ago are non-issues. and the challenge of directing yourself to new issues is very complicate. . conservatives have been uncomfortable with health care for a long time and takes real work and confidence where you see the health care issue somewhat like the well fare issue where it belonged to the less but in fact is begging for conservative marketing-oriented solution that is would actually address the problems. i think that's one reason, the other has to do with the fatigue of being in power for a long time and in certain respects conservatives are especially subject to this kind of fatigue, we don't tend to operate intellectually and have a different notion power is not everything to us that means being in power and being on the defense has an effect on us that's probably a little different from the left. and there are certainly particular failures that i think the public identifies with -- and conservatives.

that's a pretty difficult -- but the first element may be thinking about recovery. that is applying ourselves to new issues, issues we have not been used to thinking of as ours. it's absolutely crucial and health care is one, there are others, energy, the environment. but we have to remember health care didn't always look like a conservative issue. conservatives a generation or two ago are wary as we have been of health care recently, and we've got to think creatively how our ideas that can solve a very real problem. >> the health care and the iraq war and policy exhaustion stemming partly from our successes as you pointed out but another huge thing we can't ignore is the financial crisis. you know, for a lot of people, that's the most discrediting event for free market

capitalism, you know, in a generation. or perhaps more, so a huge part of our chore in coming back is -- it has to be explaining the true roots of that crisis and how every instrument of government policy was applied to make the bubble much, much worse than it should have been. but that's going to be the work of years i think. >> that bull's-eye. everything you just said. a lot of it is so circumstantial. i mean, don't misdiagnosis the patient. there's basic world view the picture is still favorable. it's the republican party that's in the drink and the republican party discredited itself to a large extent. and the rich just gave the reason why, but i think let's just remember the policies on offer right now were not the

ones campaigned on just a few months ago, so the republican party has a lot thicker patience for the moment than the views that are or have been associated with it. and we got to repair the gentleman loppy because that's only vehicle these views can travel in. >> so it's not a repudeuation of conservativeism. -- once the republicans start to remember principals over sheer power, they perhaps will start to win again and become the voice of conservativism that they once were and perhaps can be in the future. back here. yes, sir in? >> thank you. a i'm roger with the center for equal opportunity and i'd like to ask you all what

conservatives can and should do to ensure that the principal of efailure bus ewan i mean is in a country that's increasingly vindicated in a country that is increasingly multi health nick and multi-racial. >> want to take that? >> sure. >> i think in light of that general concern and the kind of immigration debate we had not long ago, i think this is a time for civic education to be a priority. and it doesn't have to be simply a government priority. it ought to be a priority of our society. republicans, conservatives and everybody else ought to be talking about assimilation in ways we've probably been uncomfortable talking about for a while and ought to be talking about civic education and american history and the importance of teaching our children of why this is a special country and i think that's a place to begin that kind of work and rather than taking on the kind of abstract

problem of multi culturalism to plain the very particular uniqueness of this country and this society to our children who are going to have to carry it on i think is a challenge that we've been remiss about for a long time and need to think seriously again. >> governor? >> i think you have to walk the balance beam here. but i opt for a heavy lean to the side of embracing newcomers as this country always has. i don't have a lot of trouble as i travel my state as i say more snins english but to new americans in spanish, and i do this all the time to me there's a simple three-part step. [speaking spanish][newline] obey the law, the old patriotic american, support yourself, and speak english or teach your children. i get -- i believe this is

something that the vast, vast majority of every citizen, whether they have came on the, you know, on the plymouth rock or across the border recently has subscribed to, and i think it's a grave, grave mistake to act as though somehow we ought to pull up the fences that we -- that in any way becoming a multi more multi ethnic society is a threat to america. it's a reality and it can be the strength of america as it's always been if we 'em place brace it but emphasis but emphasize that many efailure bus unum is still always the motto and always must be. >> i agree with everything that's been said about assimilation. i think it's really hard though to maintain an asim list agenda at the same time you

have mass, uncontrolled immigration, you know, people from mexico and points south who are coming here, you know, for good reasons but also have very little in the way of education, very little in the way of skills, and tend to settle in areas with masses of people with exactly the same characteristics, which the fact is that just makes it very hard to assimilate them. now this is a delicate balancing act, because i think we need to try to restrict that immigration at the same time we don't alienate a hugely important and growing part of the electorate, and that's an extremely difficult balancingal act and one that i sometimes dispair at republicans being able to pull off. >> roger, your own views on this are prominent and important. could we hear them?

>> well, thank you. the center for equal opportunity believes very strongly in the principal of e pluribus unum but we also are on the side of the conservative that relatively high immigration levels are not a bad thing, that nsket they are something that's necessary for the economy to work well, but in order to ensure that those relatively high immigration levels do not jeopardize the principal of e pluribus unum, there needs to be more attention given by the got to the to assimilation. assimilation is not a dirty word. i like mitch's three-part test. as you note, arthur, i've expanded that to a to 10 a top

10 list for immigrants that include not only speaking english and following the law but some other things as well. working hard, studying hard is not -- i have written also about the importance of keeping -- of having children after you are married. i should say that a lot of these assimilation do's and requirements are things that apply not only to recent immigrants, but to all americans. and i think it is going to be a challenge. but it's a challenge that i think you know consecutives -- that i think conservatives can meet and are in a good position to make this an issue that works for them. i think as -- as you've all said, the -- there's a failure

sometimes for conservatives to recognize issues that are actually good issues for us. and i think that the overwhelming majority of americans, including recent immigrants, agree, that assimilation is important. you know, they are here for a reason. they think this is a great country, and they understand that in god we trust is written on dollar bills in english. and that that's something that that's the language that their children need to understand, and therefore, that this is an issue -- and i should say one of the items on my top 10 list is you can't ask for special preferences. for your group on the basis of your skin color or what country your ancestors came from. and i think that that's an issue that works very well for conservatives too. and where i think this summer

we have a lot of opportunities to drive home that pointer with with the new supreme court nomination, with some important supreme court cases about to come down. >> thank you, roger. before we move on to the next topic, another quick question i'll address to you, i happen to be married to a native spanish-speaking i mean grant and if she were hear i would ask her the question. she would tans question does not the relevant movement rely on having spanish-speaking and how do we get them to understand we are not hostile to these communities and share their views and bring them into the leadership. >> well, we've all seen now over and over that there's no more hazardous sign in public

life than to be disdependant to the public in that the african-american and hispanic community will look to kill you for stepping forward or becoming prominent, and so it's not marryly a matter. i think there's a lot of eagerly and actively recruiting trying to promote the leadership opportunities for these folks but sometimes it's a risky business for them to undertake. yes, of course, very important, and please, let's remember how important people of indian and other nationalities are, and disproportionately so, and what wonderful personifications of the virtues and values and commitment to entrepreneurship they represent.

the family commitment. i inaugurated awards for the top math and science students purely on academic achievement in our state. we've had two years time two, three of the four were indian youngsters, the fourth was a mormon. so you know, there are many people like that who -- who i believe are more -- can also be invited and welcomed to this debate and maybe their presence would attract those from the other nationalities too. >> thank you. >> yes, sir? >> now for more from the other side after this. >> i'm from the republican staff of the u.s. congress joint economic committee. thank you. voting results over the recent past few elections show that well-educated people are turning away from the republican party. why is that?

and how do we reverse it? thank you. >> rich? >> well, i think obama, we have a peace in our last -- we had a piece in our last issue by a guy who writes real numbers about real politics and he's a real number cruncher and he says in terms of income and education, if you look at bush's coalition, he picked up kind of the middle income groups and steadily went upward. you know, fliping the line, is that a technical term ok? if you look at obama's coalition, it's a shallow u-shapet. it's higher in the lower educated groups and dips a

little in the middle and then goes up among high-income, higher-educated folks. and that's probably inhanchtely unstable coalition because how is he going to pay for all the government programs to support the people at the lower end? well, it's eesketly it's going to be taxes and quite stiff taxes on people on the upper end, and we actually have to comblefment those taxes. i think we may see the suburbs populated by better-educated professionals swinging back in a republican direction. >> hmm. >> well, i think there's a lot of truth to that. there's also -- you have to think about these groups, each person belongs to more than one group so if we think about the highly-educated, the people considered highly-educated,

they also tend to be unusually young, and they also tend to be wealthy as the highly-educated do. i think we have to think about the appeal of republicans and the conservatives croice this specktrum, democratic governance tends to make them for conservative because it tends to tax them more likely so i think that will flatten out or balance out as rich says but you want to be the smart party and the people who appeals to those who think of themselves as sophisticated political consumersen and-for-a while now republicans have had a problem with that. that's part of why we need to focus on policy and make an appeal that's a little less expresley populous and a little more serious and sophisticated about the problems of the country without losing what i think is genuine and true about

the pop will you explain movement and there's also a way in which the culture of the academic world is tilted against us and more and more of the highly-educate ready educated not in engineering but in what used to be humanities, whatever it is now. so you're going to see a left wards tilt in people who have ph.d.'s. that in and of itself is not a huge problem but points to things that underlie. >> governor? anything to add to that? >> it's too soon i think to say. clearly there was an enthusiasm that i think stem from a lot of miscellaneous sources. for a lot of upper income people it was a luxury purchase. >> in a sense that he didn't seem a threat economically. and it was the history the national desire for change after a period of poor rilts

which quite honestly was a fashion statement for some folks, some people, and i'm not disparaging that. people who wanteded to demonstrate their enthusiasm for a society which in which we could elect an african-american president, things like that. like this. not sure how that holds up over time. even since the election there's a lot of people who aren't quite so certain of their economic futures and the threats of higher taxes or severe restrictions on their lives and lifestyles will be more evident. so let's wait a while and see whether this is a pattern or a one-time bullet. >> also, in terms of obama's use and especially the senseibility was the first opportunity in american history to vote for a graduate student for a united states president

so, i think there's an element of identity politics to it in that sense. >> if i can medal the arkts of rich and uval, i think what they are saying is that the democrats disproportionately right now have the support of people who did not finish high school and those who have ph.d.'s in gender studies where as the republicans continue to win those with a bachelor's degree and go to work. as to where the future leads, well, it's your guess. here, actually, i have passed it to you a couple times, yes, sir. >> >> all right. well, i'm arnold and admittedly ask obnoxious questions, i've heard a lot of description that is made it sound like conservativism is not being helped by the association of

the republican party. and it's a logical conclusion then that either a non-political approach to pushing conservativism is right or looking for some sort of structural change or new party is right as opposed to pinning all our hopes on the republican party. >> that's not that obnoxious a question. i just think as a practical matter, the -- the political expression or vehicle for conservative goals, the only vieible one at the moment and over the last 30 years is and has been the republican party, so we have to be concerned about its health and its direction. >> governor? >> yes. the part of the first time folks on either side about discarding one of the traditional parties, trying to

construct something new is not very practical. and just intensifies the equal librium and it will again, and reference more than once if there's anything that today's americans of all ages enassists on, the choice, lots of choices, and i think that they wouldn't sit still for the extinction of one of the two that they have in this context. >> i also think we shouldn't be too dismissive of the republican parties. and i think it's important for them to have political vehicles and practical and winning elections and being able to do something rather than,ing about what we could do if only. it hasn't always worked out

when we have got engine power but we easily could have stayed same things of the 1970's and seen ourselves win an election in a big way and have said the things i same thing in the 1990's or 1998, and i think it's worth the time and effort to make the republican party a vehicle for ideas and there are not a lot of other options and in a democratic society it helps to have to filter yourself through some kind of process that forces you to talk to voters and face elections and think about what the political system asks of people who want to exercise power and our two parties actually do a fairly decent job of that and it's worth the effort. >> rich, would it not be of significant benefit of the country if the republican were it detached able to influence

right-minded democrats? >> yes. that should obviously be our goal. you know? one of the great political watch words of the 1980's was reagan democrat. so of course you want to appeal to the democrats and reasonable elements of the democratic parties. >> but reagan democrats were voters not of the political party. you have the -- opportunity speak the reagan democrats voted for republicans. >> um, we have time for one more question and i'm sorry i'm going to have to make a decision sir, you've had your hand up for a long time. this will be our last question for the day for the panel. >> john goodman national center for policy analysis, one of the things that jack kemp was so good at was talking to blue collar workers and explaining why capitalism was good for

them and their self-interest and except for a few references to headache i haven't heard anything like that on this panel for days. seems to be no real interest in using the conservative point of view to solve the economic problems ordinary americans face. >> governor? >> well, i do all the time, john. i get to do this by example but no examples come to mind right here but i talk to people all the time what it will mean in their life and if we were for no persuasive reasons dramatically raise the price of energy in our state. i talk to them all the time about why higher taxes not only means a bite out of their paycheck but less chance for their son or daughter to get a job, at least in our state, going forward.

and so your question is a very important one, i think we probably didn't give the right illustrations but i think you heard each of us in different ways recognize that be credible and really to earn to right to try to lead any part of this country, we have to address not only address ourselves but begin by putting ourselves in the shoes of the large majority of american citizens. and to reserve our greatest concern, our greatest concern for those who have shareed the least in the blessings that freedom brings to this country. and you're right to remind us of jack kemp, because in his every breath, he started from the standpoint of the citizen who hadn't got up the ladder yet. and he will always be as great

a role model in that respect as we could look to. >> uval? >> i think your question is exactly the essence of the challenge we zfs face, if we haven't got than across we haven't done our jobs because i think that's the point where conservatives need to speak to voters and see the need for their -- not to stand back and stand at a great distance and think about accounting. it means to think about the life of a family. it means to think about parents who confront a difficult balance between needs of raising a family and the needs of prospering and making money. it's the balance that exists, the tension between what we think of now as social conservativism and fiscal conservativism. it's just in the life of every american family. and our effort to think about that and our effort to deal

with that means to express ourselves in the solutions that speak to the problems that middle class parents face and inner city families face and in bringing up a new generation of americans and a dream of social mobility therefore begins at the bottom not at the top and is to my mind that's what it means to think about the problems of the moment, the problems that face that problem and that family and worker and person in need. >> rich? >> absolutely. i agree with that and john's question and uvol and it's not just kemp that was on to this. it was abraham lincoln who said insofar as there's any measure that will them lot of the average working man, i am for that measure. and i think that attitude should be at the core of what we're about as conservatives. >> we end on the note that free enterprise is at the center of

american culture. it is the essence of opportunity and freedom. entrepreneurship is a question of character and indeed a vehicle on which we will take not the conservative movement bureau america on greater and greater heights and a note on which i'm delighted to leave you today. before we break up i do want to ask you to join me in thanks to the bradly foundation. as many of you know it has been the leading venture phelan throw pist in the cause of philanthropist in the cause of celebrating entrepreneurship, defending free enterprise. this this is something that's been of great benefit to our communities and indeed to the united states so, please join me in thanking the bradly foundation for this conversation and so many others. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> and thank you to our panelists. and to all of you for your attention, your energy and your interest in the conversation we had today. thank you, very much. [applause] .