Cspan. Org or listen live on the free cspan radio app. Joining us is kim chapman. The executive joining us is kate ackley who covers congress for roll call and daddy or, the house report of politico which is where we will begin. Thanks for joining us today. Bit of a news on this thursday, roger stone a former trump associate was sentenced to three years in prison for lying to federal prosecutors as part of the russia probe, i just wanted to get your take on whether or not thats a fair sentence and whether you agree with some of the statements President Trump is made. Its lower than initially thought. I know the president has some issues with it. Obviously infractions were made, its a felony. I think its a problem and i think the sentence make sense but i will leave it up to the people and Legal Community to figure that out. Do think he received a fair trial . From my vantage point, yes. He is the latest in a series of Trump Campaign officials now facing prison time or in prison, this is a problem for the is this a problem for the president in an Election Year . Of course. Any perception of people like that around you is a major problem. We counsel the white house to do over and over again is focus on the policy, focus on whats going on in the economy. Try to take the one story about results of poverty. The extent they do that i think it might not be as big of a problem. But if youre spending a lot of time talking about this instead of your actual record and i think its a political drag. Would a pardon play into that then . If you were to receive a pardon would that put things to rest or would that make it all bubble up again even more . What would your advice be to the lighthouse . To the white house . A pardon would be in the front page of every newspaper in media outlet would run it for a while. Longterm politically, like everything in new cycle it would probably be a 24, 48 hour new story and then a talking point in the campaign. Im not sure how that would end in terms of where people go in november. You said earlier one of the things Heritage Action is advising the president or white house to do is focus on policy, you talk about the economy. One of the phrases weve heard on the Trump Campaign this election cycle is socialism takes an capitalism creates, i just wanted to ask you if you truly think that that is something that animates voters outside of the conservative base and is able to shore up support with suburban communities and demographics that are trending away from Republican Party at the moment. Absolutely. Weve done a lot of work at Heritage Action in terms of polling in swing states and polling in key battleground districts. The socialism issue is the major track for democrats. Especially if you look at the big issue right now in the big issue is where republican suburban voters going to end up going, will they stick with the president or will he have a similar situation like we had in 2018 where we sag a bit with those voters. If you look at that, the one thing that absolutely puts them back on the map is nominating a socialist for the democratic party. There is just too much at stake and when you look at the numbers, there was an nbc poll that came out a few days ago that looked at the democratic field and it was asking people what are the characteristics of the most disliked about the candidates in the top on is socialism. 65 . I think the democrats are really playing with fire here because they would be smarter as a party to try and do what we are suggesting as well just just talk about issues. When you talk about issues people are more interested in having that conversation and they have a better chance that if you put a democrat socialist at the top of the list you put all the suburbs whether there the philadelphia suburbs or whether they are the des moines or whatever back on the map and i think thats a Good Development for the president s chances. Michael bloomberg is not the nominee but if he were, his Campaign Says he will send spent three or 4 billion in a general election. Does that worry you, that amount of money in a campaign . Of course course it is not insignificant its very interesting. I dont think money plays a role in politics. I think increasingly people are skeptical of bigmoney campaigns, i think the era of carpet bombing a state or a district with Television Ads and making that the final difference in election i think that era is over. It matters most in american Politics Today is authenticity and i think that part of bloombergs problem will be that the money might work against him in that respect because it wont feel authentic. Does h have a real Grassroots Movement behind him or is he buying his way towards an election . Its not insignificant but i dont does his entry into the race undermine democrats message about wanting to be the party of political reform, wanting to do hr one which was the first sort of premier piece of legislation ,hat House Democrats featured Campaign Finance reform and a whole host of other measures, does having than this billionaire come in and get himself on the debate stage and into the race like that, does that undermine the sort of rationale for campaignfinance overhaul and things like that . Yeah, absolutely. I think it undermines it. This goes back to authenticity. Earlier the nominating a socialist is bad for the party and they still believe that, but at least with sanders there is a level of authenticity, theres a real Grassroots Movement. And he is a true believer in what he the kind of most progressive base of the party believes in. He is a champion for them. There is a real relationship there. It goes both ways. Is youveouve seen seen them try to legislate those values and so at least in that way, thats authenticity. Bloomberg does not have that. I think the real problem for the party. The other thing i would say about bloomberg is i think what you are seeing is his assumption was that there was this Critical Mass of moderates in the democratic primary that are ready to go and elect a moderate democrat. And i dont think thats there. Areink yes some of them being shared by klobuchar and biden to a certain extent there is no energy there. So the other thing we are learning from the bloomberg what i think will probably be a fizzling out here over the next few months, what we are learning is the real energy in the party is with the progressive hardcore base. Who do you think the nominee will be . At some point we have to believe the polls and at some point you have to look at what happened to donald trump, no one believes the polls, republicans were trying to over and over again a certain senator would ascend or for some reason trump would stumble and then ultimately the energy is there. Thats the same dynamic i was talking about. People look to trump and they thought here is a guy who is not a traditional politician and he is definitely rough around the edges and he says stuff we dont totally agree with and hes an imperfect vessel. But at least we think hes authentic and his desire to be someone who shakes things up in washington. I see the same dynamic playing out of the democratic party. I will not be surprised at all if Bernie Sanders is the nominee or they decide to tamp it down a little bit and go with elizabeth ward. I suppose there are scenarios where you could have a convention where there is some programming going on. But if you just sit back and look at the statistics and look at the polls and look at the energy, look at the rallies, it can be one of those two. Youve been involved in gop politics for several years now. The helm of Heritage Action which is been on the forefront of the culture war in this country. I want to ask you based on the rhetoric weve seen from the democratic primary debates and particularly senator klobuchars claim there should be a litmus test for future democratic on supremeto impose Court Nominees over abortion, is that something you think are public and candidates moving forward also need to adopt . That there should be a litmus test to determine whether supreme Court Nominees would commit to overturning roe v. Wade . Alwaysrepublicans of skewed a litmus test. And sometimes to the disadvantage of constitutional conservatives who have seen some of our nominees go to the court and votes in ways we are not comfortable with. But i think thats the right way to be. I dont and you want to impose litmus tests on judges. I think ultimately what you want to do is do your best vetting possible, look at the case history, look at the way they reason their legal argument and then make your best judgment possible. I dont think republicans will move towards a litmus test. I thing weve seen with the Republican Party is a prolife party, theres no doubt about it and im a proud prolifer. But you see party thats big enough to allow other competing thoughts into the tent and so we have a lot of that going on in their publican party. When younk thats juxtapose that with what you have on the left which is an andlute litmus test absolutely, especially in terms applicable candidates, a prolife political candidate and i think the answer is no. Today,ad a story on that the remaining antiabortion democrats in the house or having a hard time finding allies among various groups. I wanted to step back a little bit. You were writing back in 2010, 2011 about the rise of populism and we really seen that play out in the Trump Administration when it comes to trade policy and other matters like that, you see it in the riser Bernie Sanders on the campaign trail. , is populismhappen to continue and help it play out in policy issues or is it kind of reaching an endpoint . I think the populism will continue, but i think it will begin to mature in a sense and i think the populism on both sides is going to begin to coalesce around ideas, so as you mentioned, we have been involved in that populist movement for a long time when restarted started Heritage Action in 2010. We were very antiestablishment and had a lot of fights with our own leadership in the Republican Party, and they were over these populist issues, and that was the precursor to trump in many ways, that period from 2010 to 2016, and then trump comes along and is an agent of change with, whatever you think of him, he is not establishment. He is here to shake things up. What is going to be really interesting is on the right hand on the left, where do people in the future you see on the right some thinking on different policy ideas. I used trade as an example, and you are not seeing conservatives run away from the idea of free trade. People understand the value of free trade, but you are seeing a more sophisticated thought process about it when you are really weighing all of the factors that occur in some of these trade deals and thinking of other ways to make sure that people in this country get to take advantage of all that we have to offer, so i think it should be a really interesting next decade is the next decade you will see on the left and right, people coalesce around policy agendas that might look a little different than they have. Do you mean by partisanship . No, there have been pivotal moments in republican politics, the most recent was the reagan era of the 1980s and the right did something that was really smart, which was think about all of the ideas that we have had and how they apply to the politics of the 80s and fuse a movement around that. Conservatives, social conservatives, and you had business conservatives coming together around an idea, and that is the kind of stuff i am talking about, on the right and left trying to figure out the coalitions of the future. President trump gave a little snippet in 2016 of what that might look like in bringing a new cohort of voters. When he won wisconsin and pennsylvania and michigan, he won those states by bringing workingclass voters, who had voted for democrats in previous election. 10 of Bernie Sanders election in 2016 voted across the aisle for President Trump. It is interesting how republicans are thinking of keeping that coalition together of being creative while sticking to your principles and not backing down. You are leaving Heritage Action this spring to work with nikki haley, former u. S. Ambassador, stanford america, why the move . It is a fantastic opportunity. Ive been with Heritage Action for a decade now, they will do great. Nikki haley is someone i havent by a have admired for a long time. She has great, toughness, is principled and getting the opportunity to work for her is something im pretty excited about. Is she going to run for president in 2024 . You will have to ask her. What do you think . I dont know. Is verygabby figure in the gop you see as a natural successor to donald trump . I dont think so. I think that is being settled right now. Those conversations are occurring, but in truth, the gop right now is not talking about a successor to trump the cousin people are focusing on getting trump reelected. I am sure that if he is reluctant reelected, the conversation becomes who is his successor, but there are so many good people out there, many who are qualified to lead, many who are learning the right lessons right now, thinking strategically about the future, so i think our bench is pretty deep. I want to go back to something you were talking about earlier, the Republican Partys realignment post trump era. Theres been a lot of discussion on the right over whether the libertarian wing of the party has consolidated power, gained too much influence in Republican Party circles and has essentially shut down a willingness to talk about social issues or issues important to social conservatives. Is that an accurate assessment of the current gop . I have seen some of that and to the detriment for social conservatives. The interesting thing is when you look at populist moment we are in, their house always been an assumption in the last 10 years of the Republican Party that you need to stay away from socialist issues. We know you have your principles and values there, but dont run on those things because if you run on those things, you will end up losing elections, so the social conservatives have kind of gotten elbowed into the back, and i think there is a resurgence where people are saying, no, values really matter and when talking about authenticity, that is how you connect with people. The values that they share are as important to them as many of the economic situations around them not that the economy is not important. It is tremendously important, but i think there is room for in the future social conservatives to be a bigger part of what we are doing, and i think it makes good populist politics, social. Politics, too. Immigration is an issue you have worked on with Heritage Action. The community has been saying the country needs more legal immigrants, whether hightech or Seasonal Worker visas, really to drive the economy, the u. S. Needs more immigrant workers. The Trump Administration during the trump era, Legal Immigration is down. Are you with the chamber of commerce on this or the Trump Administration . Im definitely with the Trump Administration. I dont think this is rocket science. The. Reason this has become so hard is it is just such a political landmine. Both sides condemned the issue. Securing your borders, simple. Then you can have lots of conversations about if there are needs to be filled. I think the first thing we in terms of the way youve got to look at it principally, is the need has to be there. It cant be something that could be filled by an american worker. That should be the priority first, but if there is a need, you can absolutely bring programs on board that will fill that need, if youve done the right stuff first, which is security and protecting your borders. If you were advising a republican president ial candidate in 2024 or down the road, what would you say they need to do to consolidate the middle class gains that President Trump has brought in for the party, while also not alienating suburban voters . Is there a particular policy agenda or elements . There are a couple of things here. The economy is important and the economy to the extent that the economy does well come you need to sing that song over and over again. Second, immigration is something you can do and Immigration Reform im talking about immigration security. You can do this in a way that doesnt alienate suburban voters. We worked with the administration on one of our proposals that i think they got exactly right. We had done some polling in swing states and found that the Biggest Issue people felt about ilLegal Immigration was not crime, was not culture was not those negative things that you think about with it, but it was what happens with social services that i need for my family and neighbors and my Community Needs . Schools, hostels, things like that. One of the things the Trump Administration did was the public charge rule, which basically said if you are going to come into our country, we want to make sure you have the resources to not be a net drain on welfare services. I think that is a better way to approach this rather than talking about crime and violence, because that lends itself toward demagoguery and is a cultural flashpoint. I was proud to be able to work