DOCSLIB.ORG

Enterprise Report Restoring Liberty, Opportunity, and Enterprise in America

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Enterprise Report Restoring Liberty, Opportunity, and Enterprise in America Issue No. 1, Winter 2020 Enterprise Report Restoring Liberty, Opportunity, and Enterprise in America A New Year and New Opportunities By AEI President Robert Doar A new year offers the opportunity to set priorities. Our highest priorities at AEI come from our institutional commitment to freedom: We believe in free people, free markets, and limited government. We promote the rule of law, economic opportunity for all, and institutions of civil society that make our freedom possible. And we stand for a strong American role in the world. These priorities guide how we want our scholarship to move the public debate; they relate to our philosophical predisposition. And they are well-known. Lately, I have been thinking about two other priorities that are less discussed but vitally important to the Institute and our scholars’ work. These two priorities are not so much about where we want our country to be headed but rather how we want to do our research—the intellectual environment AEI must foster so that our scholars can do their best and most effective work. That intellectual environment must be grounded in two simple values: independence of thought and the competition of ideas. So long as they remain consistent with our overarching philosophy and maintain high standards of quality, our scholars engage in their work free of control from anyone, including management. Within their areas of expertise, our scholars study, write, and say what they want to study, write, and say. We recruit great thinkers and writers with established records, and we give them the freedom to apply their skills however they see fit. There is no one voice at AEI—no heavy-handed review to check for ideological or partisan orthodoxy. All our scholars have, in effect, a publish button on their keyboards. This is a rare thing. It has allowed great minds such as Jeane Kirkpatrick, Irving Kristol, Robert Bork, Charles Murray, Leon Kass, Michael Barone, Nicholas Eberstadt, Lynne Cheney, Alan Viard, Arthur Brooks, and countless others past and present to do groundbreaking work, often (and at their best) challenging orthodoxies in the academy, in our culture and politics, and on the left and right—Democrat and Republican. That freedom is why scholars want to come to AEI and why they love working here. It is Robert Doar also why our scholars sometimes disagree with each other—why we may find ourselves on AEI President and different sides of a particular debate, representing contrasting views in the op-ed pages, Morgridge Scholar at a congressional hearing, or on our own AEI stage. Such competition of views is made possible by AEI’s commitment to intellectual “There is no one voice at independence. And that commitment certainly extends to our approach to fundraising. AEI—no heavy-handed We do not accept government money, and we never accept donations that are conditioned review to check for on predetermined research conclusions or recommendations. We always turn down ideological or partisan donations that come with strings attached. orthodoxy. All our Since 2011, 57 percent of our contributions have come from individuals, 29 percent from scholars have, in effect, a foundations, and 14 percent from corporations. No one donor accounts for more than a publish button small fraction of our revenue. Our scholars’ work is never, in the parlance of Washington, on their keyboards.” “transactional.” To be sure, some of our scholars have professional pursuits beyond their AEI work, and they undertake a variety of activities, from teaching at universities to serving as advisers and consultants to other organizations, both private and not-for-profit. On the whole, these activities enhance our research community. Our scholars are not isolated in an ivory tower; they are engaged in the policy community and the world in a meaningful way that makes their work more relevant and productive. When there is a question about a conflict of interest—when a scholar’s professional pursuits outside of AEI might threaten the integrity of his or her work—we address the conflict head-on through disclosure. In the marketplace of ideas, readers ought to make their own judgments about whether a scholar’s disclosed activities prejudice his or her argument. In some cases, when a conflict is such that our scholar’s work is unduly influenced by an outside interest, disclosure is not sufficient. When that happens, we will part ways because independence is vital to our work’s credibility. By being vigilant about our commitment to freedom and independence, we enhance our scholars’ ability to improve our country through the wisdom of their ideas and the strength of their empirical research. As a result, we will be more successful in advancing our central mission: promoting economic and political freedoms that are nurtured by a healthy civil society and protected by a strong American presence in the world. One final point: AEI’s commitment to independence of thought and the competition of ideas is especially important now as various ideological orthodoxies capture so much of our national discussion. As the main partisan camps seem to be retreating to separate corners and waging a vicious tribal war, we at AEI remain committed to the power of ideas and civil discourse because that path leads our country toward what Winston Churchill called the “broad sunlit uplands” of a free and flourishing nation. New Books from AEI Scholars Offer Optimism for American Renewal New Volume Making Citizens: The AEI scholars Yuval Levin and Michael Strain recently released books that Purpose of America’s offer valuable insights into the political, Education System economic, and cultural moment in which we are living today. Both books Several AEI scholars contributed to offer reasons for optimism and concrete a book released in February titled steps for national renewal. How to Educate an American: The Conservative Vision for Tomorrow’s Schools (Templeton Press, 2020). Coedited by Michael Petrilli (Fordham Michael Strain’s new book, The University) and Chester Finn (Hoover American Dream Is Not Dead (but Institution), the volume includes Populism Could Kill It) (Templeton original essays from AEI scholars Press, 2020), contests the popular Michael Barone, Arthur Brooks, narrative that the American dream is Nicholas Eberstadt, Jonah Goldberg, no longer attainable by the majority Yuval Levin, Ramesh Ponnuru, Ian Rowe, of Americans. The book presents the and Naomi Schaefer Riley, as well as Yuval Levin’s book is titled A Time to overwhelming—and underreported— Robert P. George (Princeton University), Build: From Family and Community to data that undermine claims from the Bill Bennett (former secretary of Congress and the Campus, How populist left and right about the education), and Peter Wehner Recommitting to Our Institutions Can demise of the American dream, (Ethics & Public Policy Center). Revive the American Dream (Basic making the case that today’s Addressing various issues including Books, 2020). Levin argues that a economy is in fact delivering for family structure, the mission of high transformation of our expectations of American workers and is still largely school, and education’s role in institutions has played a key part in characterized by upward economic labor force participation, each powering our age of acrimony and mobility. The book attempts to shift contributor converges on the belief shaking the foundations of our common the narrative from victimhood and that the purpose of primary and culture. We have moved from seeing grievance to personal responsibility secondary education is to mold our institutions as formative to thinking and economic opportunity. Essays the individual into an integral and of them as performative—from molds from Henry Olsen (Ethics & Public productive US citizen. The volume that shape our character to platforms that Policy Center) and E. J. Dionne offers recommendations to refresh enable us to be seen. By understanding (Washington Post) respond to the vision of quality K–12 education what our institutions do for us, how they Strain’s argument and set the stage for today’s America and equip are failing us, and how we might be for an ongoing conversation on the next generation to preserve failing them too, Levin hopes to chart a these issues. America’s heritage. path toward an American renewal. Charles Murray on Gender, Race, and Class In January, Charles Murray released his latest book, Human Diversity: The Biology of Gender, Race, and Class (Twelve, 2020). The book examines advances in genetics and neuroscience that threaten to overthrow many of the existing intellectual orthodoxies in social science surrounding issues of gender, race, and class. Human Diversity draws on the most authoritative scientific findings without sensationalism and celebrates human differences and our common humanity. Murray’s other landmark books include the New York Times bestseller Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960–2010 (Crown Forum, 2012), By the People: Rebuilding Liberty Without Permission (Crown Forum, 2015), and In Our Hands: A Plan to Replace the Welfare State (AEI Press, 2006). 3 Foreign and Defense Policy AEI Scholars on Iran In January, the Middle East was rocked by the killing of Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani and Iraqi militia chief Abu Mehdi al-Muhandis by the United States in Baghdad. The killings of Soleimani and Muhandis stirred up considerable controversy, with debate on issues such as the risk of escalating conflict with Iran, the process to authorize the strike, and how it would affect the US presence in Iraq. In response to these events, AEI scholars including Hal Brands, Frederick Kagan, n Danielle Pletka testified before the Danielle Pletka, Ken Pollack, Michael Rubin, and Marc Thiessen published more House Committee on Foreign Affairs than a dozen op-eds in top news outlets, spoke with dozens of reporters, Subcommittee on the Middle East, appeared on numerous broadcast news outlets, and produced podcasts and North Africa, and International videos offering a deep dive into the context surrounding the latest developments Terrorism on the outcomes and in Iran.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Murray PR.Qxd
    Media inquiries: Véronique Rodman 202.862.4871 ([email protected]) Orders: 1.800.462.6420 or 1.717.794.3800 IN OUR HANDS: A PLAN TO REPLACE THE WELFARE STATE By Charles Murray With his new book, In Our Hands: A Plan to Replace the Welfare State, Charles Murray offers a radical solution to the problems of the entitlement system: get rid of it entirely and give $10,000 a year to every American adult. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 25, 2006 The AEI Press Charles Murray offers a plan that would eliminate all income transfer programs at the federal, state, and local levels—including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, and corporate subsidies—and would substitute an annual cash grant of $10,000 for life, beginning at age twenty-one. Murray argues that “the Plan” would end poverty, allow all Americans access to health care, and empower people to control their own lives. Murray’s book describes the financial feasibility of his ideas and their effect on retirement, health care, poverty, marriage and family, work, neighborhoods, and the larger civil society. In his seminal 1984 book Losing Ground, Murray sparked national debate by arguing that the social programs of the Great Society not only failed to help the poor and disadvan- taged, but also made things worse. Now, Murray has written a book that is, in his own words, “not a book about poverty. It’s about building a society in which people can run their own lives.” Once again, Charles Murray is ahead of his time: • Today, about 36 million people are below the poverty line.
    [Show full text]
  • The United States and Democracy Promotion in Iraq and Lebanon in the Aftermath of the Events of 9/11 and the 2003 Iraq War
    The United States and democracy promotion in Iraq and Lebanon in the aftermath of the events of 9/11 and the 2003 Iraq War A Thesis Submitted to the Institute of Commonwealth Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of PhD. in Political Science. By Abess Taqi Ph.D. candidate, University of London Internal Supervisors Dr. James Chiriyankandath (Senior Research Fellow, Institute of Commonwealth Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London) Professor Philip Murphy (Director, Institute of Commonwealth Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London) External Co-Supervisor Dr. Maria Holt (Reader in Politics, Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Westminster) © Copyright Abess Taqi April 2015. All rights reserved. 1 | P a g e DECLARATION I hereby declare that this thesis is my own work and effort and that it has not been submitted anywhere for any award. Where other sources of information have been used, they have been duly acknowledged. Signature: ………………………………………. Date: ……………………………………………. 2 | P a g e Abstract This thesis features two case studies exploring the George W. Bush Administration’s (2001 – 2009) efforts to promote democracy in the Arab world, following military occupation in Iraq, and through ‘democracy support’ or ‘democracy assistance’ in Lebanon. While reviewing well rehearsed arguments that emphasise the inappropriateness of the methods employed to promote Western liberal democracy in Middle East countries and the difficulties in the way of democracy being fostered by foreign powers, it focuses on two factors that also contributed to derailing the U.S.’s plans to introduce ‘Western style’ liberal democracy to Iraq and Lebanon.
    [Show full text]
  • National Security and Local Police
    BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE NATIONAL SECURITY AND LOCAL POLICE Michael Price Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law ABOUT THE BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law is a nonpartisan law and policy institute that seeks to improve our systems of democracy and justice. We work to hold our political institutions and laws accountable to the twin American ideals of democracy and equal justice for all. The Center’s work ranges from voting rights to campaign finance reform, from racial justice in criminal law to Constitutional protection in the fight against terrorism. A singular institution — part think tank, part public interest law firm, part advocacy group, part communications hub — the Brennan Center seeks meaningful, measurable change in the systems by which our nation is governed. ABOUT THE BRENNAN CENTER’S LIBERTY AND NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAM The Brennan Center’s Liberty and National Security Program works to advance effective national security policies that respect Constitutional values and the rule of law, using innovative policy recommendations, litigation, and public advocacy. The program focuses on government transparency and accountability; domestic counterterrorism policies and their effects on privacy and First Amendment freedoms; detainee policy, including the detention, interrogation, and trial of terrorist suspects; and the need to safeguard our system of checks and balances. ABOUT THE BRENNAN CENTER’S PUBLICATIONS Red cover | Research reports offer in-depth empirical findings. Blue cover | Policy proposals offer innovative, concrete reform solutions. White cover | White papers offer a compelling analysis of a pressing legal or policy issue.
    [Show full text]
  • To View This Issue of Political Report As An
    Volume 5, Issue 6 • June 2009 Obama in Motion Views about how President Barack Obama is handling his responsibilities as president are generally positive, although negative impressions about his handling of the economy have risen. Favorable impressions of Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden have dropped, but Michelle Obama is more popular than four months ago and more popular than her husband. Nearly six in ten view the Democratic Party favorably; four in ten give that response about the GOP. Q: Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling . ? ——His job as president—— ———Foreign affairs——— ———The economy——— Approve Disapprove Approve Disapprove Approve Disapprove February 2009 63% 26% 54% 22% 59% 30% May 2009 61 34 59 32 55 42 Note: In the late May poll, 55 percent approved of the job the president was doing handling terrorism, while 37 percent disapproved. Forty- six percent approved of his handling the budget deficit (48 percent disapproved). Forty-five percent approved of his efforts to control federal spending, while 51 percent disapproved. Source: Gallup/USA Today. Q: As I read some names, please tell me if you have a . ? ———Barack Obama——— ————Joe Biden———— ———Michelle Obama——— Favorable Unfavorable Favorable Unfavorable Favorable Unfavorable January 2009 78% 18% 63% 20% 68% 18% May 2009 67 32 April 51 28 76 13 Source: Gallup/USA Today. Source: PSRA/Pew Research Center. Q: I’d like to get your opinion of some groups and organizations. Is your overall opinion of . ? Favorable Unfavorable Favorable Unfavorable The Democratic Party The Republican Party January 2009 62% 32% January 2009 40% 55% April 2009 59 34 April 2009 40 51 Source: PSRA/Pew Research Center.
    [Show full text]
  • (Pdf) Download
    NATIONAL & LOCAL NEWS MEDIA TV, RADIO, PRINT & ONLINE SOURCES Master List - Updated 04/2019 Pain Warriors Unite Washington Post: Website: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/submit-an-op-ed/?utm_term=.d1efbe184dbb What are the guidelines for letter submissions? Email: [email protected] We prefer letters that are fewer than 200 words and take as their starting point an article or other item appearing in The Post. They may not have been submitted to, posted to or published by any other media. They must include the writer's full name; anonymous letters and letters written under pseudonyms will not be considered. For verification purposes, they must also include the writer's home address, email address and telephone numbers, including a daytime telephone number. Writers should disclose any personal or financial interest in the subject matter of their letters. If sending email, please put the text of the letter in the body and do not send attachments; attachments will not be read. What are the guidelines for op-ed submissions? Submissions should be limited to 800 words. We consider only completed articles and cannot commit to, or provide guidance on, article proposals. Op-eds may not have been submitted to, posted to or published by any other media. They must include the writer's full name — anonymous op-eds or op-eds written under pseudonyms will not be considered. They also must include the writer's home address, email address and telephone numbers. Additionally, we ask that writers disclose any personal or financial interest in the subject at hand. Please use our op-ed submission form L.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Geopolitics of the Iranian Nuclear Energy Program
    Geopolitics of the Iranian Nuclear Energy Program But Oil and Gas Still Matter CENTER FOR STRATEGIC & CSIS INTERNATIONAL STUDIES A Report of the CSIS Energy and National Security Program 1800 K Street, NW | Washington, DC 20006 author Tel: (202) 887-0200 | Fax: (202) 775-3199 Robert E. Ebel E-mail: [email protected] | Web: www.csis.org March 2010 ISBN 978-0-89206-600-1 CENTER FOR STRATEGIC & Ë|xHSKITCy066001zv*:+:!:+:! CSIS INTERNATIONAL STUDIES Geopolitics of the Iranian Nuclear Energy Program But Oil and Gas Still Matter A Report of the CSIS Energy and National Security Program author Robert E. Ebel March 2010 About CSIS In an era of ever-changing global opportunities and challenges, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) provides strategic insights and practical policy solutions to decision- makers. CSIS conducts research and analysis and develops policy initiatives that look into the future and anticipate change. Founded by David M. Abshire and Admiral Arleigh Burke at the height of the Cold War, CSIS was dedicated to the simple but urgent goal of finding ways for America to survive as a nation and prosper as a people. Since 1962, CSIS has grown to become one of the world’s preeminent public policy institutions. Today, CSIS is a bipartisan, nonprofit organization headquartered in Washington, D.C. More than 220 full-time staff and a large network of affiliated scholars focus their expertise on defense and security; on the world’s regions and the unique challenges inherent to them; and on the issues that know no boundary in an increasingly connected world.
    [Show full text]
  • 2005 ANNUAL REPORT CONTENTS 6 Economic 10 Studies Global Economy and Development 27 Katrina’S Lessons in Recovery
    QUALITY IMPACT AND INDEPENDENCE ANNUAL REPORT THE 2005 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 www.brookings.edu BROOKINGSINSTITUTION 2005 ANNUAL REPORT CONTENTS 6 Economic 10 Studies Global Economy and Development 27 Katrina’s Lessons in Recovery 39 Brookings Institution Press 14 40 Governance Center for Executive Education Studies 2 About Brookings 4 Chairman’s Message 5 President’s Message 31 Brookings Council 18 36 Honor Roll of Contributors Foreign 42 Financial Summary Policy Studies 44 Trustees 24 Metropolitan Policy Editor: Melissa Skolfield, Vice President for Communications Copyright ©2005 The Brookings Institution Writers: Katie Busch, Shawn Dhar, Anjetta McQueen, Ron Nessen 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW 28 Design and Print Production: The Magazine Group, Inc. Washington, DC 20036 Jeffrey Kibler, Virginia Reardon, Brenda Waugh Telephone: 202-797-6000 Support for Production Coordinator: Adrianna Pita Fax: 202-797-6004 Printing: Jarboe Printing www.brookings.edu Cover Photographs: (front cover) William Bradstreet/Folio, Inc., Library of Congress Card Number: 84-641502 Brookings (inside covers) Catherine Karnow/Folio, Inc. Broadcast reporters zoom in for a forum on a new compact for Iraq THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION featuring U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware. he Brookings Institution is a pri- vate nonprofit organization devoted to independent research and innovative policy solutions. Celebrating its 90th anniversary in 2006, Brookings analyzes current and emerging issues and produces new ideas that matter—for the nation and the world. ■ For policymakers and the media, Brookings scholars provide the highest-quality research, policy recommendations, and analysis on the full range of public policy issues. ■ Research at the Brookings Institution is conducted to inform the public debate, not advance a political agenda.
    [Show full text]
  • Ms. Danielle Pletka Danielle Pletka Is Senior Vice President for Foreign And
    Ms. Danielle Pletka Danielle Pletka is senior vice president for foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), where she oversees the Institute’s work on foreign and defense issues. Ms. Pletka writes regularly on national security matters with a special focus on Iran, the Middle East (Syria, Israel, ISIS), and South Asia. She is also an adjunct professor at Georgetown University’s Walsh School of Foreign Service. Before joining AEI, Ms. Pletka was a longtime senior professional staff member for the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, where she specialized in the Near East and South Asia as the point person on Middle East, Pakistan, India, and Afghanistan. Ms. Pletka has authored, coauthored, and coedited a variety of studies, monographs, and book chapters, including the report “Tehran Stands Atop the Syria-Iran Alliance” (Atlantic Council, 2017); the chapter “America in Decline” in “Debating the Obama Presidency” (Rowman & Littlefield, 2016); “America vs. Iran: The Competition for the Future of the Middle East” (AEI, 2014); “Iranian Influence in the Levant, Egypt, Iraq, and Afghanistan” (AEI, 2012); “Containing and Deterring a Nuclear Iran” (AEI, 2011); and “Dissent and Reform in the Arab World: Empowering Democrats” (AEI, 2008). A regular guest on television, Ms. Pletka appears frequently on NBC News’ “Meet the Press.” Her broadcast appearances also include CBS News, CNN, C-SPAN, and MSNBC. She has been published in The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Hill, and Politico, among other outlets. She has an M.A. from the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University and a B.A.
    [Show full text]
  • America in the Post-Watergate Era: Politics of Distrust and the Myth Of
    America in the Post-Watergate Era: Politics of Distrust and the Myth of Ronald Reagan Senior Honors Thesis for Department of History Ryan Long Tufts University, 2012 Table of Contents Chapter One: Foundations of Distrust 3 Historical Background 4 Immersion in the Public Consciousness 13 Chapter Two: Reform and Revision in the Post-Watergate Era 19 Common Cause 20 Post-Watergate Reforms 25 Chapter Three: Presidential Image in the Post-Watergate Era 47 President Ford and President Carter 48 Economic Performance in the 1970’s 56 President Ronald Reagan 61 The Myth of Ronald Reagan 71 Chapter Four: Politics of Distrust 80 References 85 2 Chapter 1: Foundations of Distrust One of the most interesting facets of American politics is that the name of every current political scandal receives the suffix “gate” attached to the end. This pattern goes back to the Watergate Scandal. Stephanie Slocum-Schaffer states that Watergate had a significant impact on the 1970’s and the rest of the century. She argues that Watergate caused the public to see government service as ignoble but that it also proved that the American system of checks and balances could effectively contain corruption. 1 Ted Sorensen, a former Kennedy speechwriter and advisor, stated that Watergate significantly effected every subsequent presidential administration. He stated that: Removing the perpetrators of Watergate, even without altering the environment in which they operate, should teach some future White House occupants the necessity of not trying something similar. But it may only teach others the necessity of not being caught. History has never proven to be a strong deterrent.2 These accounts make it clear that Watergate completely reshaped the political system in the United States and fundamentally changed the way the Americans thought about the government.
    [Show full text]
  • TOPLINE Broad Story Topic (January 1 – November 1, 2007) Top 10 Stories
    TOPLINE Broad Story Topic (January 1 – November 1, 2007) Topic % of newshole Daily Show Mainstream Press1 US Foreign Affairs 16.5% 18.5% Elections/ Politics 15.8 11.6 Government 14.6 6.8 Lifestyle 9.2 3.3 Press/ Media 8.4 2.7 Foreign (non-U.S.) 4.9 10.7 Celebrity/ Entertainment 4.5 2.1 Race/ Gender/ Gay Issues 3.0 1.2 Crime 2.7 7.6 Science/ Technology 2.6 1.2 Additional Domestic Affairs 2.6 2.5 Environment 2.5 1.6 Sports 2.0 1.8 Religion 1.9 0.7 Health/ Medicine 1.7 4.1 Defense/ Military (Domestic) 1.5 2.6 Immigration 1.1 2.8 Domestic Terrorism 0.8 1.9 Economics 0.7 3.2 Education 0.7 1.0 Business 0.6 3.2 Court/ Legal System 0.6 0.4 Catastrophes/ Disasters 0.4 5.1 US Miscellaneous 0.3 2.7 Transportation 0.2 0.7 Development/ Sprawl 0.1 0.2 Total2 99.9 100.2 Top 10 Stories (January 1 – November 1, 2007) Rank Story % of newshole Daily Show Mainstream Press 1 2008 Campaign 14.6% 8.8% 2 Debate over Iraq Policy 10.7 8.9 3 Events in Iraq 3.4 6.3 4 Fired U.S. Attorneys 3.3 1.8 5 Global Warming 2.2 1.1 6 Immigration 1.9 3.1 7 Domestic Terrorism 1.6 1.8 8 CIA Leak Investigation 1.5 1.2 9 Vice President Cheney Controversies 1.2 0.1 10 Iran 1.2 2.5 1 Mainstream press refers to 48 media outlets.
    [Show full text]
  • Trump's Conundrum for in Republicans
    V21, 28 Thursday, March 24, 2016 Trump’s conundrum for IN Republicans Leaders say they will support the ‘nominee,’ while McIntosh raises down-ballot alarms By BRIAN A. HOWEY BLOOMINGTON – GOP presidential front runner Donald J. Trump is just days away from his Indiana political debut, and Hoosier Republicans are facing a multi-faceted conundrum. Do they join the cabal seeking to keep the nominating number of delegates away from him prior to the Republi- can National Convention in July? This coming as Trump impugns the wife of Sen. Ted Cruz, threatening to “spill the beans” on her after two weeks of cam- paign violence and nativist fear mongering representing a sharp departure dent Mitch Daniels, former secretary of state Condoleezza modern Indiana internationalism. Rice, former senator Tom Coburn or former Texas governor Do they participate in a united front seeking an Rick Perry? alternative such as Sen. Ted Cruz, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, Or do they take the tack expressed by Gov. Mike or a dark horse consensus candidate such as Purdue Presi- Continued on page 3 Election year data By MORTON MARCUS INDIANAPOLIS – Let’s clarify some issues that may arise in this contentious political year. These data covering 2005 to 2015 may differ somewhat from those offered by other writers, speakers, and researchers. Why? These data are “This plan addresses our state’s from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ “Quarterly Census of immediate road funding needs Wages and Employment” via the while ensuring legislators come Indiana Department of Workforce Development’s Hoosiers by the back to the table next year ready Numbers website, where only the first three quarters of 2015 are to move forward on a long-term available.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Evangelical Support For, and Opposition to Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 9-1-2020 Understanding Evangelical Support for, and Opposition to Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election Joseph Thomas Zichterman Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Political Science Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Zichterman, Joseph Thomas, "Understanding Evangelical Support for, and Opposition to Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election" (2020). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 5570. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.7444 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Understanding Evangelical Support for, and Opposition to Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election by Joseph Thomas Zichterman A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Political Science Thesis Committee: Richard Clucas, Chair Jack Miller Kim Williams Portland State University 2020 Abstract This thesis addressed the conundrum that 81 percent of evangelicals supported Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election, despite the fact that his character and comportment commonly did not exemplify the values and ideals that they professed. This was particularly perplexing to many outside (and within) evangelical circles, because as leaders of America’s “Moral Majority” for almost four decades, prior to Trump’s campaign, evangelicals had insisted that only candidates who set a high standard for personal integrity and civic decency, were qualified to serve as president.
    [Show full text]