Crane. At 4 p. M. Eastern, the Historical Society holds a conversation on race from the explorers club, apollo seven astronauts on the first manned spaceflight. New years day on cspan 2 author hector tobar on the 33 men buried in a chilean mine. And the life of nelson rockefeller. That former investigative correspondent for cbs news on her experiences reporting on the obama administration. New years day on American History tv on cspan 3, at 10 00 eastern, Juanita Abernathy on her experiences and the role of women in the civil rights movement. Brooklyn College Professor injured in a car on the link benjamin car on the link between alcohol and driving. Idiot cartoon is it drives and 10 president ial characters and a story and a cartoonist as he draws 10 president ial caricatures and a historian speaks. A discussion on the future of conservatism. A panel at the university of chicago this into a politics discussed how conservative principles could be used to solve some of todays problems. They look at the challenges facing republican president ial candidates in 2016. This one hour, 15 minutes. Republicans won a sweeping electoral yet Many Americans struggle to identify with an affirmative party message. The most sought after conservative policy watch to tell us how they think the Republican Party can close this gap. The leaders collaborated to write a manifesto for a reformer con agenda that ms. Conservatism work for the middle class. Commentators refer to the resurgence of the Political Party and theyll referring to our guests today. You will soon see why. Offers panel as is andrew kelly. Our first panel was is andrew kelly panelist is andrew kelly. She is a prolific author. [indiscernible] he holds a host of senior positions for he served on the domestic policy and earned his phd at a universe should consult. He published the great debate her at the university of chicago. April ponnuru. She has served in both senate and house leadership including a senior advisory. Previously she served as executive director of the nonprofit rational review institute. Her husband, Ramesh Ponnuru is a Senior Editor and columnist and visiting fellow. He is one of the most prolific commentators and his work can be found in the New York Times and many other places in he served as a fellow 2013. Last but not least our moderator will be megan mcardle, she wrestled economics if this is a public policy. Is behind the popular blog. She is currently completing her term asan ip felt as an ipo fellow. [applause] quick im going to start off by asking you a question, ramesh. 2014 is a great year for republicans. A decent, sizable wave. Why do conservatism needs to be performed . First, it is ok to [indiscernible] i think that one thing that republicans should have learned in recent years which is very different from the president ial electorate. You can be very good [indiscernible] thats for a couple of reason. It is easier to get people to let you apply the brake paddle fan to get control over the steering will. President ial elections the people think of Steering Wheel elections if they need to know the republicans take them somewhere they want to go. The obama metaphor. The other thing thats always been a demographic distinction between looters out in midterms and also turnout in president ial elections. For example, the midterm electorate is older and wider. In recent years, that demographic distinction has to convey much more parts cast and we are you super has turned out a much more partisan [indiscernible] it is easy to keep the House Majority is a little harder but still quite doable to give a sense of majority. You have to reach a little further. April, i will go to you. What is reform conservatism . Is it a bunch of different ideas . Is the day since we need reform conservatism is less do it . Isnt that we needed to reform conservatism and lets do it . Not offering anything new the principles has been around for a long time certainly over the last few decades, principle we are comfortable with and feel we need to be expanded upon her what can form conservatism is is apply those principles as we face today. Report the republicans often had no agenda on breaking down thought marginal tax rate which was prereagan confiscatory. A 70 rate. Using real urgent need at the time to prove that rate them from reagan saw the need and prioritize. There was a real urgent need at the time to bring data rate down. We need to bring it down and he did and he was effective. Partly because we were successful, a lot of argenta has become rather outdated. We have not been responding to the challenges of our day. Reform conservatism is trying to bring to bear the principles that we believe in the particular policy challenges that we face as he mentioned today. Can you talk about core policy changes that republicans are not addressing and needed to be . It is important , i think, as a reform conservatism. Our target conservatism but the government and the nations challenges and what is required to address those is reform of our institutions. It is applied conservatism and what that means in practice if it seems to me is a modernization of conservatisms understanding of the challenges. It is not a change in how we as conservatives need to think about changing problems for what we understand the problems to be. If as you say in 1991 were a lot of conservatives, the problems have to do with hyperinflation and high marginal income tax rates. Today, the challenges have more to do with the consequence of globalization for working americans and more to do with stagnating wages. More to do with the pressures that middleclass families confront to the extent we want to talk about tax reform, the tax burden is especially heavy as a result of payroll tax and not the income tax for most americans. It means thinking about how conservatives ideas need to be applied to contemporary challenges. The most difficult thing for both parties is to look beyond the to do list of what they have for such a long time actually think about what the country needs to do. A lot of democrats like to live in the mid90s and republicans in the 1980s for it seems like they have Something Real to offer. The economy does not love it either at those times and you cannot pretend like it does. The reason they are trying so hard to pretend is the reason i looked at some the things that reagan got done. So i went to go to the end of our that there, i. Hi. Talk about antielection antiintellectualism. They are sort of rather than having an education policy and reflects in time the academy in dublin it represents reflects in the anti. One of the talking was isleftie one of the talking points is leftie politics. Which serve as a recruiting device. Precisely. That is always been at work to this discussion and rightfully so. You look at a College Campus and see these departments under enrolled majors in womens studies and so on and that will be something to a mainstream conservative that will be not something theyre interested in or interested in subsidizing. Thats one of the traditional talking points on it. For me, this is symptom of a much larger problem. That is a market that doesnt function effectively. That sets consumers say i do not want to learn or a professor that is going to fill my mind with all sorts of nonsense it seems that will make one clearance and make my. Much. Make my parents of much. And make my parents blush. But again, there is a function of a market that rewards kind of behavior and that kind of product because it is not a broader array of options. We get bogged down in the politics. This sort of hand to hand combat over liberalism and lose sight of the fact that is a symptom of his broader problem. Yu isv that preventing republicans from having the sort of resourcesal, and policy advisers that republicans have a small handful of conservatives . Quick to question whether its a intellectualism is very complicated. It is not as simple as a lot of people make it out to be. The service is far more intellectual in their thinking about politics. Conservatives are more intellectual and their thing about politics. At the same time an attitude of the academy and the actual academy. In fairness, i do not think reagan was wrong to say next one always here in chicago area always here in chicago. I wrote a quarterly journal of essays about policy it a lot of the people who write for us are people who ought to be at the deuce but are not. People working since who would rather be teaching the people who are on wall street when they were rather be. They think they cannot be academics because they are concerned and sometimes they are right from a lattes they are not smart. It a lot of times they are not right. Heres a huge advantage for the lets look and universities seem to offer more credibility than a think tank and thats understood. My own attitude about the academy is different from a lot of conservatives. In enormous amount of very valuable work being done in social sciences from what it is not in todays academy in a way he used to be in the way it used to be is the learned intellectually even through the 90s and is an into the 19th have these even through the 1960s and the 1970s. That person is really hard to find. That the fault of the university. It is not any better. There are a lot of great specialist. Its not right to see the [indiscernible] a lot of good work being done. I will throw out a list of issues that are the big issues health care, immigration, family formation, Climate Change which of those does this interest effectively and which doesnt . One dimension of conservatism is an attempt to supply politically effective answers about the issues the most Americans Care about. And part that involves reorienting the conversation to the issues. An interesting list you put out there and if you think about the conversation in washington, d. C. Over the last two years, how much has been about immigration or inequality or Climate Change . Issues that on a good day will get a combined 6 of the American Public saying that is the top issue that congress be thinking about you the issues that americans really want to focus on are these bread and butter concerns about the cost of living. About wage stagnation. Health care is one of them. They dont think about it the issues in ideological terms. They like smaller government. They dont like inequality and not at all a high priority. With they really want is a rising standard what they really want is a rising standard of living. I have my own views about each and every one of issues that we discussed. You are kidding. Is very easy for political activists and actors to get caught up in the issues that animate us and lose sight of the issues that our foremost concern of the people. What we end up focus on these things . Partly the folks that scream the loudest get the most attention. You have bit parts of your base that are concerned about certain issues that the general public is not that worried about. I think is the case with the inequality issue in particular. I want to say is around 3 thought the public says is a top issue for them. Ive seen certainly more than 3 of the News Coverage on that issue. The kind of thing that inside the beltway types tend to respond to each other a whole lot. If you are a journalist making a modest sum, a very pressing issue. Have you ever try to get your child into a really good preschool . Quick note richie not rich yet. Mobility, is that a big issue . Is it distinct . One of the more interesting things will see over the past year or year and a half is a pivot on democrats away from some this rhetoric around inequality and toward rhetoric around opportunity. Its a much more appealing friend. For you. You cannot have a conversation about it without hunt by education. Appealing frame. I filling with accounting and getting kids through college i filling with hamilton and getting more kids through college and less kids graduating high school. I feel like we are pounding in getting more kids through College Electors graduating from high school. Both parties have been guilty of that of this problem. Democratsnatural inclination is to solve from washington. They cant do that. They can pass laws that asked the bureaucracy. George w. Bush fell into the same trap with no child left behind hunt. A prescriptive attempt to fix schools from d. C. With my colleague and i tried to lay out is a different way of thinking about the federal role in the antithesis of centralizing power over decisionmaking and it is to default out to actors folder to the ground who can actually solve problems. In his wonderful chapter, allow people through trial and error figure out better ways to solve the problems they face in their local area in their School District in particular school. Have washington retreat from it but bear in mind create space for problem solvers to do their work. Youve said some green stuff about this, leaving more space between the federal government for local government, institutions that are not the government. We tend to view either the big federal government and a little State Government and everything is individual sphere and almost nothing in between. Republicans have long talked a great game about these visualization the decentralization. You look at the iraq war and no child left behind hunt behind. Why dont republicans put their money where their mouth is . Part in think about devolution. It gets to your right . The subjects you pick up. In some ways, the place would be more useful is not thinking about the subject that can be picked up and in need of a how to approach public problems. This is great difference between the left and right in america. The question of how to approach . This inclination on the left and it is rooted in progressive thinking that is very interesting and a lot of contemporary do not wrestle with the very much in it suggests we ought to think about American Society as consisting of individuals and the state. The role of the state is to enable those individuals to live the life they want to leave. Its a very appealing idea. Conservatives synthesize what happens in the space between the individual and the state, where our families are our civic institutions, where the market economy is, and levels of government are. We emphasize that not just because we do not like the federal government, but rather because it seems to us and that is where people thrive. That is where you saw problems is hand to hand face to face. Is going to have to be able to address peoples concerns where they are. It means there is an Important Role of government but a supporting role, enabling role. When able between to enable able quickly to stay in individual to help people solve problems. If you think about how things happen in that space conservatives often talk about this in terms of market oriented space itd turn some people off because we put one in the middle of it, it is not about money or works in that is. But work is as problemsolving mechanisms. We think about how you saw problems from the bottom up, you allow people to experiment with different solution if i people who need help to choose between the options allow the options chosen to follow way. Markets Enormous Economic incentive to work create the norms economic incentive to work. The consumer has a lot of power to choose among options. And things that do not work go away. Government programs do not work this way. Regulation does not allow for experimentation. The people or receiving a services do not choose among options and failures never go away. We just will try had started in even though everybody agrees it doesnt work. We just vote for head start again even though everybody agrees it doesnt work in it is not about markets in the sense of money but a way of solving problems that enables those institutions to function. Allow him try Different Things and people to choose from among options that allow failures to fail . Thats what our approach to Higher Education looks like and a lot of our welfare reform i just look like. If you think about how that would apply to space asked whether soprano to solve, it seems like it is for us space x i think this creativity and the markets you started talking about, it is much more in depth with the time it interesting that liberals are really out of step. These technocratic, topdown solutions do not seem to yield the creativity and flexibility that American Consumers can enjoy from the private sector from civil societies. The rest of our lives have become more customizable and leaner and much more responsive to individual concerns. Government continues in this sort of nonresponsive, sort of topdown way that is just it is really interesting that conservatism is when theres room for creativity. Let me ask, shifting gears a little bit not entirely. The big movement of conservatism that has been noticeable is the team part. Tea party. How much they they contribute to this question contribute to this . Is it about opening up space . I think that i would not say reform conservatives or myself fall into the tea party or establishment camp. Each has elements of the truth but neither is quite severe. Which group has which element . Tea party seems to be more realistic about the means of achieving. Youve got a reverse set of virtues and vices for the team part. I am stuck by the extent to which the division between team partiers and the establishment tea parties and establishment does not have tea partiers have a healthy reaction to visit the idea of the Republican Party that just solely about keeping fortune 500 happy. They do not have a lot in the way of ideas about, what exactly are we going to do about health care, Higher Education . The establishment doesnt either. The reason ive been so hopeful the one reason i am hopeful is i think at some point candidates, particularly president ial candidates have to run on something. Itd nobody else offering something so maybe some of ideals will catch on. Im going to you because you are the education guide and you know what the kids are up to. The youth. It has been a big thing, what ramesh was talking ab