Today, Hoover invites you to vote for our finalists in the Signal Awards, which recognize excellence in podcasting each year; David Henderson uses the contributions and contradictions of John Adams to propose a method for evaluating the morally mixed records of eminent historical figures; and Henderson, along with fellow economists John Cogan and Michael Boskin, evaluates how Thomas Sowell left his mark on the field of economics.
Hoover Institution News
The Hoover Institution is pleased to announce that three of its podcast productions were named this week as finalists in the Fifth Annual Signal Awards. Judged by a distinguished panel of podcast hosts, producers, and other industry professionals, the Signal Awards recognize “the podcasts that define culture.” The Hoover Institution’s 2026 Signal Award finalists are:
“We are thrilled to see three very different Hoover productions recognized by the Signal Awards,” said Chief Creative Officer Shana Farley. “Each reflects what we are trying to do across our programming: bring exceptional people and consequential ideas to audiences in ways that are engaging, accessible, and worth spending time with. We hope listeners and viewers who value these programs will show their support in the Listener’s Choice voting.” You can vote for each production at the links above. Voting is free and only takes a minute or two. Read the news story here.
Freedom Frequency
In this Founders & Fellows essay, Research Fellow David R. Henderson examines the life and legacy of John Adams, a founding figure who courageously defended British soldiers in court before helping to create the Declaration of Independence. As Henderson notes, Adams presided over actions during his presidency that don’t read as well today, such as the Alien and Sedition Acts. The main lesson from the remarkable life of Adams, Henderson argues, is that even outstanding, effective leaders have flaws, and that seeing such heroes in a “glass-half-full” way puts their contributions to freedom in the proper light. Read more here.
The Sowell Legacy
In a celebration of Thomas Sowell’s contributions to the field of economics, leading economists and Sowell’s Hoover colleagues John F. Cogan, Michael J. Boskin, and David R. Henderson explore Sowell’s early scholarship on the history of economic thought, his examination of Say’s law and Keynesian economics, and his evolution into a widely read public intellectual. They discuss how Sowell used historical examples, empirical evidence, and clear reasoning to challenge conventional wisdom and make complex economic ideas accessible to audiences worldwide and across generations. From minimum wages and income mobility to rent control and the role of profit and loss, the conversation examines Sowell’s ability to connect basic economic principles to real-world consequences. The three economists also reflect on the qualities that defined Sowell’s work, including intellectual clarity, close attention to evidence, a talent for teaching economic principles through storytelling, and a concern for how some public policies adversely affect the people they are intended to help. Watch here.
Confronting and Competing with China
For China Considered, Senior Fellow Elizabeth Economy sits down with Distinguished Research Fellow Glenn Tiffert to examine what China wants in the Arctic and what it can currently do there. Tiffert distinguishes a currently limited military presence from the longer-term capabilities China is developing through scientific research, ice-capable ships, and commercial activity. The two discuss the potential military uses of Arctic research, China’s efforts to gain a greater voice in regional governance, and how investment restrictions have redirected its activity toward Russia. Economy and Tiffert also consider the US approach to Greenland, scientific research, and cooperation with Arctic allies, before closing with Tiffert’s reflections on China’s technological dependencies and domestic challenges. Watch or listen here.
California Decides
Proposition 5 rewrites how California—one of 19 states that permit recall elections for state officials—recalls a state officer. Dating back to 1913, 11 recall efforts have qualified for the ballot. Only six California state officeholders have been recalled: five members of the legislature and one governor. Today a recall ballot asks two questions at once: first, whether the official should be removed; and second, if removed, who should replace them. The replacement is chosen by plurality from a separate list of candidates, and the official facing recall is barred from appearing on that list. Prop 5 removes the second question. A recall would become a single up-or-down vote on removal. If a majority votes to remove, the seat becomes vacant and is filled the same way any other midterm vacancy in that office is filled under existing law. One key question for voters: Whether a recall should guarantee them a say in an official’s replacement, or whether such an election should be a clean up-or-down vote on removal alone. Learn more about Prop 5 here.
In a post-debate installment of California on Your Mind, Distinguished Policy Fellow Bill Whalen evaluates how the only scheduled debate between California’s gubernatorial candidates went down on television. Xavier Becerra, the Democrat and front-runner, played it safe as expected, Whalen writes, while Steve Hilton, the Republican challenger, talked about big ideas and held Becerra’s feet to the fire, but he missed out on the chance to dig into actual policy problems. And in Whalen’s view, neither candidate took the chance to dive into disaster preparedness or education, gut-level issues for every Californian. Viewers who feel let down by the debate would have been better served by multiple, policy-oriented clashes, Whalen writes—a reform that, as he explains, would also require state government to step up. Read more here.
Related Commentary