To that . We have a we have had a Historic Program with haiti in food and health, and we have also a number of our faculty from the medical schools who are working in haiti periodically as is permitted, given the current circumstances. Curr but its important for us to doo we also have included haitian students, interestingly as a h migrant program, because as you know, many students from haiti u migrated into florida. And we have a university of Michigan Migrant Program for students from haiti. P president simon, i want to ask you about one thing youre involved in. The National Security Higher Education advisory board. What is that . It was formed a while ago, ty be advisory to the director of the cia and the fbi to try to Better Connect the voices of ivi universities with National Security issues, that were all n need to be worried about. And its a group of university o president s, that talks about an everything from Cyber Security to how we can better understand intern the dynamics
Now washington journals interview with Michigan State University President lou anna simon, she talks about priorities for the university and Higher Education moving forward. Its part of our special series on universities in the big ten conference. This is 35 minutes. The cou cspan bus has been on a tour of the big ten colleges across the country for the past few weeks and along the way here on the washington journal, we haver been talking withni university t president s aboutat Higher Education issues, the point is e cspan bus is on the campus of on Michigan State university, in east lansing, michigan, joining us aboard the bus, is lou anna si simon. Let me get started rightti away with the challenges that you see in Higher Education. Value good morning, and its a y. Beautiful day in east lansing ge so the promise of Higher Education creating not 1i6rle a job, but a terrific life. And one of our challenges is always to be sure that we work in a way to be as Cost Effective and relevant
You say welfare reform, which is what everybody talks about first when they talk about conservative Public Policy. It was very put it was very paternalistic. It was also very decentralized. Comfortables are with paternalism when it is relatively local and can be defined differently in different places. Even if there is sentinel even if there is centralized funding behind it. Theres certainly room for that to help people with family formation and with other concerns, but they are always going to work at the margins. Its true, there is some evidence that helping people with parenting skills works. It helps a little. It works better than marriage promotion, which does not really seem to do anything, but it only helps very little. If we talk about the ways in which capitalism does not seem to be working right now, capitalism requires a kind of notzen that it does produce. I think we are seeing now what it looks like when we fail at least in some portions of society to produce that citizen.
Hampshire and did a good enough job in New Hampshire to frighten Lyndon Johnson out of running for reelection. Eugene mccarthy in todays world could not have done that because he would have had to raise that 500,000 from 500 people instead of five people on the phone call every thursday afternoon. You are over there at the committee making phone calls. You couldnt do it the way you used to do it. Politics. Ged the burden of fundraising is a direct result of the campaignfinance activity. Pardon me. I didnt hear you. Snowe, do you want to respond to that, to his point . Donors . G fewer illuminating limits. It is the amount of limits. The debt was growing up financially before mccainfeingold. People found a loophole in the existing Campaign Laws at the time. I think what bob is referring to is not allowing Political Parties to accept soft money. There was a ban on soft money. It leveraged these other groups. I think the sphere of influence went to these outside organizations as opposed t
And it calls you back. Find book tv every weekend on cspan two. Authors and journalists met recently in new york to discuss the future of the Republican Party at the manhattan institute. They talked for about an hour and a half. What is the future of conservatism . There are a great number of people qualified to discuss these questions. We have assembled a number of younger leadingedge journalists, scholars and authors who come from a variety of backgrounds to discuss what the way forward could be. They will not always agree, but perhaps through a thoughtful discussion we will illuminate the finer points of the debate. In a way, it reminds me of the early days of city journal, when people like Kevin Mcdonald and george kelling, hardly people who would be characterized as classic conservatives, manage to get together and form a conservative policy that was both coherent and successful. I feel like in many ways we are at the same kind of point in history. In any event, we are glad to bri