Progressive critics charge that democracy is declining in Republican-led states. But a careful analysis of state-level democratic health shows that red and blue states actually score comparably, and that Americans continue to vote red with their feet by moving to Republican-governed states. Indeed, the “backsliding” narrative says more about elite assumptions than about the actual condition of American democracy.

Guest Andrew Taylor joins us to discuss the implications of a widening divide between the public and progressive elites about what democracy is, and the state of its practice.

Andrew J. Taylor is professor of political science at North Carolina State University.

This podcast discusses themes from Andrew’s essay in the Fall 2026 issue of National Affairs: “The Myth of Democratic Backsliding in the States.”

The conservative coalition that brought Donald Trump back to power looks increasingly unstable. But this turbulence may be a sign of vitality rather than decline. Once Trump leaves office, this new coalition can only thrive through compromise and policy innovation. A “new fusionism” that respects entrepreneurial genius while ensuring the gains of growth flow to workers as well as investors should serve as a guide.

Guest Henry Olsen joins us to discuss the policies and ideas that could unite a conservative-populist coalition.

Henry Olsen is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and the author of The Working-Class Republican: Ronald Reagan and the Return of Blue-Collar Conservatism (Broadside Books, 2017).

This podcast discusses themes from Henry’s essay in the Summer 2026 issue of National Affairs: “Fusionism for the 21st Century.”

In this 250th anniversary year of the Declaration of Independence, we are rightly celebrating its proclamation of natural rights. But the document’s other core purpose — founding a nation — deserves equal attention. Indeed, the Declaration was in its way a kind of constitution. In its indictment of King George III, it implicitly laid out the structural blueprint for a new government.

Guest John Yoo joins us to discuss how the Declaration constituted a new republican government and sovereign nation, and why America is both an idea and a concrete heritage.

John Yoo is a non-resident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute; Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley; and a senior research fellow for the Civitas Institute of the University of Texas at Austin.

This podcast discusses themes from John’s essay in the Summer 2026 issue of National Affairs: “The Declaration as a Constitution.”

Americans are reading less than ever. Policymakers know this is a problem, but they rarely look to public libraries for solutions. Instead, libraries have embraced an agenda of redundancy, morphing into technology centers, daytime homeless shelters, and all-purpose community centers. It’s time for libraries to return to their traditional mission: offering Americans serious books and a place for quiet study.

Guest Stephen Eide joins us to discuss how refocusing public libraries could help reverse America’s reading decline.

Stephen Eide is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. He has visited more than 300 public libraries.

This podcast discusses themes from Stephen’s essay in the Spring 2026 issue of National Affairs: “The Mission of Public Libraries.”

In an era of accelerating digital technologies, the jurisprudence of free speech has been utterly transformed. Our ideas about what the right to speech amounts to, what counts as speech, and whether all forms of speech are equally protected are all in flux. The resulting inflation of free-speech law has made it impossible to hold tech companies accountable for obvious misconduct.

Guest John Ehrett joins us to discuss applying a truly originalist understanding of the First Amendment to caselaw and policymaking, returning tech regulation and other policy matters to the democratic process.

John Ehrett is an attorney and writer in Washington, D.C. All views are his own.

This podcast discusses themes from John’s essay, co-authored with Brad Littlejohn in the Winter 2026 issue of National Affairs: “The Post-human First Amendment.”

American society has become radically permissive of some serious vices in the past few years. Drugs, gambling, and pornography are easier to access legally than ever before. A backlash against this permissiveness has clearly begun, but it has yet to find its footing because it tends to be rooted in the language of material or physical harm. Such arguments are a crucial piece of the case for prohibiting vice, but they have to be paired with a more comprehensive and coherent account of why vice is incompatible with human freedom and flourishing.

Guest Charles Lehman joins us to discuss how opponents of vice can build a bipartisan coalition for banning the addictive products that threaten republican self-government.

Charles Fain Lehman is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute and senior editor of City Journal.

This podcast discusses themes from Charles’s essay in the Winter 2026 issue of National Affairs, “The Case for Prohibiting Vice”

In principle, federal agency missions are set when agencies are created, and so remain rooted in the ambitions of the president and the Congress who decided they were necessary. But in reality, political change tends to transform agencies’ missions in both subject and scope. Understanding how this occurs can clarify the nature of presidential power and the character of constitutional evolution.

Guest Tevi Troy joins us to discuss how agency missions have changed during recent presidential administrations, and how Congress can act to restore the constitutional separation of powers.

Tevi Troy is a senior fellow at the Ronald Reagan Institute, a former deputy secretary of Health and Human Services, and former senior White House aide. He is the author of five books on the presidency, including The Power and the Money: The Epic Clashes between Commanders in Chief and Titans of Industry (Regnery History, 2024).

This podcast discusses themes from Tevi’s essay in the Fall 2025 issue of National Affairs, “Who Gives Federal Agencies Their Purpose?”

Higher education has a civic mission. The public knows that, but faculty and administrators seem to have lost sight of it. Instead of transmitting shared civic principles, universities often frame civics through polarized partisan lenses. Restoring civic education to its unifying role would require teaching democratic practices and constitutional ideals in ways that encourage pluralism rather than entrench division.

Guest Daniel DiSalvo joins us to discuss how civic education can help university students and the broader public disagree better and act together.

Daniel DiSalvo is professor and associate dean of the School of Civic Life and Leadership at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. He serves on the Public Scholars Advisory Committee of the Moynihan Center and was previously professor of political science at the City College of New York-CUNY.

This podcast discusses themes from an essay by DiSalvo and Carlo Invernizzi Accetti in the Fall 2025 issue of National Affairs: “Civics, Partisanship, and the Academy.”