Politics

Do news outlets have a responsibility to relay White House briefings in full or has analysis and commentary become essential to communicating the facts?

When it comes to government benefits (like the COVID-19 relief package) what does a fair distribution look like?

The current pandemic is but another opportunity to observe the perennial conflict between private interest and public good.

The idea of "party raiding" raises interesting questions not only about our motivations at the ballot booth, but also the way we go about preference ordering.

Do we, as voters, have an obligation to be informed? Where could such a duty come from? Who might we owe it to?

Self-funding one's political campaign seems like a noble endeavor, but it also raises a host of concerns.

How should we understand the politics behind Trump's designation of "beauty"? What is at stake in the architectural design of federal buildings?

How precise are our meanings and how precise is our usage? We use terms like "social construct" and "socialist," but can intend very different things by them.

What makes the US Senate the proper place to judge impeachment? Does the "world's greatest deliberative body" still deserve it's name?

How should we approach elections? Is there a midway between being too idealistic and sacrificing our values?

When even the presentation of facts is non-neutral, how can journalism retain any claim to objectivity?

Campaign donations can give contributors a sense of entitlement, but can these feelings be justified? What does our dollar really buy? What should it buy?

The political assault on truth has far-reaching implications. Can we save government from Orwellian dystopia and rescue ethics from a world without facts?

How should we respond when the right to conscientious exemption runs up against the right to reasonable accommodation?

The judgments inherent to perception are neither universal nor objective. And this fact can lead to a breakdown in communication or be used to hide our intentions.

The value of the impeachment hearings extends well beyond the immediate political horizon. It is not a tool in service of a particular end, but a communicative symbol to the world.

Fact-finding endeavors like the impeachment hearings highlight our inability to keep an open mind. From confirmation bias to selective perception, we possess all sorts of bulwarks for our beliefs.

What are our responsibilities at the ballot box? What does it mean for a vote to be insincere? Do we have an obligation to vote our conscience at the ballot box?

Tolerance does not, and cannot, require tolerating intolerant views. And it is not hypocrisy to say so.

Does the transcript exonerate the president as his supporters have claimed? And what's the big deal if it doesn't?