Think Tanks
Here's a look at documents from think tanks
Featured Stories
Jamestown Foundation Posts Commentary: Moscow Trying But Failing to Combat Demographic Collapse of Russian Far East
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Jamestown Foundation posted the following commentary on April 30, 2026, by Paul Goble, specialist on ethnic and religious questions in Eurasia, in the foundation's Eurasia Daily Monitor:
* * *
Moscow Trying but Failing to Combat Demographic Collapse of Russian Far East
Executive Summary:
* The population of the Russian Far East continues to decline at an accelerating rate, now far faster than any other region of the Russian Federation except the Far North. Russian President Vladimir Putin has identified this development as a threat to national security.
* Moscow is
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Jamestown Foundation posted the following commentary on April 30, 2026, by Paul Goble, specialist on ethnic and religious questions in Eurasia, in the foundation's Eurasia Daily Monitor:
* * *
Moscow Trying but Failing to Combat Demographic Collapse of Russian Far East
Executive Summary:
* The population of the Russian Far East continues to decline at an accelerating rate, now far faster than any other region of the Russian Federation except the Far North. Russian President Vladimir Putin has identified this development as a threat to national security.
* Moscow iscontinuing to try to reverse this trend, but its efforts are failing not only because they are short-term and under-funded but also because they fail to address the underlying issues causing Russians to leave the Far East for regions west of the Urals.
* As a result, the looming demographic collapse of the Russian Far East is likely to become an ever more serious challenge to Moscow, not only in terms of its domestic consequences but also because outside powers are likely to exploit the situation.
The population of the Russian Far East continues to decline at an accelerating rate, now faster than in any other region of the Russian Federation except the Far North. Russian President Vladimir Putin has frequently pointed to this development as a threat to his country's national security (URA.RU, June 6, 2023). The number of residents of that region has fallen by more than 10 percent since Putin became Russian leader in 2000 and is now projected to decline by eight percent more before the end of this decade--three times the rate Russian officials had been projecting (EastRussia, January 25, 2023; RBC, April 4, 2024; PrimaMedia, August 8, 2024). That leaves Russia's largest federal district--the Far Eastern Federal District, which occupies 40 percent of Russia's territory--with fewer than eight million people, or just over five percent of the country's population. This is far fewer than it had at the end of Soviet times, when the state forcibly populated it (Delovaya Rossiya, accessed April 30).
Moscow is devoting ever more attention to this trend and its reversal, most recently at a much-ballyhooed meeting of the Russian Ministry for the Development of the Russian Far East and Arctic on April 22 to discuss the Demographic Policy Strategy of the Far East (Russian Ministry for the Development of the Russian Far East and Arctic, April 22; Asia Russia Daily, April 23). Its efforts continue to fail, however, because they are short-term and underfunded and fail to address the underlying issues driving Russians to depart the region (Sibirskiy Ekonomist, December 25, 2025). As a result, a demographic collapse is now looming in the region and represents an increasingly serious challenge to Moscow. The collapse is domestically affecting a region where there are not enough people to do the work and where the share of ethnic Russians in the district is declining (see EDM, August 18, 2022, June 8, 2023, April 29, 2025). The likelihood that outside powers--including the People's Republic of China (PRC) in particular--are already exploiting the situation and may do more in the future is increasing (Most Media, March 12).
The demographic decline of the Russian Far East reflects long-term trends that Moscow's recent policies have exacerbated. Residents of the Russian Far East have been leaving because of the difficulties of life in its harsh climate, a crime rate higher than the rest of the Russian Federation, the lack of amenities available elsewhere, and greater opportunities in Moscow and Russian cities west of the Urals. Instead of addressing these challenges--which would be expensive and take years to achieve results--the Russian government has adopted a short-term approach based on the assumption that people will stay there if their pay is greater or if they are offered free land, incentives that may lead some to decide to remain but that have little effect on the decisions of most (RBC, April 5, 2024; Yesli Byt' Tochnym, July 30, 2025). Unfortunately, many of these programs have never gone beyond pronouncements. For example, Moscow has boosted formal wages in the region to high levels but has not paid workers on time, causing many to flee. The center has also failed to build roads, railways, and other infrastructure in areas where free land is being offered, making such celebrated "gifts" of little or no value (Novye Izvestiya, July 26, 2023; RBC, September 12, 2023; Sibirskiy Ekonomist, April 26).
Russian experts and regional activists have long highlighted such shortcomings in Moscow's policies (Demographic Review, 2023; EastRussia, January 25, 2023; Nezavisimaya Gazeta, October 1, 2023; RBC, April 5, 2024; Sibirskiy Ekonomist, May 1, 2025). Many are increasingly angry about what they see as the Russian government's colonialist policies, and some are even discussing the potential for an independent Siberia in the future (LRT, June 19, 2024; Vostok.Today, June 28, 2025). Perhaps to the surprise of many, the situation is worsening due to climate change. Global warming is increasing Russia's problems in the Russian Far East because the melting of the permafrost is making construction of transportation and other infrastructure prohibitively expensive and causing the spread of diseases that the Russian health system is ill-equipped to deal with (see EDM, March 12, 2024, February 4, 2025, March 5; Window on Eurasia, April 7, 2024; Yesli Byt' Tochnym, July 17, 2025).
Moscow has continued to talk rather than act in response, something that has already led to at least two major developments and may soon lead to others as well (Asia Russia Daily, April 23). On the one hand, Russian commentators have increasingly called attention to the center's failure to do more than hold meetings on the problems in the region (Window on Eurasia, December 26, 2025). On the other hand, some Russian officials have called for giant policies such as building "millionaire" cities in the region, which Moscow cannot possibly afford given budgetary stringency as a result of Putin's war against Ukraine, and which the population in the region would likely resist moving to, given all the center's broken promises in the past (see EDM, September 21, 2021).
Moscow is taking steps that might make sense elsewhere. They are proving, however, to be counter-productive east of the Urals. Putin's "optimization" plan to cut spending on government operations by eliminating local municipalities may be reasonable west of the Urals, but to the east, these municipalities cover enormous areas and thus play a far larger, irreplaceable role than their counterparts elsewhere. That has led to greater protests against municipalization than elsewhere and will undoubtedly prompt many residents to consider leaving or supporting radical changes in Russia's administrative structures (Federal Press, July 4, 2025). Additionally, residents of the Russian Far East are among the greatest victims of Moscow's overall reduction in infrastructure spending since the start of Putin's expanded war against Ukraine, a trend that is also pushing them to leave (Profile, February 5, 2024; see EDM, February 4, 2025).
The most thoughtful Russian experts on demographic problems in the Russian Far East have called on Moscow to change course. They advocate spending more money and adopting a 100-year plan to solve the region's demographic problems before current trends become irreversible and what is now the Russian Far East ceases to be Russian (EastRussia, August 5, 2025). The departure of so many ethnic Russians from the Far East means the region's population is increasingly composed of indigenous non-Russians and migrants from Central Asia and the PRC. Beijing is already paying more attention to non-Russians in the region than ever before (see EDM, March 9, 2023). Additionally, the combined numbers of Central Asian and Chinese migrants already in some cities in the Russian Far East are challenging the ethnic Russians for dominance (Versia, December 11, 2024). That, of course, feeds longstanding Russian paranoia about an overpopulated PRC moving northward into an underpopulated Russian Far East. These fears are likely overblown now regarding any change in the border between the two countries, but very real regarding the PRC's expanding presence on the ground in the Russian Far East, something that is made easier for Beijing by the declining Russian population there.
Demography is not destiny except in the long term. Regarding the Russian Far East, however, Moscow's failure to adopt and then fund policies to slow the exodus of Russians is reducing the time frame--and potentially leading to political and geopolitical disasters far greater than many now assume possible (see EDM, August 18, 2022; April 29, 2025).
* * *
Paul Goble is a longtime specialist on ethnic and religious questions in Eurasia.
* * *
Original text here: https://jamestown.org/moscow-trying-but-failing-to-combat-demographic-collapse-of-russian-far-east/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Jamestown Foundation Issues Commentary: State-Driven Nuclear Expansion is Winning Energy Race
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Jamestown Foundation issued the following commentary on April 30, 2026, by non-resident fellow Christopher Nye in its China Brief:
* * *
State-Driven Nuclear Expansion is Winning Energy Race
Executive Summary:
* The People's Republic of China (PRC) now commands the world's largest overall nuclear construction pipeline, placing Beijing on a credible path to surpass the United States in operable nuclear capacity before 2030.
* Policy continuity--including the 2024 Energy Law, the 2025 Atomic Energy Law, the 14th and 15th five-year plans, and State Council approval--has
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Jamestown Foundation issued the following commentary on April 30, 2026, by non-resident fellow Christopher Nye in its China Brief:
* * *
State-Driven Nuclear Expansion is Winning Energy Race
Executive Summary:
* The People's Republic of China (PRC) now commands the world's largest overall nuclear construction pipeline, placing Beijing on a credible path to surpass the United States in operable nuclear capacity before 2030.
* Policy continuity--including the 2024 Energy Law, the 2025 Atomic Energy Law, the 14th and 15th five-year plans, and State Council approval--hasallowed the PRC to mitigate the "cost escalation curse" that has haunted Western nuclear projects.
* A lower cost of capital for state-owned developers, combining record-low sovereign bond yields, staged value-added tax rebates, a centralized "spent fuel" fund, and long-term power purchase agreements, has also helped support the sector's growth.
* Provincial governments support rather than constrain the nuclear energy sector, integrating reactors into municipal heating grids, industrial parks, and regional tax bases. This, along with repressive responses to collective action, defuses most local opposition.
The People's Republic of China (PRC) is on track to have the largest nuclear energy sector in the world by 2030. According to the latest annual blue book published by the China Nuclear Energy Association (CNEA), by the end of 2025 the country operated 59 commercial reactors totaling more than 62 gigawatts electric (GWe) of installed capacity, with an additional 35 units under construction worth nearly 42 GWe. This makes for a combined portfolio of operational, under-construction, and approved units spanning 112 reactors, totaling 125 GWe--more than the United States, which has 94 reactors but none under construction (World Nuclear Industry Status Report, January 18; CCTV, April 17).
The PRC has had the world's largest under-construction fleet of reactors for 19 consecutive years, accounting for nearly half of all reactors currently under construction globally. The outline of the 15th Five-Year Plan targets approximately 110 GWe of operable capacity by 2030, and industry projections estimate 200 GWe by 2040 (Xinhua, March 13; China Energy News, April 20). This sustained success has centered on breaking the global nuclear construction "cost escalation curse." Unlike the dramatic rise in costs for installing nuclear capacity seen in Western countries, the PRC has seen costs decline. The Washington, D.C.-based Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) concluded in 2024 that the PRC is now 10-15 years ahead of the United States in fourth-generation reactor deployment. This is primarily due to PRC institutions carrying promising designs into construction and operation, rather than Chinese innovation (ITIF, June 17, 2024).
Top-Level Design Establishes Institutional Foundation for Nuclear Power
Policy certainty, the foundation of the PRC's nuclear acceleration, is a commodity increasingly scarce in the West./[1] In 2024, the PRC enacted its first Energy Law, which legally mandated the state to develop nuclear power "actively, safely, and in an orderly manner". Article 27 of that law requires relevant authorities to coordinate national planning, siting, design, construction, and operational supervision (National Energy Administration [NEA], November 9, 2024). The central energy authorities described it as a foundational law for the sector, anchoring long-range energy development in statute--more authoritative than administrative guidance, which is prone to shifts (NEA, December 2, 2024). The following year, Beijing adopted the Atomic Energy Law, codifying a unified legal framework that spans safety supervision, nuclear material security, accident emergency response, and damage liability (National People's Congress, September 28, 2025).
The legal foundation acquires operational force through national planning roadmaps. These encompass the State Council's overarching five-year plans, ministry-level energy and power development blueprints, and specialized instruments such as the "Long-term Development Plan for Nuclear Power", all of which are further operationalized through granular annual work goals and action plans (National Development and Reform Commission [NDRC], November 2, 2007; NEA, January 29, 2022; April 28). These provide explicit macro-to-micro capacity targets, such as requiring the approval and commencement of 6-8 new reactors annually (Xinhua, September 27, 2023). Construction can proceed over long timelines because these targets are integrated into the performance indicators of state-owned developers, such as the China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC), the China General Nuclear Power Group (CGN), and the State Power Investment Corporation (SPIC). These entities are insulated from quarterly earnings pressures and activist shareholders, allowing them to absorb large initial capital expenditures on the assumption that grid integration and long-term electricity purchase agreements will be guaranteed decades into the future.
The PRC's long-horizon policy certainty and projected orders through mid-century has enabled companies like China First Heavy Industries, China Erzhong, and Shanghai Electric to justify substantial workforce and equipment investments (World Nuclear Association, January 14; ITIF, June 17, 2024). According to industry analysts in the PRC, the country has achieved the full localization of key nuclear power equipment and independent control of all key component technologies, with domestic manufacturers regularly delivering core reactor components--such as pressure vessels and steam generators to meet domestic demand and support future exports (Xinhua, April 27, 2025; National Nuclear Safety Administration, August 18, 2025).
State Council Approval Eliminates Late-Stage Cancellation Risk
Policy commitment requires an administrative system capable of sustaining repeated approvals over many years. In the PRC, approvals are granted via a dual-track process. Projects are first incorporated into a national strategic pipeline managed by the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and the National Energy Administration (NEA) before the State Council grants the final authorization to begin construction.
Batch approvals have become standard practice. On April 27, 2025, the State Council simultaneously greenlit 10 new reactor units across five sites, representing a total capital commitment exceeding renminbi (RMB) 200 billion ($27 billion) (Xinhua, April 28, 2025). Between 2019-2024, it approved 46 new reactors, a frequency unrivalled globally (World Nuclear Industry Status Report, September 25, 2025). To date, no project that has received this level of authorization has been canceled.
Technical safety review is managed by the National Nuclear Safety Administration (NNSA), which operates under the Ministry of Ecology and Environment. The NNSA's 2021 annual report documents a graduated licensing regime covering site reviews, construction permits, first fuel loading permits, and operating licenses, which mirrors international practice (NNSA, June 2, 2022). What distinguishes this system is its pragmatic treatment of advanced reactors. Referring to the most recently developed reactors, the NNSA does not force fourth-generation designs to meet the same safety criteria engineered for large light-water reactors. Instead, it acknowledges the intrinsic safety features of modern designs. This approach was validated when the 200 megawatt (MW) Shidaowan Unit 1 HTR-PM reactor entered commercial operation in December 2023 as the world's first commercial generation IV nuclear power plant, with over 90 percent of equipment produced domestically in the PRC (Xinhua, December 6, 2023)./[2]
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has validated the effectiveness of the PRC's regulatory framework. While noting a shortage of human resources due to the surge in operating reactors, the IAEA highlighted the NNSA's innovative use of artificial intelligence (AI) and big data as an international benchmark that effectively mitigates this challenge (IAEA, September 14, 2016).
State Financial Mechanisms Drastically Lower the Cost of Capital
Nuclear power is capital-intensive, making its ultimate levelized cost of electricity highly sensitive to the weighted average cost of capital. The PRC wields structural macroeconomic advantages that Western markets cannot replicate. Nuclear engineering investment reached RMB 161 billion ($22 billion) in 2025, an all-time high and near $2 billion above 2024. All five nuclear projects approved in 2025 included private capital participation, showing that Beijing is broadening the financial base without relinquishing strategic control (China Securities Journal, April 17).
Macro-financial conditions have reinforced these advantages. While Western central banks raised interest rates to combat inflation, Chinese sovereign bond yields reached record lows in early 2024. This interest-rate divergence allows state-owned developers to issue long-term debt and green bonds at yields that remain below those available to Western utility companies (International Energy Agency, June 6, 2024).
Other fiscal policies have created a favorable environment to support reactor development. A policy document originally issued in 2008 and subsequently extended established a staged VAT rebate mechanism for commercial nuclear units to receive progressive rebates up to 15 years from the month of commercial operation (State Taxation Administration, April 3, 2008). Industry financial analysis indicates that the VAT rebate alone accounts for approximately 10 percent of net profits for representative listed nuclear firms (Securities Times, October 21, 2025). While the policy regime has been updated for projects approved after November 2025, the cumulative fiscal effect on operators already in commercial service is substantial (State Taxation Administration, October 17, 2025).
Beijing has also neutralized the long-tail liabilities that deter Western private investors. Five years after a pressurized water reactor enters commercial operation, a mandated fraction of its generation revenue is placed into a centralized "Spent Fuel Treatment and Disposal Fund". This transforms opaque, multi-billion-dollar future obligations for reprocessing, geological disposal, and decommissioning into a predictable current cash flow arrangement (Ministry of Finance, September 3, 2021). Rather than forcing individual developers to finance their own waste management, the central government uses this mechanism to directly fund multi-billion dollar back-end infrastructure, such as expanding the Jinta reprocessing and mixed-oxide fuel complex in Gansu (China Atomic Energy Authority, November 22, 2019; International Panel on Fissile Materials, December 24, 2024). Since the state is absorbing these capital-intensive obligations at the national level, reactor operators are shielded from crippling downstream financial risks because previously opaque future liabilities are now predictable cash flows.
Provincial Governments Actively Facilitate Nuclear Project Deployment
In the PRC, provincial authorities treat reactors as strategic assets that generate fixed-asset investment, employment, tax revenue, and grid stability. Although localized opposition forced project suspensions in Jiangmen (2013) and Lianyungang (2016), the Party-state's expanding social control has preempted large-scale anti-nuclear protests for a decade (The New York Times, July 12, 2013; August 10, 2016). Today, citizens lack the institutional recourse to challenge state-mandated infrastructure, sparing these projects the protracted legal stalling endemic in many Western countries. By 2025, nuclear power supplied more than 20 percent of total electricity generation in Fujian and Liaoning--roughly on par with nuclear's share in the U.S. national energy mix (Eastmoney, April 16). Coastal economic powerhouses, including Guangdong, Shandong, Zhejiang, Fujian, Guangxi, and Hainan, all have integrated nuclear complexes into their latest five-year plans, and preemptively have secured land quotas, water rights, and relocation approvals well before national-level authorizations are finalized (CNNPN, March 11).
Nuclear buildout has helped support municipalities' energy transition targets. For instance, the Haiyang Nuclear Power Plant in Shandong province has helped make Haiyang the PRC's first "zero-carbon heating" city. Over its first five winters, the project saved 810,000 tonnes of coal, reducing carbon dioxide emissions by nearly 1.5 million tonnes (World Nuclear News, November 21, 2024).
Local industrial participation is even more impactful. In August 2024, the State Council approved the world's first integration of a high-temperature gas-cooled reactor with a major petrochemical industrial park in Jiangsu province (CNNC, August 23, 2024). By transforming reactors from standalone assets into integral providers of municipal and industrial services, local governments shift from regulatory adversaries to vested equity partners. This is a structural asymmetry that Western regulators cannot easily replicate.
Conclusion
Decades of policy finetuning have enabled Beijing to build one of the world's most formidable nuclear power sectors. The key to this success lies in breaking the global cost escalation curse. For an identical AP1000 plant design, for instance, unit costs in the PRC are approximately RMB 20,000 ($2,600) per kilowatt, a fraction of the almost $10,800 per kilowatt in the U.S. state of Georgia (Cninfo, April 9, 2024; Georgia Conservation Voters, May 29, 2024). As global energy demand is set to rise dramatically, not least due to the requirements for AI data centers and broader human development, nuclear power is likely to be indispensable for the industries that will define the next two decades. The PRC's successful and ongoing buildout of its nuclear sector therefore is of a piece with its ambitions to dominate the technologies of the future. If the PRC becomes the world's largest generator of nuclear power by 2030, as current projections assess, this milestone will be seen as another indicator that it is pulling ahead in its technological competition with the United States.
[1] In 1994, the Integral Fast Reactor program at Argonne National Laboratory was abruptly canceled by Congress on the eve of commercial demonstration, leading to a multi-decade loss of institutional knowledge in liquid-metal fast reactor design. See Charles E. Till and Yoon Il Chang, Plentiful Energy: The Story of the Integral Fast Reactor (2011). Written by the project's lead scientists at Argonne National Laboratory, this book details the 1984-1994 development of the Integral Fast Reactor (IFR). The IFR was designed as a revolutionary closed-system fast reactor featuring on-site pyroprocessing and advanced waste management to address safety, proliferation, and waste toxicity concerns. The authors document the technology's successive scientific breakthroughs and its abrupt political cancellation by the Clinton administration in 1994.
[2] HTR-PM refers to "High-Temperature gas-cooled Reactor Pebble-bed Module" (Nuclear Energy International Magazine, February 26, 2019)
* * *
Christopher Nye is a Non-Resident Fellow at The Jamestown Foundation.
* * *
Original text here: https://jamestown.org/state-driven-nuclear-expansion-is-winning-energy-race/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Hudson Institute Issues Commentary to Providence Magazine: Centrality of Religious Freedom
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- Hudson Institute, a research organization that says it promotes leadership for a secure, free and prosperous future, issued the following commentary on April 29, 2026, by Paul Marshall, senior fellow at the Center for Religious Freedom, to Providence magazine:
* * *
The Centrality of Religious Freedom
llan Hertzke's Why Religious Freedom Matters: Human Rights and Human Flourishing is a welcome overview of the vital importance of religious freedom by a veteran writer of informed studies on the subject over the last 30 years.
The book comes at a critical time since both religious
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- Hudson Institute, a research organization that says it promotes leadership for a secure, free and prosperous future, issued the following commentary on April 29, 2026, by Paul Marshall, senior fellow at the Center for Religious Freedom, to Providence magazine:
* * *
The Centrality of Religious Freedom
llan Hertzke's Why Religious Freedom Matters: Human Rights and Human Flourishing is a welcome overview of the vital importance of religious freedom by a veteran writer of informed studies on the subject over the last 30 years.
The book comes at a critical time since both religiousfreedom and knowledge of its salience are both sadly being eroded. He reviews a wide range of arguments on its importance in and of itself and as an indispensable foundation for other human rights.
Retired Congressman Frank Wolf, a champion of religious freedom after whom the 1998 International Religious Freedom Act is now named, has recently lamented the diminished attention to religious freedom, something that others have also noted.
There are several reasons for this decreased attention:
One is current U.S. domestic divisions. Some on the left have come to see calls for religious freedom as ploys to avoid adhering to anti-discrimination laws. Such suspicions undercut bipartisan international religious freedom advocacy. This continues even though such advocacy is not limited to Christians but includes Falun Gong and Uyghurs in China, Muslims in Myanmar, Buddhists in Vietnam, Baha'is in Iran, Ahmadis in Pakistan, and a host of others throughout the world.
Another reason is that increasing secularism in the West leads to antipathy or, perhaps, simple apathy regarding religion. The European Union recently left its post for special envoy for religious freedom vacant for 16 months.
A third may be a body of scholarship, often termed "secularism studies," arguing that religious freedom is not a neutral, universal human right but a mechanism of state power that often marginalizes those it seeks to help. This critique maintains that legal definitions of "religion" are largely Western, Protestant, models prioritizing individual "belief" over collective "lived" practices. In turn this can leave unorthodox or non-institutional traditions legally "invisible" and unprotected.
A problem with this approach is that, while it may offer valuable critiques, it reflects current Western academic trends on religion. Hence it tends to replace purported previous Western categories with other more recent Western categories.
Then there is the growth of more self-described 'realist' international politics and policy, including in the U.S. This downgrades human rights concerns in general in favor of a modus vivendi between major powers.
Finally, American evangelicals have less international concern. It has been argued, wrongly, that the stress on international religious freedom in the 1990's was simply evangelicals defending their own. Apart from the fact that any such stress would itself be a perfectly legitimate, it overlooks the fact that the 1998 International Religious Freedom Act was supported by Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Baha'is, and many others. Indeed, as Hertzke has shown in an earlier work, it drew in most religious groups in the US.
However, by sheer numbers and electoral clout it was evangelicals that made the campaign successful. But now, with many evangelicals increasingly restricting their focus to domestic culture wars, the energy for international religious freedom has been reduced. Some of this slack is being taken up effectively by Catholics, but a deficit remains.
In this situation, Hertzke's latest book is especially welcome. He builds on earlier studies by Brian Grim, Roger Finke, and Robert Martin, and more recent work by Nilay Saiya, Jonathan Fox and others. Whereas Grim and Fox are heavy-duty number crunchers, albeit with good explanations of the numbers so crunched, Hertzke weaves them into a compelling narrative. Well over a third of the book is devoted to notes and an index, but he still manages to make it flow.
His overall thesis is that religious freedom is not only a major good but is also a primary driver of democracy, prosperity, the increased status of women and of the poor, and decreased violence.
His central argument is that religious freedom touches the core of "human personhood and experience"--the fundamental right to be who we are and to act on our deepest commitments. He contends that when this is protected, it frees and enhances personal agency that benefits others, both religious and non-religious. Conversely, when governments or society suppress religious liberty, it leads to destructive outcomes, including weakened democracy, increased violence, and eroding civil liberties.
He argues that there is both a strong historical and strong statistical link between religious freedom and the longevity of democratic institutions. This is because religious freedom limits government powers and, by allowing diverse groups to act independently, helps foster a robust and free civil society.
Hertzke then summarizes the strong evidence that countries with fewer religious restrictions commonly have higher economic growth. He attributes this to increasing social cooperation, attracting skilled immigrants, and promoting a more stable investment climate. He reports that religious freedom is one of only three factors significantly associated with global economic growth. In particular, countries that reduced religious restrictions between 2007 and 2017 had GDP growth rates nearly double those where restrictions increased.
In addition, he contends that there is a positive relationship between religious freedom and 10 out of 12 measures of global competitiveness, and that innovation is more likely in countries that have low religious restrictions.
He then argues that religious liberty also supports a greater role for women and for programs that uplift the poor, since religious organizations are often the primary providers of social services. Research cited in the book shows a strong correlation with women's empowerment.
Finally, there are links to international security. Drawing on Nilay Saiya, he stresses that religious repression is a leading indicator of social conflict and terrorism, whereas religious freedom reduces fanaticism and builds broader loyalty to the state.
The interrelations demonstrate that religious freedom is rarely an isolated variable. Instead, it is highly correlated with many other indicators of societal well-being, also including lower levels of armed conflict and decreased income inequality.
Of course, correlations leave lots of questions: it might mean that it is these other goods that are enhancing religious freedom. But, while recognizing that causation is not all one way and that there are certainly reciprocal effects, Hertzke gives good reasons, often through historical narrative, that the religious freedom factor is formative.
To be proactive in enhancing religious freedom, he advocates what is now commonly called "covenantal pluralism." This calls for moving beyond a "passive religious tolerance," in which groups refrain from restricting one another, toward active, respectful, and engaged relations between religions and with political and other key actors.
He concludes "We are witnessing a historical convergence of empirical evidence and events on the ground that corroborate a key ontological reality: Humans are spiritual creatures who thrive best and most harmoniously when they enjoy the freedom to express their fundamental dignity. Religious liberty is crucial to thriving societies and peace."
Read in Providence (https://providencemag.com/2026/04/the-centrality-of-religious-freedom/).
* * *
At A Glance:
Paul Marshall is a senior fellow at Hudson Institute's Center for Religious Freedom.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.hudson.org/religious-freedom/centrality-religious-freedom-paul-marshall
[Category: ThinkTank]
Heritage Expert: SCOTUS Ruling a Win for Election Integrity and Constitutional Redistricting
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Heritage Foundation issued the following news release on April 29, 2026:
* * *
Heritage Expert: SCOTUS Ruling a Win for Election Integrity and Constitutional Redistricting
The Supreme Court today ruled in a 6-3 decision written by Justice Samuel Alito in Louisiana v. Callais that the Voting Rights Act, properly interpreted, does not require states to violate the Constitution by drawing race-based districts.
Zack Smith, senior legal fellow and manager of The Heritage Foundation's Supreme Court and Appellate Advocacy Program, applauded the decision in the following
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Heritage Foundation issued the following news release on April 29, 2026:
* * *
Heritage Expert: SCOTUS Ruling a Win for Election Integrity and Constitutional Redistricting
The Supreme Court today ruled in a 6-3 decision written by Justice Samuel Alito in Louisiana v. Callais that the Voting Rights Act, properly interpreted, does not require states to violate the Constitution by drawing race-based districts.
Zack Smith, senior legal fellow and manager of The Heritage Foundation's Supreme Court and Appellate Advocacy Program, applauded the decision in the followingstatement:
"Justice Alito's opinion confirms what many of us already knew: Courts' misinterpretations of the Voting Rights Act that purported to require states to draw congressional districts based on race were wrong.
"The Court today corrected that misinterpretation and made clear that 'Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act...was designed to enforce the Constitution--not collide with it.' Sorting citizens by race is wrong. And it agreed that Louisiana's congressional map, drawn to satisfy a lower court's misguided interpretation of the Voting Rights Act, violates the Constitution.
"Going forward, states that have drawn maps based on misguided interpretations of the Voting Rights Act from lower federal courts will likely have to revisit and redraw those maps."
* * *
BACKGROUND:
Stopping the Unconstitutional Misuse of the Voting Rights Act: Louisiana v. Callais (https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/report/stopping-the-unconstitutional-misuse-the-voting-rights-act-louisiana-v)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.heritage.org/press/heritage-expert-scotus-ruling-win-election-integrity-and-constitutional-redistricting
[Category: ThinkTank]
Center of the American Experiment Issues Commentary: Nuclear/coal Up, Solar/wind Down
MINNETONKA, Minnesota, May 1 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary on April 30, 2026, by policy fellow Bill Glahn:
* * *
Nuclear/coal up, solar/wind down
From the Minnesota Star Tribune,
"Nuclear and coal expand in Minnesota's energy mix as renewables stagnate."
The Star Tribune reports on a report put out by renewable energy advocates, based on data compiled by the state Dept. of Commerce and Bloomberg.
The Star Tribune notes that report found,
"Not only was 2025 a relatively
... Show Full Article
MINNETONKA, Minnesota, May 1 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary on April 30, 2026, by policy fellow Bill Glahn:
* * *
Nuclear/coal up, solar/wind down
From the Minnesota Star Tribune,
"Nuclear and coal expand in Minnesota's energy mix as renewables stagnate."
The Star Tribune reports on a report put out by renewable energy advocates, based on data compiled by the state Dept. of Commerce and Bloomberg.
The Star Tribune notes that report found,
"Not only was 2025 a relativelystagnant year for renewables, it was also marked by increased coal use. The fuel, which is especially carbon-polluting, made up 4% more of the state's energy mix last year than in 2024."
It is truly a time of miracles.
Electricity from carbon-free or lower-emission sources made up a record share of Minnesota's power in 2025, but most of the increase came from nuclear energy, not renewables like solar and wind.
Huh. The Star Tribune reports,
The report's findings have some clean energy advocates worried that the state won't be able to meet its climate goals, including the carbon-free law that requires Minnesota to produce 100% of its electricity from carbon-free sources by 2040.
The obvious solution is more nuclear power. Under current state law, there is a ban on new nuclear power plants. There is an upper limit on how much more electricity you can squeeze out of the state's two existing nuclear power plants.
Tick tock.
* * *
Bill Glahn is a Policy Fellow with Center of the American Experiment.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americanexperiment.org/nuclear-coal-up-solar-wind-down/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Center of the American Experiment Issues Commentary: Higher State Spending Doesn't Guarantee Better Salaries for Teachers
MINNETONKA, Minnesota, May 1 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary on April 30, 2026, by policy fellow Catrin Wigfall:
* * *
Higher state spending doesn't guarantee better salaries for teachers
The premise that higher spending will yield better academic results has, in practice, fallen short. So, too, has the idea that more funding reliably translates into higher teacher salaries.
With teacher shortages consistently topping the list of public school leaders' concerns, the most
... Show Full Article
MINNETONKA, Minnesota, May 1 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary on April 30, 2026, by policy fellow Catrin Wigfall:
* * *
Higher state spending doesn't guarantee better salaries for teachers
The premise that higher spending will yield better academic results has, in practice, fallen short. So, too, has the idea that more funding reliably translates into higher teacher salaries.
With teacher shortages consistently topping the list of public school leaders' concerns, the mostcommon response has been to increase K-12 spending. Common logic would say that higher, more competitive salaries make the teaching profession more attractive. "But for legislators hoping to improve teacher pay and attract more people to the profession, increasing education spending is surprisingly ineffective," writes Christian Barnard for Education Next.
* * *
Many states have lost ground on average teacher salaries over the past two decades despite spending more. Those states that do manage to raise teacher salaries largely do so only after investing exorbitant amounts in public education, with most of those dollars still being diverted to expenditures besides take-home pay for current teachers.
...
Using data on average teacher salaries from the National Center for Education Statistics, which excludes classroom aides and accounts for new teacher hires, the picture becomes bleaker. Despite education revenues increasing by 25 percent nationally from 2002 to 2020, inflation-adjusted average teacher salaries fell by 0.6 percent, from $64,522 to $64,133.
* * *
Minnesota fits this pattern. Despite rising inflation-adjusted revenue per student over the last 20+ years, average teacher salaries have declined. According to U.S. Census Bureau data, only about 25 cents of each new education dollar in the state has gone toward instructional salaries.
By contrast, states with more modest spending growth, like Mississippi, have been "more efficient" at "devoting new funds to instructional pay," continues Barnard. While the state's overall pay levels remain low, the state has posted some of the strongest gains in the country on national assessments in recent years.
The disconnect underscores what I often reiterate -- that education outcomes are driven less by how much we spend than by how well we spend it.
Mississippi's lower per-pupil spending paired with smart policy choices is a clear example of this. Scaling choice policies in Florida has been at least 11 times more cost effective in improving public school student performance than simply spending more. Minnesota, by contrast, has relied on a funding-first approach, increasing spending without ensuring those dollars are tied to performance or classroom impact. This leaves us with a system where spending grows but outcomes don't justify the price tag and rigid union compensation structures don't reward effectiveness.
If policymakers want different results, they will need to move beyond reflexive spending increases. That means greater transparency about where education dollars are actually spent, stricter limits on the growth of non-instructional spending, and a willingness to repeal burdensome mandates that redirect time, resources, and classroom attention away from the core mission of public education. Without these changes, simply adding more money to the system will continue to produce the same disappointing results.
* * *
Chart: Minnesota Teacher Salary Growth vs. Revenue per Student Growth
* * *
Catrin Wigfall is a Policy Fellow at Center of the American Experiment.
catrin.wigfall@americanexperiment.org
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americanexperiment.org/higher-state-spending-doesnt-guarantee-better-salaries-for-teachers/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Center for American Progress: Congressional Republicans Own This Shutdown and Congress Must Pass Commonsense Reforms to Hold ICE Accountable
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Center for American Progress issued the following statement on April 30, 2026:
* * *
Congressional Republicans Own This Shutdown and Congress Must Pass Commonsense Reforms to Hold ICE Accountable
After weeks of inaction by House Republicans who refused to bring the bipartisan Senate-passed U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill to the floor until today, the House passed a bill by voice vote to fund DHS, ending a record 76-day shutdown. In response, Neera Tanden, president and CEO of the Center for American Progress, released the following statement:
House
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, May 1 -- The Center for American Progress issued the following statement on April 30, 2026:
* * *
Congressional Republicans Own This Shutdown and Congress Must Pass Commonsense Reforms to Hold ICE Accountable
After weeks of inaction by House Republicans who refused to bring the bipartisan Senate-passed U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill to the floor until today, the House passed a bill by voice vote to fund DHS, ending a record 76-day shutdown. In response, Neera Tanden, president and CEO of the Center for American Progress, released the following statement:
HouseRepublicans' inaction--on a bill the Senate passed unanimously more than a month ago--led to a record-long shutdown and blocked critical funding from passing for months, pausing essential services and forcing TSA workers to go without pay.
Americans deserve better than preventable shutdowns and TSA workers serving without pay because Congressional Republicans have to this point refused to rein in the Trump administration's unpopular and reckless immigration tactics.
It's past time for Congress to do their job and listen to the large majority of Americans who overwhelmingly demand commonsense reforms to hold ICE accountable and end its terror tactics.
For more information or to speak with an expert, please contact Rafael Medina at rmedina@americanprogress.org.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americanprogress.org/press/statement-republicans-own-this-shutdown-and-must-pass-commonsense-reforms-to-hold-ice-accountable/
[Category: ThinkTank]
