American conservatives are getting old, but their message isn’t getting old.
The conservative movement has grown up and is no longer a monolith, but rather a diverse, diverse, and powerful force in American politics.
The next four years will determine whether conservatives can continue to push the envelope of American conservatism.
As we mark the 50th anniversary of the Conservative Movement, we ask what can we learn from the past four decades?
First, we want to remember what we didn’t win, what we lost, and what we will continue to lose.
Second, we must ask what the future holds for conservative ideas, for conservative candidates, and for conservatives as a whole.
Third, we should remember what conservative ideas are and why they matter.
In a divided nation, a movement like the Conservative Action Fund (CAF) is indispensable.
The CAF works to elect conservative candidates to the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate.
It also raises millions of dollars for conservatives who run for state and local offices.
We salute its efforts to ensure that the U:tas conservative movement remains vibrant and vibrant, and to encourage all Americans to participate in it.
But now that the Conservative Leadership Conference (CLC) has decided to take a hiatus from its annual conference to focus on its 2020 election efforts, we are concerned about the future of the conservative movement.
What happened to the conservative cause?
And how can conservatives reclaim their rightful place in American society?
The Conservative Action Foundation was founded by two young conservative activists, Peter Wehner and Peter Thiel.
The two founded CAF in 2003 and have been involved in numerous conservative political campaigns and initiatives for decades.
CAF is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization and, like all nonprofit organizations, its income is tax-deductible.
The foundation received approximately $10 million from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) in 2010 and 2011.
Wehner was also a top donor to the 2016 Republican National Committee (RNC) and to other GOP candidates and causes.
Thiel was a top bundler for the 2016 presidential campaign of then-candidate Donald Trump and also a major contributor to the GOP primary campaigns of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Sen. Marco Rubio (R – FL).
Wehner is the former president of the American Conservative Union (ACU), a right-wing nonprofit founded in 1968 by the American Legion.
In the 1990s, CAF served as the official political arm of the Heritage Foundation, a right wing think tank.
CAI is part of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), a conservative think tank whose mission is to promote the idea that public schools should be secular and not indoctrinate children into conservative political views.FIRE has been involved with the CAF since 2004, and in 2010, the foundation funded a pro-Trump “National Policy Forum” at the Heritage Institute.
We know that the Heritage and CAI organizations are deeply intertwined and that there is no doubt that they are deeply influential in shaping the conservative agenda.
But what happened to conservative ideas?
In 2005, the conservative think tanks Heritage, the American Enterprise Institute, and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) started working on a “consensus” document that would define the American conservative agenda and identify the best ways to achieve that agenda.
The consensus document was a blueprint for the conservative project.
The document was produced by CAI, FIRE, and other conservative think-tanks and, according to a Heritage Foundation report, it is “the blueprint for a conservative takeover of government” in America.FIER published the blueprint for America’s Conservative Agenda in 2004, but its publication was blocked by the Bush administration.
The Bush administration argued that the blueprint should not be considered public because it was written by the conservative organizations themselves and therefore did not reflect their “private-sector-friendly” values.FIERS decision was reversed by the Supreme Court in 2010 when the court upheld a Texas law requiring public schools to use the CAI consensus document as the “sole guide to their curriculum.”
The Court ruled that it was unconstitutional for CAI to be the sole guide to what constitutes the “best” curriculum.
In 2007, after the Supreme Justice Clarence Thomas ruled that the conservative foundations could not use the conservative consensus document, the Bush-era Department of Education started a public interest litigation effort to get FIRE and CAFI to stop using the CAIS document.
The DOJ filed an Amicus Brief in support of FIRE and the CAFI.
FIRE argued that it would be a violation of FIRE’s First Amendment rights if FIRE was forced to use FIRE’s own agenda document.
We were not pleased with the DOJ’s argument.
The DOJ’s case against FIRE was based on a federal statute that prohibits any organization that receives federal funds from using its own document as a guide to its curriculum.
FIRE appealed the DOJ decision, and this time the court sided with FIRE.
FIRE successfully argued that its agenda document, based