DOCSLIB.ORG

Axis of Ideology: Conservative Foundations and Public Policy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Axis of Ideology: Conservative Foundations and Public Policy Axis of Ideology Conservative Foundations and Public Policy By Jeff Krehely, Meaghan House and Emily Kernan March 2004 GIVING AT WORK 2003 1 NCRP Board of Directors NCRP Staff Michelle T. Abrenilla James Abernathy, Environmental Support Center Chief Operating Officer Christine Ahn, Institute for Food & Development Policy Gary Bass, OMB Watch Adzo Amegayibor Paul S. Castro, Jewish Family Services of Los Angeles Research Associate Lana Cowell, Greater Cleveland Community Shares (NCRP Board Secretary) John Barkhamer Louis Delgado, Philanthropy & Nonprofit Sector Program, Research Assistant Loyola University Chicago Mike Doyle, Community Shares of Illinois Rick Cohen Pablo Eisenberg, Georgetown University Public Policy Institute Executive Director Angelo Falcon, Institute for Puerto Rican Policy Andrea M. DeArment Richard Farias, Tejano Center for Community Concerns Finance and Membership Associate Margaret Fung, Asian American Legal Defense & Education Fund Robert Gnaizda, Greenlining Institute Marissa Guananja Laura Harris, Americans for Indian Opportunity Research Assistant David R. Jones, Community Service Society (NCRP Board Vice Chair) Rhoda Karpatkin, Consumers Union (NCRP Board Treasurer) Meaghan House Larry Kressley, Public Welfare Foundation Research Associate Julianne Malveaux, Last Word Productions Inc. Peter B. Manzo, Center for Nonprofit Management Jeff Krehely William Merritt, National Black United Fund Deputy Director Nadia Moritz, The Young Women’s Project Elly Kugler Terry Odendahl, Institute for Collaborative Change Research Assistant (NCRP Board Chair) Linda Richardson, African American Fund of Pennsylvania Taha Nasar Greg Truog, Community Shares USA Communications Assistant Bill Watanabe, Little Tokyo Service Center Kevin Ronnie Director of Field Operations Axis of Ideology: Conservative Foundations and Public Policy Jeff Krehely Meaghan House Emily Kernan Authors Kaycee Marie Misiewicz Claire van Zevern Former Research Interns Michael Derr Editor Dominic Vecchiollo Design © 2004 National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy Axis of Ideology Conservative Foundations and Public Policy TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................5 2. Methodology ..........................................................................................................................7 3. Literature Review ..................................................................................................................10 4. Conservative Foundations Overview ....................................................................................12 5. Grants Analysis ....................................................................................................................15 6. Top 25 Grant Recipients........................................................................................................35 7. Networks and Political Connections......................................................................................37 8. Conclusion............................................................................................................................42 Appendices Appendix A — Foundation Sample ....................................................................................44 Appendix B — Nonprofit Recipients of Conservative Public Policy Grants ........................46 Appendix C — Interview Findings......................................................................................54 Appendix D — Foundation Profiles....................................................................................57 Notes ........................................................................................................................................70 AXIS OF IDEOLOGY: CONSERVATIVE FOUNDATIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY 3 About NCRP: The National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy is an independ- ent nonprofit organization founded in 1976 by nonprofit leaders across the nation who recognized that traditional philanthropy was falling short of addressing critical public needs. NCRP’s founders encouraged foundations to provide resources and opportunities to help equalize the uneven playing field that decades of economic inequality and pervasive discrimination had created. Today NCRP conducts research on and advocates for philanthropic policies and practices that are responsive to public needs. To obtain more information about NCRP or to make a membership con- tribution, please visit www.ncrp.org or call (202) 387-9177. 4 NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSIVE PHILANTHROPY Executive Summary In 1997, NCRP produced Moving a Public Policy Agenda: The Strategic Philanthropy of Conservative Foundations, which documented the grantmaking activities and strategies of 12 of the nation's largest and most visible conservative foundations.1 In particular, the study exam- ined grants made to public policy nonprofits from 1992 through 1994, and also profiled the major grant recipients, reviewing their history, leadership, strategies and policy achievements. It was the first major attempt to document the impact that these philanthropic institutions had on politics and society. In addition to analyzing the grants these foundations made, the report also reviewed materials directly from these foundations and their grantees, as well as relevant media reports and literature reviews. The 1997 study concluded that conservative Ideas: Conservative Think Tanks in the 1990s. This foundations and their grantees had achieved a report provided an in-depth analysis of the top 20 respectable and enviable level of effectiveness conservative think tanks in existence at the time. It because of seven factors: assessed their operations, areas of policy interest, marketing and communications strategies, gover- The foundations bring a clarity of vision and nance structure and types of financial support, strong political intention to their grantmaking including foundations, corporations and individuals. programs; Both of these publications had a significant impact Conservative grantmaking has focused on build- on the philanthropic community and continue to be ing strong institutions by providing general oper- influential today. NCRP has often received inquiries ating support, rather than project-specific grants; from the press, researchers, and nonprofit organi- The foundations realized that the state, local, and zations about updating this research. neighborhood policy environments could not be From a political perspective, NCRP's earlier work ignored in favor of focusing solely on the federal on conservative philanthropy was relevant and well level; timed. The data analyzed in the first report reflected The foundations invested in institutions and grantmaking activity in the years immediately projects geared toward the marketing of conser- preceding the Republican takeover of Congress in the vative policy ideas; 1994 elections. The second report came out as the The foundations supported the development of Democratic and Republican parties were gearing up conservative public intellectuals and policy for what would prove to be the most contentious leaders; presidential election in U.S. history. The information The foundations supported a wide range of that conservative public policy institutions—thanks policy institutions, recognizing that a variety of in large part to funding from conservative strategies and approaches is needed to advance a foundations—were providing to candidates for public policy agenda; and office had a substantial impact on the issues that The foundations funded their grantees for the were debated during election years in the mid-to late long term, in some cases for two decades or 1990s. more. Since the 2000 elections, conservative law- makers have expanded their power, controlling Moving a Public Policy Agenda was well essentially all three branches of the federal received in the philanthropic community as well as government. According to William Greider, George in more mainstream publications and venues. The W. Bush represents the third and most powerful research was presented in a number of forums, wave in the right's attack on liberalism. The first including the annual meeting of Council on wave of the attack came from Ronald Reagan, who Foundations, and was featured in media outlets such organized the right around many ideological slogans as The Nation, National Public Radio's "Morning for reform and proved the viability of regressive tax Edition," and The Washington Post, to name a few. cuts. Newt Gingrich represented the second wave Due to the success of the 1997 report, NCRP and gave Republicans control of Congress for the first followed up the study in 1999 with $1 Billion for time in two generations. This imbalance of power AXIS OF IDEOLOGY: CONSERVATIVE FOUNDATIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY © National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, March 2004 1 has allowed President George W. Bush to govern penchant for waging war, curtailing civil liberties, without having to compromise his domestic or and slashing taxes and social spending. It is critical, foreign agendas.2 Widespread Republican control of then, to revisit NCRP's past work on conservative state governorships and legislatures provides the right philanthropy, expanding the number of foundations with more opportunities to implement and solidify its that were originally studied, as well as consider the agenda. With the strong presence
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 8364 Licensed Charities As of 3/10/2020 MICS 24404 MICS 52720 T
    8364 Licensed Charities as of 3/10/2020 MICS 24404 MICS 52720 T. Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving, Inc. The David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust USA, Inc. 100 E. Pratt St 25283 Cabot Road, Ste. 101 Baltimore MD 21202 Laguna Hills CA 92653 Phone: (410)345-3457 Phone: (949)305-3785 Expiration Date: 10/31/2020 Expiration Date: 10/31/2020 MICS 52752 MICS 60851 1 For 2 Education Foundation 1 Michigan for the Global Majority 4337 E. Grand River, Ste. 198 1920 Scotten St. Howell MI 48843 Detroit MI 48209 Phone: (425)299-4484 Phone: (313)338-9397 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 MICS 46501 MICS 60769 1 Voice Can Help 10 Thousand Windows, Inc. 3290 Palm Aire Drive 348 N Canyons Pkwy Rochester Hills MI 48309 Livermore CA 94551 Phone: (248)703-3088 Phone: (571)263-2035 Expiration Date: 07/31/2021 Expiration Date: 03/31/2020 MICS 56240 MICS 10978 10/40 Connections, Inc. 100 Black Men of Greater Detroit, Inc 2120 Northgate Park Lane Suite 400 Attn: Donald Ferguson Chattanooga TN 37415 1432 Oakmont Ct. Phone: (423)468-4871 Lake Orion MI 48362 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 Phone: (313)874-4811 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 MICS 25388 MICS 43928 100 Club of Saginaw County 100 Women Strong, Inc. 5195 Hampton Place 2807 S. State Street Saginaw MI 48604 Saint Joseph MI 49085 Phone: (989)790-3900 Phone: (888)982-1400 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 Expiration Date: 07/31/2020 MICS 58897 MICS 60079 1888 Message Study Committee, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • 990-PF and Its Separate Instructions Is at Www Ins Gov/Form990pf for Calendar Year 2016 Or Tax Year Heamnina
    0 0 Return of Private Foundation OMB No ,5950052 Form 990 -PF or Section 4947( a)(1) Trust Treated as Private Foundation O ^+ Department of the Treasury ► Do not enter social security numbers on this form as it may be made public V Internal Revenue Seri ► Information about Form 990-PF and its separate instructions is at www ins gov/form990pf For calendar year 2016 or tax year heamnina . 2016 . and endma .20 Name of foundation A Employer Identification number THE LYNDE AND HARRY BRADLEY FOUNDATION INC 39 6037928 Number and street (or P O box number it mail is not delivered to street address ) Room /suite B Telephone number (see instructions) 1241 N FRANKLIN PL (414) 291 9915 City or town state or province country and ZIP or foreign postal code C If exemption application is pending check here q MILWAUKEE WI 53202-2901 q q q G Check all that apply Initial return Initial return of a former public charity D 1 Foreign organizations check here ► q Final return q Amended return 2 Foreign orgaandniz ations meeting the 65% test Name q E] Address change 7] change check here nd attach computation ► H Check type of organization q Section 501 (c)(3) exempt private foundation E If private foundation status was terminated under s ec ti o n 507(b)(1)(A) check here El Section 4947(a)(1) nonexempt chartable trust E] Other taxable private foundation q Fair market value of all assets at J Accounting method 2 Cash Accrual F lithe foundation , s,n a 60-month termination q end of year (from Part 11, col (c), q Other (specify) under section 5o7(bRl)IB) check here ► line 16) ► $ 849 426 516 (Part / column (d) must be on cash basis) Analysis of Revenue and Expenses (d ) Disbursements (a) Revenue and net for chartable expenses per (b ) Net investment (c) Adjusted amounts in columns (b), (c) and (d) may not necessarily equal income income purposes books the amounts in column (a) (see Instructions)) (cash basis only) 1 Contributions, gifts, grants etc , received (attach schedule) (489,697) 1 - 1 1 2 if the fotndaton is not required to attach Sch B -`a:, i f•,x.
    [Show full text]
  • MAP Act Coalition Letter Freedomworks
    April 13, 2021 Dear Members of Congress, We, the undersigned organizations representing millions of Americans nationwide highly concerned by our country’s unsustainable fiscal trajectory, write in support of the Maximizing America’s Prosperity (MAP) Act, to be introduced by Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas) and Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.). As we stare down a mounting national debt of over $28 trillion, the MAP Act presents a long-term solution to our ever-worsening spending patterns by implementing a Swiss-style debt brake that would prevent large budget deficits and increased national debt. Since the introduction of the MAP Act in the 116th Congress, our national debt has increased by more than 25 percent, totaling six trillion dollars higher than the $22 trillion we faced less than two years ago in July of 2019. Similarly, nearly 25 percent of all U.S. debt accumulated since the inception of our country has come since the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Now more than ever, it is critical that legislators take a serious look at the fiscal situation we find ourselves in, with a budget deficit for Fiscal Year 2020 of $3.132 trillion and a projected share of the national debt held by the public of 102.3 percent of GDP. While markets continue to finance our debt in the current moment, the simple and unavoidable fact remains that our country is not immune from the basic economics of massive debt, that history tells us leads to inevitable crisis. Increased levels of debt even before a resulting crisis slows economic activity -- a phenomenon referred to as “debt drag” -- which especially as we seek recovery from COVID-19 lockdowns, our nation cannot afford.
    [Show full text]
  • Was Ann Coulter Right? Some Realism About “Minimalism”
    AMLR.V5I1.PRESSER.POSTPROOFLAYOUT.0511 9/16/2008 3:21:27 PM Copyright © 2007 Ave Maria Law Review WAS ANN COULTER RIGHT? SOME REALISM ABOUT “MINIMALISM” Stephen B. Presser † INTRODUCTION Ever since the Warren Court rewrote much of the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment, there has been a debate within legal academia about the legitimacy of this judicial law making.1 Very little popular attention was paid, at least in the last several decades, to this problem. More recently, however, the issue of the legitimacy of judicial law making has begun to enter the realm of partisan popular debate. This is due to the fact that Republicans controlled the White House for six years and a majority in the Senate for almost all of that time, that they have announced, as it were, a program of picking judges committed to adjudication rather than legislation, and finally, that the Democrats have, just as vigorously, resisted Republican efforts. Cass Sunstein, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School,2 and now a visiting professor at Harvard Law School,3 has written a provocative book purporting to be a popular, yet scholarly critique of the sort of judges President George W. Bush has announced that he would like to appoint. Is Sunstein’s effort an objective undertaking, or is it partisan politics with a thin academic veneer? If Sunstein’s work (and that of others on the Left in the † Raoul Berger Professor of Legal History, Northwestern University School of Law; Professor of Business Law, J. L. Kellogg Graduate School of Management, Northwestern University; Legal Affairs Editor, Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductions Supplied by EDRS Are the Best That Can Be Made from the Ori Inal Document. SCHOOL- CHOICE
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 460 188 UD 034 633 AUTHOR Moffit, Robert E., Ed.; Garrett, Jennifer J., Ed.; Smith, Janice A., Ed. TITLE School Choice 2001: What's Happening in the States. INSTITUTION Heritage Foundation, Washington, DC. ISBN ISBN-0-89195-100-8 PUB DATE 2001-00-00 NOTE 275p.; For the 2000 report, see ED 440 193. Foreword by Howard Fuller. AVAILABLE FROM Heritage Foundation, 214 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E., Washington, DC 20002-4999 ($12.95). Tel: 800-544-4843 (Toll Free). For full text: http://www.heritage.org/schools/. PUB TYPE Books (010) Reports Descriptive (141) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC11 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Academic Achievement; Charter Schools; Educational Vouchers; Elementary Secondary Education; Private Schools; Public Schools; Scholarship Funds; *School Choice ABSTRACT This publication tracks U.S. school choice efforts, examining research on their results. It includes: current publicschool data on expenditures, schools, and teachers for 2000-01 from a report by the National Education Association; a link to the states'own report cards on how their schools are performing; current private school informationfrom a 2001 report by the National Center for Education Statistics; state rankingson the new Education Freedom Index by the Manhattan Institute in 2000; current National Assessment of Educational Progress test results releasedin 2001; and updates on legislative activity through mid-July 2001. Afterdiscussing ways to increase opportunities for children to succeed, researchon school choice, and public opinion, a set of maps and tables offera snapshot of choice in the states. The bulk of the book containsa state-by-state analysis that examines school choice status; K-12 public schools andstudents; K-12 public school teachers; K-12 public and private school studentacademic performance; background and developments; position of the governor/composition of the state legislature; and statecontacts.
    [Show full text]
  • Culture Wars' Reloaded: Trump, Anti-Political Correctness and the Right's 'Free Speech' Hypocrisy
    The 'Culture Wars' Reloaded: Trump, Anti-Political Correctness and the Right's 'Free Speech' Hypocrisy Dr. Valerie Scatamburlo-D'Annibale University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada Abstract This article explores how Donald Trump capitalized on the right's decades-long, carefully choreographed and well-financed campaign against political correctness in relation to the broader strategy of 'cultural conservatism.' It provides an historical overview of various iterations of this campaign, discusses the mainstream media's complicity in promulgating conservative talking points about higher education at the height of the 1990s 'culture wars,' examines the reconfigured anti- PC/pro-free speech crusade of recent years, its contemporary currency in the Trump era and the implications for academia and educational policy. Keywords: political correctness, culture wars, free speech, cultural conservatism, critical pedagogy Introduction More than two years after Donald Trump's ascendancy to the White House, post-mortems of the 2016 American election continue to explore the factors that propelled him to office. Some have pointed to the spread of right-wing populism in the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis that culminated in Brexit in Europe and Trump's victory (Kagarlitsky, 2017; Tufts & Thomas, 2017) while Fuchs (2018) lays bare the deleterious role of social media in facilitating the rise of authoritarianism in the U.S. and elsewhere. Other 69 | P a g e The 'Culture Wars' Reloaded: Trump, Anti-Political Correctness and the Right's 'Free Speech' Hypocrisy explanations refer to deep-rooted misogyny that worked against Hillary Clinton (Wilz, 2016), a backlash against Barack Obama, sedimented racism and the demonization of diversity as a public good (Major, Blodorn and Blascovich, 2016; Shafer, 2017).
    [Show full text]
  • Download Annual Report
    The New Conservative Flagship ANNUAL REPORT 2020A About American Compass Table of Contents Our Mission To restore an economic consensus that emphasizes the importance of family, community, and industry to the nation’s liberty and prosperity: 1 Founder’s Letter 4 REORIENTING POLITICAL FOCUS from growth for its own sake to widely shared economic development that sustains vital social institutions. SETTING A COURSE for a country in which families can achieve self- sufficiency, contribute productively to their communities, and prepare the next 2 Year in Review 10 generation for the same. Conservative Flagship 12 HELPING POLICYMAKERS NAVIGATE the limitations that markets and government each face in promoting the general welfare and the nation’s security. Changing the Debate 14 Our Activities Creating Community 16 AFFILIATION. Providing opportunities for people who share its mission to The Commons 18 build relationships, collaborate, and communicate their views to the broader political community. Our Growing Influence 20 DELIBERATION. Supporting research and discussion that advances understanding of economic and social conditions and tradeoffs through study of history, analysis of data, elaboration of theory, and development of policy 3 Our Work 21 proposals. ENGAGEMENT. Initiating and facilitating public debate to challenge existing Rebooting the American System 22 orthodoxy, confront the best arguments of its defenders, and force scrutiny of unexamined assumptions and unconsidered consequences. Coin-Flip Capitalism 26 Our Principles Moving the Chains 30 AMERICAN COMPASS strives to embody the principles and practices of a healthy democratic polity, combining intellectual combat with personal civility. Corporate Actual Responsibility 34 We welcome converts to our vision and value disagreement amongst A Seat at the Table 38 our members.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    Bibliography Archival Insights into the Evolution of Economics (and Related Projects) Berlet, C. (2017). Hayek, Mises, and the Iron Rule of Unintended Consequences. In R. Leeson (Ed.), Hayek a Collaborative Biography Part IX: Te Divine Right of the ‘Free’ Market. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Farrant, A., & McPhail, E. (2017). Hayek, Tatcher, and the Muddle of the Middle. In R. Leeson (Ed.), Hayek: A Collaborative Biography Part IX the Divine Right of the Market. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Filip, B. (2018a). Hayek on Limited Democracy, Dictatorships and the ‘Free’ Market: An Interview in Argentina, 1977. In R. Leeson (Ed.), Hayek a Collaborative Biography Part XIII: ‘Fascism’ and Liberalism in the (Austrian) Classical Tradition. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan. Filip, B. (2018b). Hayek and Popper on Piecemeal Engineering and Ordo- Liberalism. In R. Leeson (Ed.), Hayek a Collaborative Biography Part XIV: Orwell, Popper, Humboldt and Polanyi. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Friedman, M. F. (2017 [1991]). Say ‘No’ to Intolerance. In R. Leeson & C. Palm (Eds.), Milton Friedman on Freedom. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press. © Te Editor(s) (if applicable) and Te Author(s) 2019 609 R. Leeson, Hayek: A Collaborative Biography, Archival Insights into the Evolution of Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78069-6 610 Bibliography Glasner, D. (2018). Hayek, Gold, Defation and Nihilism. In R. Leeson (Ed.), Hayek a Collaborative Biography Part XIII: ‘Fascism’ and Liberalism in the (Austrian) Classical Tradition. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Goldschmidt, N., & Hesse, J.-O. (2013). Eucken, Hayek, and the Road to Serfdom. In R. Leeson (Ed.), Hayek: A Collaborative Biography Part I Infuences, from Mises to Bartley.
    [Show full text]
  • Meet Charles Koch's Brain.Pdf
    “ Was I, perhaps, hallucinating? Or was I, in reality, nothing more than a con man, taking advantage of others?” —Robert LeFevre BY MARK known as “Rampart College”), School] is where I was first exposed which his backers wanted to turn in-depth to such thinkers as Mises AMES into the nation’s premier libertarian and Hayek.” indoctrination camp. Awkwardly for Koch, Freedom What makes Charles Koch tick? There are plenty of secondary School didn’t just teach radical Despite decades of building the sources placing Koch at LeFevre’s pro-property libertarianism, it also nation’s most impressive ideological Freedom School. Libertarian court published a series of Holocaust- and influence-peddling network, historian Brian Doherty—who has denial articles through its house from ideas-mills to think-tanks to spent most of his adult life on the magazine, Ramparts Journal. The policy-lobbying machines, the Koch Koch brothers’ payroll—described first of those articles was published brothers only really came to public LeFevre as “an anarchist figure in 1966, two years after Charles prominence in the past couple of who stole Charles Koch’s heart;” Koch joined Freedom School as years. Since then we’ve learned a Murray Rothbard, who co-founded executive, trustee and funder. lot about the billionaire siblings’ the Cato Institute with Charles “Evenifoneweretoaccept vast web of influence and power in Koch in 1977, wrote that Charles themostextremeand American politics and ideas. “had been converted as a youth to exaggeratedindictment Yet, for all that attention, there libertarianism by LeFevre.” ofHitlerandthenational are still big holes in our knowledge But perhaps the most credible socialistsfortheiractivities of the Kochs.
    [Show full text]
  • Coalition of National and State-Based Organizations to Congress: Fix the Ban on State Tax Cuts
    Coalition of National and State-Based Organizations to Congress: Fix the Ban on State Tax Cuts April 2, 2021 Dear Members of Congress: We, the undersigned organizations, representing millions of Americans and thousands of state and local officials, write to express our profound concerns with provisions in the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. Elements of this recently adopted legislation fundamentally threaten the principles of federalism and fiscal responsibility. The American Rescue Plan Act includes $350 billion in State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds. This is despite early reports that show total state and local revenue actually increased in calendar year 2020, and many states currently have significant surpluses. These funds also are in addition to the hundreds of billions in federal assistance to state and local units of government through the CARES Act and other measures in 2020. Over the past year, our organizations raised concerns around the many public policy problems created by a federal bailout of state and local government budgets. Additionally, hundreds of state legislators voiced their numerous policy concerns. Now that this bailout of state and local governments has been signed into law by President Biden, there is perhaps an even more troubling element than any of us could have anticipated. As the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal recently pointed out, states appear to be prohibited from using these new federal funds to directly or indirectly reduce net state tax revenue through 2024. With the fungible nature of budgeting, and absent any clarifications from the Department of Treasury, the incredibly ambiguous language involving indirect net revenue reductions means that any tax relief at the state level could potentially be called into question by aggressive federal action.
    [Show full text]
  • A Critical Assessment of the Political Doctrines of Michael Oakeshott
    David Richard Hexter Thesis Title: A Critical Assessment of the Political Doctrines of Michael Oakeshott. Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. 1 Statement of Originality I, David Richard Hexter, confirm that the research included within this thesis is my own work or that where it has been carried out in collaboration with, or supported by others, that this is duly acknowledged and my contribution indicated. I attest that I have exercised reasonable care to ensure that the work is original, and does not to the best of my knowledge break any UK law, infringe any third party’s copyright or other Intellectual Property Right, or contain any confidential material. I accept that the college has the right to use plagiarism detection software to check the electronic version of the thesis. I confirm that this thesis has not been previously submitted for the award of a degree by this or any other university. The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author. David R Hexter 12/01/2016 2 Abstract Author: David Hexter, PhD candidate Title of thesis: A Critical Assessment of the Political Doctrines of Michael Oakeshott Description The thesis consists of an Introduction, four Chapters and a Conclusion. In the Introduction some of the interpretations that have been offered of Oakeshott’s political writings are discussed. The key issue of interpretation is whether Oakeshott is best considered as a disinterested philosopher, as he claimed, or as promoting an ideology or doctrine, albeit elliptically.
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Truth Politics and Richard Rorty's Postmodernist Bourgeois Liberalism
    Ash Center Occasional Papers Tony Saich, Series Editor Something Has Cracked: Post-Truth Politics and Richard Rorty’s Postmodernist Bourgeois Liberalism Joshua Forstenzer University of Sheffield (UK) July 2018 Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation Harvard Kennedy School Ash Center Occasional Papers Series Series Editor Tony Saich Deputy Editor Jessica Engelman The Roy and Lila Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation advances excellence and innovation in governance and public policy through research, education, and public discussion. By training the very best leaders, developing powerful new ideas, and disseminating innovative solutions and institutional reforms, the Center’s goal is to meet the profound challenges facing the world’s citizens. The Ford Foundation is a founding donor of the Center. Additional information about the Ash Center is available at ash.harvard.edu. This research paper is one in a series funded by the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. The views expressed in the Ash Center Occasional Papers Series are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the John F. Kennedy School of Government or of Harvard University. The papers in this series are intended to elicit feedback and to encourage debate on important public policy challenges. This paper is copyrighted by the author(s). It cannot be reproduced or reused without permission. Ash Center Occasional Papers Tony Saich, Series Editor Something Has Cracked: Post-Truth Politics and Richard Rorty’s Postmodernist Bourgeois Liberalism Joshua Forstenzer University of Sheffield (UK) July 2018 Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation Harvard Kennedy School Letter from the Editor The Roy and Lila Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation advances excellence and innovation in governance and public policy through research, education, and public discussion.
    [Show full text]