If the GOP were to adopt Jeff Anderson and Jay Cost’s presidential-nomination proposal—which would empower the grassroots, feature a real convention, shorten the process, and reduce the outsized influence of the press corps and donor class—“the Republican Party, and American democracy, would be better for it.”
Under a winning alternative, costs would drop, liberty would be secured, and any American who wants to buy health insurance would be able to do so.
A winning alternative to Obamacare needs to solve the three core concerns that Americans had with our health-care system even before Obamacare was passed—but as important as what an alternative would do is what it wouldn’t do.
A new presidential-nomination system, modeled after the process that ratified the Constitution, would provide huge benefits for the Republican Party and the country.
The continuation of the American experiment requires cultivating a citizenry that can envision the rich life that flourishes between the extremes of overbearing government and radical individualism—in short, cultivating a citizenry that knows how to be free and prioritizes that freedom.
The number of American citizens who are imprisoned solely for federal drug convictions is exceedingly low.
Neither the 14th Amendment’s text, nor its history, nor the way it has been construed by the Supreme Court, requires the United States to grant birthright citizenship to illegal immigrants.
While Obamacare is for the near-poor and near-elderly at the expense of everyone else, Scott Walker’s proposal shows how a well-conceived conservative alternative would appeal to the middle class while saving a fortune.
Democratic republics must be governed by the rule of law, not by kingly executive decrees, or else they cease to be democratic republics.