ReportWire

Tag: think tank

  • Opinion | The New Right’s New Antisemites

    [ad_1]

    Kevin Roberts of the Heritage Foundation flounders in the Tucker Carlson-Nick Fuentes fever swamps.

    [ad_2]

    The Editorial Board

    Source link

  • A Sex Scandal. A Conservative Power Network. And Moms for Liberty.

    A Sex Scandal. A Conservative Power Network. And Moms for Liberty.

    [ad_1]

    The ugly news broke during the last week of November: A Florida woman alleged that the chair of the state Republican Party had raped her at her home. The assault had occurred after he and his wife had planned, according to police, to meet her for a three-way sexual rendezvous, as they had previously.

    These were stunning claims given the power couple involved: The GOP chair, Christian Ziegler, who has denied the assault and said the encounter was consensual, is a prominent state political consultant. His Republican-activist wife, Bridget Ziegler, is a founder of Moms for Liberty, the conservative political organization whose members have made school-board meetings partisan battlegrounds across America for the past two years.

    The allegations have sparked a fusillade of condemnations, complaints of hypocrisy, and “Moms for Libertines” jokes. But the situation has also provided a window into the machinations of the movement that helped make the Zieglers so significant in Republican politics—thanks especially to the rapid rise of Moms for Liberty as a national organization.

    Bridget Ziegler started Moms for Liberty with Tina Descovich and Tiffany Justice in January 2021, but she was soon wooed away. Within months, she was hired to help run school-board-campaign trainings at the Leadership Institute, an obscure but influential nonprofit.

    The institute was founded in 1979 by Morton Blackwell, a longtime GOP activist—so longtime that in 1964, he was the youngest elected delegate for Barry Goldwater in his run for the Republican nomination. Blackwell’s participation in the emerging New Right made him a crucial figure in the Reagan Revolution, Richard Meagher, a political-science professor at Randolph-Macon College, told me. Now 84, Blackwell still serves as president of the Leadership Institute, and is the Virginia GOP’s national committeeman.

    The mission of Blackwell’s institute is to recruit and train conservative activists for positions of influence in politics and the media. Its website lists dozens of classes about get-out-the-vote strategies, digital campaigning, and fundraising tips, but its true value, Meagher told me, lies in its connections. “The Leadership Institute trains people and then plugs them into various networks, whether it’s think tanks or in Congress, in nonprofit groups or advocacy groups,” he said.

    The institute claims to have tutored more than a quarter of a million conservative operatives over the past five decades, including Karl Rove, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and former Vice President Mike Pence. Newly elected House Speaker Mike Johnson has also credited Blackwell for his career in Congress. And few people in Florida were as plugged-in as the Zieglers. But many institute alums are relatively unheralded political players, experts told me. These activists might be the technologists behind campaigns and nonprofits, the staffers for senators, or the drafters of policy.

    When the coronavirus pandemic prompted school administrators to keep kids at home, the institute developed new programs for training suburban women to wage school-board campaigns to keep schools open and masks off—a development that led to the recruitment of Bridget Ziegler, the tall, blond face of this new public arena of conservative activism. (Ziegler did not respond to requests for comment for this story.)

    The Leadership Institute exists alongside dozens of similar but better-known groups, such as the Heritage Foundation, a think tank; Turning Point USA, a youth organization; and the Family Research Council, a social-conservative group. Many of these organizations and their leaders are members of a conservative umbrella organization called the Council for National Policy, of which Blackwell was a founding member. The CNP is a secretive, invitation-only group that gathers conservative activists to coordinate political strategy, Anne Nelson, the author of Shadow Network, told me. Think the Conservative Political Action Conference, but less performative.

    The CNP’s purpose is to “bring fellow travelers together” to coordinate strategy and messaging, Meagher said. Hillary Clinton popularized the phrase “vast right-wing conspiracy,” but “it’s not a conspiracy—it’s all out in the open,” Meagher said. “They are very well connected, and there’s lots of crossover between different institutions.” The Democratic Party, of course, has similar resources for training progressive candidates and furthering policy goals. But, Meagher said, the Democratic-aligned constellation is not nearly as ideologically coherent or disciplined as the groups that make up the CNP: “There is no analogy to that on the left.”

    This interlocking structure of funding, training, and schmoozing is key to understanding the quick success of Moms for Liberty in American politics.

    According to Ziegler and her colleagues, the organization was initially launched to address concerns that parents had about school closures and mask policies during the pandemic. But Moms for Liberty was quickly absorbed into the conservative movement’s broader network. Within days of its creation, Moms for Liberty was featured on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show. By June 2021, the group was hosting the political commentator Megyn Kelly for a “fireside chat” at Cape Canaveral, Florida. This early success and financial capability suggest that the group “had a lot of resources available that just are not available to other grassroots groups,” Maurice T. Cunningham, the chair of the political-science department at the University of Massachusetts at Boston, told me.

    Now, after only two years in existence, the group has become a mandatory campaign stop for Republican political candidates. At Moms for Liberty’s summit this year in Philadelphia—only its second-ever national gathering—every major presidential-primary candidate stopped by to speak to the crowd, including Donald Trump.

    “It might’ve been for five minutes that the moms were selling T-shirts and having bake sales,” Joshua Cowen, an education-policy professor at Michigan State University, told me. “But it was very quickly, within months, that they scaled up to the right-wing avatar they are today.” Recently, the group’s focus has shifted toward advocating against the teaching of gender, sexuality, and race in school curricula, and banning from school libraries certain books that mention those themes. This new front in the group’s campaigning has placed the allegations of sexual impropriety against the Zieglers in sharp relief. (“Never, ever apologize,” Christian Ziegler said during a presentation on dealing with the media at this year’s Mom’s for Liberty summit. “Apologizing makes you look weak.“)

    The Leadership Institute has been an integral sponsor of both of Moms for Liberty’s annual summits—donating at least $50,000 in 2022 and serving again as a lead sponsor of the event in 2023—and it has provided training sessions to members. In short, Cunningham told me, “if there’s no Leadership Institute, there’s no Moms for Liberty.” Every year, the group awards a “liberty sword” for parents’-rights advocacy; this year in Philadelphia, Blackwell got the sword.

    That recognition now appears unreciprocated. In the past three weeks, Bridget Ziegler seems to have been scrubbed, Soviet-style, from the Leadership Institute; her name has disappeared from the online staff directory. (As of Friday morning, the Leadership Institute had not responded to a request for comment.) Ziegler has also been asked to resign from the Sarasota School Board.

    There’s no question that her reputation in conservative politics has taken a hit. Even Moms for Liberty’s influence may have peaked for now, given some recent failures in school-board elections. But “what isn’t waning,” Cowen said, “is the influence of the groups behind them.”

    [ad_2]

    Elaine Godfrey

    Source link

  • What Will Happen in Georgia?

    What Will Happen in Georgia?

    [ad_1]

    ATLANTA—The three dozen young Black men and women who gathered in a church meeting room last Friday night were greeted with a rousing exhortation that had the added benefit of being true.

    In welcoming remarks, Bryce Berry, a senior at nearby Morehouse College and the president of the Young Democrats of Georgia club, told the group that none of the party’s national-policy accomplishments of the past two years would have been possible without people like them. “Without young Georgians, young Black Georgians,” Berry said for emphasis, “there would be no Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, no American Rescue Plan … no Inflation Reduction Act, no student-debt relief, and no gun-safety bill.”

    It was the sort of thing speakers always say to motivate a crowd at political rallies. But in this case it was historically accurate: Massive turnout and huge margins among young voters, especially young voters of color, were crucial to the twin runoff victories of Georgia Senators Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock in January 2021 that delivered Democrats their unexpected majority in the upper chamber.

    Young adults have become an essential electoral asset for Democrats—and loom as a potentially decisive factor in determining whether the party can avoid the worst outcomes up and down the ballot this November. In particular, young voters may decide whether Democrats can preserve the fragile hold on the Senate that Georgia provided to them.

    A sharp generation gap is among the most consistent findings in public polling across almost every competitive Senate race this year. Here in Georgia, for instance, an array of recent public polls (including surveys by Quinnipiac University, Marist College, Monmouth University, and the University of Georgia) have found Warnock leading the Republican Herschel Walker by as much as two to one among young adults from about 18 to 34 and consistently by a margin of about 10 percentage points among those in early middle age. Polls almost always show Walker at least slightly ahead among those in their later working years, and solidly leading among those 65 and older. (This week’s explosive allegations about Walker—the claim that he allegedly funded an abortion for a girlfriend and the subsequent accusations of domestic violence from his son—seem likely to weaken him, perhaps substantially, with every group, but are unlikely to erase these sharp generational differences.)

    These patterns are so common across the competitive states that it’s hard to imagine Democrats maintaining their Senate majority unless young voters like those who gathered at Atlanta’s Allen Temple AME Church turn out in substantial numbers.

    Compared with older generations, Millennials and members of Generation Z are more racially diverse, more likely to hold postsecondary degrees, and less likely to identify with any religious tradition. Both cohorts have leaned sharply Democratic since the first Millennials entered the electorate in large numbers in the 2004 election; the party has routinely carried about three-fifths of young adults in recent presidential contests. In 2018, Democrats hit a peak of support among young voters, winning two-thirds of those younger than 30 and three-fifths of those ages 30 to 44, according to estimates by Catalist, a Democratic targeting firm.

    Millennials and Gen Z are especially crucial to Democratic fortunes across Sun Belt states like Georgia and Arizona. In this region, younger generations are far more racially diverse than the mostly white, older voters who provide the backbone of GOP strength. In Arizona, for instance, Latino voters and other people of color compose almost three-fifths of the population under 30 but less than one-fifth of the population over 65, according to calculations from census data by William Frey, a demographer at Brookings Metro. In Georgia, Black voters and other people of color represent half of eligible voters under 45 but only three in 10 of those over 65. The gap between what I’ve called “the brown and the gray”—the diverse younger and the mostly white older generations—is comparably large in Texas and Nevada and nearly as big in North Carolina, Frey’s data show.

    For Democrats, this year’s nightmare scenario of losing both the House and Senate is a repeat of 2010 and 2014, when the GOP midterm sweeps were turbocharged by a catastrophic falloff in turnout among young people from the presidential race two years earlier.

    The anemic youth turnout in those off-year elections during Barack Obama’s presidency fueled a widespread perception that Democrats now faced a structural disadvantage in midterms because the electorate in those years was destined to be much older and whiter than in the presidential contest. But the 2018 results upended that assumption: Much more robust turnout among young adults helped power the Democratic gains that allowed them to recapture the House of Representatives. Compared with 2014, youth turnout increased in every state in 2018, more than doubling across the country overall, Circle, a think tank at Tufts University that studies young voters, has calculated. Some of the biggest increases occurred in Sun Belt states where the youth population is the most racially diverse, including Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada.

    The turnout surge continued into 2020, when exactly half of adults younger than 30 showed up to vote, a big increase from the 39 percent in 2016, Circle concluded. Georgia again ranked among the states with the biggest youth-turnout increase compared with 2016—a key factor in the Democrats’ razor-thin victories there in the presidential race and the two Senate runoffs.

    Democrats this year are highly unlikely to win as big a share of youth voters as they did during their 2018 sweep (they didn’t even equal it in 2020). But one of the pivotal questions remaining for the 2022 election is how close Democrats can come to matching the strength with young voters they displayed while Donald Trump was in the White House.

    Democrats face some serious headwinds. Never enthusiastic about President Joe Biden during the 2020 Democratic primaries, young people have given him lackluster approval ratings throughout his presidency. Generally operating with less of a financial cushion than older voters, young people have also been more affected by the highest inflation in four decades. “The cost of living is going up, but our salaries are not,” Alexia Brookins, a manager at a construction company, told me at the AME event sponsored by the group Millennials of Faith last weekend.

    In a mid-September NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll, just 37 percent of Millennials and Gen Z said that Biden’s actions had strengthened the economy; 55 percent said that he had weakened it. In a late-September Yahoo News/YouGov survey, only about one-fifth of young adults ages 18 to 44 said life was better for people like them since Biden took office (the rest said it was unchanged or worse).

    Terrance Woodbury, a partner at HIT Strategies, a Democratic consulting firm that focuses on young voters of color, worries that these verdicts will make it difficult for Democrats to reach the turnout and margins they need among young voters. In polling that HIT recently conducted for the NAACP, he told me, three-fourths of Black adults younger than 50 said their lives had not improved since Biden took office.

    Woodbury told me that although the media seem fixated on whether potential Republican gains among men will widen the Black gender gap this year, he expects that the “generational gap” in the African American community will be much wider. “Younger voters are much more likely to say Democrats take Black voters for granted, much less likely to approve of the direction of the country, and much less likely to approve of the performance of Democrats in Congress and the White House,” he told me. “All of that is significantly higher by generation than by gender. I actually do think there is a real risk of Democrats underperforming with young voters, and specifically young voters of color.” Equis Research, a Democratic polling firm that specializes in Latino voters, raised similar warnings about young Hispanic voters in a late-September memo analyzing the upcoming election.

    But other factors may help Democrats approach, if not necessarily match, their recent advantages with young voters.

    More young adults may vote in 2022 simply because so many of them registered and voted in 2018 and 2020. One reason for that is structural: There are more young people on the voter rolls because of the [2018 and 2020] elections, which is a huge boost, because it means they are more likely to be contacted by parties and organizations,” and those contacts increase the likelihood of people voting, Abby Kiesa, Circle’s deputy director, told me.

    The other key reason is attitudinal: Higher youth turnout may mean that not only is voting becoming a habit for those who have already done it; it is also becoming more expected among the 18-year-olds who age into the electorate every two years (more than 8 million of them since 2020, Circle projects). At the AME event, for instance, Kendeius Mitchell, a disability-claims manager, told me that youth engagement in Georgia is feeding on itself. “Just having it around so much in the conversation now is making people take accountability,” he said.

    John Della Volpe, the director of polling at the Harvard Kennedy School Institute of Politics, sees the same trend in the institute’s national surveys. “Voting … could be becoming a part of this new generation and how they think,” he told me.

    Also lifting Democratic hopes is the party’s summer succession of policy advances on issues important to young people. Della Volpe said the “No. 1” criticism of Biden among young adults in the Harvard poll was “ineffectiveness.” But the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, with its sweeping provisions to combat climate change, and the president’s decision to cancel up to $20,000 in student debt for millions of borrowers have provided Democratic organizers and ad makers something they lacked earlier this year: evidence to argue to young adults that their votes did produce change on things they care about. Biden gave organizers another talking point yesterday afternoon, when he announced a sweeping pardon of all people convicted of simple marijuana possession under federal law.

    On the ground in Georgia, Keron Blair, the chief organizing and field officer for the New Georgia Project, a grassroots political organization founded by the Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, told me that with the Democrats’ recent successes, “it feels a little bit easier” than in the spring to make the case to young adults that their vote counts.

    Looking across the overall record of Democrats since they took power, “people aren’t like, ‘Oh my God, this is amazing,’” Blair told me. “But people are clear that some of the wins and the political and economic shifts that we are seeing [are] the result of the [voting] choices that people have made.”

    Also working for Democrats is the gulf in values between most young voters and the Trump-era Republican Party. Fully 70 percent of adults younger than 30, for instance, said in a Pew Research Center poll this summer that abortion should remain legal in all or most circumstances, by far the most of any age group. That places them in sharp opposition to a GOP that is intensifying talk of passing a national ban on abortion if it wins control of Congress. “If we maintain that [recent] surge among young voters and voters of color,” Woodbury said, “they are voting against the crazy on the other side.”

    Although different public surveys have sent different signals about youth engagement, the latest IOP youth survey, which is considered a benchmark in the field, found that as many young people said they “definitely” intend to vote this fall as did in 2018.

    That prospect points toward an incremental but inexorable power shift. In 2020, for the first time, Millennials and Gen Z roughly equaled Baby Boomers and their elders as a share of eligible voters. By 2024, the younger generations will establish a clear advantage. As their numbers grow, so does their capacity to influence the national direction. There’s no guarantee they will exercise that inherent power next month by turning out to vote in large numbers. But more young people appear to be recognizing how much their choices can matter. Berry, the young Georgia activist, told me that his message to his friends is centered on understanding the strength in numbers that they are accumulating: “I really impress on folks, ‘Look at what happened because of you. You understood the moment in 2020; now you have to understand the moment in 2022.’”

    [ad_2]

    Ronald Brownstein

    Source link

  • Morgan’s School of Global Journalism and Communication Launches Black Soccerlab

    Morgan’s School of Global Journalism and Communication Launches Black Soccerlab

    [ad_1]

    Press Release


    Mar 21, 2022

    Morgan State University’s School of Global Journalism and Communication today announced the launch of Black SoccerLab, a think tank dedicated to the study of soccer in the African American community and across the African diaspora.

    With a concentration on research, media programming and service, Black SoccerLab’s mission is to share the narratives of the Black soccer community and showcase its development around the world. The lab, which will operate from the SGJC’s Center for the Study of Race and Culture in Sports, shall highlight stories, examine issues and document history.

    Black SoccerLab is introduced at an unprecedented time where African Americans are identifying as soccer fans in larger numbers and participating in the sport at every level. Morgan State professor Edward G. Robinson III, the director of the Center, will manage Black SoccerLab and support student-directed projects. 

    “Soccer is beloved by black people all around the world, and we want to capture that excitement and explore the evolution of that tradition in our research and projects,” Robinson said. “We have a tremendous opportunity to collect and disseminate information about an unexplored community. As a think tank, there are so many ways to engage. We plan to connect with the pulse of the Black soccer community and share the message.” 

    Instrumental to Black SoccerLab’s integration into this space, the Center has partnered with advisors Akbar Majeed, founder of Concrete2Green, and Irv Smalls Jr., executive director of F.C. Harlem – two soccer executives with long-time ties to the Black soccer community. 

    “The Black SoccerLab is a groundbreaking platform for Black people to drive the narratives that are important to us around the world’s most popular sport and its growth in the United States,” Smalls said. “Our participation and impact in the sport requires a perspective that is uniquely ours.”

    Soccer is the world’s most popular sport and its roots run deep across the African diaspora. Americans, however, have traditionally passed on soccer. 

    Over the past 30 years, the sport has developed modestly in the American marketplace, enough to support the growth of Major League Soccer. Still, many American sports fans have held soccer at arms-length. They choose football, basketball and baseball ahead of soccer. 

    African Americans have yet to fully adopt soccer. The future, however, portends another outcome. Across America, the number of black soccer players continues to grow, evidence by their collective increased participation in youth soccer, college soccer, Major League Soccer and the U.S. National Team. Black sports fans, who have traditionally measured just a blip on the radar, are finding their way to the pitch. 

    Black SoccerLab is well-positioned to monitor that growth. Concrete2Green founder Akbar Majeed has actively worked at the grassroots level to help bolster that growth. 

    “It’s important for us to create our own properties like Black SoccerLab that offer authentic engagement and access to the Black community,” Majeed said. “I’m excited about our partnership with MSU especially because of the rich history HBCU’s have had in being in the forefront of cultural empowerment.”

    Morgan State University
    School of Global Journalism & Communication
    CONTACT: Edward G. Robinson III
    Director of SGJC Center for the Study of Race & Culture in Sports
    PHONE: 443-885-2787; 919-812-0959
    EMAIL: Edward.robinson@morgan.edu

    Source: Morgan State University’s School of Global Journalism and Communication

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Retired Adm. James ‘Jamie’ Foggo Hired as Dean of Think Tank Focused on Maritime Thought Leadership

    Retired Adm. James ‘Jamie’ Foggo Hired as Dean of Think Tank Focused on Maritime Thought Leadership

    [ad_1]

    Press Release


    Nov 14, 2021

    The Navy League of the United States — a nonprofit civilian, educational and advocacy organization that supports America’s sea services: the Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard and U.S.-flag Merchant Marine — announced today that it has launched a new think tank, the Center for Maritime Strategy, with retired Adm. James “Jamie” Foggo as its dean. This organization will conduct and support policy research and advocacy efforts across a broad spectrum of issues that impact the United States’ position as a maritime nation.

    “Policy development and advocacy are the main reasons for the Navy League’s existence, and we are stepping up our activity in these areas to meet the requirements of 21st-century maritime power,” said Navy League National President David Reilly.

    The development of the Center for Maritime Strategy was led by a steering committee drawn from Navy League leadership. The committee was chaired by former Chief of Naval Operations and current Navy League National Vice President Adm. John Richardson. Other members of the committee included retired U.S. Fleet Forces commander Adm. John Harvey, former Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy and current Navy League CEO Mike Stevens, Frank Russo of Forctis Advisory, and Fulton Homes CEO Doug Fulton. This committee will remain in place to provide general oversight and advice to the center’s dean.

    “The Navy League’s Center for Maritime Strategy will be the go-to place for maritime strategic thought, policy recommendations and informed advocacy,” Richardson said. “The new organization will include a vibrant media operation to amplify it’s work. I’m excited about this initiative to boost the Navy League’s citizen voice and help strengthen the United States as a maritime nation.”

    Media Contact: Danielle Lucey

    Senior Vice President of Marketing and Communications

    dlucey@navyleague.org (703) 312-1580

    About the Navy League of the United States The Navy League of the United States, founded in 1902 with the support of President Theodore Roosevelt, is a nonprofit civilian, educational and advocacy organization that supports America’s sea services: the Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard and U.S.-flag Merchant Marine. Through national and local programs, the Navy League of the United States provides a powerful voice to educate the public and Congress on the importance of our sea services to our nation’s defense, well-being and economic prosperity. The Navy League provides support to our sea services personnel and their families and youth programs, such as the Naval Sea Cadet Corps, Junior ROTC and Young Marines, that expose young people to the values of our sea services. For more information, go to www.navyleague.org.

    Source: Navy League of the United States

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Birth of The Center for Africa Studies and Policy

    Birth of The Center for Africa Studies and Policy

    [ad_1]

    Press Release



    updated: Jun 14, 2021

    The Center for Africa Studies and Policy (CASP), far from being a standard Western-style think tank, takes ideas to the operational and implementation level. It will serve as a reservoir of thoughts, a laboratory of ideas, a space for reflection, and a creator of stimulating debates. It will also propose action measures and engage in activities that further the process of actualizing these proposals.

    The private, non-partisan, nonprofit and independent institution brings together bosses, experts, academics and researchers who have expertise in analyzing the major themes of the international agenda, particularly in the field of security and international affairs. CASP will play a vital role in the U.S. political space. As part of its strategy, Center for Africa Studies and Policy will develop partnerships and working relationships with universities, think tanks, research centers, and other institutions with influence over policy and decision-making processes in the U.S.

    In addition, The Center for Africa Studies and Policy (CASP) operates in the areas of consulting, influence communication, business intelligence, strategic thinking, production of strategic events and training. The Center for Africa Studies and Policy (CASP) aims to help inform strategic decision-making in Africa and in the United States. Its mission is to conduct studies and strategic analysis at the national and international level in areas deemed strategic for Africa. It analyzes national structural issues, examines the external relations of African countries in their multiple dimensions and pays great attention to global issues. 

    The mission of CASP is to help anticipate emerging global, regional, and national threats and challenges and their impact in African countries and on U.S. interests. CASP will utilize all tools at its disposal to address these issues and to propose effective solutions and responses.

    The board of CASP includes Hakim Arif, Joshua D. Burt, Anis D. El Okbani, and Irina Tsukerman. Other board members and fellows are to be announced shortly.

    www.caspusa.org

    Source: The Center for Africa Studies and Policy (CASP)

    [ad_2]

    Source link