Ripon Forum September 2016 by The Ripon Society

JEFF FLAKE ON THE ONE THING HE WOULD CHANGE ABOUT AMERICAN POLITICS: “Treat those across the political aisle as often wrong but rarely evil.”

September 2016 Volume 50, No. 4

A Better Way for

AMERICA’S MILITARY Mac Thornberry on the GOP plan to strengthen our national defense Plus: Avik Roy on VA reform and improving the health care our Veterans receive And: Andrew Gamble on Margaret Thatcher and how she would deal with the challenges we face in today’s volatile world www.riponsociety.org

$7.95 U.S./$8.95 Canada

POWERING PROGRESS POWERING THE FUTURE For more than a century, members of the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers have played an integral role in enhancing the standard of living for billions of people worldwide by providing affordable energy, fuel, and the many petrochemical products that have modernized our world. Products made from abundant and affordable oil and natural gas not only make lives better today, but are helping the world solve problems and create opportunities that will make life better for future generations as well.

To learn more go to www.afpm.org AFPM is proud to support the Ripon Society.

“Ideas that matter, since 1965.“ Volume 50, Number 4 Debate 4 5

Cover Story (cont’d) A Common Sense Step in the Fight Against Terrorism By Carlos Curbelo After the massacre in Orlando earlier this year and countless other mass shootings across the country, the American people want Congress to act.

Older, Smaller and Weaker: Dangerous Trends for the U.S. military By Justin T. Johnson After 15 years of war, the U.S. military is barely large enough to win one major conflict, and is forced to get by with poor training and aging equipment.

Terrorize Terrorists by Being Armed By Larry Pratt The gun-free zone is not a crime fighting tool any more than is the background check. Armed citizens are the only way to protect life from terrorists and other criminals.

Reining in the NSC By Luke Strange The coming transition to a new administration has raised renewed questions about the size and influence of the National Security Council and its staff.

Health Independence for Veterans By Avik Roy The VA is one of the few examples in the industrialized world of fully socialized medicine. With the Department plagued by chronic mismanagement, now is the time to change that.

Readiness vs. Steadiness: Trump, Clinton & the Next Commander in Chief To the extent that 2016 is a “change” election, it’s safe to say that the biggest change in defense policy over the next four years will occur if Donald Trump is elected to the White House.

Politics & Perspective 6 Gaming the Debates: Trump is tough, but is Hillary tougher? With essays by Kim Alfano, Carrie Almond, Brett O’Donnell, Alan Schroeder & Robert Traynham 10

The Iron Lady in 2016 By Andrew Gamble With the world a more dangerous place than at any time since the end of the Cold War, how would Margaret Thatcher deal with today’s volatile global threats?

Cover Story

Sections

In this Edition

News & Events -- coverage of a September 14th breakfast with U.S. Sen. Richard Burr

Ripon Profile - U.S. Sen. Jeff Flake

A Better Way for America’s Military By Mac Thornberry The next President will confront two realities -- the world has grown more dangerous, and America’s military is approaching a crisis point. Publisher The Ripon Society

Editor Lou Zickar

President Jim Conzelman

Editorial Assistant Stephen Jackson

Editorial Board Thomas Tauke Michael Castle Billy Pitts Pamela Sederholm Judy Van Rest Jim Murtha John Feehery

Advertising Coordinator Janessa Lopez

One Year Subscription: $40.00 individuals $15.00 students The Ripon Forum (ISSN 0035-5526) is published by The Ripon Society. The Ripon Society is located at 1155 15th Street, NW, Suite 550, Washington, DC 20005. Postmaster, send address changes to: The Ripon Forum, 1155 15th Street, NW, Suite 550, Washington, DC 20005.

RIPON FORUM September 2016

Comments, opinion editorials and letters should be addressed to: The Ripon Forum, 1155 15th Street, NW, Suite 550, Washington, DC 20005 Or emailed to the Editor of The Ripon Forum at louzickar@riponsociety.org. In publishing this magazine, The Ripon Society seeks to provide a forum for fresh ideas, well-researched proposals, and for a spirit of criticism, innovation, and independent thinking within the Republican Party.

What science can do

AstraZeneca is proud to support The Ripon Society _____________________ astrazeneca-us.com

THE RIPON SOCIETY HONORARY CONGRESSIONAL ADVISORY BOARD U.S. Senators: Shelley Moore Capito - Senate Co-Chair Cory Gardner - Senate Co-Chair Roy Blunt Richard Burr Bill Cassidy, M.D. Susan M. Collins Steve Daines Joni Ernst Deb Fischer Orrin G. Hatch John Hoeven Pat Roberts Mike Rounds Thom Tillis Roger Wicker U.S. Representatives: Pat Tiberi - House Co-Chair Susan Brooks - House Co-Chair Renee Ellmers - House Co-Chair Martha Roby - Vice Chair, South Erik Paulsen - Vice Chair, Midwest Bill Shuster - Vice Chair, Northeast Greg Walden - Vice Chair, West Mark Amodei Andy Barr Mike Bishop Diane Black Marsha Blackburn Charles Boustany Vern Buchanan Larry Bucshon, M.D. Michael C. Burgess, M.D. Ken Calvert Jason Chaffetz Tom Cole Barbara Comstock Ryan Costello Ander Crenshaw Carlos Curbelo Rodney Davis Jeff Denham Charlie Dent Bob Dold Sean Duffy Tom Emmer Rodney Frelinghuysen Chris Gibson Kay Granger Sam Graves Richard Hanna Joe Heck French Hill Randy Hultgren Darrell Issa Evan Jenkins Lynn Jenkins Dave Joyce John Katko Mike Kelly Adam Kinzinger Leonard Lance Darin LaHood Billy Long Frank Lucas Tom Marino Kevin McCarthy Michael McCaul Cathy McMorris Rodgers Patrick Meehan Candice Miller John Moolenaar Randy Neugebauer Kristi Noem Bruce Poliquin John Ratcliffe Tom Reed Jim Renacci Reid Ribble Tom Rice Tom Rooney Peter Roskam Steve Scalise John Shimkus Lamar Smith Steve Stivers Glenn Thompson Mac Thornberry Mike Turner Fred Upton Jackie Walorski Mimi Walters Steve Womack Todd Young

In this Edition

Winston Churchill once said that “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.” As we approach the 2016 general election, it often seems like this year’s presidential candidates are putting that notion to the test. To the extent that Americans may be frustrated with the individuals who are seeking to lead our democracy, it may be a good time to remember the individuals who are working to defend it. For the past 15 years, the men and women of the United States Armed Forces have been putting their lives on the line trying to protect our country and make sure that the kind of horrible attacks we experienced on September 11, 2001 never happen again. During this time, it has become easy to forget that the country remains at war. Yes, we honor our service members at sporting events. And yes, we pay tribute to their service on holidays and on other occasions throughout the year. But these honors and tributes are meaningless if we fail to give them what they need when they are in harm’s way. As House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry writes in this latest edition of The Ripon Forum: “The next President will confront two realities. One is that the world has grown more dangerous under President Obama’s watch. The second is that America’s military is approaching a crisis point.” Thornberry is leading an effort in Congress to avert this readiness crisis by providing our troops with the resources and equipment they need to keep America secure. According to Justin Johnson with the Heritage Foundation, this effort could not come soon enough. Since 2011, he writes: “the defense budget has been cut by 25 percent in real terms, even as operations in Afghanistan and elsewhere continue. We now face a potentially deadly storm of rising threats, major ongoing operations, and dramatic defense budget cuts.” If there is one thing our troops in the field do not need, it is micromanagement from Washington. And yet as Luke Strange of the American Enterprise Institute notes, that is something they have faced in recent years as the National Security Council has expanded in size. “As the NSC staff has grown to around 400 people,” he states, “critics – including former members of the Obama Cabinet – have faulted it for strategic drift, inefficiency, and micromanagement of the uniformed military.” Johnson writes about an effort underway on Capitol Hill to curb the NSC’s authority. Beyond improving military readiness, Congress also must make sure our troops are cared for after they leave the battlefield. Veterans’ health care has been a longstanding priority for our country. In recent years, it’s also become an increasing challenge – in large part, Avik Roy writes, because of the way care is administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs. “The most important thing to understand about VA care,” writes Roy, who co-chaired a key task force on the subject, “is that it is one of the few examples in the industrialized world of fully socialized medicine.” With surveys indicating that “overwhelming majorities of veterans want private options,” Roy also discusses a bipartisan plan that would provide just that. In addition to focusing on “A Better Way for America’s Military,” this latest edition of the Forum also features an essay by Cambridge Professor Andrew Gamble about the late British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and how she might deal with today’s global threats. Rising star Congressman Carlos Curbelo takes on longtime activist Larry Pratt in a debate about gun safety in the age of terror, while a collection of political leaders and communications professionals analyze the upcoming presidential debates. And in our latest Ripon Profile, U.S. Senator Jeff Flake reveals his proudest achievement since coming to the Senate and the one thing in American politics that he would most like to change. As always, we hope you enjoy this edition of The Ripon Forum, and encourage you to contact us with any thoughts or comments you may have. Lou Zickar Editor of The Ripon Forum louzickar@riponsociety.org RIPON FORUM September 2016

Debate

“GUN SAFETY IN THE AGE OF TERROR”

A Common Sense Step in the Fight Against Terrorism CARLOS CURBELO In recent years, our world has seen a spike in mass denied a firearm, the number of petitions filed, and the number of shootings and deadly attacks at the hands of home-grown instances in which the district court rejected the Attorney General’s extremist terrorists, some inspired by radical interpretations of decision. It would also require that the Attorney General, as well Islam. From San Bernardino to Orlando, our nation has been as federal, state, and local law enforcement officials, be notified of ravaged by these assaults, as have our friends and allies in any request to transfer a firearm or explosive to a person who is or France and Belgium. We as Americans know the devastating has been identified in the Terrorist Screening Database within the effects these massacres have had on our communities, and we last five years. Had a bill such as this already been implemented, have come together to rebuild a stronger nation more aware of it could have stopped the Orlando Shooter -- who had previously the dangers facing the world been on a terror watch-list -Currently, individuals from buying firearms. on the TSA No-Fly list aren’t There are around 109,000 automatically prohibited from names on the TSA No Fly and purchasing a firearm. If an Selectee lists, with fewer than individual can’t board a plane 2,700 of those individuals in the United States because being U.S. citizens. I respect of the dangerous risk they the 2nd Amendment rights of may pose, then there is no Americans, while also firmly reason they should be able to believing that any person who purchase a firearm. To address cannot board a plane is given this, I introduced the bipartisan additional screening before Terrorist Firearms Prevention purchasing a firearm. The Act of 2016 (H.R. 5576) in the Terrorist Firearms Prevention House of Representatives, the Act does this while protecting companion to Senator Susan the rights of Americans who Collins’ bill in the Senate. feel they were wrongly denied This legislation gives the the sale of a firearm. Attorney General the discretion We must protect If an individual can’t board a plane to deny the sale of firearms and Americans from the growing because of the risk they pose, then threat of terrorism here at home explosives to individuals who appear on the No-Fly and TSA there is no reason they should be while our brave military fights Selectee lists. To protect American radicalism overseas. After the able to purchase a firearm. citizens’ 2nd Amendment rights, horrific massacre in Orlando this bill gives those who are and countless other mass initially denied from purchasing a firearm the opportunity to shootings across the country and around the world, Americans challenge the decision. If the government fails to meet that deserve more than words; they need action. Congress must burden and make a case within a reasonable time period, then work to ensure that terrorists cannot purchase firearms. This is the transfer can go forward. The opportunity for judicial review simply common sense. The Terrorist Firearms Prevention Act of the Attorney General’s denial upholds the fundamental tenets of 2016 carefully balances our national security priorities with of our Constitution by allowing the continued exercise of 2nd Constitutional protections for those who obey the law. Amendment rights while not allowing firearm sales to those I will continue to press upon House GOP Leadership to allow who threaten our nation’s security. In addition, if the petition for debate on this bicameral legislation and remain committed is successful, the citizen will be able to recover their attorney’s to working with my colleagues to keep firearms out of the fees. hands of dangerous individuals who wish to inflict harm upon To ensure proper Congressional oversight over the Justice our great nation. RF Department, the bill requires the Attorney General to submit a report to the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees of the Carlos Curbelo represents the 26th District of Florida in the House and Senate, detailing the number of persons who were U.S. House of Representatives. 4

RIPON FORUM September 2016

“GUN SAFETY IN THE AGE OF TERROR”

Terrorize Terrorists by Being Armed LARRY PRATT Apparently many politicians like to see dead bodies minutes. A lot of carnage can result from an attack if all piled up after mass murderers attack in gun-free zones. people can do is wait for the police – once 911 has been Why else do they continue to designate malls, schools, called. churches and other places as gun-free zones? It is in those Some politicians have argued that no one should very places that all but three of our public mass murders be able to purchase a gun if their name is on the no-fly have occurred since 1950. list. This list is so devoid of due process that the late Similarly, Democrat-dominated jurisdictions such as Senator Edward Kennedy and current Representative Tom Baltimore and Chicago are infamous for their high murder McClintock (R-CA) have had their names on these lists. rates. These cities are hostile to private gun carriers and It took both of them weeks to get their names off – even they have the murder counts to though they were members of show for it. Congress! The French terrorists who Clearly, the no-fly list is struck the Bacalan knew they not going to protect anybody were targeting a gun-free zone. from terrorism or any other Actually, all of France is such form of mass murder. a zone, and it is a terrorist Background checks playground. Moreover, the have proven to be equally guns used by the French ineffective in keeping dirt-bags were completely guns out of terrorists’ and illegal. That further protected criminals’ hands. Gun bans the terrorists from effective in France were useless, and response since they knew background checks in the U.S. they would have a monopoly have been equally ineffective of force. Not even the police in stopping the large number were carrying guns. of mass murderers who had Larry Pratt New Orleans Mayor no prior criminal record. Ray Nagin (who went to jail Others steal their weapons, The no-fly list is not going to on corruption charges after thus obviating a background Hurricane Katrina) confiscated protect anybody from terrorism or check. guns from the citizenry. The We would not (I hope!) any other form of mass murder. police were unable to keep tolerate a background check order, so the looters had a field before an editorial could be day. printed or a sermon could be preached. By the same During the Watts riots, it was Chinese merchants token we should reject the idea that background checks with their semi-automatic rifles with large magazines for the exercise of the Second Amendment are any more that warded off the looters and arsonists. They were the acceptable than they would be regarding the First. only armed resistance because the police were completely In a recent year when 24 million background checks overwhelmed. were carried out, some 40 prosecutions resulted from lying Can other armed citizens stop terrorists and mass on the form filled out by purchasers. The gun-free zone is murderers? Shortly after a court order required Chicago not a crime fighting tool any more than is the background to issue concealed carry permits, an Uber driver stopped check. a mass murderer from carrying out his bloody plan in Armed citizens are the only way to protect life August of 2015. A gunman started shooting in a crowd of from terrorists and other criminals while waiting for the people, but he was stopped when the Uber driver got out police. RF of his car and shot and wounded the assailant, stopping the attack. Larry Pratt is Executive Director Emeritus of Gun Owners A good response time for the police is at least six of America. RIPON FORUM September 2016

Politics & Perspective

Gaming the Debates

Trump is tough, but is Hillary tougher? When Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump square off against each other in the first presidential debate at Hofstra University, it will be one of the most widely anticipated events in recent political history. Democrat vs. Republican. Insider vs. outsider. Longtime public official vs. businessman and reality TV star. A record 46.2 million households tuned into the first debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney in 2012. This year’s match-up could very well top that. In anticipation of the contest, we asked five veteran political leaders and communications experts for their take on the match-up, what they would like to see, and the advice they would give to the candidates when they take the stage on September 26th .

* * * * * The Diva vs. the Death Metal Band by KIM ALFANO

I’ll start this article with a BIG caveat. What I write here is based on the world as it exists on September 7th, 2016. And we all know that this race for President changes by the second. So I’ll present the best advice I have for the candidates TODAY for the upcoming debates which are a world away. The first thing we all know is the personality of these two candidates is central to this race. I’d liken Hillary Clinton’s style to that of an opera singer – if she is clinical and mechanical in the debates, her performance will be boring and forgetful; if she’s curt or angered by Donald Trump’s attacks, she’ll seem like a diva. However, if she brings a level of humanness, and passion and skill, she may be triumphant. Donald Trump is more like a Death Metal Band. He is deeply appealing to a small group of people who will not be told he is anything but brilliant. But will it be possible for him to pick just the right song that changes that perception for the rest of the electorate? Will he be able to convince them that his style is not just screaming and spitting and tearing up the stage, but actually music? You know, can he sing a song that soccer moms will listen to with their kids to seem cool? Can he tame his usual hard core performance enough to speak to a wider audience, yet still be more dynamic than the boring opera singer? If so – if he can pull that off – he’ll kill it. The bottom line is this: If Hillary can ditch her robotic, VERY political, legalistic style and come across as passionate and a friend of the people – she will have a great night. If Donald Trump succeeds in bringing some 6

civility and depth on issues to his “bite the head off the bat” style, while at the same time maintaining the mantle of authenticity and “everyman” understanding, he will blow her away. (Not literally.) RF Kim Alfano is one of the country’s leading media strategists who has advised such Republican leaders as Governors Mitch Daniels and Terry Branstad.

What Women Want by CARRIE ALMOND

The upcoming debates give Donald Trump the opportunity to win the hearts and minds of the American people – 53 percent of whom are women. As President of the National Federation of Republican Women (NFRW), I have spent the past four months traveling the country in a red, white, and blue RV named Rosie, after my Grandmother. Across more than 20,000 miles and 35 states, I’ve listened to Republican women, as well as Independents, and even Democrats. They tell me they don’t want to vote for Hillary – they don’t trust her and they don’t like her. But many are waiting for Donald Trump to earn their vote. Here are some key points they will be listening for in the debates.  Be Presidential -- Hillary is going to try her best to bait Trump. He mustn’t bite. He needs to be the adult in the room – steady, confident, and ready to lead.  Let Us Inside -- Women want to see the man beyond the bluster – the compassionate, caring father described so compellingly by the Trump children at the

RIPON FORUM September 2016

and prepared for the job, connected to the audience, likable, Republican National Convention. but also dominant over your opponent. Walking that line  Trump the Woman Card -- Hillary talks about of aggression and likability is surely a challenge to both fighting for women, but her record shows the hypocrisy candidates this cycle and is a skill so daunting that few of her words. Donald Trump can contrast this with his candidates for the presidency have been able to master it. impressive record of hiring and promoting based on the Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton are recent examples. It ability to get the job done. As Ivanka so succinctly put it: is the ability to simultaneously charm the audience and “My father is color blind and gender neutral.” disarm your opponent. Donald Trump crosses the line from  Focus on the Real Stakes -- Women are charming to churlish frequently, but gender communication concerned about safety from terrorists abroad and violence research confirms that at home. They are concerned we are more forgiving about jobs and opportunities of naked aggression in for their children. Keep the “Presidential debates are won and men than women and focus on the failed Clintonlost by walking the fine line of so our perception of his Obama record. And for values aggression.” aggression will likely be voters, two words: Supreme perceived more positively Court. Brett O’Donnell than those moments when  Results Matter -Hillary attempts to train Donald Trump thinks big, and her fire on Mr. Trump. delivers. For Americans who believe their government is Additionally, Secretary Clinton doesn’t help herself by broken, this is a powerful contrast to Hillary Clinton, whose consistently playing more defense than offense, particularly supporters struggle to name a single accomplishment. as she continues to struggle to explain her careless handling At our biennial convention last fall, the NFRW of her emails and classified material. This line of attack conducted a poll. We asked women which characteristics seems to uniquely expose her “personality deficit.” If Mr. were most important in choosing a nominee for President. Trump is able to stay disciplined and use the emails to More than three-fourths (76 percent) chose “being a continue to undercut her trustworthiness, Secretary Clinton strong and effective leader.” could be in for three long debates. To win, Clinton has to be The debates give Donald Trump the opportunity to able to pivot out of the “corner” of these attacks and get on show that he will be that leader. If he takes advantage, he offense herself, but in doing so, she has to be able to walk will seal the deal with America. RF the tightrope of charm and aggression. So far, that has been a significant challenge for her. RF Carrie Almond is President of the National Federation of Republican Women. Brett O’Donnell is a Republican Communications Consultant who has helped prepare five presidential candidates for presidential debates, including President The Fine Line of George W. Bush, Senator John McCain, Congresswoman Aggression and Michele Bachmann, Governor Mitt Romney and Senator Likability Lindsey Graham. by BRETT O’DONNELL In the final Democrat Primary debate of the 2008 New Hampshire campaign, then Senator Hillary Clinton fielded a question about her “personality deficit.” After admitting that her opponent was “very likable,” then Senator Obama famously replied that Clinton was “likable enough.” She has attributed her perceived “deficit” to learning to control her emotions while attempting to advance through her legal education and career, protecting her from sexist attacks. She readily admits and understands the negative perception she creates. And it is that perception that may make her too tough in the presidential debates. Presidential debates are won and lost by walking the fine line of aggression. To win you have to be perceived as competent

A Study in Contrasts – and Low Expectations

by ALAN SCHROEDER Have two presidential debaters ever presented a more striking contrast than Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump? Consider the differences: female versus male, political insider versus political outsider, preparation versus improvisation, caution versus looseness. No wonder ratings for the 2016 debates are expected to go through the roof.

RIPON FORUM September 2016

As a debater, Clinton brings a number of assets to head-to-head in a debate. That said, 2016 has been anything the exercise, not the least of which is experience. In three but conventional. campaigns over 16 years, she has engaged in many one-on-one Historically, general election candidates prepare for debates, and while it is true that Donald Trump participated in debates by studying policy positions and by developing simple nearly a dozen Republican face-offs this cycle, he has never sound bites to often nuanced positions on complex issues, all shared the stage with just one opponent. the while trying to put their opponent on the defense. This experience has given Clinton a keen understanding The clearest exception to this is Ronald Reagan. During of the debate arena. Her past performances reveal someone the 1984 debates, Reagan successfully stuck to broad themes who knows how to and avoided policy attack and defend, how discussions. His Trump holds one enormous advantage: to listen, and how to sunny optimism and agreeably disagree. Her classic faulting of low expectations. Against a pro like command of information Walter Mondale’s Clinton, he will be judged by less is solid, and she displays “youth and rigorous standards. no signs of discomfort inexperience” were or intimidation. For each highly effective, in Alan Schroeder debate, Clinton prepares part because Reagan and strategizes. With Trump, we can expect her to draw upon was already well positioned with a broad coalition of the her legal background, building and prosecuting a case. American electorate. Yet this same efficiency of approach could hamper Unfortunately for Trump, that’s not the case. Trump lacks Clinton. Campaign debates are live events with a mind of their diverse support and his message is pessimistic. He offers no own. Trump understands this; he uses the volatility of live TV policy solutions. General election voters will want a positive to create an advantage for himself, to subvert the decorum. message, more policy details and greater discipline from him. By traditional measures Trump is not a good debater. He Otherwise, Trump may successfully double down on bombast is most comfortable onstage alone, not sharing the spotlight. and distraction through his usual antics (just ask Bush and In the primary debates Trump trafficked in insults instead of Cruz). policy nuances. Although this brazen approach caught his Without question, Clinton will perform well. Her Republican opponents off-guard, Clinton will not be so easily knowledge, experience, and stature are significant assets. ambushed. Furthermore, in a long-form, two-person match, However, she suffers from a massive trust deficit with voters trash talk and platitudes can only go so far. and seems incapable of speaking or behaving with sufficient Still, Trump holds one enormous advantage: low transparency. Clinton must find a way to translate public trust expectations. Against a pro like Clinton, he will be judged by in her abilities (competence) into trust in her words and actions less rigorous standards. And in the unpredictable realm of TV (integrity). Torturous, evasive answers to debate questions debates, that may be enough. RF will blunt her prospects, as could how she handles Trump’s expected below-the-belt punches (just ask Bush and Cruz). Alan Schroeder is a Professor at the Northeastern University We’ll see how conventional the campaign ends up on School of Journalism and the author of Presidential Debates: Election Day and if the debates even mattered anyway. RF Risky Business on the Campaign Trail (Columbia University Press, 2016) Robert Traynham serves as Vice President of Communications at the Bipartisan Policy Center. He previously served as press secretary for former Senator Rick Santorum.

At the End of the Day, Will the Debates Even Matter?

by ROBERT TRAYNHAM

Americans are eagerly anticipating this year’s presidential debates between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Conventional wisdom gives Clinton the edge. She is more experienced, substantive and disciplined. By contrast, Trump is an erratic political novice who has never competed 8

2016 PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE SCHEDULE Monday, September 26 Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY Sunday, October 9 Washington University, St. Louis, MO Wednesday, October 19 University of Nevada, Las Vegas Las Vegas, NV

RIPON FORUM September 2016

SEE THE WORLD FOR WHAT IT CAN BE At our healthiest, we can be our best selves and enjoy all that life has to offer — from everyday moments to some of life’s biggest milestones. That’s why, at Abbott, we advance promising technologies that help people every step of the way and make the journey that much more joyful. abbott.com

The Iron Lady in 2016:

How Margaret Thatcher would deal with the challenges we face in today’s volatile world ANDREW GAMBLE Margaret Thatcher’s approach to national security would advocate. Reducing defence expenditure was was set out in a speech in London on January 19 th always for her a false economy. 1976. She had only recently become Conservative party Secondly, recognizing that Britain was no longer leader and leader of the Opposition. The speech was strong enough to defend its way of life on its own, she an uncompromising attack on the expansionist plans of urged alliances with other western countries which the Soviet Union, and a call to Britain and the West shared the same fundamental beliefs in economic and to wake up and strengthen political freedom. In her their defences before it 1976 speech, Thatcher was too late. She declared: argued that a key part of ‘The Russians are bent on national security for Britain world dominance, and they was the western alliance: are rapidly acquiring the ‘We look to our alliance means to become the most with America and NATO powerful imperial nation as the main guarantee of the world has seen.’ A our own security and, in Russian newspaper referred the world beyond Europe, derisively to Thatcher as the United States is still ‘the iron lady’. The phrase the prime champion of was picked up by western freedom.’ British foreign media and came to define policy should continue her attitudes towards to be based on a close defence and security, understanding with its particularly during the traditional ally, the United Falklands War. The speech States. This alliance positioned her as a leading reflected Britain’s Angloopponent of détente and an Saxon heritage which also Thatcher’s basic principles may architect of the new cold embraced the countries of war. be summarized as strong defence the old Commonwealth – Two principles are Australia, New Zealand and strong alliances. affirmed throughout the and Canada. This vision of speech. Firstly she gave Anglo-America anticipates priority to national security above all other aims the recent interest in the idea of the Anglosphere, which in politics: ‘The first duty of any Government is to has been advocated on both sides of the Atlantic. safeguard its people against external aggression. To Thatcher’s basic principles may therefore be guarantee the survival of our way of life.’ A government summarized as strong defence and strong alliances. could only discharge that duty if it was prepared to spend How might those principles be applied to our present enough on defence to deter external enemies. A strong circumstances? Thatcher in her own career was economy was needed to do that, but the economy was concerned most of all with the threat from the Soviet not the primary goal of national policy. Citizens had to Union. Her close partnership with Ronald Reagan, her be persuaded that the choice between guns and butter willingness to see Cruise missiles deployed in Europe, was a false choice. There could be no secure prosperity her determination to defeat campaigners for unilateral if the government did not spend enough to keep the nuclear disarmament, reflected that. But though at country safe. In the arguments today about whether times she sounded like an ideological crusader, she was western governments are spending enough of their GDP also highly pragmatic. She was one of the first western on defence, there is no doubt what Margaret Thatcher leaders to meet Gorbachev and see his potential. 10

RIPON FORUM September 2016

She began her career as a strong supporter of negotiations over the return of Hong Kong. She would the European Community, campaigning in the 1975 have advocated friendly relations but she would always Referendum for Britain to stay a member. But while she have supported negotiating from a position of military often supported greater economic integration, she grew strength. She was a strong nationalist, but also a strong increasingly hostile to the ideological believer in the plan for greater political West, and in the leadership She would have remained a integration, because she role of the United States. saw it as potentially Her priority for Britain strong advocate of interventionist undermining British was to be as close to policies to defeat terrorism. How national sovereignty, and the United States as she would have handled China is driving a wedge between possible, notwithstanding Britain and the United the occasional serious less certain. States. Whether she would disagreements between have supported BREXIT is the two countries, as over disputed. Charles Powell, her leading foreign policy Grenada. But for Thatcher, the United States always adviser believes she would have decided reluctantly in mattered more than Europe. RF favour of staying in the EU, because she would have feared the effects of BREXIT on the stability of western Andrew Gamble serves as Europe and the cohesion of the western alliance. Other Emeritus Professor of Politics former colleagues like Norman Tebbit disagree, and and International Studies Fellow think her concern for national independence would Emeritus at Queens’ College have made her a supporter of BREXIT. University of Cambridge. He is She would have remained a strong advocate of also the author of numerous books, interventionist policies to defeat terrorism. How she including The Free Economy and would have handled China is less certain. She was the Strong State: The Politics of Thatcherism (Duke well aware of rising Chinese power, not least from her University Press, 1988).

ENDING THE NATION’S OPIOID EPIDEMIC: WE ALL HAVE A ROLE TO PLAY. And it starts with physician leadership. In facing one of the most urgent yet complex public health issues of our time, the American Medical Association is calling on those who can make a difference to get involved. Physicians, regulators, lawmakers, insurance companies, families and patient advocates—only by working together can we turn the tide on this national epidemic. Learn about the AMA Task Force on Opioid Abuse’s ambitious plan of action and how you can help fight this problem head on. ama-assn.org/go/endopioidabuse The AMA is proud to support the Ripon Society.

RIPON FORUM September 2016

Cover Story

A Better Way for

AMERICA’S MILITARY by Mac Thornberry

Photo credit: House Armed Services Committee

Mac Thornberry visits with Marine All Weather Fighter Attack Squadron 533 during a fact-finding mission to the Middle East in July.

The next President will confront two realities. One is that the world has grown more dangerous under President Obama’s watch. The second is that America’s military is approaching a crisis point. The pace of conflict has remained high for 15 years, but military resources have been cut dramatically. The Pentagon budget for Fiscal Year 2017 is on track to be $100 billion below the level that President Obama’s own Defense Secretary planned for just five years ago. And that was before the rise of ISIS, 12

before China started building islands in the Pacific, before Russia started invading its neighbors, before continual confrontations with the Iranian Navy, and before North Korea stepped up its nuclear and its missile testing. This mismatch between resources and threats is known as a “readiness crisis.” It means that our military is struggling to meet today’s threats and is less prepared than it should be to meet the threats of tomorrow. It would be convenient to blame one party or president for the current

RIPON FORUM September 2016

state of affairs. But the truth is that both parties, Congress These are all mission items that serve a very specific critical and the Administration, and civilian and military leadership function on board these ships. So 13 of those parts have been in the Pentagon have all made decisions that have brought taken from my ship over the last month and a half just to get us to this point. the strike group ready to go.” It is not only ships with which Perhaps the most alarming development, however, the Navy is struggling. Only 21% of their early model F-18s has been President Obama’s use of military spending as can fly, while only 50% of their newer F-18s can get in the air leverage to gain more domestic spending. Never before has due to shortages of spare parts and mechanics. a Commander-in-Chief held the military hostage, arguing In 1991, during Desert Storm, the Air Force had 154 that there can be no increase in defense spending unless fighter and bomber squadrons. Today, even with continued it is matched dollar-for-dollar with increased domestic high demand, the Air Force has less than half the resources spending. This places unacceptable risk on the already it did 25 years ago—just 64 fighter and bomber squadrons. burdened shoulders of our military men and women. It is It is short 700 fighter pilots, and that number will grow. It no wonder that friends and allies, as well as adversaries and is also short of maintainers, which makes it harder to keep competitors, look on in astonishment and begin to plan for a our planes in the air, and it robs our pilots of vital training post-American world. time they need to maintain proficiency and stay safe. As Air We have a critical choice before us, one between Force Colonel Gentry Boswell put it recently, “When I was continuing to regard defense as just another federal program young coming into the Air Force in the early 90s, we used to or giving national security the priority it has traditionally had make fun of foreign air forces for flying at such a slow rate, over the last 70 years. These two approaches can be seen and we are slowly but surely walking ourselves into the same in two documents. One is an problem.” internal Pentagon memo that I came face to face with We have a critical choice before was leaked detailing how to gain this readiness crisis in South political advantage in its budget Carolina this spring. At the us, one between continuing to disputes with Congress. The Marine Corps Air Station in regard defense as just another other is the House Republican Beaufort, a Marine showed plan offering dozens of specific me the F-18 he was shortly to federal program or giving policies to restore our defenses, fly into harm’s way. His jet national security the priority known as “A Better Way.” flew over Libya in the Reagan it has traditionally had over The facts show that we Administration. To keep it have no time to lose. Recently, flying today, that same Marine the last 70 years. Army Chief of Staff General went to the USS Yorktown Mark Milley said that if we are museum to pull parts off of one faced with fighting a peer competitor in the near future, the of the F-18s they have on display. Today, only two of the 12 Army “is not at the levels that can execute satisfactorily ... in Marine F-18 fighter squadrons are meeting their flight hour terms of time, cost in terms of casualties, or cost in terms of training requirements. According to FOX News, of the 237 military objectives.” The size of the Army has been cut to the F-18s in the Marine Corps inventory, only 91 can fly. The lowest level since World War II; training has been deferred; Marines, as well as the other Services, have seen a disturbing infrastructure is failing; and pay raises have been reduced increase in aircraft accident rates. four years in a row. It is easy to see how the patience of even In the House, Republicans and Democrats came together the most dedicated Army families is being taxed. to pass a Defense Authorization Bill that begins to turn things The Navy is sailing in similarly dark waters. Global around. It also includes substantial reforms to see that the commitments require the U.S. Navy to have 100 ships at taxpayers get more for their money and that the U.S. is more sea at all times. In 1998, we had 338 ships to help meet agile in responding to the proliferation of threats. that demand. Today, we are at 272 ships and falling. We But much more needs to be done. In the national security have been unable to deploy carriers to the Persian Gulf or to portion of “A Better Way,” House Republicans provide the Pacific for months at a time while the ships we do have dozens of specific proposals to help ensure that the nation are kept at sea longer, wearing them out faster, and making can be protected in these perilous times. You can review repairs more difficult, time-consuming, and expensive. The them at abetterway.speaker.gov. Defense should never be result is a vicious cycle of robbing our Navy’s readiness just another federal program, and it should certainly never be at home to ensure our deploying ships have the parts and a political bargaining chip. The sacrifices of Americans past equipment they require. and present demand more of us than that. RF This summer, Captain Scott Robertson, Commander of the USS Normandy, testified to my Committee that, “I have Mac Thornberry represents the 13th District of Texas in 13 parts that have been cannibalized from my ship to support the U.S. House of Representatives. He also serves as the the current strike group getting ready for deployment… Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. RIPON FORUM September 2016

WHAT ONE EXPERIMENT MEANS TO EVERYONE’S RETIREMENT.

The time between when people should start saving for retirement and when they actually do is known as the “Action Gap.” And it has a bigger effect than you might think. To better understand the impact, we performed a simple experiment. We asked a group of young people to use paint rollers to show us what age they think they should start saving. Then we asked a group of older people to indicate what age they actually did start. What we found was that there was often a years-long Action Gap between the two. But closing it up by even just a few years makes a huge difference in how much people can save over the long run. Which makes right now the perfect time to get better prepared for your retirement.

SPEAK TO A FINANCIAL ADVISOR TODAY, OR VISIT RACEFORRETIREMENT.COM

RETIREMENT

INVESTMENTS

INSURANCE

Older, Smaller and Weaker:

Dangerous trends for the U.S. military J U S T I N T. J O H N S O N Fifteen years ago, the U.S. military was called into and dramatic defense budget cuts. action after the devastating attacks on September 11. The problems facing the U.S. military are in three The enemy was capable and committed, but hard to main areas. A strong military, just like a good police find and finish. Today, while the fight against Islamist department or a winning sports team, is built on three terrorists remains a serious challenge, the U.S. also faces basic building blocks: equipment, training, and size. A nations that are acting more like capable adversaries than police department without good equipment, like the right potential allies. On top of all that, the U.S. military is police cars or bulletproof vests, will struggle to protect getting older, smaller, and weaker. its community. A football team that never trains – never The growing threats throws the ball or runs plays against U.S. interests are – will struggle to win. And familiar to many Americans. any organization, from a We’ve seen Russia’s kid’s soccer team to the U.S. aggressive actions in military, will struggle if it is Ukraine, and China’s illegal not big enough to play the islands in the South China game or meet the mission. Sea. We know that regardless Unfortunately, in all three of the nuclear deal, Iran will areas – equipment, training, continue funding terrorist and size – the U.S. military organizations and pursuing is struggling. weapons that threaten the The U.S. military’s United States and our allies. warfighting equipment North Korea has combined today was largely designed intercontinental ballistic and built during the Cold missiles with its nuclear War. During the 1990’s, weapons, and is now investments in modernizing also pursuing submarinethe military were minimal. Justin T. Johnson launched ballistic missiles. In the following decade, Added to all this is the funding for ongoing growing danger of cyberconflicts did not leave much We now face a potentially attacks and the persistent room in the budget for deadly storm of rising threats, threat of terrorism. modernization, and some At the same time, many major modernization efforts, major ongoing operations, and Americans are not aware of like the Army’s Future dramatic defense budget cuts. the problems facing the U.S. Combat System, did not military. Before 9/11, the produce results. Today, that military was shrinking and the defense budget was small. lack of modernizing means that the Air Force’s main As the fight against terrorism ramped up, so did defense bomber fleet averages 53-years old and its main aerial budgets, but the vast majority of that funding went to refueling tankers entered the fleet in 1956. And the other fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to update or military services have similarly old, sometimes even improve the U.S. military. Even after U.S. engagement antiquated, equipment. is the Middle East declined, the military had little time Sadly, the U.S. military’s training situation may be to reset and recover. Since the Budget Control Act was even worse than its equipment situation. During the last passed in 2011 the defense budget has been cut by 25 fifteen years, the U.S. military understandably focused on percent in real terms, even as operations in Afghanistan training for the fight against terrorists and insurgencies. and elsewhere continue. We now face a potentially While the military dramatically improved its ability to deadly storm of rising threats, major ongoing operations, fight these low-end threats, it came at the expense of RIPON FORUM September 2016

preparing to fight potential high-end adversaries like older, smaller, and weaker, but this can be turned around. Russia or China. Soldiers were preparing to fight poorly The most important step is increasing the defense budget. trained, equipped, and organized insurgencies, not large- Today, the U.S. government spends a smaller portion of scale ground combat against capable adversaries. Air the federal budget on defense than it did before 9/11. And Force pilots were training to bomb caves, not defeat as a percent of GDP, defense spending is well below the sophisticated air defenses. Marines were driving through 40 year average. A group of outside bipartisan experts deserts in MRAPs, not practicing amphibious assaults. has recommended that the minimum the U.S. should Today, the Secretary of the Air Force says that less than spend on defense should be based on former Secretary one-half of Air Force squadrons are ready for a high-end of Defense Robert Gates’ last budget. For fiscal year fight, the Chief of Staff of the Army says that one-third 2017, that level would be almost $100 billion more than of his brigades are ready for a high-end fight, and the President Obama’s request. Navy and Marine Corps are struggling to keep their ships With greater funds available for defense, Congress and units trained and maintained. and the Administration can then start repairing the On top of old equipment and poor training, the three basic building blocks: equipment, training, and U.S. military size. The House has become versions of the historically small. fiscal year 2017 For many decades, defense policy the U.S. military and defense was designed to funding bills be large enough take steps in the to fight one war right direction, while maintaining but more must the ability to deter be done. With opportunistic all three critical adversaries from areas, rebuilding threatening will be measured U.S. interests in years, so the elsewhere. This process should two-conflict be started as concept was soon as possible. s u p p o r t e d As threats grow, across numerous providing for administrations the common of both parties defense should Today, the U.S. government spends a smaller and served the be the federal portion of the federal budget on defense than U.S. well. Today, g o v e r n m e n t ’s the U.S. military top priority. it did before 9/11. is barely large Congress and the enough to win one Administration major conflict. should work The Army is at 31 combat brigades instead of the 50 together to increase the defense budget so that the U.S. needed for two conflicts. The Navy is at 276 ships far military can start modernizing its equipment, increasing short of the recommended 350. The Marine Corps is at its training, and growing its size. RF 23 battalions instead of 36. The Air Force has a large number of aircraft, but many of them are outdated and Justin T. Johnson specializes in defense budgets and approaching the end of their usefulness. policies for The Heritage Foundation’s Allison Center At a time of growing threats, the U.S. military is for National Security and Foreign Policy.

Subscribe to The Ripon Forum One year - Six editions for $40 www.riponsociety.org 16

RIPON FORUM September 2016

“Ideas that matter, since 1965.“

Reining

in the NSC LUKE STRANGE useful to remind ourselves how the NSC has evolved since What is the National Security Council for? The coming transition to a new administration, following its establishment after the Second World War, from a small years of debate over the role of President Obama’s NSC, has group charged with coordinating the president’s paper flow in raised this and other important questions about the size and national security matters to a large and influential organization in its own right. Presidents have each used the NSC differently, influence of the NSC and its staff. As the NSC staff has grown to around 400 people,1 according to their personal style and preferences,3 but the trend critics – including former members of the Obama Cabinet2 has been toward an “operational” NSC, centralizing national security policymaking in the – have faulted it for White House and away from strategic drift, inefficiency, a “coordinating” NSC. and micromanagement of The growth of the the uniformed military. national security state itself Congressional leaders have and its attendant bureaucracy proposed language to cap the has also contributed to a NSC’s size and subject the larger NSC. The creation of National Security Advisor to the Department of Homeland Senate confirmation if the cap Security, the Office of is breached. the Director of National If the legislation were to Intelligence, and other entities become law, the next president all create demand for more would face a fundamental staff attention at the top of decision about how to structure the food chain and more his or her administration. perceived need by a president Will he or she want the NSC to make sure the whole of the to be an “honest broker,” Luke Strange executive branch is on-board teeing up decisions for the with his agenda. Although president and overseeing The House and Senate Armed these developments help to implementation, or should it Services Committees have explain why the NSC has be a mini-agency within the grown in size and influence, White House, centralizing proposed language in their each president’s choices as power and reducing the sway National Defense Authorization chief executive ultimately of even cabinet members in determine how the NSC will Acts that would cap the NSC executive policymaking? In function and, in turn, the short, a decision about the permanent staff at 150 people. balance of power relative structure of the NSC will to and between the cabinet inevitably have an impact on not only the office of the president, but also the whole of the agencies. Against this backdrop, the House and Senate Armed national security bureaucracy. To understand how we’ve reached this point, it’s Services Committees have proposed language in their National Defense Authorization Acts that would cap the NSC permanent staff at 150 people. If the cap is breached, the 1) Karen DeYoung, “How the Obama White House Runs Foreign Policy,” Washington Post, August 4, 2015: https://www. National Security Advisor would become subject to Senate washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-the-obama-whitehouse-runs-foreign-policy/2015/08/04/2befb960-2fd7-11e5-83531215475949f4_story.html 2) Robert Gates, Duty. Vintage, May 2015

3) Peter Rodman, Presidential Command. Vintage, January 2010

RIPON FORUM September 2016

confirmation – an assertion on the part of Congress that if the is ultimately an instrument of presidential decisionNSC is going to have the size and influence of an agency, it making, subjecting the National Security Advisor to Senate should be subject to congressional oversight as an agency, not confirmation would have far-reaching implications for as a White House staff office with the protection of executive the president as “the unitary executive,” who relies on privilege over documents and deliberations.4 the National Security Advisor to adjudicate differences These reforms, if adopted, would force the next between agencies on the president’s behalf and to provide president to decide: is the NSC a coordinating, advisory confidential advice. Congress, as well, may have to consider body, or is it an agency? If it is whether its current committee an advisory body, the president structure and jurisdiction is could direct cabinet secretaries appropriate to the oversight of These reforms, if adopted, to empower the policymaking would force the next president an organization that oversees teams in their respective the entire national security to decide: is the NSC a agencies, disempowering the “interagency.” NSC and restoring its role as a After the debate during coordinating, advisory body, coordinator of policy-making the Obama years over the role or is it an agency? and implementation. If the and influence of the NSC, it is worth remembering that each NSC is an “agency,” the next iteration of the NSC is a product president will have to consider the possibility of televised Senate confirmation hearings of a particular president and a particular administration, and for his or her National Security Advisor and congressional that it serves that particular president in his or her national oversight of some of the most sensitive presidential decision security decision-making. On November 8th, we will find documents and deliberations. out who the next president will be. He or she will have Because the National Security Advisor has always precious little time to put an NSC system into place. RF been a White House staff position, and because the NSC Luke Strange is the Government Relations Associate Director for Foreign and Defense Policy at the American 4) Kathleen J. McInnis, “’Right-Sizing’ the National Security Council Enterprise Institute, and a former congressional staffer. Staff?” Congressional Research Service, June 30, 2016: https:// www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/IN10521.pdf Follow him on Twitter @ljsiv.

Grant Thornton LLP is a proud supporter of The Ripon Society

twitter.com/grantthorntonus linkd.in/grantthorntonus youtube.com/grantthorntonus

As a first priority, the 114th Congress should lower the effective business tax rates equitably for all U.S. businesses — large and small. Enacting corporateonly tax reform would exclude more than 80% of our nation’s businesses. Promote growth — visit grantthornton.com/BEtaxrate and tell Congress to treat business fairly.

“Grant Thornton” refers to Grant Thornton LLP, the U.S. member firm of Grant Thornton International Ltd (GTIL). GTIL and the member firms are not a worldwide partnership. Services are delivered by the member firms. GTIL and its member firms are not agents of, and do not obligate, one another and are not liable for one another’s acts or omissions. Please see grantthornton.com for further details.

RIPON FORUM September 2016

Health Independence for Veterans AVIK ROY In 2014, it emerged that across the country, VA there has been a VA. In 1921, witnesses informed Senate facilities were leaving tens of thousands of veterans committees that individuals without appropriate medical to languish on waiting lists, on which they were not training were handling veterans with tuberculosis, leading receiving needed care. Worse still, regional VA officials to a far higher incidence of the disease in veterans’ were creating fake lists in order to falsely claim to their facilities than in private hospitals. In 1945, Albert Maisel superiors that all was well. summarized the quality of VA care in Readers’ Digest as The ensuing outrage “third rate treatment of from the public claimed first-rate men.” In 1976, the job of Veterans Affairs Vietnam veteran Ron Secretary Eric Shinseki. Kovic memorialized his Others were modestly poor experiences at the disciplined. Congress VA in his book Born on passed a law that allowed the Fourth of July. In each a tiny fraction of veterans case, scandal was met the option to seek care from with incremental reforms, non-VA sources. after which performance These personnel and reverted to the status quo. policy changes did little to improve care for veterans, Obstacles to veterans’ because few in positions of health reform influence bothered to ask The most important the question: why did these thing to understand about problems arise at the VA in VA care is that it is one of the first place? the few examples in the Avik Roy industrialized world of The VA’s cycle of fully socialized medicine, The most important thing to scandal, insufficient in which all facets of reform, and failure the health care system understand about VA care is that 4.7 million Americans – hospitals, clinics, and it is one of the few examples in were mobilized for World insurance – are owned by the industrialized world of fully War I, from which 116,000 the government. The British died and 204,000 returned National Health Service is socialized medicine. wounded. American the closest analogue to the involvement in the war VA and suffers from many ramped up and down so quickly that the government could of the same problems in terms of waiting lists and mixed not adequately prepare. By 1920, five overlapping federal quality. bureaucracies were responsible for meeting veterans’ Previous efforts to reform the VA – for example, to give financial needs, and doing so badly. veterans control of the dollars spent on their behalf by the Hence, in 1921, Congress established a single government, in order to purchase private coverage or see Veterans’ Bureau to consolidate these functions. But the private physicians – have foundered for two sets of reasons. new Bureau was immediately mired in a $200 million The first set of reasons relates to policy. It is widely kickback scandal in which few veterans’ hospitals were assumed – though not well-established – that VA care is less actually built. expensive than private care. As a result, giving veterans the Citations of poor conditions and inconsistent quality option of private care could increase the deficit. Furthermore, of care in VA facilities have been going on for as long as advocates of the status quo claim that if more veterans opt 20

RIPON FORUM September 2016

out of the government-run system and seek private care, the while also reforming and improving the quality of VA care quality of VA facilities could decline for those who rely on for those who wish to stay in the VA system. Fiscal modeling indicates that the proposal would not require additional them and are satisfied with their care. The second set of reasons – more important than the federal spending, while providing veterans important options first – relates to interests. “The VA and its advocates,” wrote to seek alternatives to the VA. Surveys indicate that John Iglehart in the New England overwhelming majorities of Journal of Medicine in 1985, Surveys indicate that veterans want private options. “represent a classic example of overwhelming majorities of Eighty six percent say that an ‘iron triangle’ of interests” it is “extremely” or “very” that block reform. The VA is the veterans want private important to “allow veterans to largest single employer in the options. use a private physician if they federal government, and public choose.” Seventy seven percent sector unions are adamantly believe it “extremely or “very” important to “give veterans opposed to private-sector health care options for veterans. more health care choices, even with higher out-of-pocket The leaders of veterans’ service organizations, and the costs.” legislators on relevant committees, often seek to protect their Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act all status as gatekeepers for veterans’ care. allow their enrollees to seek care from private insurers and private physicians. It’s understandable that veterans want the The path forward A new bipartisan proposal – called the Veterans same choices as everyone else. No one can deny that they RF Independence Act and coauthored by former legislators, VA deserve them. officials, and health policy experts – seeks to overcome these obstacles. The proposal is carefully crafted to give veterans Avik Roy is the President of the Foundation for Research the option of converting their VA health coverage into on Equal Opportunity, and co-chaired the Fixing Veterans premium support payments for private coverage and care, Health Care Taskforce.

WHEN YOU’RE PASSIONATE ABOUT SOMETHING, YOU PROTECT IT IN THE BEST WAY.

At Zurich , all of our passion goes into helping understand, manage and minimize risks. For more than 100 years we have proven our committment to delivering reliable and thorough insurance solutions to our customers. zurichna.com

ZURICH INSURANCE. FOR THOSE WHO TRULY LOVE THEIR BUSINESS.

RIPON FORUM September 2016

THE NAM IS PROUD TO SUPPORT THE RIPON SOCIETY

WHEN MANUFACTURERS SEE A PROBLEM, THEY COME UP WITH A SOLUTION. How can you ensure your support for manufacturing matches what the 12 million men and women who make things in America need? “‘Competing to Win’ is a policy roadmap that expresses the priorities of manufacturers in the United States. The strategy will strengthen our industry and open new doors of opportunity for all Americans.”

MANUFACTURERS’ AGENDA FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH AND AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM

COMPETING TO WIN

Jay Timmons

President and CEO National Association of Manufacturers

NAM_CompetingToWinJan2016-cover.indd 1

1/20/16 4:46 PM

Learn more at www.nam.org/CompetingtoWin. Connect with Us #MFGwins

Readiness vs. Steadiness Trump, Clinton & the Next Commander in Chief

To the extent that the 2016 presidential contest is being called a “change” election, it’s safe to say that the biggest change in defense policy over the next four years will occur if Donald Trump is elected to the White House. Simply put, Trump is offering everything that Barack Obama – and by extension, Hillary Clinton – has not. When it comes to military spending, for example, Trump is calling for an increase. He proposed ending the defense sequester in a September 7th speech in Philadelphia. In this same speech, he also pledged to “submit a new budget to rebuild our military,” and said he would boost the size of the Army to “around” 540,000 troops, increase the number of Marine Corps battalions from 23 to 36, increase from 276 to 350 the number of Navy ships and submarines, and increase the number of Air Force fighter aircraft from 1,113 to 1,200. Clinton, by contrast, has been vague on where she stands on military spending and readiness issues. She, too, calls for ending the sequester (on both defense and non-defense areas). But rather than increasing defense spending, her campaign website simply says that she will “create a defense budget that reflects good stewardship of taxpayer dollars,” and will “prioritize defense reform initiatives, curbing runaway cost growth in areas like health care and acquisition and stretching every dollar.” The same differences also apply to the global projection of military force. Where Clinton can be expected to continue following the same basic foreign policy she helped put in place as President Obama’s Secretary of State, Trump has repeatedly said he plans to use military force more sparingly around the world. “In a Trump Administration,” he said in this same September 7th speech, “our actions in the Middle East will be tempered by realism. The current strategy of toppling regimes, with no plan for what to do the day after, only produces power vacuums that are filled by terrorists. Gradual reform, not sudden and radical change, should be our guiding objective in that region.”

As has been widely reported, Trump has also raised questions about the U.S. commitment to our global military alliances, particularly NATO, which he characterized as being “obsolete” earlier this year. He has also questioned whether the U.S. should come to the aid of other NATO countries if they are attacked, and said it was time for these other countries to assume a greater share of the financial burden of the alliance. Clinton, on the other hand, disagrees. In a speech earlier this year, she made clear that she believes American participation in global alliances is a critical – and historically important -- part of our national defense. “For decades,” she said in March, “Republican and Democratic administrations have understood that America’s alliances make us stronger … Turning our back on our alliances or turning our alliance into a protection racket would reverse decades of bipartisan American leadership and send a dangerous signal to friend and foe alike. Putin already hopes to divide Europe. If Mr. Trump gets his way, it will be like Christmas in the Kremlin. It will make America less safe and the world more dangerous.” Clinton’s criticism of Trump on these and other issues has a common theme – namely, that the Republican candidate is temperamentally unsuited for the Presidency. To effectively serve as Commander in Chief, she says, a President must be calm in the face of a crisis and capable of making rational, informed decisions. Steadiness is a quality, she argues, that Donald Trump does not possess. Trump, obviously, believes otherwise. He argues that an important part of serving as Commander in Chief is unpredictability – keeping America’s adversaries off balance so they never know our next move. “We need unpredictability,” he said earlier this year in response to a question about whether he would ever use nuclear weapons. “When you ask a question like that, it’s a very sad thing to have to answer it because the enemy is watching … and I frankly don’t want the enemy to know how I’m thinking.” RF

RIPON FORUM September 2016

Advocating for the

Health

Insurance

Community and the

Consumers

They Serve

News & Events

Burr Lays Out the Stakes of This Year’s Election in Address to Ripon Society WASHINGTON, DC -- With the policy changes away from being a competitive around the world through general election just over 50 days magnet of global capital from all tax reform; away, U.S. Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) around the world. These policy -Rolling back the government red appeared before a breakfast meeting changes will not be achieved with tape and regulations that are holding of The Ripon Society yesterday Hillary Clinton in White House. But back economic growth; and, morning to talk about the stakes of with a Republican majority in the -Repealing and replacing the the fall contest, the Affordable Care Act so mood of the American taxpayers can choose electorate, and why the health care that suits “We’re a few policy changes away from their needs the best. he believes the United States is on the verge of Burr is serving being a magnet of global capital from becoming “a magnet of his second term in all around the world.” global capital from all the U.S. Senate after around the world.” serving a decade in “We’re this close the House. A member to being the 800 pound gorilla of House and Senate and Donald Trump of the Republican Revolution that the global marketplace,” the North as President, I can assure you they seized control of Congress in 1994 Carolina lawmaker stated. “We’re will be achieved within six months.” and balanced the budget for the this close to driving the U.S. economy According to Burr, these policy first time in over a generation, he at a pace that will put the American changes include: has established a reputation during people back to work. We’re a few -Making America more his service as a common sense

RIPON FORUM September 2016

conservative who is committed to sector of the economy, as well. Five important this year. making government smaller, smarter years from now, for example, we could “This election will be the first and more accountable to the people. see IBM, Google and Apple being as generational election in our lifetime,” He serves as Chairman of big of health care companies as Glaxo he said. “For one primary reason – the Senate Select Committee on Smith Kline. Not because of new the next president will likely nominate Intelligence where he puts the security compounds that may be discovered, three Supreme Court Justices. Those of the American people Justices will set the first, while providing direction for the entirety rigorous oversight of our of their time on the bench. intelligence community. That is the lifetime of The American people have finally stood my children. That is He also serves on the Health, Education, up and said, “I’ve had enough of this.” their adult lifetime. It Labor, and Pensions will not only affect their Committee and the pathway, but it will Finance Committee. significantly impact my In his remarks, he spoke not only but because of technology. Technology granddaughter’s pathway, as well, and of the policy changes that need to could be the key that unlocks a new she is six months old.” be made in Washington, but also the delivery system to patients around Burr concluded his remarks by “technological explosion” that is on the the world. And if it could have that talking about the driving force of verge of happening around the world. significant of an impact in the health this year’s election – the mood of the “We’re at a unique point in time,” care field, imagine what technology American electorate. he remarked. “We’re at a point where could do in other areas.” “The American people have finally we’re about to have a technological The veteran legislator also touched stood up and said, ‘I’ve had enough of explosion globally. The technology that on the stakes of the fall election and this,’” he observed. “They are as angry drives our phones will soon drive every why the decision facing voters is so as I’ve ever seen them.” RF

CONSENSUS & LEADERSHIP.

RIPON FORUM September 2016

Name: Jeff Flake Occupation: U.S. Senator from the State of Arizona First job held & lesson that you learned from it: Milking cows. I learned I didn’t want to milk cows for the rest of my life. Proudest achievement since your election to the Senate in 2012: Playing a role in restoring diplomatic relations with Cuba after 54 years of isolation. Challenge facing the people of Arizona that you’re working hard to address: Making sure that Arizona’s rights regarding Colorado River water are respected. Finish this sentence: “If I could change one thing about American politics, it would be…” That we could treat those across the political aisle as often wrong but rarely evil.

RIPON FORUM September 2016

SIFMA is proud to support The Ripon Society. SIFMA represents broker-dealers, banks and asset managers whose nearly 1 million employees provide access to the capital markets, raising over $2.5 trillion for businesses and municipalities in the U.S., serving clients with over $20 trillion in assets and managing more than $67 trillion in assets for individual and institutional clients including mutual funds and retirement plans. SIFMA, with offices in New York and Washington, D.C., is the U.S. regional member of the Global Financial Markets Association (GFMA). For more information on SIFMA, visit www.sifma.org.

The Ripon Society 1155 15th Street, NW Suite 550 Washington, DC 20005

B:9.25” T:9” S:7.8333”

Before it became a medicine, It was 5,000 researched compounds. 87 different protein structures. 500,000 lab tests. 1,600 scientists. 80-hour workweeks. 14 years of breakthroughs and setbacks. 36 clinical trials. 8,500 patient volunteers. And more problems to solve than we could count. Before it became a medicine, It was an idea in the mind of a Pfizer scientist. Now it’s a medicine That saves lives every day.

Driven to discover the cure