C (10:07)

Well, Allie, it's a pleasure to be with you. You know, my family and I are big fans of yours and we have been for many years.

B (10:12)

Thank you.

C (10:12)

And to your question about you course. And to your question about Inauguration Day, this is the beginning of taking back this country, not just in terms of politics and policy, but if you think about what Donald Trump and J.D. vance personify, which is that they love this country more than I think any other Americans perhaps ever in history, the rest of us have something to learn, which is that beyond elections, beyond policy, let us be very serious as we go about our family lives, building our businesses, going to church, maybe going back to church this year, that those are all things that are far more important than Washington, D.C. in other words, ironically, on Inauguration Day, when all of our eyes are cast upon events in the nation's capital as they should be, starting tomorrow, we really need to get about rebuilding our communities and being the kinds of Americans who deserve to be as self governing people. I think that's going to be the.

B (11:07)

Legacy of this day, Heritage was at the center of a lot of media contrived controversy, as you very well know, during the campaign with Project 2025. Can you talk about that a little bit? Were you surprised, first of all, that Project 2025 became like the rallying cry of Democrats during the election?

C (11:29)

Boy, media contrived is the best explanation I have heard about that. I was not surprised that the radical left overreacted, because that's what they do. You know, their performance about anything that conservatives do that might actually be conservative is guaranteed. What did surprise me, to be completely candid with you, Ali, is the scale and scope of their overreaction. And clearly they thought, particularly at one point in the summer, that this was going to be the Achilles heel for President Trump and a lot of conservative campaigns. And once we started correcting the record, I think my coms colleagues at Heritage secured nearly 100 fact checks from really conservative outlets like CNN and USA Today. We realized that we were going to turn the corner. And of course, as it turns out, I think it was a net positive for conservative candidates, because what people were telling me across the country for a couple of years was that it wasn't enough for conservatives to win, that they also needed to have a plan. It's obviously up to the president and vice president how much of that plan they want to use, but I think it was a real sense of security, that in addition to winning elections, they would have conservative candidates, elected officials who actually knew what they were going to do, that they were going to have a blueprint. So it ultimately backfired. It was great to see, and we just can't get. Can't wait to get started on the next version of that in the 2028 presidential cycle.

B (12:59)

You know, it really just didn't stick the way that they thought that it was going to. There are still people out there, I realize, even in my audience, who have friends, maybe across the aisle, who are still scared of Project 2025. They think that that is what is going into place tomorrow. And they believe that what is in Project 2025 is that you personally are going to go to their house, open their drawer, steal their birth control and run away. That seems to be like this crazy fear that has been stirred up in a lot of people on the left. Can you just tell us, for those who still haven't heard, like, what is project 2025 and does it actually have a role to play in Trump's agenda?

C (13:43)

Thanks for that question. Most succinctly, Project 2025 is this election Cycles version of something that Heritage has done since 1980 for President Reagan. And it is just a menu of conservative policies. It's actually, on one level ali really boring. It's what think tanks and public policy organizations do. But perhaps because it covers every policy area from international policy to education policy, and we are unabashedly conservatives, the Democratic Party and its affiliated institutions thought that they could turn it into something that would scare people. And so the advice that I would give, and I really do intend this to be friendly for people who are in the political center or maybe on the political left, is that whatever you've heard about Project 2025 is unlikely to be true. And so I would encourage you to go read about it, read the substance. What almost every person who's taken that advice from me has said is that they may not agree with everything, but they have found nothing in it that would cause someone to be worried about continuing to do whatever it is that Americans are doing behind closed doors. Let's get on with conservative policy, with governing this country. We got policy differences, but the lying and dishonesty, which is purposeful and behind which $75 million was spent, really is pretty ridiculous.

B (15:06)

Yes. When I read it, because we did a deep dive on this show, I was. I was looking for something. Okay, let me look for some things that are truly kind of scandalous that maybe I agree with, but I understand why this would make the left mad. And while of course I do understand that there are policy proposals in that people on the left would not like, as you said, it was kind of boring. Like there just wasn't anything in there that I was like, whoa, I can't believe they went all the way there. I mean, a lot of it is very typical, and I don't say this in a bad way at all, but typical Republican stuff that a lot of conservatives have been saying for decades. And so how they somehow created really this Boogeyman of Project 2025. It was kind of interesting to watch, very dark to watch, but as you said, it showed me also that they had very little to run on if they had to lie about this kind of like, boring bulk of policy prescriptions by a conservative think tank.

C (16:09)

It shows you how little the political left had run on this year. And look, in my lifetime, it may go all the way back to when I was a little boy in the 1970s and early 80s, while conservatives disagreed with the political left, the political left had a real viable and popular policy agenda. That isn't the case anymore. It really is based on unfortunately, creating in a dishonest way, a complete mischaracterization of what the right wants to do. And if there's a silver lining to this whole story, Ali, it isn't just that this effort backfired on the left, but for a lesson that maybe all Americans, regardless of their political background, would agree on, is that it shows that in this era when a lot of money can be spent to create, in a dishonest way, a completely different picture of what reality is that when you just stay the course, which is what my colleagues and I at Heritage did, and you continue to tell the truth, and you continue to correct the record, and you have friends like you in the media who are willing objectively as you did, to go into that and say, look, I'm going to look for something that's really objectionable here. And when you realize that that's not the case and you tell the truth, a majority of Americans still will respond to that. And I think we ought to all take that as real encouragement that our political discourse can still be saved.

B (17:33)

Quick pause for the first sponsor for the day, and that is America's Christian Credit Union. America's Christian credit union, since 1958 has been dedicated to their vision of Christians financially equipped to serve God's world by providing lending and banking services to churches, ministries and the individuals they employ and service across the U.S. accu is an amazing financial institution. You never have to worry about being debanked or being deprioritized or mistreated in any way because of your beliefs. Unfortunately, we've seen that debanking happen to certain individuals across the United States because of the values that they support. You don't have to worry about that with Accu. Plus right now they are partnering with EveryLife, the pro life Diaper Company, to donate a box of diapers to a Christian Pregnancy Resource Resource center for every new member who opens a checking account at Accu before January 31st. Plus, when you use my Code Ali to sign up, they will pay you a $100 bonus to your new account. Go to America's Christian CEO.com ally code ally America's Christian Credit Union is federally insured by the ncua. You and I are Christian Conservative Christians first conservatives. And we because of that also have what are considered socially conservative views, culturally conservative views. Not everyone who votes Republican shares our views about the definition of marriage, family, things like that. And now that we kind of have the Make America Healthy Again movement with the MAGA movement, we've got lots of different kinds of people over on the right, which is great. We needed everyone to win this election. It's a good thing. But we've got some pretty big disagreements. How do you see those disagreements? I don't want to call them factions because there's so much that we agree on as well. But the different segments, I would say, of the Republican Party, how do you see that playing out in the Trump administration over the next few years?

C (19:41)

Boy, historically, it's always difficult to take a diverse political coalition and harness that political power into governing policy power. But that's certainly what Heritage and I are committed to doing. Obviously, we're have some differences of opinion with some people, not just new adherents to this coalition, but gosh, long standing friends. And you know what? That's okay. What we try to do at Heritage, and it's the first part of answering your question, is just be part of the conversation. That is, in other words, as my colleagues, I think, personify every day, is don't just disallow a conversation from happening because we think we disagree with someone. The second example that I will use is to riff off your comment about Make America Healthy Again. That's something that really has animated a lot of people for whom political ideology may be important. But really what we're all realizing, you know, whether we're liberals or conservatives or somewhere in between, is that we've been sold a bill of goods from big Pharma, from big government, from local pharmacists, local doctors, and it's time to correct that. And the beauty of the Maha movement is that it is apolitical. I mean, the motivation of RFK is not some political ideology. And so let me just take that one level deeper, if I may, for you and for me and your audience who are social conservatives. And let's talk about the issue of abortion in life. RFK is not nearly as committed to the pro life cause as you and I are, although I've learned that he's more so than maybe he was in the past. If we look at lifestyle, if we look at quality of life, if we look at the health of mothers, if we look at the health of expectant mothers, and you start to sort of impose or implement the Make America Healthy Again agenda on that in public policy, all of us, whether someone's an expectant mother or like me, a middle aged dad, we all can benefit from that. That's so far upstream specific policy proposals regarding what we want to do with abortion. Our operating theory here at Heritage, where we're all pro life, is that we can gain some momentum, some muscle memory, if you will, of working together, such that at some point down the road, I don't know what year that will be, both in state policy and federal policy, we might be able to develop an emerging consensus on what the right federal policy regarding abortion is. I know that that sounds fantastical because almost everyone on the left and in the center wants us to say that there's nothing that we can do regarding abortion. I just think we need to take things in the proper order, the proper chronology. We need to be magnanimous. That doesn't mean that we're going to betray our principles, but it does mean that we're willing, as I think our Lord would want us to do, to have conversations with everyone. And I think that's going to help American society.

B (22:30)

A lot of people are freaking out about the possibility of the dissolution of the Department of Education. I've even got some conserv in my audience saying, hang on a second, my friends are saying that this is going to be terrible for American education. Am I supposed to be supportive of this? So what do you think about getting rid of the Department of Education altogether? And what do you think realistically will happen while Trump is in office?

C (22:56)

I understand why that might sound scary to anyone, even some conservatives. But the first point is the reason that we want to eliminate the Department of Education. And make no mistake, if you gave me a magic wand to do one thing in public policy, that's what I would do. The reason that we want to do that is to improve education. And so for people who are skeptics of that, just bear with me for one moment. I am a fifth generation teacher. I only went to public schools. I'm an unabashed conservative. I think one of the greatest achievements in American society is our public school system. But since 1979, when the Department of Education was created, all that's happened after spending trillions of dollars and centralizing power in Washington, is that education has deteriorated. I'm not saying that President Carter, who had this idea, or other people who support the Department of Education are ill intentioned. I'm just saying that they're not looking at the data. And so here at Heritage, and certainly for me, as a social science guy, I want to look at the data and I want to do something different on behalf of America's school children and teachers. And what we need to do that's different, Alan, is to eliminate this over centralization of power in Washington. Give that back to the states, give that back to local entities, and very importantly, give it back to parents and families. And let's have a block grant system in which states compete for dollars and the money that they get is reflected on the achievement that they're able to secure on behalf of America's schoolchildren. That system will be far more natural for America, far more natural for America's families, and also think it's going to be a lot more appropriate, if you will, for the 21st century. What we're doing is outdated. And for us to say that is not to call into question fellow Americans who are a little skeptical about this big change. We get it. But at Heritage and Frankly At Project 2025, we're so transparent. We've laid out step by step how this can be done. And I think it's very important to sum up here that President Trump and the Secretary of education and other leaders be in constant communication with the American people about why they're taking each one of those steps, because it is a very legitimate skepticism to have about making such a big change.

B (25:14)

It's hard for us to even imagine it because obviously for most of us, our entire lives, we've had a Department of Education and we've also been told that that is the foundation of all good in the United States. And there's been really no reason for a lot of people to question it. But over the past, I mean, 20 years, but especially in the past five years, as people have asked themselves, not only, okay, is my child even getting a good education? Can they read? Can they do the same math problems that I could do at their age 20 plus years ago, but also what are the values that they're learning? And are the teachers or the administrators at this particular school actually in direct opposition to what I am teaching them at home? And it's just made a lot of people over the past few years who would have said they're huge supporters of public education in America, ask, okay, who is behind this? How much power do the teachers unions have? What is actually going on at the Department of Education that these changes, unnecessary and counterproductive changes, have been happening over the past few years. Speaking of parents and parental rights, you mentioned what is this parental bill of rights that I hear talked about so much?

C (26:30)

Another revolutionary idea which is a reminder that it isn't bureaucrats in Washington, even if they're well intentioned. It isn't politicians, even politicians we agree with in Washington who are in charge of this society. It is parents. And of course, the over lockdowns under Covid really amplified this already existing move for state legislatures and for Congress to issue this parental Bill of Rights. That is they of course are in charge of their kids education. They also need to know to speak about the issue. That's particularly timely as we have this conversation. If their child is in conversations with teachers or school officials about going through a so called gender transition, they also need to be parents need to be notified about anything that might be a mental health concern. In other words, what's happening, and frankly it's related to the previous conversation thread we had about the Department of Education is that as we have centralized power in the Department of Education that that centralized power has crowded out, it's actively pushed out the role of parents, the right of parents to be obviously not just involved, but leading such conversations. One of the great successes that has happened because of conservative public policy advocates is the Parental Bill of Rights. It's passed in a number of states, obviously a big issue in front of Congress. We think that restoring that, that amplifying this call for a parental Bill of Rights is not only common sense, it's apolitical. It transcends a lot of the political divide. And we think looking at public policy through the perspective of parents is one way that we can develop some momentum in Washington and in state capitals around the country toward good education policy. Also policy in other arenas such as reminding people that boys are boys and girls are girls and that at the very least parents should have 100% of the say regarding that.

B (28:25)

Absolutely. I've had parents on this podcast who would not describe themselves as conservatives, as Christians, as Republicans, who have had their children taken out of their cups custody because their child declared themselves a particular gender that does not align with their sex, the parent didn't go along with it and the child was taken to a home that affirmed this newfound so called identity. They were able to butcher their bodies and immutably or irreversibly change their bodies through a hormone regimen. And these parents, the people who have, the only people really who have the best interest of their child at heart, are completely excised out of the child's life. And so I think you're right that this is an issue, not just the parental rights issue when it comes to that, but this issue of boys declaring themselves girls and vice versa, especially boys and men entering into girls and women's spaces is one that has woken a lot of people up. I think moved a lot of people over to the right and voting for President Trump. I think a lot of people in the Make America Healthy Again movement, whether or not they are with us on the definition of marriage, when life begins, things like that, they realized not only the absurdity of this issue, but the danger of this issue. And while Trump wasn't as strong on some things during the campaign as I wanted him to like abortion, on this one, he has been pretty steadfast. So what are you anticipating when it comes to this transgender issue, policy wise, in this next administration?

C (30:02)

I think by the end of this calendar year, the scourge, the tragedy, the evil of properly trained physicians butchering the bodies of young Americans will come to an end. And it will come to an end because of stalwarts like you in the media, stalwarts who are governors of states. And one of the most important stalwarts on this issue has been President Trump. And so there is certainly a role for federal action on this that I think we will see continue here in Washington. And if we do that, that is, if we end this terrible practice, then the United States will simply be catching up with none other than the European Union, which, of course, in most parts of the European Union, most European countries have disallowed this practice. And that, of course, is going to be just in time before this really catches fire. Unfortunately, as we do every January at Heritage in our Gender Ideology Conference, we have a few people who've gone through transition surgeries. It will not have prevented the terrible tragedy that's been inflicted upon other Americans, but at least there won't be any others. The key thing here, Ali, is that we learn our lesson. And the lesson is that when you take a handful of physicians, a handful of medical schools who are able to get this practice, this approved by their different licensure boards in various states, we have to understand there is a role for common sense and for those of us who are social conservatives to say on behalf of American kids, on behalf of biology, on behalf of parents, we have to prevent these kinds of practices. I'm hopeful that not only we secure that victory, but that it becomes a lasting lesson for us across the board in decades to come.

B (31:54)

The House just passed the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act. I mean, this seems to be just the most common sense piece of legislation. Unfortunately, only two Democrats, but good for these Democrats. Two Democrats from Texas voted for. The rest of the Democrats voted against it. HR28 says to amend the Education Amendments of 1972 to provide that for purposes of determining compliance with Title 9 of such act, an athletic sex shall be recognized based solely on a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth. I mean, in a way, it's kind of sad that we even need to spell that out. But I do think, even before Trump is president, that it's good that Congress is all already making this clear and moving in that direction. I do think that congressmen, congresswomen are realizing this is whether you like it or not, this is the direction that the country is moving. And I actually hope to see more Democrats realize that. And even if it's just because it's politically advantageous to them, start speaking out about fairness in sports. At the very least, when it comes.

C (33:03)

To women, it's ridiculous that there aren't more Democrats who are willing to do that. To your point on the substance of the matter. But just speaking to the politics of this, this is an 8020 issue at least. In fact, the one recent poll I saw showed that 85% of Americans support the legislation that you just mentioned. And so, yes, hats off to those two Democrats, but almost every other Democrat, every Democrat really should be supporting this because of the common sense. But this sort of conveys a lesson about politics. Rank and file Democrats pick your state, whether it's a blue state like New York or a red state like Texas, rank and file Democrat is supportive of this legislation. But the problem is when they become elected officials and they're here in Washington, the institutional part of the Democrat Party prevents them from going along with their populace, with their constituents. And that's really going to cause a reckoning for the political left in this country. As a lifelong conservative on the political level of this, I relish that they have to go through this kind of controversy that they themselves that have created. But obviously what's far more important than the politics is the human side of this. And it would be great if we just bring this terrible practice to a close right now with their help.

B (34:19)

Absolutely. Absolutely. I'm praying for that. Second sponsor is Cozy Earth, y'all. I love our Cozy Earth sheets. I'm about to get another sheet set from Cozy Earth because I just love them so much and I can't stand when I have any other kind of sheets on my bed. They are so breathable, so soft, so luxurious. I feel the same way about their loungewear. I am always wearing my Cozy Earth quarter zip. Their pajamas are amazing, just really high quality. And this is a company that you can feel really good about supporting. Plus, they have an awesome deal if you use my code, like, I typed in my code just to see, like how much of a discount it would be if I were to buy sheets. And it is so significant if you go to cozyearth.com relatable and use my code relatable, you get to up to 40% off. That's incredible. Cozyearth.com relatable coderelatable tell me about your new book, Dawn's Early Light, Taking Back Washington to Save America.

C (35:28)

Well, there are a lot of public policy leaders who write these books and nothing against them or their books. And you know, my book is not perfect. I was trying to write a book as the head of the largest conservative policy organization in the world that caused people to think, that caused them to be a little surprised. And so what I do with a little bit of edgy rhetoric is explain what's at stake. And I will say that in a couple of things that I wrote about in the book, well before the conclusion of 2024, I sort of predicted the Trump victory. And the man who wrote the forward, J.D. vance, is now the vice president of the United States. I also talked about the mismanagement of California, California potentially leading to a massive wildfire in the southern part of the state. And I used that concept of forest mismanagement, the lack of controlled burns in a literal sense in forests that of course led to this tragedy in California. And apply that to what we need to do in politics and policy. In other words, I name names, Ali. I talk about the New York Times and what used to be called the Boy Scouts of America as entities that no longer are worthy of existence. Nothing against the people who are in them, but they as institutions no longer deserve to call themselves American institutions. And figuratively speaking, I argue in the book, we need to apply this concept of a controlled burn and eliminate those organizations, those schools, those universities that simply are doing no good but actually doing a lot of harm. And I inject a personal story like a lot of people and the vice president who was inaugurated today had some challenges in my family life as a child. And I try to appeal to the quintessential American story of living the American dream, which I dare say based on what happened today in Washington is still alive and well.

B (37:15)

Yeah, you know, Christians built the many of the universities that now are the worst perpetrators of this progressive activism that are turning out those who are out there in the streets anti Israel, pro Palestinian, anti American protesters, many of them are products of these Ivy League schools that actually have like a Christian pro America foundation. What does it look like? Like, can you give me an example of how America loving people can take back these institutions for the good of the country?

C (37:51)

I'll give you two examples, both in education because you know, that's my first love, having founded a school and run a college. And the first would be what any parent can do. And whether your child's in public schools or whether they're in private schools or whether you're homeschooling. In all of those cases, you are using a curriculum, and you need to have some skepticism about the curriculum that you're using. And so it doesn't matter if you're not someone who's. Who says, I have enough formal education to do this. You're an American, of course you do. It doesn't matter if you're a business person or a liberal arts person or a physics person. Go ask questions about the curriculum that your child is using. And I'm just here to tell you that if by simply taking that simple act, you are going to learn more, and you might discover something in some of those cases where it's really bad, and if you discover that it's bad, then you need to take action. You need to be more involved in your child's education. The second example is also in education, but it's in universities, and it involves public policy. I think that universities that take federal funds for student loans and grants for research, which is almost all of them, that if they have large endowments and they are teaching things that are anti American and they have students to whom they are promising a great education and they are not delivering it, that their endowments ought to be taxed by the federal government, I think that they need to lose some of the privileges they have because, frankly, they're living off the trough of the generosity of the American people, but doing everything in their power to undermine the American dream. And what's particularly sadistic about this, Ali, to your point, is that in so many of these cases, particularly all of the Ivy League colleges, these are entities that have. Have Christian roots, and there was a time when they offered the finest education in the history of the world, and now they're at embarrassment. Federal policy ought to treat them as such rather than holding them up on pedestals.

B (39:49)

What about our security apparatus in the United States? A lot of people are concerned about that, especially in light of recent terror attacks. And you've got people asking, rightly so, okay, how. How did these people get in? I mean, as far as we know, the person who committed the atrocity in Louisiana was an American citizen. But how did they become radicalized? And how did this happen? Were they already known to law enforcement? Could something have been prevented? And we just wonder, are our intelligence agencies, are they effective? Are they operating in integrity. I think a lot of people would say no in many cases. And people want to see an overhaul. I mean, it's a national security issue, of course, and people don't like instability. That's one reason why President Trump got elected. We don't like instability. We want him to bring back stability and strength and protection. So tell us about that. Like, can there be some kind of overhaul? The corruption runs so deep sometimes, it feels kind of hopeless.

C (40:58)

It does feel hopeless. I'm more hopeful today than I was yesterday. Thank goodness President Trump won, but, boy, do some of his appointees have a big job ahead of John Ratcliffe at the CIA, Kash Patel at the FBI, which I think is the most rotten of the rotten agencies. Not just intelligence agencies, but federal agencies, period. And we have to get them fixed for the American people. Take, for example, the perpetrator in Louisiana. He is Native American, native born American. He is someone who was radicalized, it seems, fairly recently before the attack. But think about the FBI's response to that on three or four different major questions in the first days following that tragedy. They gave completely opposite answers to questions. And at the very least, that's incompetent and doesn't breed any kind of confidence in their assessment. But what I've happened to come to know firsthand because of the work that we do at Heritage involving some retired FBI agents, is that the FBI is rotten to the core. That in fact, someone like you or someone like me, maybe many people in the audience, merely by being conservative, is more of a target of FBI analysis and assessment than are people who are real perpetrators, like this man. And so this is precisely the kind of thing that has to be fixed. I will say, Ali, that I am cautiously optimistic that it will. I'm only cautiously optimistic because there is something that is very real and it's the deep state. And until and unless Trump's excellent appointees to these intelligence agencies, in leading them, will just completely, in a figurative sense, lop off the heads of the deep state, we're going to continue to have this problem. It is a huge priority, not just for the American people, but for free societies around the world.

B (42:48)

Yes. I mean, you mentioned in your book some of the other non governmental institutions, BlackRock, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, I mean, these organizations, George Soros is open society, they've also got a lot of power now. Not as much power as I thought they did because I thought there was no way they were going to allow Donald Trump to win whatever means, legal or whatever, that they could employ to stop Donald Trump from becoming present. I certainly thought that they would pull out all the stops. And so there, as you said, there's already more hope than I thought. But it sounds like people need to read your book to understand the specifics of how these people can be stopped and how the institutions that used to exist for America's good can go back to serving that purpose. So I'm guessing they can get it wherever books are sold, Is that correct?

C (43:42)

That's correct. They can get it anywhere. And to your point just now, just very briefly, I try to use stories of regular Americans, people who would say that they're not special in the same way that I would say that I'm not special. My heritage colleagues are not special, just ordinary Americans who work behind enemy lines here in Washington, D.C. on everyone's behalf. But I use stories of those ordinary Americans in the book to encourage others who are reading the book to understand they, too, can play a really small part that has a big consequence in taking back the country. And yes, you can find the book anywhere good books are sold.

B (44:18)

That's Don's Early Light. Taking Back Washington to Save America. Thank you so much. I really appreciate you taking the time to. Come on, Allie.

C (44:26)

You're a great American. It was a pleasure.

B (44:28)

Likewise. Thank you.