Today, the Russell Kirk Center awards Eugene Volokh its prestigious prize for advancing free speech and expression; Matthew Turpin analyzes how youth unemployment is likely to trouble the Chinese Communist Party for years to come; and Joshua Rauh sits down with Peter Robinson on Uncommon Knowledge to discuss the significant fiscal challenges facing the United States.
Revitalizing American Institutions
Last week, Senior Fellow Eugene Volokh was named the winner of the 2026 McLellan Prize for Advancing Free Speech and Expression by the Russell Kirk Center. A distinguished blue-ribbon jury selected Volokh for his “unparalleled” contributions to improving public understanding of First Amendment freedoms. “Free speech—which must necessarily include the freedom to err and not just the freedom to say what others label correct—is critical to a healthy political system, a healthy culture, and a healthy soul,” Volokh said upon receiving the award. “The Russell Kirk Center’s work is a major contribution to the noble endeavor of defending and promoting free speech, and I feel deeply honored to have been given the Center’s Richard D. McLellan Prize for playing my small part in this unending project.” At Hoover, Volokh leads the Program on Free Expression and hosts the Free Speech Unmuted podcast. Read more here.
Confronting and Competing with China
In his weekly China Articles newsletter, Visiting Fellow Matthew Turpin argues that youth unemployment is a serious problem for officials in China, as the “youth unemployment rate for August 2026 was about 19%.” Contextualizing this figure, Turpin writes, “That is double the youth unemployment rate in the United States and [even here] there is much consternation that young people cannot find jobs given AI and the perceived lack of economic opportunity.” In his view, the youth unemployment situation is likely to have real social and political implications in China, as seems to be the case in France, where the youth jobless figure is similar. A lack of opportunities for Chinese non-STEM students in particular (given preferential government investment in technical versus humanistic fields) may come back to haunt the Communist regime, Turpin says. As he writes, if an authoritarian government alienates “a bunch of extroverted social scientists, artists, lawyers, and journalists, they will organize a political movement against [that regime].” Read more here.
Economic Policy
How will the nation’s public finances shape—or constrain—the future of republican democracy in America?
Get the Story: Making his Uncommon Knowledge debut, Senior Fellow Joshua D. Rauh examines the country’s mounting federal debt and the political obstacles to controlling government spending. Rauh discusses why higher taxes and faster economic growth alone cannot close the budget gap, warns that rising interest costs could lead to an inflationary crisis, and argues for slowing the growth of entitlement spending. The conversation also covers President Trump’s tariff policies, the potential consequences of California’s proposed billionaire tax, and the economic policy lessons offered by states such as Texas and Florida. Watch or listen here.
For the latest episode of Capitalism and Freedom in the Twenty-First Century, Visiting Fellow Jon Hartley talks with Tyler Hassen about the legacy of the short-lived Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
Get the Story: The conversation covers Hassen’s time as a member of the DOGE team and his new book Inside DOGE: The Real Story from a Senior Insider. Hartley asks what Hassen learned working with Elon Musk; about his insights into government spending; and what it means that many former DOGE staffers are now permanently embedded in various federal agencies today. Host and guest then consider the various DOGE-like initiatives that have been undertaken at the state level over the last two years. Watch or listen here.
At Health Affairs, Visiting Fellow Brian J. Miller and coauthors argue that a “managed care” approach, wherein the government pays health plans “an actuarially sound fixed per-member payment to manage care” rather than a per-service fee, promises to reduce improper payments (including but not limited to fraudulent payments) in the Medicaid system. “The current focus on Medicaid fraud is well-founded,” the authors write, “but investigating and prosecuting fraudulent providers without addressing the payment architecture is akin to treating symptoms without addressing the underlying disease.” They conclude, “As long as [fee for service] remains the dominant payment model for the services most vulnerable to phantom billing, eligibility manipulation, and fly-by-night provider entry, Medicaid will continue to generate fraud at scale.” Read more here. [Subscription required.]
Related Commentary