Heritage Events Podcast

Presented during National Employee Freedom Week (August 20-26), a national information campaign educating about an employee’s rights regarding union membership and non-union alternatives. In many states, public employees are forced to pay dues to labor unions even if they do not want to join the union. Known as “agency shop” arrangements, these payments can amount to hundreds of dollars each year and were upheld in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977). Recent Supreme Court cases, including Knox v SEIU (2012), Harris v. Quinn (2014) and Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (2016), have challenged the extent and constitutionality of the Abood decision and many believe the days of “agency shop” arrangements are numbered. Two cases in particular, Janus v. AFSCME and Yohn v. CTA, seek to address issues raised in the Friedrichs case that were left unresolved when Justice Antonin Scalia passed away unexpectedly, resulting in a 4-4 decision and leaving the Abood decision and “agency shops” in place. Join us for a discussion on these cases and the impact of “agency fee” arrangements. Rebecca Friedrichs, lead plaintiff in Friedrichs v. CTA, will discuss her lawsuit and her activity since the 4-4 decision to continue to advance employee freedom. Terry Pell, whose nonprofit public interest law firm brought Friedrichs case and is bringing Yohn, will discuss the developments in both cases. Jacob Huebert from the Liberty Justice Center will discuss their major lawsuit, Janus v. AFSCME, which could be heard by the Supreme Court within the next year. Colin Sharkey, whose non-union association for teachers is a plaintiff in Yohn and co-leads National Employee Freedom Week, will examine these cases and others in the broader context of restoring individual liberty and preserving First Amendment rights for all employees.

President Trump issued Executive Order No. 13781 with the intent to “improve the efficiency, effectiveness and accountability of the Executive Branch.” The order directs the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to “propose a plan to reorganize governmental functions and eliminate unnecessary agencies.” However, achieving significant reforms as envisioned by the President will require more than just the OMB and executive agencies’ efforts. Many of the President’s desired reforms will require buy-in from Congress – a process that will open the door to the special interests and political games the President sought to drain from the swamp. In an effort to provide the OMB with its request for ideas for reform, The Heritage Foundation published two separate Blueprint for Reorganization reports. The first, An Analysis of Federal Departments and Agencies, contains bold and timely recommendations to downsize and reform the Executive Branch while the second, Pathways to Reform and Cross-Cutting Issues, discusses the problems of a cluttered and overgrown federal government, the history of executive branch reorganizations, various pathways for a successful reorganization, and recommendations for cross-cutting reforms – such as federal personnel, budget, and regulatory reforms – to help streamline and improve the federal government. Join us for a panel discussion on what types of reforms are necessary for a more efficient, effective and accountable government as well as the pathways to achieving those results. Donald Devine’s newest book, Political Management of the Bureaucracy: A Guide to Political Reform and Control, may be downloaded free of charge, or paperback editions may be purchased online.

1:30 p.m. Opening Remarks Lee Edwards, Distinguished Fellow in Conservative Thought, The Heritage Foundation Wei Wang, President, Taiwan Benevolent Association of America Yeni Wong, President, Institute for Taiwan-America Studies Keynote Address Lyu-shun Shen, Former Representative, Taiwan Economic and Cultural Representative Office, Washington, D.C. 2:15 p.m. Session 1: Cross-Strait Relations and the U.S. Chung-Chian Teng, Professor, Department of Diplomacy, National Chengchi University, Taiwan Patrick M. Cronin, Senior Advisor and Senior Director, Asia-Pacific Security Program, Center for a New American Security Russell Hsiao, Executive Director, Global Taiwan Institute Scott Kastner, Professor, Department of Government and Politics, University of Maryland Dean Cheng, Senior Research Fellow, Asian Studies Center, The Heritage Foundation – Moderator 4:00 p.m. Session 2: Future of Economic Relations between the U.S. and Taiwan Riley Walters, Research Associate, Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy, The Heritage Foundation Scott Kennedy, Director, Project on Chinese Business and Political Economy, CSIS Vincent Wang, Dean and Professor of Politics, School of Humanities and Sciences, Ithaca College Yinglee Tseng, Managing Director of TBAA-GDC – Moderator

Sixteen years after 9/11 Islamist terrorism remains a serious threat. Over the years the threat has evolved. Terror groups have waxed and waned, including Al Qaeda and its affiliates, ISIS, al Shabab, Boko Haram, and many other groups active around the world today. In some cases, these terrorists resemble insurgencies that seek to control territory, while in other cases they are striking soft targets. One thing they all have in common is that they hope to strike fear by targeting innocent civilians. This terrorism has killed and injured countless innocents across the world from suicide bombings in the Middle East to homegrown terrorists in Europe and the U.S. attacking people on the street with vehicles. Join us for a discussion of the threat of Islamist terrorism in the world today, how it has changed in the past sixteen years, and what the U.S. and our allies can do fight and defeat these terrorists.

While the vast majority of Americans want the threat from Islamist terrorism to diminish, there is precious little agreement about how best to achieve that. One of the policy areas that has proven to be especially polarizing is that of Countering Violent Extremism (CVE). A President Obama-era initiative, CVE seeks to address grievances and promote “counter-narratives” – particularly among Muslim communities – at home and abroad. Through CVE, the federal government hopes to reduce the terrorist threat by supporting local, community-led efforts to challenge extremism and violent, radical ideas. This approach was criticized for funding programs with little accountability, few metrics for effectiveness and for failing to deal with the ideological roots of Islamism. The Trump Administration appears to be taking a more skeptical approach to the efficacy of CVE. There has already been a re-evaluation of which groups are to be rewarded money for CVE projects, with those with a track record of effectiveness and potential for delivering results favored. More money has also been distributed to law enforcement. This approach has inevitably also had its critics. What is the appropriate role of the government in winning the war of ideas against Islamism? Should CVE be focused only on violent manifestations of Islamist ideology, or on political Islam in general? Who are the appropriate partners to work with? Which other radical ideologies – if any – should CVE be focused on? Questions of this type need to be addressed if the new administration is to forge a more effective Countering Violent Extremism policy than its predecessor.

As kids in D.C. and around the country are preparing to head back to school, the topic of education reform is once again on our minds. This week, Emily and Tommy sit down with Lindsey Burke; Director of the Center for Education Policy at the Heritage Foundation to discuss the future of school choice and what Congress can do to improve education for all students.

This week, Elizabeth and Tiffany talk about SCOTUS in the movies, an important 2nd Amendment case out of the D.C. Circuit, and interview the Washington Post’s Supreme Court reporter, Robert Barnes.

The right to earn a living and better oneself is at the heart of the American Dream. But in recent decades, many states have passed numerous laws that make it very hard, if not impossible, for individuals to get a start in business. A growing number of professions, such as barbers, bartenders, florists, and cosmetologists are subject to excessive licensing requirements that go far beyond what is needed to protect the health and safety of community members. These laws now affect nearly a third of American workers, denying employment opportunities and raising the cost of affected services. An Economic Liberty Task Force has been formed by Federal Trade Commission Chairman to address this important issue. Following opening remarks from Acting FTC Chairman Maureen Ohlhausen, an all-star panel of experts will examine what can be done to eliminate these excessive burdens and promote economic freedom.

In an attempt to hold the U.S. homeland and our allies in the Pacific hostage, North Korea – a highly reclusive and rogue state – is continuing to make rapid advances in ballistic missile and nuclear technology. In its July ballistic missile test, North Korea demonstrated the intercontinental range of Kim Jong Un’s new arsenal. It is more important than ever that U.S. missile defenses stay ahead of the growing threat. The United States currently fields an array of sensors that span land, sea, and space and its sea-based and ground-based interceptors offer limited protection against first generation ballistic missile threats. Importantly, this missile defense system is the ONLY thing that can defend our country once a missile has been launched. How will the United States stay ahead of the threat from North Korea? What options will Congress champion to fully modernize and evolve U.S. missile defense? Please join our keynote speaker Senator Dan Sullivan (R-AK), a leader on missile defense, and a panel of experts as they discuss the North Korean ballistic missile threat along with the future of the United States missile defense system

Margaret Thatcher Fellow Robin Simcox on realistic expectations for stabilizing Afghanistan, the need for continued U.S. engagement in the country, and what role a U.S. program to halt violent extremism around the world can (or can't) play in the process.

Serious thinkers of antiquity offer lessons from Rome’s history that illuminate our current political and moral circumstances. The geographical growth of the Roman Empire brought with it vast administrative centralization which diminished the sovereignty of small cities and localities. Yet, the small city was the place where civic virtues were best formed. In losing their autonomy by being subsumed in the empire, the small cities in which republican virtues flourished were suffocated, which in turn accelerated Rome’s decline. Today, with the endless expansion of the federal government, America’s cities face a similar situation, with grave consequences to our nation. Hugh Liebert will draw on some of antiquity’s greatest thinkers to clarify our situation, shed light on what might await republicanism, and evaluate what can be done today.

College students today face an environment that is largely hostile to the principles of a free society. University administrators prevent student groups from inviting speakers that oppose their academic orthodoxy and relegate freedom of expression to designated areas. Campus culture more often reflects an echo chamber than a marketplace of ideas. What can students do to affect this kind of culture and put the healthy exchange of ideas back in the center of the university? Join the Heritage Foundation and National Review Institute on Tuesday, July 25, for a panel discussion on “Impacting Culture: How to Be a Better Advocate for Freedom on Your Campus.” Our distinguished panelists will show you practical, easy ways that you can be a more effective and persuasive influencer of culture and advocate for freedom. Lunch will be provided at the conclusion of the event. National Review Institute is a non-profit, 501(c)(3), journalistic think tank, established to advance the conservative principles William F. Buckley Jr. championed, and complement the mission of the National Review magazine by supporting and promoting NR’s best talent.

Free speech is in peril on college campuses, and so-called “free speech zones” are anything but areas that allow for free expression. Located on higher education campuses around the country, these zones are often small, difficult to locate areas where students can distribute brochures or speak about issues of the day – but nowhere else. According to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, Longwood University requires students to register 5 days in advance before speaking their mind in the campus free speech zone, while the University of Cincinnati’s free speech zone comprises 0.1 percent of the school’s campus. Today, lawmakers and advocates are pushing back. Representative Phil Roe, M.D. (R-TN) has introduced a resolution stating federal lawmakers’ opposition to free speech zones. Arizona lawmakers enacted a bill in 2016 that makes all of the state’s public college and university campuses free speech zones – so individuals can speak and demonstrate anywhere on campus, as long as they do not interfere with the free speech rights of others. Join us for discussion of the problem with the misnamed “free speech zones” and how to protect free expression on campus.

This week, Tommy and Emily sit down with Luke Coffey, the Director of the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy at the Heritage Foundation. They discuss President Trump's foreign policy agenda, his recent speech in Warsaw defending Western civilization and the challenges ahead, and round out the episode with some "news of the day".

“The problems of culture and opportunity demand smarter and better policy at all levels of government, participation of civic institutions, and energetic private-sector players,” writes J.D. Vance in the Introduction to the 2017 Index of Culture and Opportunity. “[B]ut asking the right questions is a necessary first step.” Asking the right questions about the cultural and economic factors shaping opportunity in America is what The Heritage Foundation’s Index of Culture and Opportunity aims to do. The Index tracks national data on key indicators and pairs it with expert commentary from think tank researchers, academics, journalists, and practitioners. Their insights shed light on the factors that are helping to advance – or to hinder – opportunity in America. Join us to hear from several of this year’s contributors at the release of the 2017 Index of Culture and Opportunity.