You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


Speaker Series

Note: Meals at the Athenaeum are available only to CMC students, staff, and faculty. Only the presentations are open to the public starting at 12:15 for midday programs and 6:45 for evening programs.

Spring 2018

JOEL KOTKINCalifornia Squashes its Young: How the Golden State’s Economic Policies are Driving Out a New Generation

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 2018 | Evening program

Many progressives see California as a model of enlightenment and the Golden State’s post-2010 recovery has won plaudits in the progressive press. Yet if one looks at the effects of the state’s policies on key Democratic constituencies— millennials, minorities, and the poor—the picture is dismal. A recent United Way study found that close to one-third of state residents can barely pay their bills, largely due to housing costs. When adjusted for these costs, California leads all states—even historically poor Mississippi—in the percentage of its people living in poverty.

Joel Kotkin is the Presidential Fellow in Urban Futures at Chapman University, Executive Director of the Center for Opportunity Urbanism (opportunityurbanism.org), and Senior Advisor to the Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute. He is Executive Editor of the widely read website www.newgeograpy.com and writes the weekly “New Geographer” column for Forbes.com. He is a regular contributor to the Daily Beast and Real Clear Politics. The author of seven books, Mr. Kotkin has been described by the New York Times as “America’s uber-geographer.”

JOHN A. PÉREZThe California Comeback

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2018 | Lunch program

John A. Pérez, former speaker of the California Assembly, will examine what California’s response to the Great Recession portends for higher education and California’s economic expansion.

John A. Pérez is the current Vice Chair of the University of California Board of Regents. He was elected to the California Assembly in November 2008, representing downtown Los Angeles and communities of East Los Angeles. In January 2010, his colleagues elected him California’s 68th Assembly Speaker. He was subsequently reelected in 2010 and 2012, making him one of the longest serving Speakers in the era of term limits. Prior to his service in the Assembly, Pérez was a lifetime member of the labor movement.

MICHAEL P. ZUCKERTIs the Problem of Freedom of Speech Soluble?

TUESDAY, MARCH 20, 2018 | Evening Program

Freedom of Speech, especially on college and university campuses, has once again become a subject of intense discussion and debate. It is a particularly difficult debate because over the time in which Free Speech has been a topic of political and philosophical concern the accepted doctrines of speech have undergone many transformations with the result that several varieties of speech doctrine coexist, each claiming allegiance to a conception of free speech often in conflict with other such conceptions. I will attempt to sort out our debate by looking at the development of the different speech doctrines and by considering the political and philosophic reasons and implications associated with the different versions of free speech doctrine.

Michael Zuckert is the Nancy R. Dreux Professor of Political Science at University of Notre Dame. Before that, he was Kenan Professor of Political Science at Carleton College. His main scholarly work has been in the areas of early modern political philosophy, and constitutional law and history. He has written widely in these areas. His books include Natural Rights and the New Republicanism, The Natural Rights Republic, Launching Liberalism, and Leo Strauss and the Problem of Political Philosophy. He is now completing a book titled A Nation So Conceived; Abraham Lincoln and the Problem of Democratic Sovereignty.

NADINE STROSSENHATE: Why We Should Resist it with Free Speech, not Censorship

THURSDAY, APRIL 5, 2018 | Evening program

We live in an era in which offensive speech is on the rise. Given its potential for harm, should this speech be banned? Nadine Strossen dispels the many misunderstandings that have clouded the perpetual debates about “hate speech vs. free speech.” She argues that an expansive approach to the First Amendment is most effective at promoting democracy, equality, and societal harmony. Ms. Strossen argues that anti-hate speech laws are not effective in reducing the feared harms, and worse yet, are likely counterproductive by giving enforcement officials the power to suppress vital expression and target minority viewpoints. The solution instead is to promote equality and societal harmony through vibrant “counterspeech.”

Nadine Strossen is the John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School. She has written, taught, and advocated extensively in the areas of constitutional law and civil liberties, including through frequent media interviews. From 1991 through 2008, she served as President of the American Civil Liberties Union, the first woman to head the nation’s largest and oldest civil liberties organization. Professor Strossen is currently a member of the ACLU’s National Advisory Council, as well as the Advisory Boards of EPIC (Electronic Privacy Information Center), FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education), and Heterodox Academy. When she stepped down as ACLU president in 2008, three Supreme Court Justices (Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Antonin Scalia, and David Souter) participated in her farewell and tribute luncheon.

Ms. Strossen is also a prolific author. Her latest book, HATE: Why We Should Resist It With Free Speech, Not Censorship, will be published by Oxford University Press in 2018. Her first two books are Defending Pornography: Free Speech, Sex and the Fight for Women’s Rights and Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. In addition, Ms. Strossen has written dozens of articles and book chapters.

Ms. Strossen is a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School.

DAVID LESHERMedia Trends: The Profitless and the Non-Profits

THURSDAY, APRIL 26, 2018 | Lunch program

Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost. So said Thomas Jefferson. So if journalism is essential to democracy and quality journalism is no longer profitable, how do we preserve a healthy democracy? Mr. Lesher will discuss the rapidly changing media and the emerging case for non-profits like CALmatters. Newspaper ad revenue today is a quarter its value in 2000. Meanwhile, non-profits have grown six-fold in a decade, filling gaps in essential coverage. California is a prime example.

David Lesher is co-Founder, Editor and CEO of CALmatters, a non-profit media organization launched in 2015 to cover state policy and politics. Today, CALmatters has the largest news staff in Sacramento and its work is shared with more than 100 media, including all of the state’s major newspapers and radio stations. Lesher has worked with top state leaders and major California issues for more than 35 years as a journalist and policy analyst. He was in newspaper for more than 25 years, largely at the Los Angeles Times where he was a political writer, state Capitol reporter and assistant national editor for the White House campaign. He also served as editor of California Journal magazine, California director for the DC-based New America Foundation and Government Affairs Director for the Public Policy Institute of California.

Fall 2017

MICHAEL NELSON, JOHN J. PITNEY, ANDREW E. BUSCHThe 2016 Election One Year Later

DEBORAH GONZALEZ ’85Policy Research and Political Challenges

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2017 | Lunchprogram

Think tanks play an important role in the U.S. policy process, attempting to improve lawmaking and governance by testing political assumptions through empirical research, and offering policy alternatives based on evidence. However, a think tank’s ability to influence policymaking rarely hinges on the strength of their claims or the quality of their findings. An ever-changing political climate, driven by public opinion, legislative politics, interest group lobbying, and a host of other factors make it challenging for think tanks to understand what issues to focus on and how to effectively influence the policymaking process.

Deborah Gonzalez ’85 spent a career working in the California legislature, serving as Policy Director to five different Republican leaders, and now directs government affairs for the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC). Ms. Gonzalez has a unique perspective that combines an intimate knowledge of process in Sacramento with the policy research environment of PPIC. She will discuss the divide between policy research and the policy process in California government, and ways in which the two can work better together to improve lawmaking.

Ms. Gonzalez’s talk was co-sponsored by the Dreier Roundtable and the Rose Institute for State and Local Government.

KEITH WHITTINGTONWhy Free Speech Matters on Campus

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 26, 2017 | Lunchprogram

Keith E. Whittington, professor of politics at Princeton University, will argue that robust protection of free speech and civil discourse is essential for universities to fulfill their distinct and important mission to assemble and nurture an open and diverse community of scholars, teachers and students dedicated to the production and dissemination of knowledge. Understanding the relationship between the critical functions of the university and the principles of free speech can help provide guidance in resolving the difficult challenges that confront modern universities.

Keith E. Whittington is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Politics at Princeton University. He is the author of “Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy: The Presidency, the Supreme Court, and Constitutional Leadership in U.S. History,” “Constitutional Interpretation: Textual Meaning, Original Intent and Judicial Review,” and “Constitutional Construction: Divided Powers and Constitutional Meaning,” among others. He is also a co-editor of “Congress and the Constitution” and “The Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics.” He has published widely on American constitutional theory and development, judicial politics, the presidency, and federalism.

Whittington is currently working on a political history of the judicial review of federal statutes and preparing, with Howard Gillman and Mark Graber, a book of cases and materials on American constitutionalism. His work has won the C. Herman Pritchett Award for best book in law and courts and the J. David Greenstone Award for best book in politics and history. He has been a John M. Olin Foundation Faculty Fellow, an American Council of Learned Societies Junior Faculty Fellow, a visiting scholar at the Social Philosophy and Policy Center, and a visiting professor at the University of Texas School of Law. He is a member of the American Academy of the Arts and Sciences. He received a Ph.D. in political science from Yale University.

From Marconi and AM radio to email, Facebook Twitter and Snapchat, each new medium has changed the nature of politics and civic engagement. Yet in many ways our political knowledge and civic participation has decreased. Why has this happened, and how can we revitalize our democracy through new media models of civic engagement?

Professor Westen founded and directed the Center for Governmental Studies (CGS) and taught communications law and policy at the USC Annenberg School for Communications and UCLA Law School for over 30 years. He created four Blue Ribbon Commissions; built award-winning model websites to enhance civic education including The Democracy Network, Video Voter, California Channel, Digital Democracy and PolicyArchive.org; litigated test cases on media in the federal courts; and authored or edited over 75 books and reports on media, democracy and judicial reforms. He was Deputy Director for Consumer Protection at the Federal Trade Commission and Legal Assistant to an FCC Commissioner. He received degrees with high honors from UC Berkeley Law School (J.D.), University of Oxford (M.A.) and Pomona College (B.A.).

Spring 2017

TIM SANDOVALThe New Vision for the City of Pomona

THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 2017 | Lunch program

Running on a campaign of creating a One Pomona vision and embracing servant leadership model, Tim Sandoval was elected mayor of Pomona and took office in December 2016.

Tim Sandoval and his family moved to Pomona when Tim was just nine years old. He attended Montvue Elementary, Emerson Middle School and Pomona High School, becoming its senior class speaker. He went on to higher education at Claremont McKenna College, and University of California Riverside.

After completing his education, Sandoval returned to Pomona to help others in the community access college as well. He led Pomona Valley Community Center’s youth programs and then taught English at Charter Oak High School from 1999-2002.

In 2001, Sandoval became a founding member of Bright Prospect, a mentoring organization that has helped more than two thousand low-income youth become part of the first generation of their family to complete their college degrees. Sandoval served as the program director for Bright Prospect from 2002 through 2016.

MIKE HESTRINCalifornia’s Deincarceration Experiment

TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 2017 | Evening Program

Michael A. Hestrin was elected as Riverside County District Attorney in June 2014 and was sworn in as the District Attorney on Jan. 5, 2015.

Hestrin was born in the Coachella Valley and he graduated in 1993 from the University of Arizona in Tucson, Arizona with a bachelor’s degree in history. After college, he spent a year living in Mexico with relatives working as a reporter for a small newspaper based in Guadalajara. He then returned to the United States to begin his legal studies at Stanford University, graduating in 1997 with both a Juris Doctorate in Law and a master’s degree in Latin American studies.

Hestrin spent 18 years as a line prosecutor in the DA’s Office before being elected as District Attorney. During his years as a prosecutor, represented the people of Riverside County in some of the most difficult and challenging cases. He has completed more than 100 jury trials during his career. As Trial Team Leader for the District Attorney’s Sexual Assault and Child Abuse Unit, he prosecuted those who target and abuse children. For most of his last 10 years with the DA’s Office prior to becoming District Attorney, Hestrin was assigned to the Homicide Unit where he conducted more than 35 murder trials including seven successful death penalty cases.

Hestrin has been recognized for his achievements during his legal career. In 2003, 2005, and again in 2010, he was named Countywide Prosecutor of the Year for Riverside County. In 2008, Hestrin was chosen by the legal publication, The Daily Journal, as one of California’s “Top Twenty Lawyers Under Forty”. In 2009, he was honored as the Statewide Prosecutor of the Year by the California District Attorney Investigators Association. In 2010, the California District Attorneys Association recognized him as California’s Outstanding Prosecutor of the Year.

In addition to prosecuting cases, Hestrin conducted trainings for prosecutors, paralegals, law enforcement officers, Riverside County Bar Association members, and social workers in ethics, trial advocacy, sex offender prosecution, homicide prosecution, and capital case litigation. He has also been an adjunct professor at Azusa Pacific University for the last 10 years teaching American Government, Introduction to Criminal Law and Procedure and Latin American History.

Hestrin currently lives in Murrieta with his wife and children.

HEATHER MAC DONALDThe War on Police

THURSDAY, APRIL 6, 207 | Evening program

The Black Lives Matter movement holds that the U.S. is experiencing an epidemic of racially-driven police shootings, and that policing is shot through with systemic bias. Those claims have been embraced at the highest reaches of government and amplified by the media. But are they true? Heather Mac Donald will argue that the central Black Lives Matter narrative is not just false but dangerous. It has caused officers to back off on proactive policing in high crime areas, leading to the largest spike in homicides in nearly 50 years. The victims have overwhelmingly been black.

Mac Donald will explore the data on policing, crime, and race and argue that policing today is driven by crime, not race. In fact, there is no government agency more dedicated to the proposition that black lives matter than the police.

She is a contributing editor of City Journal. She is a recipient of the 2005 Bradley Prize. Mac Donald’s work at City Journal has covered a range of topics, including higher education, immigration, policing, homelessness and homeless advocacy, criminal-justice reform, and race relations. Her writing has appeared in theWall Street Journal,Washington Post,New York Times,Los Angeles Times,The New Republic, and The New Criterion. Mac Donald’s newest book, The War on Cops(2016), warns that raced-based attacks on the criminal-justice system, from the White House on down, are eroding the authority of law and putting lives at risk.

Ms. Mac Donald earned her B.A. from Yale University, M.A. from Cambridge University, and a J.D. from Stanford University Law School.

This talk was co-sponsored by the Salvatori Center for Individual Freedom in the Modern World, the Rose Institute of State and Local Government, and the Marian Miner Cook Athenaeum.

JASON L. RILEYThe State Against Blacks

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 1, 2017 | Evening program

Have well-intentioned government efforts – starting with the Great Society – helped the black underclass? Jason Riley assessed the track record of these programs and argued that, more often than not, these efforts have been counterproductive and widened racial disparities in income, education, employment and other areas. Riley also discussed how blacks have fared in the Obama era.

Jason Riley is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a columnist for the Wall Street Journal, and a commentator for Fox News. After joining the Journal in 1994, he was named a senior editorial writer in 2000 and a member of the editorial board in 2005. Riley writes opinion pieces on politics, economics, education, immigration, and race. A frequent public speaker, he is a longtime commentator for Fox News.

Riley is the author of Let Them In: The Case for Open Borders (2008), which argues for a more free-market-oriented U.S. immigration policy; and Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed (2014), which discusses the track record of government efforts to help the black underclass. He has also worked for USA Today and the Buffalo News. Riley holds a B.A. in English from SUNY-Buffalo.

This talk was co-sponsored by the Salvatori Center for Individual Freedom, the Rose Institute of State and Local Government, and the Marian Miner Cook Athenaeum

Fall 2016

STEVEN E. SCHIERPolarization: The Rise of Ideology in U.S. Politics

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2016

The 2016 presidential election features the two most unpopular major party nominees in the history of opinion polling. How did that happen?

Steve Schier is Dorothy H. and Edward C. Congdon Professor of Political Science at Carleton College in Northfield , Minnessota.

Professor Schier graduated in 1974 from Simpson with a double major in political science and history. He then enrolled in graduate school at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and received his M.A. in 1975 and Ph.D. in 1978. He taught at Wittenberg University in Springfield, Ohio, earning full professorship in 1993. Professor Schier is the recipient of a Fulbright Distinguished Lecturing Award in 2002.

Professor Schier has published thirteen books and has authored many scholarly articles and monographs. His edited book entitled A Post-Modern Presidency: Bill Clinton’s Legacy in American Politics was named by Choice magazine an “Outstanding Academic Book” of 2001. A more recent book entitled High Risk and Big Ambition: The Presidency of George W. Busch was listed as an “academic press best seller” in 2004.

More recently, he coedited (with Janet Box-Steffensmeier of Ohio State) and authored a chapter in The American Elections of 2008 for Rowman and Littlefield publishers. His book, Panorama of a Presidency: How George W. Bush Acquired and Spent His Political Capital, was published by M.E. Sharpe in late 2008. This book also won a Choice magazine “Outstanding Academic Book” award in 2009. In 2009, the University of Pittsburgh Press published his edited volume, Ambition and Division: Legacies of the George W. Bush Presidency.

Forthcoming is an edited volume, Debating the Obama Presidency, “the first book to present both the arguments for and against Barack Obama’s presidency and its policies.” The book presents different perspectives on the subject from political scholars, including CMC’s Andrew Busch and Jack Pitney.

California has the nation’s most extensive system of direct democracy, as citizens regularly exercise the power to determine important policy issues by direct popular vote. In this election, Californians will vote on an astounding 17 propositions. The topics cover a broad range of subjects, including among other things, the death penalty, legalizing marijuana, criminal sentencing, firearms and ammunition sales, bond funding, cigarette tax, income tax, and open government measures. Two of the state’s leading political commentators, Bob Stern and Tony Quinn, provided expert analysis of these consequential choices. Professor Ken Miller moderated the discussion and presented the Rose Institute’s Video Voter series of informational videos produced by the Rose Institute students.

Bob Stern is the co-founder and former president of the Center for Governmental Studies, a California think tank focused on political reform. Stern has been called “the godfather of modern political reform in California.” He began drafting and analyzing political reform laws as a staff attorney for the California Legislature’s Assembly Elections Committee; he then served as the Elections Counsel to the California Secretary of State’s office. He has drafted numerous state initiatives, and was a principal drafter of the City of Los Angeles’ Ethics and Public Campaign Financing laws in 1990. He is a graduate of Pomona College and Stanford Law.

Tony Quinn is co-editor of the California Target Book, a non-partisan almanac of California politics. Quinn is an authority on California political trends and demographics. He served three years as an assistant to the California Attorney General, is a former director of the Office of Economic Research in the Department of Commerce, and for five years served as a member of the California Fair Political Practices Commission. Dr. Quinn has written extensively on California politics and elections. He holds degrees from Georgetown University, University of Texas, and Claremont Graduate University.

Ken Miller is a member of the Government Department at CMC and is the Associate Director of the Rose Institute. His research focuses on state government institutions, with emphasis on direct democracy (initiative, referendum, and recall) and the interaction between law and politics. Dr. Miller is a graduate of Pomona College, Harvard Law School, and U.C. Berkeley.

A resident of Santa Barbara since 1964, Congresswoman Lois Capps represents California’s 24th District, which includes San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties, and a portion of Ventura County. She was sworn in as a member of Congress in 1998.

Rep. Capps has spearheaded and passed legislation on issues addressing national nursing shortage, violence against women, underage drinking, mental health services, research on pediatric rare diseases, provision of AEDs to local communities, diversification of clinical trials for effective treatments, CPR instructions in schools, hearing loss in newborns, Medicare coverage for patients suffering from Lou Gehrig’s disease, the expansion of TRICARE health coverage for military mothers, and rental car safety for consumers.

At the forefront of efforts to protect the environment and promote clean energy and green technology, she has led efforts to prevent new oil and gas drilling off our coast and on the public’s lands, strengthen oil pipeline safety and spill response, protect consumers from shouldering the financial burden of cleaning up water pollution in their water supplies, and conserve wildlife and rare species native to the Central Coast. She has also authored laws to establish a national system for ocean monitoring, expand conservation efforts for public lands, and strengthen labeling standards for organic foods.

Rep. Capps serves on the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and the Natural Resources Committee.

She is a member and has served as co-chair of numerous Congressional caucuses. She is the founder and co-chair of the House Nursing Caucus and was an original member and is honorary Vice-Chair, of the LGBT Equality Caucus.

Rep. Capps graduated from Pacific Lutheran University in Tacoma, Washington with a B.S. in Nursing, earned an M.A. in Religion from Yale University, and an M.A. in Education from U.C. Santa Barbara. She has received honorary doctorates from Pacific Lutheran University and Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary.

Spring 2016

CYNTHIA BRYANT

The Future of the Republican Party in California

TUESDAY, MARCH 29, 2016

With Republicans now shut out of all statewide offices, in the minority in both houses of the legislature, and occupying only 14 of the state’s 53 House districts, California has become one of the nation’s most solidly blue states. Yet, it has not always been this way – California had a Republican governor only five years ago. Moreover, as California Democrats face a number of challenges, including divisions on some issues and emerging battles to replace older leaders in the state’s top elected offices, the political landscape may be primed to shift. How will the nation’s grassroots voter unrest affect California? Will it present a challenge to California’s blue state governance model? What does the future hold for California’s Republican Party?

Ms. Bryant is the Executive Director of the California Republican Party. She is the former Deputy Chief of Staff and Director of Planning and Research for Governor Schwarzenegger. She has also been the Vice President of the California Charter School Association and the Policy Director for the Senate Republican Caucus. Ms. Bryant is a graduate of Lewis and Clark College and the University of California Hastings College of Law.

SENATOR ROBERT HERTZBERG

The Future of the Democratic Party in California

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2016

How will the nation’s grassroots voter unrest affect California? Is the blue state governance model sustainable over the long term? What does the future hold for California’s Democratic Party?

With Democrats now filling all statewide offices, dominating both houses of the Legislature, and controlling both U.S. Senate seats and 39 of the state’s 53 House districts, California has become one of the nation’s most solidly blue states. Yet, as Robert Hertzberg will address, California Democrats face a number of challenges, including divisions on some issues and emerging battles to replace older leaders in the state’s top elected offices.

Hertzberg, a native of Los Angeles, was twice unanimously elected Speaker of the California State Assembly (2000‐2002), and is the first former Assembly Speaker in 86 years to be elected to the California State Senate, where he now serves nearly one million residents in the San Fernando Valley. Hertzberg continues to address the big challenges facing California and is a founding member of The Berggruen Institute’s Think Long Committee and serves on the board of directors at the Rose Institute of State and Local Government at Claremont McKenna College.

Hertzberg is a graduate of The University of Redlands (1976), and earned his law degree from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law (1979).

Senator Hertzberg’s talk is co-sponsored by the MMC Athenaeum and the Rose Institute of State and Local Government.

Before the luncheon talk, Rose research assistants Shivani Pandya’18 and Melissa Muller’18 interviewed Senator Hertzberg on podcast. To listen to the podcast, click here.

Fall 2015

CHRISTOPHER SKINNELL’99 and KEN MILLER

The Supreme Court first formulated the “one person, one vote” rule in the 1960s, holding that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment includes a “one-person, one-vote” principle. This principle requires that when members of an elected body are chosen from separate districts, each district must be established on a basis that will insure that equal numbers of voters can vote for proportionally equal numbers of officials. The Court, however, has never resolved the issue of what is the appropriate population to use for redistricting, whether it is total population, voting age population, citizen voting-age population, citizen-eligible voting-age population, or some variant. Evenwel v. Abbott, a case now before the Supreme Court, focuses on this question.

Christopher Skinnell is a partner at Nielsen Merksamer practicing law and civil litigation relating to elections, state and local initiative and referenda, redistricting and voting rights, campaign finance, tribal gaming, and general constitutional and government law matters. He is a 1999 graduate of Claremont McKenna College, where he was a research associate at the Rose Institute, and the University of Chicago Law School.

Ken Miller (B.A. Pomona College, J.D. Harvard Law School, Ph.D. U.C. Berkeley) is a member of the Government Department at CMC and the associate director of the Rose Institute. Dr. Miller’s research focuses on state government institutions, with emphasis on direct democracy (initiative, referendum, and recall) and the interaction between law and politics. His publications include Direct Democracy and the Courts (Cambridge University Press 2009) and a co-edited volume The New Political Geography of California(Berkeley Public Policy Press 2008). Dr. Miller has worked with Rose Institute students on many research projects, including the 24-state Miller-Rose Institute Initiative Database.

MAC TAYLOR

Taxing California

MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 2015

Currently, there are numerous proposals in California to change the way people are taxed—from measures to extend the temporary taxes adopted in 2012 to major changes in the sales and property taxes. What is the state’s tax system and what are its major strengths and weaknesses? What are the issues that likely will be discussed—and voted on—in the coming year?

Mac Taylor was appointed to the position of Legislative Analyst in October 2008, as the fifth person to serve in that capacity since the office was founded in 1941. Mac began his career with the office in 1978 and has served in various capacities:

Program Analyst. Mac worked in the tax area, primarily income-related taxes, authoring reports on state and local spending limits, tax expenditure programs, and tax auditing issues.

Section Head. Mac managed the General Government section in the office, covering a wide variety of assignments (retirement, employee compensation, labor issues, and housing).

Deputy. Mac served for 17 years as deputy to the prior Analyst, Elizabeth Hill, overseeing the work of the K-12 Education, Higher Education, Local Government, State Administration, and Economics and Taxation sections.

As Legislative Analyst, Mac serves as the nonpartisan fiscal advisor to both houses of the California Legislature and oversees the preparation of annual fiscal and policy analyses of the state’s budget and programs. His office is also responsible for preparing impartial analyses of all initiative and constitutional measures qualifying for the state’s ballot.

Mac earned a bachelor’s degree, with highest honors, in political science from the University of California, Riverside, and a master’s degree in public affairs from Princeton University. He serves on the Statewide Leadership Council of the Public Policy Institute of California.

Spring 2015

MICHAEL GREVE

The Rise of Executive Federalism

MONDAY, APRIL 20, 2015

Modern federalism is the “cooperative” federalism of the New Deal. Politically, that regime has proven stupendously successful in doing what it was supposed to do: expands government at all levels. However, cooperative federalism’s stability rested on peculiar historical conditions: private and public affluence (that is, a general sense that we can afford an ever-expanding transfer state); tolerably homogenous states; and a functioning Congress. Those conditions have all ceased to operate, and they are not going to return any time soon. This predicament heralds the rise of an essentially extra-legal, executive federalism. Avoiding that fate would require a major overhaul of our most basic federalism arrangements.

Michael S. Greve is a member of the faculty at George Mason University School of Law, where he teaches constitutional law. He was previously a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and, before that, was the founder and co-director of the Center for Individual Rights, a public interest law firm specializing in constitutional litigation. A prolific writer, Greve is the author of nine books and a multitude of articles appearing in scholarly publications, as well as numerous editorials, short articles, and book reviews. He has an M.A. and a Ph.D. from Cornell University.

Who Draws the Lines? Will the Supreme Court Strike Down Independent Redistricting Commissions?

MONDAY, APRIL 6, 2015

The Elections Clause of the United States Constitution provides that the “Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.” The voters of Arizona and California, however, have used the initiative process to take responsibility for drawing new congressional districts from the state legislatures and given it instead to independent redistricting commissions.

On March 2, 2015 the Supreme Court heard Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, a case challenging the use of independent redistricting commissions to draw congressional district boundaries. The Supreme Court’s resolution of that case may also govern the fate of California’s redistricting commission.

Peter Gentala is the General Counsel of the Arizona House of Representatives. He advises the Leadership of the House and serves as the Policy Advisor to the House Judiciary, Elections, and Rules Committees. Gentala is also a Faculty Associate at Arizona State University where he teaches criminal law and constitutional criminal procedure in the ASU School of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Gentala regularly represents the Speaker of the House in litigation and has participated in numerous lawsuits posing difficult state and federal constitutional questions in areas such as elections, education and healthcare funding, pension reform, the separation of powers, the Freedom of Speech, the Freedom of Religion, and redistricting. Before joining the staff of the House of Representatives, he worked at both the Center for Arizona Policy and the Alliance Defending Freedom, where he specialized in constitutional litigation. Gentala is a native of Tucson, Arizona. He has a J.D. and Master’s Degree in Public Policy from Regent University. In 2012, Gentala filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Arizona State Legislature challenging Arizona’s Proposition 106 as a violation of the Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution. That suit is now pending on appeal in the Supreme Court of the United States. Oral argument was held on March 2, 2015.

Mary O’Grady P’15, counsel to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, is a partner at Osborn Maledon in Phoenix, Arizona. Her practice focuses on appeals, civil litigation and administrative law. O’Grady was the longest-serving Solicitor General for the State of Arizona and has a unique breadth of experience with public law issues. She has represented the State of Arizona and public officials in a variety of complex, high profile lawsuits and appeals in state and federal court. Her work has included ten cases that the U.S Supreme Court heard on the merits. O’Grady’s areas of expertise include election and campaign finance law, the Voting Rights Act, State constitutional law, government contracts, state legislation, open meeting and public records laws, redistricting and school finance. She has also worked extensively in the area of tribal-state relations, with a particular focus on tribal-state agreements. O’Grady is a graduate of Arizona State University and the University of California Santa Barbara.

Christopher Skinnell ’99 is a partner at Nielsen Merksamer Parrinello Gross & Leoni LLP, practicing law and civil litigation relating to elections, state and local initiative and referenda, redistricting and voting rights, campaign finance, tribal gaming, and general constitutional and government law matters. He is a 1999 graduate of Claremont McKenna College, where he was a research associate at the Rose Institute, and the University of Chicago Law School. Skinnell has published articles and written extensively on voting rights and redistricting, California political demographics, campaign finance and ethics compliance, and Native American issues, and has been a guest lecturer on redistricting issues at Claremont McKenna College.

MICHAEL BARONE

American Politics 2015: Looking Forward

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2015

Michael Barone is Senior Political Analyst for the Washington Examiner and a Resident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Fox News Channel contributor, and co-author of The Almanac of American Politics.

Along with being the principal co-author, of The Almanac of American Politics, first published in 1971 with new editions appearing every two years, Barone is also the author or co-author of another six books. They are Our Country: The Shaping of Americafrom Roosevelt to Reagan (1990), State Legislative Elections: Voting Patterns and Demographics (1997), The New Americans: How the Melting Pot Can Work Again (2001), Hard America, Soft America: Competition vs. Coddling and the Competition for the Nation’s Future (2004), Our First Revolution: The Remarkable British Upheaval That Inspired America’s Founding Fathers (2007), and Shaping Our Nation: How Surges of Migration Transformed America and its Politics (2013).

Barone has written for many publications, including U.S. News and World Report, The Economist, The New York Times, The Detroit News, Detroit Free Press, The Weekly Standard, The New Republic, National Review,The American Spectator, American Enterprise, The Times Literary Supplement, and The Daily Telegraph of London.

Barone grew up in Detroit and Birmingham, Michigan. He is a graduate of Harvard College and Yale Law School.

Fall 2014

Dreier Roundtable: Immigration Policy for the 21st Century

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2014

In collaboration with the Brookings Institution, Claremont McKenna College’s new Dreier Roundtable hosted its inaugural conference on campus on Friday, November 7. Titled “Immigration Policy for the 21st Century,” the Roundtable brought together renowned policy experts, academics, and journalists to discuss immigration reform in the changing political and economic landscape of the 21st century. Rep. David Dreier, former Chairman of the House Rules Committee and honorary Chairman of the Dreier Roundtable, described the forum as a part of CMC’s greater mission of fostering leadership in business, government, and the professions. Specifically, The Roundtable’s goal is to “address public policy questions and make recommendations to how we will resolve them.”

The conference began with a panel discussion examining the economics of immigration reform. Eric Helland—CMC Professor of Economics, Rose Institute Faculty Fellow, and Co-Director of the Dreier Roundtable, moderated the discussion. Neil Ruiz from the Brookings Institution, Giovanni Peri, Professor of Economics at University of California at Davis, and Timothy Kane from the Hoover Institution all served on the panel. All agreed that the United States must provide an easier path for high-skilled immigrants to work in the United States. This would not only improve the economy through innovation and global trade, but also provide a supply of workers in the STEM fields, addressing a labor supply shortage in the U.S. tech and science industry. In terms of to low-skilled workers, Peri noted the importance of recognizing that immigrants provide demand for the economy, as well as supply. They help grow our economy in the long run rather than just taking jobs from native workers. There was consensus at the end of the panel that the United States should implement simpler policies to lower work barriers between countries.

Ken Miller, CMC Associate Professor of Government, Associate Director of the Rose Institute, and Co-Director of the Dreier Roundtable, moderated the politics panel. It featured panelists Mike Murphy, a renowned Republican political consultant and political media expert, Peter Skerry, Professor of Political Science at Boston College (and former CMC faculty), and Heather Williams, Associate Professor of Politics at Pomona College. The panelists discussed questions of how President Obama should move forward on immigration policy, particularly in light of recent Republican gains in Congress in the 2014 midterm elections. Mike Murphy explained that it would be wise for the President to work with the Republican leaders of Congress rather than issuing an executive order, for an executive order would be “far less legitimate.” The panelists agreed that there must be a political consensus to legalize immigrants, with Murphy and Skerry speaking to the importance of first focusing on legal status rather than a path to citizenship.

The Dreier Roundtable concluded with a luncheon and panel discussion, moderated by William Antholis from the Brookings Institution, at the Athenaeum. Rep. Dreier, Jacob Goldstein from National Public Radio, Mike Murphy, and Peter Skerry discussed issues such as border security, E-Verify, and the positive and negative impacts of immigrants on American workers.

Moving forward, Rep. Dreier’s vision for the Dreier Roundtable is to continue conversations on issues beyond immigration, such as international trade, development of democratic institutions, and flow of information for commercial purposes. He believes the Dreier Roundtable initiative “demonstrates how Claremont McKenna is bringing the full spectrum of insightful opinions to our students’ world.”

GOVERNOR STEVE BULLOCK

Public Service, Integrity, and the problem of “Dark Money.”

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2014

On October 28, 2014, Montana Governor Steve Bullock paid a special visit to the Rose Institute to meet with students and discuss issues concerning Montana and state government. Topics ranged from tax policy, to life on the campaign trail, to the state budget.

On October 24 the Rose Institute of State and Local Government hosted a conference on California’s Three Strikes law. The conference reviewed the history and effects of the controversial law and also featured a debate on Proposition 47, which reclassifies certain crimes as misdemeanors and thus further narrows the scope of Three Strikes.

The event began with Mike Reynolds, author of California’s Three Strikes Law, and Professor Jennifer Walsh of Azusa Pacific University reviewing the history of the law and the events leading to its enactment. Mr. Reynolds started the session with a short video from the program 60 Minutes. It detailed how the murder of his daughter, Kimber, by someone who had been in and out of prison many times, led him to propose the harshest sentencing law in the state. According to Reynolds, “Thirty years ago, the most severe California penalty for first degree murder was 16 years.” Three Strikes, which passed twenty years ago as both an emergency bill and an initiative, was designed to counter criminal recidivism. Mr. Reynolds referred to it as a success with specific mention to the second strike as being the most effective. Professor Walsh agreed and noted that “Three-Strikers are only 6 percent of inmates in California” and that by “1993 to 1995, almost half of the states passed a Three Strikes law.”

Continuing the discussion of criminal sentencing, Professor Joseph Bessette of Claremont McKenna College moderated a debate over the Proposition 47 initiative. Deputy Los Angeles County Public Defender Brent Tufeld ’82 spoke first in support of the initiative. Mike Hestrin, recently elected as the Riverside County District Attorney, spoke in opposition.

Tufeld led by asserting that “the reason for Proposition 47 is to lower penalties for charges seen as less serious in order to reduce jail overcrowding.” He went on to say that the cost of incarcerating “less serious” offenders is extremely high, and that “courts and [the] threat of jail sentences” do very little in helping drug offenders beat addiction. Tufeld ended by stating that Proposition 47 is not perfect, but the aims are on the right path. Mike Hestrin began by reinforcing the necessity of Three Strikes and warned against the “pendulum swing” that Proposition 47 is part of. Specifically, Hestrin disagreed with reducing the penalty for possession of drugs like heroin and methamphetamine and brought up the reduced charge of theft of a firearm as another flaw in the initiative.

Professor Bessette led a brief question and answer period to conclude the discussion.

BOB STERN and TONY QUINN

California’s Choices: 2014 Ballot Initiatives

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 2014

Just in time for the 2014 election on November 4, the Rose Institute of State and Local Government hosted two experts on California politics to discuss the six measures on the ballot. Bob Stern is the co-founder of the Center of Governmental Studies, and Tony Quinn is the co-editor of the California Target Book. The event, titled California’s Choices: 2014 Ballot Initiatives, is part of a larger effort, including the recently completed Video Voter Series, which seeks to educate California voters about the six measures on this year’s ballot.

After viewing the Video Voter segment addressing each ballot measure, the panel, moderated by Associate Director of the Rose Institute Dr. Ken Miller, provided further insight on each measure. The measures range from Indian Tribal gaming rights to a $7 billion bond to finance water conservation and infrastructure. Both Stern and Quinn agreed that they expected the majority of the measures on the ballot to fail due to a stronger conservative streak in California ballot initiative history, as well as the increased power of negative ads and spending. About the initiative and referendum process, however, Stern and Quinn affirmed their support of the direct democracy, with Stern calling the initiative process a “fourth branch of state government.”

A prediction shared by the panel is the passage of both Proposition 1, the $7 billion bond measure for water resources, and Proposition 2, a constitutional amendment which strengthens the state’s rainy day fund. Both propositions passed by wide margins in the state legislature and, according to Stern, work to address timely issues that will make passage by the voters more likely.

Proposition 47, a citizen initiative which reclassifies certain non-violent felonies to misdemeanors, is likely to be the most closely contested measure on the ballot. According to Quinn, the legislature prefers that the voters deal with this subject, rather than taking it up in the legislature, because they are weary of appearing “soft on crime” or “anti-police.” Whichever way the ballot initiatives play out, the only certain thing is that the voters who get out and vote on November 4 will determine the outcome.

NANCY MCCALLIN

Education and State Budgeting

MONDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2014

This Monday, October 13th, the Rose Institute welcomes Dr. Nancy McCallin to Claremont McKenna College. The talk is co-sponsored by the Kravis Leadership Institute. A leader in public education, Dr. McCallin serves as the President of the Colorado Community College System, which encompasses 13 state colleges and over 159,000 students. During her time as President, Dr. McCallin has implemented a redesign of the CCCS remedial education program, focusing on accurate course placement and individual attention for students.

She is a member of the board of the American Council on Education and the Colorado State Governor’s Education Leadership Council, and was awarded the Phi Theta Kappa Distinguished State Community College Director Award in 2012. Dr. McCallin also has extensive budget policy and economic analysis experience, having served as chief economist for the Legislative Council of the Colorado General Assembly, and later as the executive director of the Governor’s Office of State Planning and Budgeting, where she was responsible for Colorado’s $13 billion budget. Outside of budgetary or education issues, she has worked on issues such as energy, economic development, and Colorado Supreme Court nominations.

TOM LEPPERT

Four Lessons on Leadership

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2014

Tom Leppert, currently the CEO of Kaplan, Inc., and formerly the mayor of Dallas, spoke at the Marian Miner Cook Athenaeum on Wednesday, September 25, 2014. Leppert has a long history of leadership in both the private and public spheres. In the private sphere, he has led companies in several industries, notably construction. His nine years as the head of the Turner Corporation, the nation’s largest general construction company, is considered enormously successful. In the public sphere, he was mayor of Dallas from 2007 to 2011, and was a White House Fellows during the 1980s.

The focus of Leppert’s talk was on the four lessons on leadership he has learned throughout his career. The first of these was to never feel comfortable. He noted that during his career, he would frequently feel overwhelmed, but never intimidated. Only in this environment can people learn a new perspective – a key for leadership. The second was to be leery of straight lines. Following his tenure at McKinsey, a major accounting firm, he became a White House Fellow. Though diverging from a typical career path for his industry, he gained two important things: a new environment to explore and a much broadened base of experience which made him more valuable when he returned to McKinsey. Again, the key was a different perspective. The third was to have a moral compass – know what is worth compromising on and what principles are sacrosanct. At various times in his career, Leppert faced moral trials that tested this sense. He always chose to do do the right thing, though it was often harder in the short-term than some alternatives. The last lesson was to get involved in the community. Besides being a good citizen, this also leads to an increased awareness of the way the rest of the world lives.

To Leppert, the key to leadership is in gaining new perspectives. Leaders do not listen to themselves, but to those around them. Only then will they gain enough information to make the correct decision. During the question and answer session, he joked that he lowered the average IQ of meetings with his staff. By surrounding himself with more intelligent people, he is better able to run any organization he is in, private or public. In closing, he urged the audience to find something they are passionate about and pursue it as much as possible.

Mr. Leppert’s talk was sponsored by the Kravis Leadership Institute, the Robert Day School, and the Rose Institute of State and Local Government.

JACK PITNEY

What’s at Stake in the Midterm Elections?

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2014

On Tuesday, September 23, Rose Institute Faculty Fellow Jack Pitney gave a talk at the Marian Miner Cook Athenaeum entitled “What’s at Stake in the Midterm Elections?” Pitney, who has been at Claremont McKenna College since 1986, has become one of the most quoted government professors in the entire nation. His quotes and articles can be found in numerous places, including the Washington Post, Politico, and The Christian Science Monitor.

Pitney began with an examination of the broad forces at work during the election. Historically, midterms have seen poor showings for the party holding the presidency. This year, it seems like that will be the case once again. Macroeconomic indicators frequently reported are improving, namely the unemployment rate, which is the lowest it has been during Obama’s presidency, and overall GDP. Nevertheless, many people do not see a healthy economy because labor force participation is the lowest it has been in decades, middle-class wealth has shrunk, and a large majority of the country believes the nation is headed on the wrong track. This creates strong headwinds for the Democratic Party in the fall.

While Pitney notes that the Republican Party is almost guaranteed to maintain control of the House, the Senate is a true toss-up. The Senate class up for reelection is from 2008, a banner year for Democrats, leaving many Democrats in vulnerable positions. Combined with broader forces, Pitney is leaning ever so slightly to the notion the GOP will win the Senate, but he would not be surprised if the Democrats kept the chamber. Looking forward, candidates from both parties are likely to be the recipients of ads, mostly negative, from both opposition candidates and outside sources.

Spring 2014

STEVEN MALANGA AND CHUCK REED

Tough Choices for California: What Public Pension Liability Means for Your Future

THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 2014

State and local government pensions across the country are collectively underfunded by at least $1 trillion and the heavy burden of public pension obligations is a primary factor in the recent wave of municipal bankruptcies. In California, unfunded public pension liabilities are a cloud looming over not only the state budget, but also those of many local governments. Last year, Moody’s Investor Services placed 30 California cities on review for possible ratings downgrades. As pension obligations consume an increasing portion of public budgets, a shrinking share is left for services. Join us for a discussion of the public pension crisis and what it means for the future.

Steven Malanga is City Journal’s senior editor, a Manhattan Institute senior fellow, and a former RealClearMarkets.com columnist. He is author of the recently published Shakedown: The Continuing Conspiracy Against the American Taxpayer, about the bankrupting of state and local governments by a new political powerhouse led by public-sector unions. He writes about the intersection of urban economies, business communities, and public policy. Prior to joining City Journal, Malanga was at Crain’s New York Business, first as managing editor and then executive editor, for fourteen years. In 1995, Malanga was a finalist for a Gerald Loeb Award for Excellence in Financial Journalism for the series “Nonprofits: New York’s new Tammany Hall,” which he co-authored. Malanga has also written articles on various topics for The Wall Street Journal, the New York Daily News, the New York Post, and other publications.

Chuck Reed was elected as the 64th Mayor of San José in 2006, after serving six years on the City Council as an independent voice for fiscal responsibility and reform. Since taking office, Mayor Reed has been committed to improving the quality of life in the city, boosting the public’s trust in local government, and eliminating the City’s structural budget deficit. He is one of the leading voices in California calling for public pension reform, fighting for reforms in San Jose and spearheading an effort for a state-wide ballot initiative. Mayor Reed attended the U.S. Air Force Academy and served in Thailand during the Vietnam War. He also received a Master’s Degree in Public Affairs from Princeton University and graduated from Stanford Law School. After passing the bar, he worked as an attorney in San José handling environmental, employment, land use and real estate law, as well as commercial litigation.

MICHAEL COHEN

California’s Budget and Choices for the Future

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2014

On January 9, 2014, Governor Jerry Brown unveiled his proposed 2014-15 budget for the state. Recent increases in personal income tax revenues have improved the state’s budget conditions significantly and the $151 billion proposal reflects an increase in general fund spending of $11 billion. The proposed budget would continue California’s recent progress toward a firmer fiscal footing by paying down some of the state’s “wall of debt” and proposing a $2.3 billion reserve. While critics praise these measures they argue that the proposed budget does not do enough to address California’s massive pension liabilities. As Director of the California Department of Finance, Michael Cohen directs the development of Governor Brown’s budget. He will provide an overview of key budget decisions and discuss the outlook for California’s fiscal future.

Michael Cohen was appointed as Director of the California Department of Finance by Governor Jerry Brown in September 2013. He serves as the Governor’s chief fiscal policy advisor. Prior to becoming Director, he served as Chief Deputy Director of the Department of Finance from 2011 to 2013. In this capacity, Mr. Cohen was the department’s lead contact with the state Legislature on the state budget. From 1997 to 2010, Mr. Cohen worked at the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO). While there, he served as a local government finance analyst, Director of State Administration, and Deputy Legislative Analyst.

Mr. Cohen earned a Master’s Degree in Public Affairs from the Lyndon B. Johnson School at the University of Texas and a Bachelor’s Degree in Urban Studies from Stanford University.

Fall 2013

BRUCE CAIN, MARGUERITE LEONI w/ KEN MILLER, moderator

The Voting Rights Act after Shelby County v. Holder

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2013

In Shelby County v. Holder (2013), a sharply divided U.S. Supreme Court declared Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional. CMC Associate Professor of Government Ken Miller will moderate a discussion between Bruce Cain and Marguerite Leoni, two leading experts on the Voting Rights Act, on the history of the Act, the issues decided in this case, and the consequences of the court’s ruling for elections in the United States. Sponsored by the Rose Institute of State and Local Government.

Bruce E. Cain is a Professor of Political Science at Stanford University and Director of the Bill Lane Center for the American West. He received a B.A. from Bowdoin College (1970), a B Phil. from Oxford University (1972) as a Rhodes Scholar, and a Ph.D. from Harvard University (1976). He previously taught at Caltech and U.C. Berkeley, where he served as Director of the Institute of Governmental Studies 1990-2007. He was elected the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2000 and has won awards for his research (Richard F. Fenno Prize, 1988), teaching (Caltech 1988 and U.C. Berkeley 2003) and public service (Zale Award for Outstanding Achievement in Policy Research and Public Service, 2000).

Marguerite Leoni is a partner at Nielsen Merksamer Parrinello Gross & Leoni LLP, specializing in law and civil litigation relating to elections, redistricting and voting rights questions, school district reorganization law, campaign, government and initiative/referendum law including appellate practice and extraordinary writ proceedings. Ms. Leoni is a nationally renowned redistricting and voting rights expert with expertise in administrative preclearance practice under Section 5 of the Federal Voting Rights Act and Section 5 enforcement litigation. Ms. Leoni graduated from the University of California, Berkeley. She received her law degree from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law. Ms. Leoni has been a guest lecturer on the Voting Rights Act at Hastings College of the Law and has spoken at numerous forums concerning voting rights and election issues.

TOM RIDGE

Boston and Beyond: Homeland Security and the Hometown

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 31, 2013

The Boston Marathon bombings of last April brought renewed attention to the issue of terrorism within the United States. While federal authorities played an important role in breaking the case, state and local police were also crucial. As the former Governor of Pennsylvania and the first Secretary of the federal Department of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge is uniquely qualified to discuss the role of state and local governments in fighting terrorism. Governor Ridge will survey the relationship between them and the federal government, how that relationship has developed, and where it is headed.

Following the tragic events of September 11th, 2001, Tom Ridge became the first Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and, on January 24, 2003, became the first Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, serving until February 2005. The creation of the country’s 15th Cabinet Department marked the largest reorganization of government since the Truman administration and another call to service for the former soldier, congressman and governor of Pennsylvania. During his DHS tenure, Secretary Ridge worked with more than 180,000-plus employees from a combined 22 agencies to create an agency that facilitated the flow of people and goods, instituted layered security at air, land and seaports, developed a unified national response and recovery plan, protected critical infrastructure, integrated new technology and improved information sharing worldwide. Mr. Ridge previously served in the U.S. House of Representatives for six terms from 1983 to 1995, and was twice elected Governor of Pennsylvania, serving as the state’s 43rd governor from 1995 to 2001. Governor Ridge’s aggressive technology strategy helped fuel the state’s advances in economic development, education, health care and the environment.

Secretary Ridge is currently president and CEO of Ridge Global, an international security and risk management advisory firm, headquartered in Washington, DC. In March of this year, Secretary Ridge co-founded, with former White House cyber czar Howard Schmidt, the strategic advisory firm, Ridge Schmidt Cyber, an executive services firm that helps leaders in business and government navigate the increasing demands of cybersecurity.

HENRY OLSEN

The Rose Institute 40th Anniversary

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 17, 2013

Henry Olsen, a lawyer by training, is the director of AEI’s National Research Initiative. In that capacity, he identifies leading academics and public intellectuals who work in an aspect of domestic public policy and recruits them to visit or write for AEI. Mr. Olsen studies and writes about the policy and political implications of long-term trends in social, economic, and political thought.