Erick Erickson HR 2

America, it's Eric Erickson here. Welcome. We are waiting to see if the Federal Reserve is actually going to cut rates again. They're meeting in Washington. I'll keep you posted. Speculation is they will, and this may be the last one for a while. We'll see what they do. The phone numbers would be on the program 877-97-97-9-37-9-3-7-4-25. As always, text Eric, E-E-R-IC-A to 33-777. Before I get into phone calls. I got to talk about Ketanji Brown Jackson. People are going to get mad at me because whenever I bring this up, they get mad at me. They should get mad at Joe Biden. Joe Biden himself said that he was going to put a black woman on the United States Supreme Court. Ketanji Brown Jackson is definitionally an affirmative action pick for the United States Supreme Court. Sonia Sotomayor used to be the dim wit on the Supreme Court. deeply hostile to religion. There are eight to one cases where the other progressives on the court joined the conservatives on religious liberty issues, and Sonia Sotomayor was like, nope, nope, she doesn't want anything to do with it. But even Ketanji Brown Jackson is oftentimes a bridge too far for Sonia Sotomayor. There were two times this past year where Sotomayor released concurrences where she was essentially very diplomatically explaining to Ketanji Brown Jackson the way the law works. Jackson is just not smart.

Then, you know, she got on the United States Supreme Court. Well, Donald Trump got elected president of the United States, and you don't think he's smart. Ketanji Brown Jackson was an affirmative action pick for Joe Biden, and she got on the Supreme Court, and she has been increasingly alienating even to the progressives of the court. The last year, you had Amy Coney Barrett slap her down with one of her concurrences. essentially saying, I'm not dealing with her nonsense, and it is nonsense. I disagree with Elena Kagan often, more often than not. But Elena Kagan's sharp. She's strategic in how she argues and debates and asks questions. She tries very hard to highlight the inconsistencies or what she perceives as hypocrisies of the right. Elena Kagan is a very sharp-witted, brilliant jurist. And while I've always had a low disregard of Sonia Sotomayor, and again, she was an affirmative action pick. The president at the time, Barack Obama wanted a diversity play, wanted a Hispanic pick. He got her.

But, Sung's than Sotomayor's head and shoulders smarter than Ketanji Brown Jackson, who is not just dumb, but as arrogant in her stupidity. When Woodrow Wilson was president of the United States, probably the most racist president we've ever had, he re-segregated the armed forces, and the left loves Woodrow Wilson. Woodrow Wilson is the rise of the technocratic bureaucratic state. He was an academic. He was a PhD. He was a professor that should tell you everything wrong with him. Woodrow Wilson believed that the people could not govern themselves. And they needed technocrats, experts in their field who could ignore the populace. We saw how that played out in COVID. The experts ruined their credibility. and people no longer trust the experts. There are experts who should be trusted, including in the medical, the scientific field. But a lot of the people in the administration turned out to be nanny staters who wanted to control people's lives. They weren't real experts. They just claimed to be. I mean, you got the assistant head of the Health and Human Services, Rachel Levine, who is a man who insists men can become women, and he attempted to do so, and he's totally a man. You know, the Trump administration has gone back in and they put Richard Levine on his name tag instead of Rachel Levine for his nameplate. I actually disagree with that because he did legally change his name. Has nothing to do with his biological name versus the name he wanted to be called. It has to do with his legal name is Rachel Levine. You can say he's a man and he is a man, but his name actually legally is Rachel Levine. But he's a man. And he was supposedly an expert, but he was an expert who believed the false belief that men can become women. He's just an insane man, mentally disturbed man. The experts have discredited themselves. That gets me back to Ketanji Brown Jackson, who has embraced this Wilsonian view of technocratic experts who cannot be held accountable for their actions. Yesterday in the Supreme Court was the case Trump v. Slaughter, the president of the United States fired a Democratic appointee to the Federal Trade Commission. Back in the 1930s, The Supreme Court ruled that the president could not fire members of the Federal Trade Commission except for cause. Increasingly, the Supreme Court has taken the position that those appointees on these commissions are operating as partisan agents. They're not operating as technocrats. They're operating as partisan agents, often for the Democrats, and because they're doing the role of the executive and they are administering policy on behalf of the executive, not just being stewards of ideas. the president can fire them. This is where the Supreme Court is headed, the end of Humphrey's executor. It's very obvious that the conservative argument and the Trump administration has won the day, and Ketanji Brown Jackson is upset about it, and I want to play you this exchange between Ketanji Brown Jackson.

And one of the lawyers at the United States Supreme Court yesterday, you need to hear her, in her own words and her concerns, listen to this. Some issues, some matters, some areas should be handled in this way by nonpartisan experts. That... Congress is saying that expertise matters with respect to aspects of the economy and transportation and the various independent agencies that we have. So having a president come in and fire all the scientists and the doctors and the economists and the PhDs and replacing them with loyalists and people who don't know anything is actually not in the best interest of the citizens of the United States. These issues should not be in presidential... control. So can you speak to me about the danger of allowing in these various areas the president to actually control the Transportation Board and potentially the Federal Reserve and all these other independent agencies. In these particular areas, we would like to have independence. We don't want the president controlling. I guess what I don't understand from your overarching argument is why that determination of Congress, which makes perfect sense, given its duty to protect the people of the United States, why that is subjugated. to a concern about the president not being able to control everything. I mean, I appreciate there's a conflict between the two, but one would think under our constitutional design, given the history of the monarchy and the concerns that the framers had about a president controlling everything, that in the clash between those two Congress's view, that we should be able to have independence with respect to certain issues should take precedence. Now, you got that, the president should not be able to fire the experts, the scientists, the engineers, the doctors. And then she talks about our constitutional structure. If the president can't fire these people, who are they accountable to? That's what she wants. She wants no accountability for the experts. She wants us to be beholden to the experts. Our constitutional structure is very easy to understand. There are three branches of government, the legislative, the executive, and the judicial. And they are ranked in order of importance in the Constitution. The legislative is primary, executive, secondary, judiciary, tertiary. They were considered to be the least powerful branch of government. Where do you place the experts? She talks about Congress decided that there should be experts, and the experts shouldn't be fireable by the president. But where did Congress place the experts? They placed them in Article 2. Article 2 says the executive power of the United States shall be vested in a president.

It doesn't say the executive power shall be vested in a president and such other officers as Congress shall empower. It says the executive power of the United States shall be vested in a president, period. Congress chose to put these commissions within the executive branch. That means that the president controls them, and they tried to restrict the president's power to be able to control these individuals. They can't. That's what this case is about. If Congress wanted these groups, these experts to be... experts at regulation, put them in the legislative branch and allow Congress to control them. But see, Congress doesn't want to do that because then Congress would be accountable for the bureaucrats. And Congress likes to say, it's not our fault. It's the bureaucrats over in the executive branch. We can do nothing. See, they've set themselves up to do what Ketanji Brown Jackson wants, which is an unaccountable group of technocrats who control our lives. She's the authoritarian tyrant, not Donald Trump. She and the left lecture us on democracy being at stake, and she's actually staking out a position that there should be a portion of our government that is unbeholden to the democracy that cannot be touched by the democratic elements, by the duly elected elements. That's what Ketanji Brown Jackson's vision of America is. By the way, that's not even, and I should note, that's not the vision of even Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan, who recognize that there should be an accountability process. Gadangy Ketanji Brown Jackson wants an unaccountable group of bureaucrats to control our lives and does not like the fact that the president believes that as an elected person who is the elected chief executive officer of the United States, he should be able to fire people who don't carry out his vision that he was elected to carry out. Her view, in other words, is more radical than the most radical view of the progressives on the Supreme Court ever articulated. that there should be some people able to be untouched by the masses who get to control our lives. She mentions the monarchy and the structure of the Constitution and the institutions of monarchy we left behind. She wants to establish a monarchy of bureaucrats. So here's the thing. I really just have got to wonder. There's got to be a... group of progressive legal scholars who recognized what a missed opportunity it was to put someone smart in that slot on the Supreme Court. Joe Biden got one pick for the Supreme Court and he put an affirmative action blithering idiot on the Supreme Court. You could have had another Elena Kagan who would be there challenging the right and making persuasive arguments for the future. Ketanji Brown Jackson's not even there to make persuasive arguments for the future. She's there for la resistance. Like people 100 years from now are not going to be citing Ketanji Brown Jackson's dissents in the way they do of an Oliver Wendell Holmes or an Antonin Scalia or an Elena Kagan. Elena Kagan's dissents get cited now.

That's not what the Democrats want. What a missed opportunity. See, I actually believe that we need two healthy functioning parties in the country, and I actually believe that we need a setup where the left can challenge the right because it keeps the right on their A game. The right can get lazy when you're dealing with idiots like Ketanji Brown Jackson. We don't have to put our A game on every day. We just have to have our B game because she's such a D will look like an A. What a missed opportunity, but also an exposure. All the people who are championing Ketanji Brown Jackson, they're the authoritarian they've warned us about. They're the authoritarian. They actually want a group of unelected bureaucrats controlling our lives, and they're mad that Donald Trump is standing in their way. Those who love him Listen to find out what he's gonna say next Those who disagree with him also listen to see what he's gonna say next It's the Eric Erickson show Hello there. It is Eric Erickson here. There is some news I need to get to happening now. Two New Jerseyans have been arrested for threatening to hang the Department of Homeland Security's Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. This has just hit the wires. Emilio Roman Flores and Ricardo Antonio Roman Flores are both being charged by the federal government. Emilio with unlawful possession of assault weapon, possession of prohibited weapons, conspiracy, terroristic threats, criminal coercion, threats, and cyber harassment. And Ricardo Antonio Roman Flores charged with conspiracy of terroristic threats. They wanted to torture and kill. Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary, Tricia McLaughlin, and shoot ICE agents on site. They have been arrested by federal authorities. They said they wanted to torture Tricia McLaughlin, and then they wanted to hang her and shoot ICE agents. These are two Hispanic progressive activists in New Jersey, arrested by the federal government. This is happening today. The ongoing increasing violence of the progressive left in the United States. Now, when we come back, I want to take your phone calls. Got some folks who've been waiting very patient. I want to get those phone calls. 877-97-973-7-4-25. There's also, I saw my friend Bethany Mandel. She's got a letter to the editor that made it into the Wall Street Journal. I have never been published to the Wall Street Journal. I don't think they like me. And she was able to get a letter to the editor in about going to Europe and the declining birth rate in Europe. So the immigrant populations of Europe less than 13%, less than 10%, in many cases. But in major urban enclaves in those areas, you're starting to see, for example, in Brussels, the number one name is Muhammad.

The immigrants are taking over the cities there, changing the dynamics. Birth rates declining globally, and young women in this country don't want to get married anymore. I want to get into that after I take your phone calls. First, let me tell you about the Eden Pier Thunderstorm. Great stocking stuff or idea for you. You got kids off at college. They've got smelly dorm rooms and the like. The Eden Pier Thunderstorm eliminates all odors. You can get three of them for less than $200. You can save $200, you go to Edenpuredeals.com. Eden, like the Garden of Eden. Pure is the driven snow. Edenpuredeals.com. The discount code is Eric 3, E-R-I-C-K-3, Eric 3 at Edenpeer Deals.com. They're odor eliminators. They get rid of pollen and dust. They get rid of pet dander. They kill 99% of bacteria and viruses floating in the air. They eliminate all odor. So they generate ozone, which kind of operates as like odor bleach. ozone touches odor particles and wipes them out. So you go to Edenpuredeals.com. Edenpuredeals.com. You put in Eric 3, E-R-I-C-K-3. You get three of them. You save $200. You get them for less than $200. You can plug them in with a USB cord in a car or a laptop. You can plug them into the wall. And they just work to eliminate odors. I've used them in rental cars and hotel rooms to get rid of smoke odors and the like, and they work. Edenpuredeals.com. The discount code is Eric 3.

Hello there, welcome. It's Eric Erickson here across the United States. The phone number 877-9-737-9-3-7-4-25. Let's go to the phones. Let's begin with Rick calling from Dayton, Ohio. Welcome to the show, Rick. How are you? Hey, Eric, I'm doing great. Thanks for taking my call. You know, I just heard today, like most Americans did, concerning that Nibia... chip sale to China, and that's so counterintuitive to our defense and everything else that, you know, they might be able to use it for. I'm just wondering if it's within the realm of possibilities that we figured out a way to encode these chips, a back door maybe where it could have a kill switch or something if anything goes wrong. So, um... Somebody raised this issue on social media, and a guy who is an AI expert said that he doesn't believe it's likely for a couple of reasons. One is because the Chinese could very easily under a microscope inspect the chips to make sure that the same chips. Two, they can run programming to make sure that there's no additional code. And three, that by the time we decided to activate the kill switch, it would have already been too late because what the Chinese are using the chips for in AI technology is to advance their development. And so how will the AI be able to know the development? And likewise, the other thing is because of the great firewall of China, all data into and out of China goes through a single connection. And I don't think most people realize that. Like, we've got cables coming in from all over the world. There are cable connections in this country that connect the Internet globally in major ports in New York, Savannah, Georgia, Miami, Florida, Los Angeles, Seattle. And in addition to satellite connections, in China, literally every single bit. of internet data that comes into and out of the country flows through a military installation in Shanghai, so they can inspect everything. So if you want to send in this kill switch or you want to turn it off, the Chinese can see the data coming in. So how do you trigger the kill switch if you've got to come in through the Chinese firewall? So it's very unlikely. There are some optimists who are going to hope that it is so because they can't believe that otherwise this would be done. The rational explanations and all of that. I think at the end of the day, what we have is we've got some young guys in the White House who convinced the president this was a good deal and he should do it. And so the president's doing it and he got bad advice. And hopefully there will be people who talk him out of it, but it may be too late to talk him out of it. It's just kind of weird that on the exact same day that the Justice Department arrested individuals trying to smuggle these very same chips into China, that the president decided to sell these chips to China when the Justice Department said it's a national security issue.

We can't let China get these chips. I'm trying to make sense of it, and I can't. I think they just lost the plot. Michael, you're going to be up next. Welcome to the show. Michael, how are you? I'm doing very fine. Prayers for you and your wife. Thank you. So I was wanting, you always talked about Trump being not a conservative, but a common sense president. And just for picking a product and a price, why is it that he can't see that when he came into the White House, the prices were, say, like a dollar for potatoes? And now they're $2 for potatoes. Again, just picking a product and a price. And the only thing that's changed is the tariffs, or if you want to insert the word tax, that has made these products, housing, cars, groceries go up. And then he wants to turn around with all this money that he's accrued that he's taxed the consumer, insert the word voter, and he's going to give that money back to them. What is the disconnect here? What does he not seem that most people are? So, and just so everybody knows, I say that Trump is a common sense guy, not a conservative guy, because that's what Trump says. He says he's not a conservative. He says he's not a conservative. He's a common sense guy. I believe within the Trump administration, from Peter Navarro to the trade rep, there are people who truly believe that tariffs are good. and that they bring in new tax revenue. Part of the thinking is we have a $39 trillion debt we need to be able to raise taxes on Americans without Americans feeling like it. So they raise tariffs. And how many Trump supporters do you know who really believe that foreigners are paying the tax? It's not true, but they believe it. So their taxes have gone up, and they don't believe it because they think the foreigners are paying it. And so essentially the president's been able to do a backdoor tax increase on Americans to help pay down the debt without anybody saying it's a tax increase. Without a vote in Congress, he spared the Republicans raising taxes. Also, it is absolutely true that if you want to bring down inflation, tariffs bring down inflation. Now, there's an initial price spike that gets counter-ded as inflation, but it's not really inflation because it's one-time price spike. But how do the tariffs bring down inflation? We know from the San Francisco Federal Reserve. Tariffs bring down inflation by slowing down the economy and driving up unemployment. But if you want to tame inflation, and allow the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates, you add tariffs, even without an interest rate hike. It's going to bring down inflation because it drives up costs. Now, I think the reason the president's team, Peter Navarro in particular, did it, is because Peter Navarro envisions us as a mercantilist society with lots of global trade and that we can reinvigorate American manufacturing and other issues in this country, and it's not working.

More American factories are closing down and costs on factories have gone up in the country. In fact, American manufacturers are saying this is not helping us. But the president staked out a position. He's surrounded by people whispering his ear that it's a good thing and so he's following his advisors. To a fault. He's following his advisors and selling chips to China. He's following his advisors and he's imposing tariffs. The president's kind of a 1950s Democrat when it comes to this economic policy stuff. He thinks that stuff worked. It didn't. It hurt to the economy. Remember, it was John F. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. who cut taxes and got rid of a lot of tariffs and caused the economy to explode. When Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was president, the tax rate was at 90%. He cut it down to like 70%. Reagan got it down to 30%. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. also got rid of a lot of tariffs. He was a free trader back in the day. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. would probably be a Democrat these days or a Republican these days. He was a tax-cutting free trader. Got rid of a lot of tariffs and stimulated the American economy. Trump's very Nixonian. Back in 1960, it was Richard Nixon campaigned against John F. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who was fine with taxes and was fine with tariffs. And we're seeing a return of the Nixonian economic and foreign policies where we're going to divide up the world. We're going to have fears of influence. We're going to have detain, all that. That's where we are. You know, it's the rise of the Buchananites within the Republican Party. People forget Pat Buchanan work for Richard Nixon alongside Henry Kissinger and bought into their worldview. And this is what's coming out right now. I just think he's surrounded by people. He's getting advice from him. Donald Trump is, it was one of George W. Bush's bigger faults in office, deeply, deeply, deeply loyal to a fault. And Donald Trump has essentially staked out a position where he does not want anyone who's been assailed by the media to be thrown under the bus. So if they get attacked, they get protected. So he's not getting rid of any of the people giving me the bad advice. He's trying to be loyal to them. They're loyal to him. And we have this perpetuating cycle of economic brokenness inside the White House as a result where we're selling advanced AI chips to China that we should not be selling to them. Now, we've got to talk about something else.

People are not getting married and having kids anymore. I want to read for you a letter to the editor in the Wall Street Journal from my friend Bethany Mendel. She and her husband have six kids. Economic charts can tell us birth rates are collapsing, but they can't tell us what that actually feels like. I was recently in Greece with my six children, a country and demographic freefall, and we were treated like a traveling circus. People stared out of shock, not rudeness. They would stop us, smile, and count the kids out loud. Again and again, strangers told us some version of the same thing. This is how Greece used to look. That's how they grew up. The tragedy of falling birth rates isn't merely national decline, strained pensions, or a shrinking labor force. It is the intimate human loss. Americans talk about the country feeling lonely. But we rarely connect that to the most obvious cause. Fewer brothers and sisters, cousins, aunts and uncles, fewer people to whom we belong. The childhoods so many Americans grew up with, holidays packed with relatives, built-in playmates, bustling Friday night dinners, are quietly disappearing. The country feels emptier because our homes are emptier. In his column, the Great American Baby's Shortage, William Galston wrote that when Americans once again believe their best years lie ahead, we may see more strollers in our parks. But the causation may run the other direction. Our futures are bleak, not simply because we lack optimism, but because we are creating a society in which fewer people will have the most reliable source of meaning and joy that humans have ever known. Family. No civilization in history has raised children and the isolation we're normalizing today without the intergenerational web that once carried people from infancy to old age. The American dream was never merely about opportunity. It was about continuity. A belief that life is worth building because someone will inherit it. If you want to restore hope, we can't talk about our GDP or policy tweaks. We must tell the truth about what we are losing, what Greece is already living through, and what kind of country we will become if Americans stop believing family is worth a struggle, sacrifice, an extraordinary reward of a full dinner table. Amen and amen. Bethany Mandel, friend of mine, she and her husband Seth Super People. My wife wants to steal one of their kids. Emily Jashinsky has a related piece in the Washington Post. A marriage gap is growing and it could spell disaster. Essentially, what we're finding is that down to the high school level, young men in this country want to get married and young women do not. Young women are increasingly being convinced from society that if they get married, they will be losing their freedom. Young men understand that with family comes stability and with stability comes growth. In fact, you know, the growth in wages in this country comes from men who get married and have families and their families support them. If you want to...

get out of the middle class and ascend into wealth in this country, if you want to get out of poverty and ascend to the middle class, getting married and having a family is the number one way to do it. But young women are being told by popular culture if you do that, you are being shackled. And your ability to penetrate the glass ceiling will be undone and you will be bound to take care of kids. In fact, young women are being told that having a family and being a mom is the least fulfilling opportunity out there that instead you could be a careerist. Sell yourself to the Fortune 500 and you will thrive. That's what young women are being told. We've had a war on boys for a very long time, and that war on boys is translated into a war on marriage, where young men realize that having a family is part of being fulfilled in life, and young women are being told that's a terrible idea. Girls have swung away from marriage by double digits. In the early 1990s, 83% of high school girls wanted to eventually get married. In the year 2023, it's only 61%. And you know where those 61% are? In churches. In secular society, young women do not want to get married. Young men do. And those secular young men are going to church to find wives. I'm very tempted to say. Side note, I have a niece who's 30, got a lot of money because she's a nurse. My wife and my sister are looking for a husband for her. My sister's trying to marry off her oldest. The problem is my brother-in-law is an awesome human being. and my brother-in-law sets the bar so high for marriage. I don't think his oldest child is ever going to be able to find a man to live up to her ideal of what a man should be because of her dad. It's his fault. He's just too good a guy. But my sister would like you to know if you're in the Memphis area, she has a single daughter who loves Jesus and is a nurse and is a great cook, I can attest to. She's figured out my cinnamon roll recipe. I got a 20-year-old daughter who is interested in getting her degree and not dating, but she's starting to ask those questions. I keep saying you've got to join RUF or some church group on campus where you can find a single guy. My son, meanwhile, wants to go off to Sanford and be an architect and says, well, he's there. He wants to find a wife. The architecture program there has a 10 to 1 female to male ratio. I'm just saying, folks, young women these days, they're having a hard time finding the young men that want to get married to in church, and the young women out of church want nothing to do with getting married. And the young men are there trying to normalize them all as a problem. We have got to rebuild families and society. And by the way, I also have this sneaking suspicion that, to Bethany's point,

that young people don't feel like there's an optimistic future so they don't want to bring kids into the world. Bring kids into the world and you'll build the optimistic future. We're going about it counterintuitably the wrong way. We think that we've got to show optimism for the future to have kids, actually have kids, and we'll see the optimism in the future. a growing, robust society. We've got to incentivize people having kids. And by the way, the church plays a role in this because the people most likely to get married, the young people most likely to get married in this country, are the ones going to churches. They found Jesus, and he says it be fruitful and multiply, and they want to do that. The rest of the world, they want to put their career first. When the truth seems hazy, Eric will clear the way. It's the Eric Erickson Show. Text Eric to 33777 and get the four things you need to know podcast. Eric tells you the four things to pay attention to after the show. Also available on YouTube and your favorite podcast app. I want to read for you an excerpt of a story out of Canada. because there are a lot of people out there who believe single-payer government-run health care is a good thing. And they gloss over these sorts of stories. So the lady, she visited the provincial legislature on Tuesday to plead for help getting surgery to remove her remaining parathyroid gland. Currently, there is no surgeon in Saskatchewan able to perform the operation. Van Allsteen said she must be referred out of province, but she can't obtain a referral without first being seen by an endocrinologist. No endocrinologist in Saskatchewan is accepting new patients. As a result of the pain, Van Allstein says she has applied and been approved for medically assisted suicide on January 7th. She's an excruciating pain. She needs her parathyroid gland removed. She can't get a surgeon to do the operation to be referred out of Saskatchewan somewhere else to do the surgery. She's got to see an endocrinologist. No endocrinologist in Saskatchewan are seeing new patients. And she's in such terrible pain. They have... urged her and she has, as a result, gone to do mutually assisted suicide and she will kill herself on January 7th because she can't get the medical treatment she needs. In single-payer health care systems, more and more they are pushing people to commit suicide as a way to alleviate the burdens in single-payer systems. Single-payer health care systems and medically assisted suicide packs go hand in hand.

It would be a terrible day in this country if we got single-payer government-run health care. That's what Obamacare is trying to push us towards. Republicans do not have a plan. The reason we are on the course for where we are with health care in this country is because Republicans refuse to actually put up a comprehensive plan to rely on the free market, so that's pushed Americans to Obamacare, which is headed towards this sort of suicide pact. Americans for Prosperity offers common sense conservative plans, including on health care. If Republicans want to take a look on the president's tax cuts, on school choice, on deregulation around the country, you can go to afpvolunteer.com and sign up today with American for Prosperity and be part of the growth of Americans for Prosperity. They've got chapters in all 50 states. They would love to have you. AFPvolunteer.com is where you want to go.afpvolunteer.com. Americans for Prosperity is the largest leading grassroots group in the country. They have to be conservatives. They fight regularly for common sense conservative reforms at the local level, the state level, and the federal level. They rely on an army of activists who can get involved and get educated on the issues of the day and learn how to talk to neighbors about them and policymakers and states and Washington about them and even rally them to get out the vote or call members of Congress or state legislatures. Go to afpvolunteer.com today. Sign up with Americans for Prosperity. Get involved. Take action to advance freedom in your state.