate Explain Trade-Offs Honestly?

Every policy decision involves trade-offs. Budget priorities compete. Regulations have costs and benefits. No serious proposal is purely upside.

Candidates who pretend otherwise may win applause, but governing gets harder when reality intrudes.

Look for leaders who can say: “Here’s what this will improve — and here’s what it may cost.” That kind of transparency builds trust and invites mature discussion.

Problem-solving requires acknowledging complexity. Oversimplification fuels polarization.

5. Will This Candidate Lower the Temperature?

Conflict drives engagement. Outrage raises money. But high temperature politics makes collaboration nearly impossible.

Ask yourself: If this person wins, does the overall tone improve or intensify? Do they have a track record of calming tensions, or amplifying them?

Lowering the temperature doesn’t mean being passive. It means channeling disagreement into structured negotiation instead of constant escalation.

Democracy works best when intensity is directed toward solutions, not spectacle.

Your Vote Is Your Power

None of these questions require you to abandon your convictions. They simply expand the criteria.

We don’t just elect policy preferences. We elect behaviors. We elect incentives. We elect the kind of political culture we want to live in.

If voters consistently reward candidates who escalate, the system will supply more escalation. If we reward cooperation and problem-solving, we’ll see more of that too.

Before you vote, pause.

Ask not just, “Do I agree with them?”

Ask, “Will they make cooperation easier or harder?”

That shift may feel small. But over time, it can reshape what politics rewards — and what it produces.

Your vote has power. Use it on someone who will use theirs to get something done.

—Alex Buscemi (abuscemi@buildersmovement.org)

Art by Matthew Lewis

Help Turn Common Ground into Real Change

You’re a Builder, which means you, like us, believe that most Americans agree more than the loudest voices want us to believe—and that solutions are possible when people come before politics. In a world where extremists seek to divide for power and profit, Builders take action to unite, create, and bring light to the world. Support the development of new media, tools, and platforms to help us give power back to the people.

 Support the Builders Movement

The post 5 Questions to Ask Before You Vote appeared first on Builders.

The post From the Inbox: Couples Who Disagree Politically Tell Us How They Stay Together appeared first on Builders.

In Texas, most legislative races are already decided before November even arrives. The primary election in March is where your actual representative gets chosen. 

Due to gerrymandering and partisan sorting, the vast majority of Texas districts are “locked-in” for one party, meaning whichever candidate wins that party’s primary in March will almost certainly win in November.

But here’s the kicker: during that same cycle, only 17% of eligible voters participated in the primaries, meaning a tiny, usually ideologically extreme slice of the electorate is choosing representatives for everyone. 

If you’ve ever wondered why Texas politics feels more polarized than actual Texans, this is why. The primaries are where extremism gets locked in, moderates get squeezed out, and Builders sit on the sidelines wondering why nothing ever changes.

What Is a “Locked-In” District?

A “locked-in” (or “safe”) district is one where historical voting patterns and district boundaries heavily favor one party. Analysts track this by looking at past election results, voter registration data, and partisan voting indexes.

Texas has many such districts, largely due to long-term geographic sorting and aggressive redistricting after the 2020 census. According to election analysts and nonpartisan trackers, the majority of Texas congressional districts are not competitive in general elections.

That means if the district leans overwhelmingly Republican, the GOP primary winner is very likely to win in November. If the district leans overwhelmingly Democratic, the Democratic primary winner is very likely to win in November. Republicans hold large majorities in rural and suburban districts while Democrats hold urban districts.

So while November feels like the “main event,” March is often where the real choice is made.

Where the Primary Is the Real Election

Republican-Dominant Districts

In many North and East Texas districts, Republican candidates routinely win general elections by double-digit margins. GOP nominees are very likely to win in November, making the March GOP primary the de facto election.

• TX-2, Houston Metro (NE & SE): Currently held by Dan Crenshaw, who won in 2024 by 31 points.
• TX-3, North Dallas Suburbs/Rural Northeast: Held by Keith Self. While redistricting added five new rural counties, it is rated “Solid Republican”.
• TX-4, NE Texas/Dallas Suburbs: Held by Pat Fallon, who won his 2024 race by 37 points.
• TX-6, SE of Dallas/Fort Worth: Held by Jake Ellzey, who won in 2024 by 31 points.
• TX-12, West Tarrant/Parker Counties: Redrawn in 2025 to be even more conservative; it backed Donald Trump by 24 points in 2024 and is considered out of reach for Democrats.
• TX-13, Panhandle & North Texas: Consistently rated as a solid Republican stronghold.
• TX-14, Upper Gulf Coast: Traditionally very safe Republican territory.
• TX-17, Central/East Texas: Consistently rated as a solid Republican stronghold.
• TX-19, South Plains/West Texas: Consistently rated as a solid Republican stronghold.
• TX-24, Mid-Cities (Dallas/Fort Worth): Held by Beth Van Duyne. Despite being a suburban Dallas district, it is rated “Solid Republican” or “Safe Republican” for 2026.
• TX-25, North Central/West of DFW: Consistently rated as a solid Republican stronghold. 

In districts like these, voters who sit out the primary are effectively letting a much smaller, more ideologically intense group choose the representative for everyone.

Democratic-Dominant Districts

That dynamic also exists on the Democratic side:

• TX-7, Houston (West/SW): Includes wealthy and diverse areas of West Houston, Bellaire, and parts of Fort Bend County.
• TX-16, El Paso: Centered on the city of El Paso and the surrounding border communities.
• TX-18, Houston (Central/North): A historic stronghold including downtown, Third Ward, and the Heights. It is currently vacant following the death of Rep. Sylvester Turner, with a runoff set for January 31, 2026.
• TX-20, San Antonio (West/Central): Anchored by downtown and western San Antonio.
• TX-29, Houston (East): A heavily Latino district covering East Houston, Pasadena, and Galena Park.
• TX-30, South Dallas: Includes parts of downtown Dallas and southern Dallas County, represented by Jasmine Crockett.
• TX-33, Dallas/Tarrant County: A diverse district covering parts of Fort Worth and Dallas; redrawn in 2025 to consolidate Democratic voters from surrounding areas.
• TX-37: Austin (Central/West): Centered on downtown Austin and the University of Texas campus, held by Lloyd Doggett.

The same thing happens in these districts. When one party is guaranteed to win, the only meaningful choice happens inside that party’s primary.

What about State Legislature Races?

In Texas’ State Legislature races, partisan lean is even more entrenched. Because of this, state legislative primaries shape the November makeup more than the general election itself.

To see whether you live in a “safe Democrat” or “safe Republican” district for the Texas State Legislature race, visit Ballotpedia (link for Texas House, link for Texas State Senate), click on your district, and scroll to see past election results. A district is generally considered “safe” for a party if they have won by a margin of 10 to 12 percentage points or more in recent elections.

If your district is “safe” for either party, you can be confident that the primary election is likely where your vote actually matters. 

Why This Fuels Polarization

Texas primaries have abysmally low turnout compared to general elections, and that changes everything about who wins and how they govern. 

When only 15-20% of eligible voters show up in March, candidates don’t build broad coalitions. They cater to the most committed, ideological, and predictable slice of the electorate (known as high-propensity voters) because those are the only people who reliably vote. Moderates, independents, and casual voters stay home, which means their preferences don’t matter. A candidate can win a primary with support from just 8-10% of all eligible voters in a district, and that’s exactly what happens. 

The result is representatives who reflect the extremes of their party (whether that’s the furthest left in deep blue districts or the furthest right in deep red ones) rather than what most people in that district actually want. 

Low turnout rewards ideological purity over pragmatism, and until Builders start showing up in primaries, the extremes will keep picking everyone’s representatives.

Make a Plan to Vote in the Texas Primaries

The best thing you can do is make a plan to vote in the Texas primaries on March 3.

Start by confirming your voter registration status on the Texas Secretary of State’s website. 

Decide which party’s primary you plan to vote in. Texas has open primaries, meaning you can choose which party’s primary you want to vote in on election day without registering with that party in advance, but you can only participate in one. 

Check out your party’s sample ballot ahead of time so you’re not making decisions in the booth. 

Then choose how you’ll vote. Primary Election Day is March 3. Early voting begins on February 17 and ends on February 27. You can also apply for a ballot by mail now, but the election office must receive it by 7 p.m. on Election Day, March 3 (you have until 5 p.m. March 4 if it’s postmarked by 7 p.m. on Election Day).

Texas primaries aren’t a warm-up act. In many districts, they are the election.

If we want representatives who reflect more than the loudest voices, the path runs through education, participation, and showing up when the real decision is being made.

March doesn’t get the drama of November. But in Texas, it often holds the power.

—Alex Buscemi (abuscemi@buildersmovement.org)

Art by Matthew Lewis

The post Primary Elections 101: How to Actually Make a Difference in Texas Politics appeared first on Builders.

Here’s the blunt reality: even though primary contests decide who represents us, they’re massively under-attended. In recent nationwide cycles, only about 20% of eligible voters show up for primary elections, meaning roughly 4 out of 5 people skip them entirely.

Why Primaries Matter More Than You Think

A primary election is how political parties narrow the field of candidates before the general election. They decide which Democrat runs, which Republican runs, and which independent or minor-party contenders might make it through.

In many parts of the country (especially where districts are heavily skewed toward one party) the general election is essentially decided in the primary. Whoever wins the dominant party’s nomination is almost guaranteed to win the November contest. That’s why political scientists say primaries exert outsized influence over who actually holds office and whose voices are heard in government.

That influence ripples outward. Candidates choose how to run based on who turns out in the primaries. If primary voters are a highly motivated, ideologically narrow group, politicians respond by catering to those voters first, often at the expense of the broader electorate’s interests.

Why do so few people vote in primaries? Yale researchers note that primary contests tend to be less familiar and seen as less relevant by the general public, even though the outcome often decides who we choose between in November.

What Happens When Too Few People Vote?

When only a fraction of the electorate participates, the candidates who emerge are often more extreme or less representative of the broader population. Research shows primary electorates tend to be older, wealthier, and more ideologically unified than average voters, meaning the voices shaping our democracy can be a skewed subset.

This can affect who gets elected, how they govern, and whether voters in the general election feel they have meaningful choices. When candidates are selected by such a narrow subset of voters, the general electorate is left choosing between options that may not reflect what most Americans want.

What Can We Do — and What’s Already Working?

First and foremost, make a plan to vote in the primaries.

Check your voter registration status and look up your state’s primary election date (rules and timelines vary widely by state). Find out whether your state has open, closed, or semi-closed primaries so you know if party registration is required to participate. Review your sample ballot ahead of time, decide whether you’ll vote early, by mail (if eligible), or on Election Day, and put a specific date and time on your calendar so your plan is concrete and easy to follow through on.

Once you’ve got your plan down pat, the next step is getting others to participate in primaries. The key here is not to guilt people. Most people don’t skip them because they’re apathetic or irresponsible. They skip them because no one ever treated them like they mattered. 

One of the simplest things you can do is make primaries visible again. Tell friends when they’re happening. Text someone you trust and say, “Hey, early voting starts this week—want to go together?” Share why you vote in primaries without lecturing. Normalize the idea that November isn’t the only moment that counts. Research shows that among the strongest predictors of whether someone votes is being surrounded by friends or family who vote. This “contagious voting effect” is amplified by gentle reminders to vote—all it takes is a quick text message.

Some advocate for systemic reform that strengthens representation. 

A number of states have experimented with nonpartisan or open primaries, where all voters (not just party members) can participate and all candidates compete together. These reforms have been shown to increase turnout significantly, rising from a national 21% average to 29–37% in states with nonpartisan primaries.

These approaches can make primaries feel less like a small club and more like a public forum.

Democracy Starts Before November

If we care about fair representation, accountable leadership, and a democratic system that actually reflects the will of the people, we have to stop treating primaries as an afterthought. Participating in them (by voting, by understanding the contests, by encouraging others to show up) is one of the most powerful things we can do to shape our democracy.

Think of the general election as the final score, but the primaries are the game. If only a handful of players show up, you don’t get a true contest. You get a default outcome.

And in a democracy, default outcomes belong to no one but the few who noticed.

—Alex Buscemi (abuscemi@buildersmovement.org)

Art by Matthew Lewis

The post Voting in the Primaries Is the Most Important Thing You Can Do for Democracy — and You Probably Aren’t Doing It appeared first on Builders.

There is a lyric in Hamilton that is haunting right now. A loyalist to the King of England warns, “Chaos and bloodshed are not a solution. Don’t let them lead you astray.” Following the tragic killing of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis by federal law enforcement, words like insurrection, civil war, massacre, and madness are trending on social media. The emotions are raw, the distrust is deep, and any attempt at nuance is often met with anger.

Fear is justified. Anger is understandable. But when emotions are high, clarity is low. As Builders, we must hold fast to something more fundamental than our feelings: the rule of law.

The rule of law is the bedrock of a civilized society. It is the bare minimum standard for government and citizens. As Movement Partner Sharon McMahon posted, “You don’t have to break the law to uphold the law.”

Right now, we are witnessing disregard of constitutional protections by I.C.E., Customs and Border Protection, and the Department of Homeland Security. The 1st Amendment protects peaceful protest. The 2nd Amendment protects the right to bear arms. Due process is not optional. These protections exist for everyone, or they exist for no one.

Citizens must also respect the law. Violence is not protected speech. Assaulting law enforcement is a crime. Threatening death or doxxing families has consequences. These actions cannot be excused by righteous anger.

The antidote to chaos is consistent and rigorous upholding of the law—from elected officials, law enforcement, and citizens alike. We cannot abandon, “innocent until proven guilty.” We cannot make determinations without facts, investigations, and accountability. Justice demands it.

A recent poll by CBS found 59% support for deporting illegal aliens, though approval for the handling of these deportations was significantly lower at 37%. That gap tells the story: Americans want secure borders and lawful process. When enforcement runs afoul of immigration law and basic human rights, we all lose. The Minnesota tragedy highlights what happens when any level of government abandons the rule of law. 

When we adopt a “if you can’t join them, beat them” approach, we get exactly what the loyalist in Hamilton warned against: chaos and bloodshed. The irony of that lyric is that Hamilton pushed back against the farmer calling for revolution, but if you think America has descended into tyranny that calls for violent revolution, talk to someone in Iran. 

Being a Builder isn’t just about finding common ground. It is about holding fast to common law, common decency, and constitutional rights. 

 —Stacy Blakeley, Executive Director 

The post Minneapolis Doesn’t Need More Chaos—Here’s What It Needs Instead appeared first on Builders.

The urban-rural divide in Texas is real. The differences in how people live, what they prioritize, and how they see the world are significant. But those differences have been weaponized by politicians and media who benefit from conflict. What gets buried under all that noise is the fact that urban and rural Texans face a lot of the same challenges—and their futures are tied together whether they like it or not.

How the Divide Gets Amplified

Politicians and partisan media have turned the urban-rural divide into a full-time culture war. 

Rural Texans are told that cities are full of people who hate their way of life and want to impose regulations that will destroy their communities. Urban Texans are told that rural areas are filled with ignorant, intolerant people standing in the way of progress. Both narratives are caricatures, but they’re repeated so often that people start believing them.

Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick once said “all our problems in America” stem from “cities that are mostly controlled by Democrat mayors.” Then-San Antonio Mayor Ron Nirenberg replied that leaders like Patrick and Gov. Greg Abbott have “shown a willingness to dismantle what most people are calling ‘The Texas Miracle’”—the state’s booming infrastructure, diversity, and economic growth, which he attributes to the success of Texas cities.  

Politicians love this divide because it’s an easy way to mobilize voters. You don’t have to talk about complicated policy solutions if you can just point to the “other side” and say they’re the problem. According to research from the Pew Research Center, Americans’ trust in one another has been declining for decades, especially across geographic and political lines, and this mistrust is heavily driven by media narratives that exaggerate cultural differences.

In Texas specifically, this plays out in debates over everything from gun rights to LGBTQ+ policies to how schools should teach history. The actual policy disagreements are real, but the way they’re framed—urban elites vs. rural values—turns them into identity battles instead of conversations about trade-offs and solutions.

The Shared Challenges Nobody Talks About

Here’s what gets lost: urban and rural Texans are dealing with a lot of the same problems, even if they manifest differently.

Health care access is a crisis in both settings. Rural Texas has been hit hard by hospital closures. More than 20 rural hospitals have closed since 2013, leaving entire communities without emergency care. Meanwhile, urban areas struggle with overcrowded ERs and long wait times that only grow longer as the urban population continues to explode.

Housing affordability is squeezing people everywhere. Cities like Austin, Dallas, and Houston have seen skyrocketing rents and home prices that have priced out working- and middle-class families. Rural areas face a different version of the same problem: limited housing stock, aging infrastructure, and younger generations leaving because there’s nowhere affordable to live and no economic opportunity. This has led to a rise in both urban and rural homelessness. 

Addiction and mental health don’t respect city limits. The opioid crisis has devastated rural communities across Texas, but urban areas aren’t immune. Drug overdose deaths have spiked across the state in both rural and urban counties. Mental health services are scarce everywhere, and the stigma around seeking help exists in both settings.

Economic security is fragile for a lot of Texans, regardless of zip code. Rural economies are often dependent on industries like agriculture, oil, and manufacturing that are vulnerable to market shifts and automation. Urban workers face job insecurity too, with gig economy jobs, rising costs, and wages that haven’t kept up with inflation. Both groups are one medical emergency or job loss away from financial disaster.

The Interdependence That Quietly Binds Rural and Urban Texans

Urban and rural Texas need each other more than most people realize. Cities depend on rural areas for food production, energy, and natural resources. Rural communities depend on urban centers for markets, services, and economic engines that fund state programs. When one side suffers, the ripple effects hit everyone.

The urban-rural divide isn’t going away, and pretending it doesn’t exist won’t help. But recognizing that the divide is being exploited for political gain is a start. The differences between how urban and rural Texans live are real, but the shared challenges they face are bigger. Health care, housing, addiction, economic security—these aren’t urban problems or rural problems. They’re Texas problems.

Columnist Tim Marema wrote in The Daily Yonder: “When rural and urban are in tune, the success of one contributes to the success of the other. And, the corollary is also true: When one falters, the other is likely to experience loss.”

The question is whether people are willing to stop letting politicians and media outlets profit off their anger long enough to notice that. Because as long as urban and rural Texans are too busy hating each other to demand solutions, nothing is going to change for either side.

How You Can Defy the Divide

If the urban-rural divide is being exploited for political gain, the most powerful response isn’t another argument online. It’s showing up. In Texas, 4 out of 5 registered voters skip the primary, which means a small, highly partisan group chooses the candidates for everyone else. If you’ve ever felt like the options don’t reflect most Texans, this is why.

Early voting starts February 18. Primary Day is March 3. Showing up on these dates is the best way to push back against the extremes and ensure that problem-solvers, not pot-stirrers, are on the ballot. 

You don’t have to convince anyone to care. Just make participation normal. Go with a friend. Share the dates. Keep it simple.

The people who profit from division want Texans fighting. They don’t want Texans voting. Showing up breaks the cycle and puts the power back where it belongs.

—Alex Buscemi (abuscemi@buildersmovement.org)

Art by Matthew Lewis

The post How Politicians Manipulate the Urban-Rural Divide in Texas—and How We Can Push Back appeared first on Builders.

What Is Value-Based Analysis?

Value-Based Analysis is a critical-thinking tool that forces you to slow down and examine what’s really driving your position on an issue. Instead of jumping straight to “I agree” or “I disagree,” you take a step back and ask yourself: what values am I prioritizing here? Is it fairness? Freedom? Safety? Responsibility? Most hard issues aren’t hard because there’s one obvious right answer. They’re hard because multiple legitimate values are in conflict with each other, and different people weigh those values differently.

For example, take public health mandates. One person might prioritize personal freedom above all else and oppose mandates on principle. Another person might prioritize community safety and support them. Both people have legitimate values guiding their thinking, but they’re weighing those values differently. Understanding that doesn’t mean you have to agree with the other side, but it does mean you can stop assuming they’re stupid or evil just because they landed on a different conclusion. 

How To Use Value-Based Analysis

Here’s a simple step-by-step process for using this approach when you’re trying to think through a difficult issue:

Step 1: Identify the issue clearly. What exactly are you trying to evaluate? Be specific. Replace “What do I think about education policy?” with something clearer: “Should our school district change its curriculum to include more real-world skills?” 

Step 2: List the core values at play. What principles are relevant here? Common values include fairness, freedom, safety, responsibility, equality, tradition, progress, and community. Write them down. Don’t skip this step (seeing them on paper helps).

Step 3: Rank your values for this specific issue. Which of these values matters most to you in this context? Be honest. You might value freedom highly in general, but maybe in this particular situation, safety takes priority. That’s okay. Context matters.

Step 4: Evaluate the options through your value lens. Now look at the possible positions or solutions and ask: which one best aligns with the values I’ve prioritized? This is where you actually think instead of react.

Step 5: Consider the trade-offs. Every decision involves trade-offs. If you choose Option A because it prioritizes freedom, what does that mean for safety? If you choose Option B because it prioritizes fairness, what does that mean for efficiency? Acknowledging trade-offs doesn’t make you wishy-washy. It makes you realistic.

Dive deeper: For more tips on uncovering the values beneath the argument, check out the essay “Complicating the Narratives” by our Movement Partner Amanda Ripley. 

Why This Matters

Value-Based Analysis won’t magically make everyone agree on everything. That’s not the point. The point is to give yourself a structured way to think through hard issues so you’re making decisions based on what you actually believe in, not just what your social media feed told you to think. It also helps you understand why other people disagree with you, which is useful if you ever want to have a conversation that doesn’t devolve into a screaming match.

When you understand that most disagreements aren’t about facts (they’re about which values people prioritize) you can stop talking past each other and start having real discussions. You might still disagree, but at least you’ll understand why. And that’s a hell of a lot better than what most people are doing right now, which is just yelling into the void and hoping someone on the internet validates them.

Value-Based Analysis is a tool. It takes practice. But if you’re serious about thinking better instead of just feeling confident in your snap judgments, it’s worth the effort.

—Alex Buscemi (abuscemi@buildersmovement.org)

Art by Matthew Lewis

Help Turn Common Ground Into Real Change

In a world where extremists seek to divide for power and profit, Builders take action to unite, create, and bring light to the world. Support the development of new media, tools, and platforms to help us give the power back to the people.

 Support the Builders Movement

The post The Missing Tool for Tackling Tough Problems: Value-Based Analysis appeared first on Builders.

We rarely find solutions by winning an argument. It comes from finding the thin strip of common ground where people with different beliefs decide to work together anyway. 

We saw this firsthand in our Citizen Solutions session in Austin, Texas. Participants came from very different backgrounds and carried very different political instincts into the room. They were brought together for a panel to address the state’s healthcare crisis, including the uninsured rate, which is the highest in the country, and how to turn their ideas into practical solutions.

At first, the differences felt like barriers. But once people chose to be flexible thinkers instead of fixed defenders of their side, something shifted. They moved from debating ideology to developing innovative ideas, including expanding telehealth services, addressing healthcare deserts in rural areas, and reducing the burden of medical debt. 

 “I decided to agree with most of the initiatives and even some that go against my Libertarian beliefs,” said one of the participants, Jay Shoesmith, a salesperson from Longview, Texas. “I justify this because we can’t just leave a good portion of Texans without affordable and accessible healthcare.”

That’s what solving problems looks like in real life. Not perfect consensus. But people willing to change their minds enough to move forward together.

What flexible thinking is

Flexible thinking is the ability to update your beliefs when new information appears. It means holding opinions with confidence, but not with rigidity. Instead of seeing change as a threat, flexible thinkers treat it as a learning opportunity

Psychologists often describe this as cognitive flexibility: the capacity to shift perspectives, adapt to new rules, and revise assumptions. The American Psychological Association defines it as a key part of healthy problem-solving and emotional resilience.

This does not mean being indecisive or abandoning values. It means distinguishing between principles and positions. Principles—like fairness, safety, or freedom—tend to endure. Positions—the policies or strategies we use to express those values—sometimes need revision.

Carol Dweck’s research on the growth mindset captures this idea well: people who believe they can learn and adjust outperform those who believe ability and understanding are fixed.

Flexible thinking, at its core, is intellectual humility paired with curiosity. It is the discipline of saying, “I might be wrong—and that’s okay.”

How to practice flexible thinking in daily life

Flexible thinking is not a personality trait. It is a habit. And like any habit, it can be trained. Here are some ways you can do just that.

1. Separate identity from opinion.
   In his book, Ego Is the Enemy, Movement Partner Ryan Holliday argues that a desire to always be right is a manifestation of an unchecked ego, which prioritizes validation over truth, learning, and progress. Instead of thinking, “If I change my mind, I lose,” try, “If I learn something new, I grow.”
2. Replace reflex with reflection.
   When you feel defensive, pause and ask: What new information is challenging me right now?
   In meetings, this might mean listening fully before responding. In family arguments, it might mean asking, “What’s your experience been?” instead of immediately countering.
3. Practice “steel-manning.”
   Try summarizing the best version of a viewpoint you disagree with before stating your own. This technique is often referred to as steel-manning, and it’s the conceptual opposite of strawmanning. Steel-manning forces you to understand the strongest version of an opposing view, which leads to smarter thinking, fairer conversations, and decisions based on clarity rather than caricatures.
4. Build a diverse information diet.
   Pew Research finds that people who consume varied news sources are less likely to fall into ideological certainty traps. Read outside your lane. Follow people you respect who disagree with you. Treat difference as data.
5. Normalize changing your mind publicly.
   Leaders who say, “Here’s what I believed—here’s what I learned—here’s why I changed,” build trust, not weakness. Transparency increases credibility.
6. Spend time with people who don’t think like you.
   Ideas can be debated. Experiences are harder to dismiss. When you build real relationships across differences, issues stop being abstract and start being human. That shift often does more to open minds than any argument ever could.

Flexible thinking is no longer optional. It is the operating system for a world that will not slow down.

The people who thrive in the future will not be the loudest or the most certain. They will be the ones who learn the fastest, adapt thoughtfully, and stay humble enough to evolve.

Changing your mind is not an admission of defeat. It is progress in motion.

—Alex Buscemi (abuscemi@buildersmovement.org)

Art by Matthew Lewis

Help Turn Common Ground Into Real Change

In a world where extremists seek to divide for power and profit, Builders take action to unite, create, and bring light to the world. Support the development of new media, tools, and platforms to help us give the power back to the people.

Support the Builders Movement

The post The Future Belongs to People Who Can Change Their Minds appeared first on Builders.

In February 2021, Winter Storm Uri showed just how bad grid failure can get. Millions of Texans lost power when temperatures dropped, and 246 people died from exposure, lack of heat, and everything that comes with being without electricity for days. The state’s infrastructure broke down in ways that exposed serious problems with how electricity gets generated and delivered.

Texas didn’t just fail in 2021 because of cold weather. It failed because planning lagged behind reality. The state has learned hard lessons since then, and important steps have been taken to winterize the grid. But those same vulnerabilities are back in focus—this time because of a boom in businesses that use massive amounts of electricity.

Data centers and skyrocketing electricity demand

Texas has become a major destination for data centers. ERCOT, which manages about 90% of the state’s grid, reports exponential growth in requests to plug giant facilities into the system. Many of these facilities are AI and cloud data centers that require several gigawatts of electricity—as much as a small city. 

Now that winter’s arrived and everyone’s cranking up the heat, ERCOT has issued its annual warning that grid risk is “elevated,” which means Texas needs more power than we can reliably produce. Freezing weather would increase that strain exponentially.

Data centers and population growth are driving most of the increased demand.

What we’ve done about it: Bipartisan reforms and infrastructure work

After the 2021 outages, Texas lawmakers passed a bunch of bipartisan laws meant to make the grid stronger. 

The state added new power capacity from renewable sources like solar and battery storage, which can help prevent outages.

To deal with data centers specifically, the Texas Legislature passed Senate Bill 6. The bipartisan law lets grid operators require data centers to disconnect during emergencies so residential power gets priority. That’s a notable policy shift—even in Texas, where the market usually drives decisions more than regulations.

These reforms weren’t pushed by just one party. They reflected widespread bipartisan agreement that the grid needed better defenses and clearer rules to handle large users while protecting reliability.

What still needs to be done

Despite the progress, big challenges remain:

The actual wires that carry power across long distances are expensive and take years to build, and data center growth is outpacing this work.

Electricity generators are powered by natural gas, which is delivered on oil tanker trucks that can be slowed or halted by frozen highways. And the natural gas wells that pump the fuel can grind to a halt when the weather freezes. Inspectors found in 2025 that many of these wells are not adequately prepared to operate in severe cold snaps, despite promises to winterize.  

To make gas wells truly winterized, some argue we must enforce stricter penalties on wells that do not properly prep their hardware for winter by doing things like insulating valves and pipes, installing weatherproof enclosures, and keeping critical components heated. Enforcement is up to the Railroad Commission (the state’s oil and gas regulatory body) but critics say their oversight of the industry has been too lax.  

Another thing we can do is make sure large data centers and other power-hungry facilities comply with grid safety standards before hooking them up. Right now, we’re approving growth first and solving grid reliability later, which puts everyone at risk. The Public Utility Commission of Texas released a draft late last year that would give them the authority to enforce earlier coordination between the grid and large load facilities, but they won’t have such authority until late 2026.

While politically controversial, the federal Connect the Grid Act has been proposed to require Texas to link with national grids. That way, other states could provide Texas power in case of emergencies. Although this could provide extra capacity available during peak stress, it would be expensive, time-consuming, and would not replace the need for strong internal weatherization.

What you can do

1. Participate in Public “Listening Sessions”

The Railroad Commission (RRC) has recently launched virtual Listening Sessions to gather public feedback on its regulatory performance.

• Upcoming Opportunity: The next session is scheduled for Wednesday, January 14, 2026, from noon to 1:30 p.m. CST.
• How to Join: You must Register with the RRC in advance to participate or ask questions. These sessions are specifically designed for Texans to voice concerns about issues like orphaned wells and winterization oversight.

2. File formal complaints

Contact your local Oil & Gas District Office to report specific concerns about well site safety or lack of visible weatherization (like missing insulation or enclosures).

3. Contact elected officials

Your state lawmakers and representatives are responsible for creating the policies that govern the power grid. Reach out to them to express your concerns and advocate for specific solutions, such as:

• Enforcing stricter penalties on natural gas wells and power generation facilities that do not properly weatherize their equipment.
• Ensuring the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) gets the authority to enforce early coordination between the grid and large load facilities, such as data centers.

Building responsibly

Texas has made real progress since the dark days of 2021. The grid is stronger than it was. The rules are clearer. The conversation is more serious. That matters. And it deserves to be recognized.

But progress doesn’t mean protection if growth keeps outpacing safety. As AI data centers and other power-hungry industries flood into the state, we risk repeating a familiar mistake: putting speed, profit, and business development ahead of the basic responsibility to keep Texans safe in extreme weather.

Economic growth should never come at the cost of public safety. And it doesn’t have to. Texas can lead in innovation and reliability, but only if we demand that new industries meet the same standard we expect of our leaders: prepare first, expand second.

The work isn’t finished. And the next chapter of Texas’s energy story should be written not by who builds fastest—but by who builds responsibly.

Help turn common ground into real change

You’re a Builder, which means you, like us, believe that most Americans agree more than the loudest voices want us to believe—and that solutions are possible when people come before politics. In a world where extremists seek to divide for power and profit, Builders take action to unite, create, and bring light to the world. Support the development of new media, tools, and platforms to help us give power back to the people.

 Support the Builders Movement

The post Texas Fixed Its Power Grid. Now a New Threat Is Testing It. appeared first on Builders.

Only 34% of Americans are satisfied with how democracy is working in the U.S., according to a 2025 Gallup poll. Overall, Americans’ satisfaction with democracy has been in steady decline from its peak of 60% in the mid-1980s. 

This persistent disillusionment has given rise to the idea that perhaps we shouldn’t have democracy at all—at least in its current form. Only 67% of Americans say democracy is the best form of government. Which begs the question: what alternative do people think would work better? 

Most Americans still believe in the actual values that make democracy work. 80% think leaders should compromise across party lines. 84% say the country is stronger because of its diversity.

So it would seem that people haven’t given up on democracy itself. They’ve given up on the version of it they’re experiencing right now.  

It’s like when your cousin tried to bake Grandma’s fantastic cake recipe, but it ended up tasting like sawdust and sadness. This isn’t a problem with Grandma’s recipe. It’s proven over generations to be a delicious cake. The problem is the baker. 

Likewise, Americans are not rejecting the blueprint of democracy—the recipe on which our country is built. They’re demanding a democracy that actually functions the way it’s supposed to. And the gap between what they believe democracy should be and what they see every day is where the cynicism lives.

If all you see is endless division, why would you trust democracy?

For a lot of Americans, especially younger ones, democracy hasn’t looked like progress. Government shutdowns have increased in frequency over the past decade—and they’re lasting longer than ever. President Ronald Reagan presided over eight government shutdowns during his tenure, but the longest lasted only three days. Last fall, our government came to a halt for a whopping 43 days, the longest shutdown in history. And spending bills are rarely—if ever—passed on time anymore. If your earliest political memories are characterized by constant gridlock, culture wars, and politicians who prioritize winning over solving problems, being skeptical doesn’t seem extreme. It seems rational.

From that angle, doubting democracy isn’t about rejecting freedom or fairness. It’s asking a legitimate question: if this is what the system produces, why should I keep believing in it?

That’s not a problem with people’s values. It’s a problem with what they’ve lived through.

Do people who want an alternative to democracy have a point?

When people say they want an alternative to democracy, they typically mean an authoritarian leader who has the power to do what they want without the slog of earning congressional approval. 

In some ways, I get it. Democracy is slow. Watching problems stack up while leaders argue makes any system that promises quick action sound appealing.

But history is pretty clear about what those alternatives cost.

Systems that trade participation for efficiency don’t just move faster—they concentrate power. They solve short-term dysfunction by creating long-term danger: fewer voices, fewer checks and balances. They replace debate with obedience and a fear that if you do disobey, you will be severely punished.

So yes, their frustration is valid. But the solution they’re reaching for creates problems far worse than the ones we have now.

How we restore faith in democracy

If we want Americans to believe in democracy again, we can’t just lecture them about how important it is. We show them it can actually work.

That means creating spaces where people with different views solve problems together. Making compromise courageous—not as giving up, but as making progress. Elevating regular citizens instead of just the loudest voices. Replacing performative politics with practical wins that people can feel in their daily lives.

Builders’ Citizen Solutions session proved that agreement across differences is not only possible—people on both ends of the political spectrum desperately want it. The session gathered a group of 14 strangers from across Texas with very different backgrounds and beliefs and tasked them with finding solutions to the state’s healthcare crisis: namely, the vast number of citizens in the state who are uninsured. Participants found that although they disagreed on plenty, when the labels were stripped away—red and blue, left and right, conservative and progressive—finding common ground on the issue came far more effortlessly than many had anticipated. 

Although solving these problems feels like a deeply systemic issue that may be impossible to tackle as an individual, there are plenty of things you can do to help democracy make its comeback. 

Show up locally. Attend a school board meeting. A town hall. A library forum. Democracy feels broken when it feels distant—local is where it becomes real again.

Get involved in a civic space. Volunteer group. Faith community. Neighborhood association. Sports league. Democracy grows where relationships do.

Vote—but also stay engaged after. Democracy isn’t a one-day event. Follow what happens after elections. Ask questions. Stay curious instead of cynical. (More on this soon—keep your eyes peeled on how to “vote like a Bulder”). 

And lastly, talk to people outside your bubble. Not to “convert” them—just to understand them. Trust is rebuilt conversation by conversation.

A moment worth rising to

America is approaching its 250th anniversary. That milestone isn’t just something to celebrate—it’s a moment to ask what kind of democracy we want to carry forward.

Not institutions stuck in gridlock and grievance. Not a citizenry held together by nostalgia or fear. But a Democratic Republic of We the People, renewed through participation, courage, and the willingness to thrive as a nation despite our differences.

The truth is, Americans haven’t stopped believing in democratic values. They’re waiting for democracy to deliver on its promise—that we all live freely, make personal choices, and seek fulfillment. Our Democratic government’s role is to protect these rights. 

That’s not a reason for despair. That’s a reason to do something.

Because the future of democracy won’t be saved by louder arguments or extreme politics, it will be rebuilt by citizens who refuse to give up on each other and who decide that the next chapter of America should be written in common ground, not division.

—Alex Buscemi (abuscemi@buildersmovement.org)

Help turn common ground into real change

You’re a Builder, which means you, like us, believe that most Americans agree more than the loudest voices want us to believe—and that solutions are possible when people come before politics. In a world where extremists seek to divide for power and profit, Builders take action to unite, create, and bring light to the world. Support the development of new media, tools, and platforms to help us give power back to the people.

Support the Builders Movement

The post Here’s Why Only One-Third Of Americans Think Democracy Is Working in the U.S. appeared first on Builders.

Is it just me, or did 2025 feel like 3 years compressed into one? As I look at the remaining days on the calendar, I am struck by the sweeping changes, from a new administration right down to my own professional journey. I joined Builders as Executive Director on October 8th, a little over a month after Charlie Kirk’s assassination. The heart and soul of the Builders movement is to overcome “us vs them” thinking, and ultimately, to provide a path to hope and unity instead of hatred and division. Ensuring that Builders becomes a transformative national movement of millions has taken on a new sense of urgency for our leaders, partners, and dedicated staff. 

To that end, the Builders Movement made powerful strides this year to exponentially increase its reach and impact, changing culture and equipping citizens to find common ground solutions to the biggest challenges facing their communities, states, and the nation. 

The Builders Movement experienced exponential growth this year, reaching 4 million followers on social media with high engagement that educates, inspires, and motivates our diverse community to seek solutions rather than conflict. World-class original content and thought-provoking series have generated over half a billion all-time views. The level of thoughtful conversations we have online and through our newsletter evidences how much people want to engage in meaningful and substantive dialogue. Here are a few responses to our prompt, ‘Why did you become a Builder?’

“I sensed the “us vs. them” happening about 8 years ago ( as I’m sure many others did). I’m glad to support a voice of reason that is dedicated to fighting this chaotic spirit and trying to reclaim the best of our intentions.”—David M.

“I want to be the light for as many as I can reach.”—Laura W.

In 2026, we will build on that demand by providing more opportunities for our community to connect, learn from our 400+ remarkable Movement Partners, and utilize a wide range of tools to equip Builders to lead and grow in their hometowns. 

This year, we launched Builders Texas as a civic innovation lab. Many have asked, “Why Texas?” The first reason is that Texas is like four states in one, with distinct geographic regions ranging from the most prosperous and fastest-growing cities in the nation to some of the poorest and least populous counties in America. Often, once Texas passes legislation, there is a ripple effect across the country, with some states following suit and others passing laws in direct opposition.

Citizens Solutions is a marquee citizen empowerment program of Builders. This year in Texas, the first issue we are tackling is healthcare—a big, complex challenge that looms large for all Texans. To gain insights, Builders launched an innovative AI-driven conversation tool named Ima. We have heard from hundreds of citizens who shared their experiences and ideas to improve healthcare access and affordability in Texas. Earlier this month, we convened 14 citizens from across the political spectrum for three days of intense collaborative policy development. This work will continue in 2026 & 2027, expanding to a new issue and building on this unique, citizen-centric approach to policymaking and grassroots advocacy. Ultimately, success will be a large group of Builders standing next to the Governor as the Builders policy becomes law in Texas.  

A quote from one of the Texas Citizen Solutions participants captures the power of convening and collaboration: 

“Allowing others to share their experiences in a safe environment, regardless of background, political or religious beliefs, created a strong bond among those participating, which in turn fostered excellent conditions for growth and collaborative ideas. It was such an honor to witness what we are capable of doing as a group of very diverse individuals, in a time of discord and political division.” 

After only three months with Builders, I am 100% certain of three things: 

1. Americans not only agree on more than we think, we actually crave connections with people who think differently—we want to find common ground.
2. The status quo’s constant quest for division, which rewards them financially and politically, is now in the harsh light of day. The conversations demanding accountability and more civility will not go away. 
3. The Bulders community is unlike any other because it is built on love for one’s neighbor and deep respect for America’s promise—we will no longer stand by and let division tear us apart. 

Builders is a national cross-partisan movement powered by informed optimism and grace-filled grit. We are just getting started, and the best is yet to come. Please consider supporting our work by joining as a Builder and making a donation. We look forward to seeing you both online and in person in 2026. Get ready to roll up your sleeves, and let’s get to work. 2026 will be the Year of the Builders! 

With gratitude and hope,  

Stacy Blakeley

The post The Moment Is Urgent. The Future Is Ours to Build. appeared first on Builders.

Here is the challenge: the most extreme voices are the loudest. Media and culture prop up the pot stirrers—not the problem solvers. All the noise, vitriol, and division are breaking down trust, eroding essential institutions, and ultimately, leading to dehumanization and tragic violence. 

Here is what you can do: Support our growing community of more than 400,000 citizens from every corner of the country. 4 million followers on social means we are on to something—Americans want to rebuild, reconnect, and restore the foundations of common ground that make us stronger together.  Please consider making a one-time or monthly tax-deductible contribution that will fuel our mission and expand the reach of this powerful citizen-led movement. 

Support the Builders Movement

The post Help Turn Common Ground into Real Change appeared first on Builders.

The Values of Family AND Freedom

Will do one for each:

Conservatives: I appreciate how they see the value in a nuclear family and ensuring that children have a strong support system.

Liberals: I appreciate how they largely fight for justice for all. “If only some of us are free, then none of us are free.”

—Josh S

Showing Up With Grit AND Growth

Conservatives show up with grit.

They’re determined, they’ll get their hands dirty, and when their people need them, they don’t hesitate. There’s a loyalty there, a “we take care of our own” kind of backbone that I genuinely respect.

Liberals show up with openness.

They’re thinkers, question-askers, willing to sit with discomfort and let people be imperfect. There’s a curiosity and compassion there, a “we grow by listening” kind of heart that I also deeply value.

—Small Moments in Oklahoma

To Protect AND to Nurture 

Conservatives are good at protecting a country from invaders.

Liberals are good at empathy and being nonjudgmental.

I’ve oftentimes wondered if our 2 parties in the U.S. are subconsciously based on traditional ideas of masculinity and femininity. The former hunts and protects, while the latter nurtures and nests. If we could only get the two sides to work together they’d make a hell of a team!

—Jesse H

Championing Personal accountability AND Justice for All 

I admire how conservatives often emphasize personal responsibility and align with values that provide social stability.

I admire how liberals champion justice for all people and the protection of individual rights.

—Mikey P

Fiscal Responsibility AND Standing Up for the Marginalized

Independent personally, but I like the focus on fiscal responsibility and government restraint of traditional conservatives, and I like how liberals try to protect and stand up for the marginalized.

—Bim R

Core Values We All Agree On

I appreciate the conservative impulse to keep taxes low and government small, as long as those impulses are balanced by the need for a strong, working, collective infrastructure (including physical structures, our shared ecology, and the protection of equal rights). I also believe that whether one is conservative or liberal, there are many core things we all want and can agree on – such as that our children and other loved ones are fed, housed, healthy, safe, well educated, and free to pursue the life they choose.

—Claire P

On Moving to a Republican Town

I moved from a very Democratic area across the country to a very conservative one. And it’s been a real education to see how the societal norms impact the two cultures. I’ve generally really enjoyed the experience even if I don’t always agree with what was said.

I appreciate that Conservatives (in this area) have very different ideas about how to get things done because of the way they perceive they have been treated by the government (both for good and for bad). They make a lot of sense when you understand the context of why they feel that way.

I try to focus more on what we have in common vs what we don’t. Like term limits. I haven’t met a single person who doesn’t agree that we need term limits (and not just 2, 4, or 6 years—more like you can’t be in Congress for 25+ years).

—Elizabeth A

The post From the Inbox: We Asked Liberals and Conservatives to Compliment Each Other—Here’s What Happened. appeared first on Builders.

Keep going to see what brought them here.

To Build a Better World for Our Children

I feel like with all of the division, some of us are at risk of violence due to having different political views than others. I try to remind folks that a different political view doesn’t make me or others Satan or a traitor. I try to remind them we all want similar things. A full belly, a better world for our grandchildren, love. 

—Kim P

To Make Democracy Stronger

I see polarization as a catalyst for autocracy. I’m Venezuelan and I’ve seen solid democracies fall. I trust Americans are meant to make democracy stronger if we do something about it. 

Also, we Americans agree more than we disagree. We are united, but the powers that be want to convince us we are not. 

—Deborah M.

To Build Bridges with Friends and Family

I joined because I want to be a bridge builder to my MAGA friends and relatives. I want to meet them where they are, really listen, and reaffirm that we want the same things for ourselves, our families, and each other. So, how do we band together instead of polarizing

I joined because I believe even a small ripple has power, a voice should be used for good, and we are more intelligent than the algorithms that funnel us into fear, hate, despair, cynicism and apathy. Whew!

—Pamala R

To Cut Out the Distractions

I’m tired of divisiveness about problems that don’t impact my neighbors nearly as much as a strong local community. I believe politicos have learned to leverage this divide for their benefit. They will continue to do so if we the people don’t fix it.

—Steve F

To Demand Accountability

What brought me here? The battle between corporatists and oligarchs leaving out the people that actually make the country run. Taxation without representation. Military Industrial Complex redistributing of wealth. Corrupted 2-party system that is right of center compared to the rest of the “civilized” world. Term-limits. Campaign financing. Corporate Personhood. Politically manipulated and biased Supreme Court. Separation of Church and State. Using Military against citizens. No accountability from either side.

—David P

To Practice Love and Compassion

I am exhausted. I cannot stand the state of our country or our world. Everything is going to hell so fast it’s (perhaps, purposefully) impossible to keep up, much less keep smiling. I’ve worked hard on overcoming my “Snowflake” fragility. I’ve worked hard to curb my demonization of those who vote/choose to support people and policies that directly oppose my own political, ethical, and moral principles. I have done much to practice love in the face of hate, from others and from the hate fighting to be heard within me.  

But try as I might, I succeed far less than I fail.   

I am exhausted by my own unceasing judgment and lack of forgiveness; my endless failure to possess in my heart the compassion—the humanity—I need and expect from myself. I am exhausted by the feelings of alienation, of being seen as “other,” of being “nasty,” of feeling unwelcome and unwanted in my own country.  I’m so tired. And I need a tool or resource or some sense of support to help me overcome these obstacles, so that I might spread wisdom to others suffering the same exhaustion.

Here for the reconstruction,

—Anna P

To Prove We Aren’t Enemies

I am tired of hearing that I am the enemy and my neighbor is the enemy, when actually we want the same thing, but we just look at it from different angles. I would like perspective on what is actually happening in America instead of what the media tells me.  

—Rogina

To Help Us Evolve

We have not been made for the modern world. The arrival of the modern world came too fast for normal evolution to keep up. But fortunately, that same evolution gave us a brain that allows us to evolve rapidly.

If we don’t use that brain, we will quickly extinct ourselves. We may already be past that critical brink, but we still have to try to claw ourselves back from the ledge.

—John R

To Grow Together

Good to be here. I joined because I believe that all meaningful and lasting change has to happen at the citizen level if we ever hope to elect (and hold accountable) representatives who share our interests. 

I think the most fundamental change happens in the way we interact with information, circumstances and people. 

I’m excited to grow together in sentiment and action. 

—Ted W

The post From the Inbox: Readers Share the Reason They joined appeared first on Builders.