Both the quest for purity and the quest for unity [among conservatives] are misguided...

Peter Berkowitz, the Tad and Dianne Taube Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, discusses his new book, Constitutional Conservatism.

Contrasting positions on American exceptionalism go to the heart of what distinguishes the 2016 Republican presidential field from its Democratic counterpart.

In the book "Why I Turned Right," twelve right-leaning baby boomers offer their thoughts on how and why they became conservatives...

You would never guess from the current campaign trail pyrotechnics, but public opinion polls suggest a straightforward formula for victory in the 2016 general election.

Why do conservatives believe in free markets and limited government? Because they make life better—especially for those in need. 

On October 7, 2003, Californians go to the polls to vote in a historic election. They will decide whether to recall Governor Gray Davis and replace him with someone else. Davis is only the second governor in U.S. history to face a recall election. Is the California recall in the best interests of its citizens? Or is this recall election an example of direct democracy gone awry? And what long-term effects will this recall campaign have on politics at both the state and national levels?

To understand the sometimes glaring gaps between candidate Obama’s promises and President Obama’s policies, it is useful to appreciate an old tension in American progressivism. . . .

In his first term, President George W. Bush has had difficulty getting his nominees to the federal courts of appeal confirmed by the Senate. The Democrats have taken the almost unprecedented step of threatening filibusters to prevent floor votes on certain nominees. Has the judicial appointments process become the latest victim of bitter partisan politics? Or has the judiciary brought this state of affairs on itself by advancing a doctrine of judicial supremacy, leaving the executive and legislative branches no choice but to resort to political litmus tests for nominees? What does this situation bode for the next Supreme Court nomination? And what, if anything, should be done to reform the process?