Loading...
Loading...

The Heritage Foundation’s highly anticipated 2026 Index of Economic Freedom is finally here! The diagnosis? The American economy is in resurgence, but we have a lot of room for improvement. How does America’s economy stack up against the rest of the world and what do we need to change to move ourselves up in the global economic freedom rankings?
Dr. Kevin Roberts and Larry O’Connor discuss!
Read the Index of Economic Freedom here: https://economicfreedom.heritage.org/
This video would not be possible without the generous donors of The Heritage Foundation. If you like our content, please consider supporting The Heritage Foundation by making a donation of any amount here: https://secured.heritage.org/?utm_medium=organic&utm_source=youtube&utm_campaign=youtubedescription&utm_content=260310-robertsdescription
Larry O’Connor is the host of “O’Connor & Company” on WMAL-FM and “LARRY” on Townhall Media.
Dr. Kevin Roberts is the president of The Heritage Foundation.
Shanghai Airport can look nice.
There are a couple of infrastructure projects
in China that actually have been well built.
They look really snazzy and fantastic.
But what has it happened is that as we would appreciate
in the United States and Britain and the West,
is that that has not come from a healthy civil society,
sort of an organic development of organizations
or small businesses, that's really the engine
of economic freedom rather than a centralized system.
Welcome back to the Kevin Roberts Show.
I'm Larry O'Connor, and this is an exciting episode,
because Heritage Foundation just released their annual report
on economic freedom.
This is something that people wait for to see,
how we're doing, how the whole world is doing.
And, well, Kevin Roberts, you wrote the introduction
for this year's report, and let's cut to the chase.
What's our report card?
How are we doing on economic freedom here in America?
Look, I know people only want to hear bad news these days,
but we've got good news today, Larry,
and that is because the United States among advanced
developed countries made the greatest strides,
the greatest improvements in improving an economic freedom.
That's just 14, 15 months into President Trump's second term.
And it is, and it's a very important thing,
and it's a very important thing to do,
and it's a very important thing to do,
and it's a very important thing to do,
for President Trump's second term.
And it is a direct result of Trump's policies
and Congress passing one of those big priorities of his.
We know it was the one big beautiful bill.
The bottom line is that, well, we still have some room to grow.
We've dropped a lot of spots forward
so that the United States is one of the leading
countries in economic freedom as it should be.
All right. So most improved is nice to hear,
but I got to be straight with you, Kevin.
I saw the report.
I saw the grade.
It was a 72.8.
I remember in school, I got a lot of these too.
My dad was not happy.
That's kind of a C minus, but I understand it's better
than before, but you just said,
we've got a lot of room to grow.
Why does it, because that seems relatively low
for such a free country as ours.
Well, it is, and we don't believe,
believe in great inflation at Heritage,
even for our own country, especially for our own country.
If you take, for example, the countries
that fared the best in the index of economic freedom,
Singapore once again leading the way, Taiwan, Ireland,
in the top five, one of the things that they do
much better than the United States
is that they spend within their means.
And so the United States, to tell you something you know,
continues to spend more money than it has,
where as we sit here and record this,
$37.5 trillion in debt.
That weighs very heavily against economic freedom,
because what happens is that the government
has to spend money on interest payments,
those interest payments often go hand in hand
with other symptoms of a lack of economic freedom
like over-regulation.
Those are the kinds of things that, in terms of policies,
the United States needs to improve on
in order to move up from a C minus to maybe a B minus next year.
All right, that's what I always told my dad,
he never bought it.
You gotta sell him on the trajectory, right?
You gotta be moving uppers.
That's right, I've improved.
By the proof.
And in fact, the score is up 2.6 points in a single year,
and you're saying no other country
made those kind of strides in just one year.
In that category of advanced economies like ours,
one other country I would highlight that has done very well
and has also been in the news is Argentina.
You remember that when Heritage Friends,
Javier Miele, surprisingly one of the presidential election
there, he came in with a lot of gusto,
personality-wise and policy-wise,
and all of the experts, Larry,
all of the experts said he couldn't do it.
Well, what did Argentina do?
Because it has slashed spending,
it has slashed federal workers,
it has really attacked the problem of monetary policy
in Argentina.
It also has made great strides,
a little bit different category,
because there's a different category,
different size of economy.
All right, let's break down the various components
of how Heritage ranks economic freedom on this report.
And I'm not overstating the case,
it's much anticipated every year,
and it's gonna be able to inform a lot of policy discussions
on Capitol Hill for the rest of this year.
All right, number one, monetary freedom.
How do you measure that
and how does the U.S. measure up?
Well, in terms of monetary freedom in the United States,
we would usually look at federal reserve policy,
and so a lot of the haggling between the president
and the federal reserve is about monetary freedom,
ultimately, making sure that this central bank,
which I think at the very least should be entirely reformed,
if not completely eliminated,
to actually echo some libertarian economist friends,
make sure that it doesn't lord over the economy,
it actually gives investors more freedom to invest.
And so the United States has made some modest improvement there.
There needs to be more, I would think,
that once the nominee to lead the Fed,
Kevin Warsh is confirmed, we expect him to be confirmed,
that there will be more freedom there,
and individual Americans will feel that better
because of their access to credit.
That's the main thing that you're looking for.
Why do we want access to credit?
Not credit card debt,
but the kind of low interest credit
that allows us to start small businesses.
We're talking about loans from community banks,
regional banks, and interest rates
between six and nine and 10%,
the kinds of things you can pay back
while hopefully you're building
a profitable future for yourself.
That's the real secret for America's capitalism
is that credit availability for small and medium-sized businesses.
That literally puts the capital in capitalism.
That's exactly right.
We have a tendency to focus on the big corporations
and nothing against them for the most part,
although I have a lot against those
who see themselves not as American companies,
but as international companies,
but the real heart and soul of America's free market
are small businesses,
and so we need to be sure that we're focused on them.
Yeah, like all those small-town Americans
who went into Jimmy Stewart's little bank and loan there,
instead of Mr. Potter's big meme bank.
I got it, I watched that.
That's exactly right.
All right, you mentioned freedom to invest.
One of the categories in the index is investment freedom.
How do we stack up there?
Because I mean, from my perspective,
it seems like we have a lot of options.
I mean, we have more options here for regular Americans
to be able to invest in things
than we used to when my dad was my age.
Yeah, it's certainly improving.
There have been a couple of ebbs in the modern era,
the last 25 years there,
but that's one category where the United States
has made some strides.
The example that you mentioned in terms of just common sense,
it would strike Americans as odd
that we don't have investment freedom.
That's generally true,
but we want to make sure in particular
that Congress, that the Securities and Exchange Commission
is not overdoing the regulation and management of risk.
In other words, the real key there is,
we have to be willing to let people fail.
We have to be willing to let people take a risk,
make a dumb investment,
and have to pay for it themselves
as opposed to spreading that risk,
socializing that risk across the population.
So when you look back on 2025
and how we got to these ratings
that you gave us the US and economic freedom,
we're gonna get to the rest of the world in a minute
because that frankly teaches us even better lessons.
How much of the progress we made here was the tax relief
and the regulatory reform?
That's the bulk of it.
It's really the bulk of it.
The United States was already doing pretty well
in monetary freedom and investment freedom,
room for improvement to be sure.
At Heritage, obviously, we think the United States
ought to be number one in every category.
Singapore tends to lead the way there.
But continued improvement there,
we need to continue in the United States
to expand what is another strength,
which is property rights freedom or property rights.
That's obviously the heart and soul,
the foundation of our entire system.
Where the United States needs to improve
is in judicial effectiveness.
The United States has a real need there
to sort of embarrassing for us to be there.
But the obvious categories that continue
to be drags on that swore,
the reason it's a C minus and not something else
is because we spend too much money
and our tax system is simply too expensive.
Now, there'll be critics who will look at this
and say economic freedom is meaningless.
It doesn't matter because you can have
strong central government that controls
so much of the economy and your markets can still boom, right?
Yeah, you can, but in what history teaches us
and for that matter, the present day teaches us
is that yes, you can have that at the macro level,
but that the benefits of economic freedom
in such a situation aren't felt
across a wide percentage of the populace.
They're gonna be held in the hands of a few.
In fact, that kind of system tends to produce
an oligarchy, think Russia.
There are some people who experience economic freedom
and a lot of wealth,
but then there is a huge percentage of the population
that are the have-nots.
And so what we want in the United States
is not just a legal egalitarianism,
but an economic one, which is to say,
we all get an equal opportunity
to be as wealthy or as unhealthy as we want to be.
That's really the American system.
I see.
So you're not really measuring the wealth of the nation
of the size of their economy.
It has to do with economic freedom for the populace,
for the people who live there, the people who matter.
We human beings.
Yeah, that's right.
And one way to think about it is,
even though this particular research product, Larry,
is our most sought after by international friends
and to some extent by American policymakers,
because they want to see that macro level aggregate data
about how one country stacks up against another,
the research methodology for this is through the eyes
of the everyday person,
the person who might want to go invest,
who might want to go borrow money
to start a small business, expand a business,
who might find himself or herself
dealing with his country's legal code.
We want to look at this through the lens
of the everyday person.
It's a very typical heritage approach to policy.
And if you keep that in mind,
then those rankings really start to make sense.
So there were 184 countries globally that you measured.
And I said, America ranked a 22nd.
So that's, that's damn good compared to 100.
Although we should be number one as far as I'm concerned.
The global average economic freedom score is 59.9.
That basically means based on how you sort of label
each sort of grouping here,
that more than half of the country overall,
or excuse me, over half the world's economies
are operating under a mostly unfree scenario.
That might shock a lot of people.
Yeah, it might shock a lot of people,
and it should shock a lot of people.
I think especially with shock Americans,
because they get the sense that while other countries
may have some particular limitations,
particular drawbacks,
and they know that there are a few countries
that are really awful in economic freedom,
that generally the world's going in the same direction,
which is toward more economic freedom.
Two things have happened.
First of all, that general sense,
over a long sweep of time,
especially since World War II,
that the world has enjoyed greater economic freedom
is correct, so that gut instinct we have is correct.
But the second thing that's happened that is more modern,
it's more recent,
is exemplified by supernatural organizations
like the European Union.
What has happened to many European countries, for example,
is that there has been a regression,
a backsliding in economic freedom,
because there has been an over regulatory state,
a high taxation state,
at the same time that there has been
a dramatic expansion in so-called safety net
or welfare programs.
And so we have to be cognizant
that while that long-running trajectory
toward greater economic freedom
for most people in the world is true,
that some recent tendencies toward socialist governments,
certainly to high regulatory governments,
have definitely impacted that trajectory.
So it sounds like it's the same struggle
that we've for the last hundred years,
which is free markets versus state control.
You know, it's easy when you look at China,
or when you look at the old Soviet block nations,
but state control doesn't always come
with an authoritarian military style communist country,
risking state control in countries
that well sort of present themselves as free.
Now that's exactly right.
I mean, think about Western European countries
while we might pick on them as Americans,
particularly the French, the Germans.
These are really big economies.
They're obviously stable countries
on and off allies of the United States,
but they are sort of classic examples of what has happened
that take in France, for example,
even when you've had a center-right government,
in other words, a government that you would think
would begin to scale back some of that regulation,
it's actually done the opposite.
Why has Macron's government in France done the opposite?
Because they are really saluting first
to the desires of the European Union.
And we need to understand that you've got to throw off
that yoke of what these supernatural organizations want to do,
along with the sort of home-bred,
native-born tendencies toward regulation.
It's countries like that that are by no stretch
of the imagination small economies that affect
not just investment, economic freedom there
in their own countries, but sort of spread that disease
of over-regulation and high taxation across their region.
In addition to the United States being first,
which of course is our desire here at Heritage
and the index of economic freedom,
if we had a magic wand, it would eliminate that tendency
in those Western European nations to do such a thing.
Well, and as you said, you tried to shoot this sort of judgment
on economic freedom through the eyes of the individual,
the human living in these conditions
and their ability to flourish.
So as you said, when you look at the European Union,
the people making decisions there
and their central control is so far removed
from that dude who's living in a village in Brussels.
Well, and actually Brussels is closer.
Let's say Italy instead.
Yeah, I mean, I am a huge, we at Heritage
are huge skeptics of the European Union.
We think that it probably shouldn't exist.
But even if it were to continue to exist,
it ought to be a lot less powerful.
What do I mean by that?
I'm talking about the desire of the EU
to start its own military,
although that's a completely absurd idea.
We're talking about two measures of freedom.
Economic freedom in one case,
there's this tendency toward over regulation, high taxation.
But that goes hand in hand with the mitigation
or the violation rather of another freedom
and that's the freedom of speech.
Where in certain countries where we see a real attack
on free speech,
there often is a corresponding attack on economic freedom.
It's just that that latter attack on economic freedom
is more subtle.
It takes a longer amount of time
before you realize the effects of it.
That brings us to China.
I think it's a good transition because you've got
China ranked 154th in the index.
I had a score of 48.3 below the 50% mark.
I got grades like that sometimes too,
but not for the same reason.
You didn't show this to your dad, did you?
Yeah, barely made it out alive.
You are describing China as economically repressed.
But Kevin, didn't you get the memo?
I keep hearing that China is our big economic rival.
They're doing everything right.
We should be doing more like China is doing.
So they are a huge economy
and they're dominant in many areas.
So how can they be economically repressed
and still be so dominant in so many areas?
I'm glad you raised this issue
because China's the classic example
of what you were describing earlier,
which is a command economy
that has experienced tremendous economic growth.
Why has it been able to experience
tremendous economic growth because of its population?
Because it can produce a lot of goods, consumer goods
that we in the west have consumed
with an insatiable appetite.
It also of course can consume some goods in return.
But what hasn't happened is that the individual Chinese person
has felt the benefits of that economic freedom.
In fact, you have seen the classic example
of a small handful of people in China
be able to benefit from that wealth,
from that economic freedom.
Not just big oligarchs like what we see in Russia,
but the heads of state themselves,
while the average Chinese person isn't just middleing,
but they actually have become impoverished.
And so it's a classic example of that.
So in other words, the bottom line is that China
can be a huge economic adversary to the United States
because of its aggregate economic power
versus our economy's aggregate power.
But on the individual Chinese level,
there is a cancer of the economy.
It's actually a cancer of natural freedom
in which there is a repression against any individual Chinese
person who wants to do something in economic freedom
that's outside the desires of Xi Jinping's government.
It's a classic case for those of us
who followed the Cold War and the Soviet Union
and its satellite states.
And there to sum up here, Larry, there is no doubt
in our minds at heritage that that kind of system
is going to collapse.
We happen to think it's going to take much longer for it
to collapse just because of the sheer size of it
than some prognosticators indicate.
And that's why we think we need to confront China
not militarily, but in terms of other policy
and be prepared to confront them militarily
as we've discussed in another episode.
So this is so different than what people hear
when they turn on cable news or broadcasts.
And they got the news host there, the journalists
who will marvel at the technology of the Shanghai airport
and the high speed bullet trains and the bridges
and the highways and all the infrastructure
that China is building and they're jealous.
They think that they've got it right over there
and America is falling behind because of those things.
But what you're painting, this picture you're painting
makes it seem like that's all sort of a Potemkin village
sort of appearance that the government is creating
but underneath they've got some real structural problems
in their economy.
Yeah, in fact, I think when the history
of the modern Chinese regime is written in hindsight,
I think that's going to be in our lifetimes.
It is going to be the classic case of a Potemkin village.
The, I mean, literally the infrastructure
that they're building in many cases in China
but also abroad through their Belt and Road initiative
is falling apart.
I mean, I just got back from a trip to Latin America
and one of the things we're doing when we go in these trips
is to try to advise these new governments
in Latin American countries to rid themselves
of the Chinese influence.
And they say without fail, Larry,
or give us some example of some infrastructure project
that they had the Chinese do that's falling apart,
bridges falling in the water and so on.
But there is a second underlying, it's very subtle
but very powerful symptom of this Chinese symptom too
or a Chinese system rather,
and it is the deterioration of civil society.
So yes, Shanghai Airport can look nice.
There are a couple of infrastructure projects
in China that actually have been well built.
They look really snazzy and fantastic.
But what hasn't happened is that as we would appreciate
in the United States and Britain and the West
is that that has not come from a healthy civil society,
sort of an organic development of organizations
or small businesses, that's really the engine
of economic freedom rather than a centralized system.
It should be noted for our Gen Z and younger millennial viewers
that it was the Heritage Foundation back in the 80s
that noted correctly, accurately,
that there was some very real structural economic problems
if not basically a crisis in the Soviet Union at the time.
But all the smart guys from Manhattan
and the New York Times editorial page were saying
that the Soviet Union is still just chugging along and fine.
It was Heritage that saw that there were real problems
with the basics of their economy.
You predicted, Haraldont, you weren't there at the time.
Kevin, but Heritage predicted that the Soviet Union
would collapse when it did.
No, Heritage did.
It hats off to our longtime president,
co-founder, Dr. Ed Fulner, who saw that
and actually that recognition by Dr. Fulner
and the scholars at Heritage at the time
led directly to them asking the question in the early 1990s,
what kind of research product could we put together
that would help scale this awareness that the path to stability
to individual freedom is for federal national governments
to develop better policies toward economic freedom.
And that's when Ed started traveling the world,
especially in the Far East.
This is a sort of emblematic story.
Although you would never want to take credit for this,
the fact that the economy of South Korea,
the economy of Taiwan in particular
have become exemplars of economic freedom
is in part because Ed traveled there
something like 200 times and advised them
on the policies of free market principles.
A lot of people deserve credit for that,
including the policymakers in those countries,
the capitalists and the investors.
But there has to be a source of these ideas.
And I'm really proud of the index of economic freedom
every time it comes out.
Because we know that when we highlight
that whether it's for our country or others,
they need to improve an economic freedom,
what we're talking about is what God has written on our hearts.
And that is yes to be economically free.
But to be economically free is to be free period.
And to spread this message of freedom
properly understood, of course,
is the great passion of Heritage.
You've helped me segue into our next segment here
because this is so important for everyone to understand
that we conservatives obviously were America first
and were interested in the flourishing of our neighbors
and our brothers and sisters here in our country.
But ultimately to be a conservative,
it is to embrace and celebrate humanity
and the flourishing of the human spirit.
And you talk a lot about that in this report
that economic freedom is linked to better health outcomes,
education levels, innovation, environmental performance.
If anyone cares about the environment,
they should want to embrace economic freedom, right?
That's exactly right.
And that's always been part and parcel
of the index of economic freedom.
But as we enter this or live through this season
in the United States and in the conservative movement,
when there are so many pressures
that want to divide the movement and divide the country
in between this kind of conservative
and that kind of conservative,
we wanted to make sure that we were being very explicit
about the benefits of economic freedom in other realms,
but also to be very explicit
that what we're saying is that the measure of economic freedom
is not a country's GDP.
It's a very important metric.
We want the GDP to be higher rather than lower.
But to instead emphasize that what flows out of policies
of economic freedom are policies
of other kinds of human freedom,
but ultimately something even more important than freedom itself.
And that's, as you said, human flourishing.
The understanding that we can wake up,
not just in a free country, but no.
We have the freedom to do what we ought.
We can fail, we can succeed along the way.
We believe it heritage that each of us
has a moral obligation to the other.
It helps us build a society with a great rule of law
when the United States great principles, great realities.
And so that leads us to later this year reprising
an old research product that had sort of been put on the shelf
called the index of cultural flourishing,
which we'll talk about on a subsequent episode
because we're trying to emphasize
even to those countries that fare well in economic freedom.
Let's be sure that all of your other measures
of cultural flourishing, human flourishing, are doing well too.
Well, I'll be all over that.
That sounds awesome.
All right, so I can already hear them now,
whether it's ASEA or Bernie Sanders
or Zora Mondani or Gavin Newsome
or all those weenie brains over there
at the Center for American Progress.
They're all screaming back at us right now, Kevin.
They're saying free markets produce inequality.
Inequality is the real problem here
and you're not addressing inequality.
Does the index address inequality?
The index addresses inequality,
but not in the way that those people
who need to learn a little more about economics understand.
In fact, you get a drag everybody down from the top
and that makes us equal, isn't that how you do it?
That's exactly right.
Well, give your little history a lesson
and you know this well, the audience knows it well.
The greater the economic freedom,
there tends to be greater equality, if you will,
but greater access to economic success,
is probably the most accurate way to put it.
Why is that?
Because if everything else in the country is relatively free
as it is in the United States,
we get regulation out of the way,
education is improving,
then we have basically equal opportunity to succeed
or to fail.
What is going to happen is that we're all going to benefit
from this rising tide.
What happens, what creates inequality
is over government involvement.
And that's the kind of thing that we have to be wary of.
We're seeing that in New York City already.
Yes, in fact, I called the people at center
for American progress when we need brains.
I love them by that, by the way.
All right, now go back to your introduction
because it was actually quite moving.
I know I get moved by the introduction
to a report on economic freedom,
but you made an important point.
And that is that economic progress and wealth
is not an end to itself.
The whole reason for this economic freedom index
and to be able to be economically free
is to support families, to support our communities
and our churches and what you call the permanent things.
Expand on this because it really is something
that conservatives lose focus of sometimes
because it's all, sometimes we look at it
as just wealth, wealth, wealth for wealth sake.
Yeah, we in the conservative movement
have become victims of our own success.
And by that, I mean, we were so successful in the 1980s
and 90s in leading the way to defeat communism,
both militarily but also economically,
that we sort of put the cart in front of the horse.
And the carts are perfectly fine thing.
In this case, the cart is the free market.
The free market's a good thing.
What we sort of got out of order
was that the free market flows out of a healthy society,
healthy families, healthy civil society.
And if you go back to early America, for example,
the free market that was established there
came as a result of a very stable society in New England
and an increasingly stable society
and southern colonies like Virginia and South Carolina.
It really is a sequential thing.
And but we have turned the free market unintentionally,
I think, into and end unto itself.
And it simply isn't, that's not how freedom works.
It is a symptom of a society that's working well.
And so what we're trying to do at Heritage,
with the index of economic freedom of all things,
is remind people that yes, the free market is a good.
Yes, economic freedom is a good,
but there are higher goods, human freedom generally,
human flourishing, and we need to be working
on all of those things.
And when we do, we will see that the economic freedom
improves as well.
So what about the concern from people on the right?
Sometimes worry that a focus on economic freedom
or a strong economy ends up leaving social issues
sort of in the dust, right?
That markets themselves and just the focus on markets
sort of erodes cultural institutions
because they will have trouble surviving.
How do you balance economic freedom and dynamism
with social stability from a conservative's perspective?
Well, it's a really good question.
And that's a fair critique by friends in the movement
who focus on social and cultural issues.
Because there are people on the right,
I won't describe motives, I'm maybe unintentionally
they do this, that they focus so much on economics
and the free market, that it makes it sound as if
that's the only thing we need to be worried about
in order to see society be successful
or for that matter to call ourselves conservative.
And heritage, what we say is, we reject
what is a false dichotomy.
This is not an either or picture.
This is why we famously have said for decades
we don't put a modifier in front of conservative.
We're fiscal conservative, social conservatives,
all of the above national security conservatives,
we're simply conservative because all of these freedoms
point to the same thing, which is that we're recognizing
what God, what natural law has imprinted on our beings,
which is that we have been hardwired to be free
in every respect.
It's not economic freedom versus having freedom
to build our families, to build healthy societies
and communities, it is a freedom to flourish
as the man upstairs would have us flourish,
a free will being a very powerful thing.
So what we're trying to do also with this product
is to remind friends on the right
to cut off the silly false dichotomy
and work together, even with our respective
different ways of prioritizing certain issues
towards this sense, not just of economic freedom,
but of human flourishing.
Well, and we've got to put our America 250 stamp
on our conversation this year in 2026, Kevin, it is.
I've been reading a lot of our founding documents
and the Federalist papers and the writings Thomas Payne.
It wasn't even a question back with our founders
as they were facing our independence.
Political liberty was economic liberty
and vice versa, the two were obviously connected together.
Oh, completely.
And I've been thinking a lot about the founders
this year for the reason that you mentioned,
thinking about someone who's sort of an honorary founder
of America because of the influence
that his work had, Adam Smith.
It was Adam Smith, the Godfather of the free market,
economics who said the free market flows out
of the healthy society out of healthy families
and he even quoted anthropologists,
cultural anthropologists in order to build that theory,
which obviously has has borne out.
All of that to say here in 2026
as we honor our founding in its 250th year,
if we really wanna honor the founding,
we not only need to see the United States
improve an economic freedom from this year to next
as it did from last year to this year,
we need to see the United States improve across the board
and some other avenues, some other respects,
which is the revitalization of civil society,
the revitalization of community life,
it sounds a little squishy and soft to say that,
but I've also been rereading in this 250th anniversary year,
the great work of the German social scientist William Ruppke.
And it was Ruppke who said that this quest for community life
actually enhances all of our different desires
to be free in those different respects.
We're really seeing the truth of that this year.
Well, Kevin, I will admit, as a C-minus student,
I am unfamiliar with hair to rucker.
So I'll do my reading, you all, you don't lie,
you don't know who that is either,
but now we've got our reading assignment,
we'll catch up and we'll pick up where you told us to
on that one, Kevin.
And that has to be homework, right?
Exactly, exactly.
So that doesn't for this episode,
but the Index for Economic Freedom,
you can download your own copy at Heritage Foundation,
you really should because it really does lay out the roadmap here
for so many of the decisions and challenges we've got ahead of us
in this year's election and in the critical election two years from now.
History proves it when governments get out of the way
and give their people more freedom,
a strong economy follows almost every single time.
That's always been proven true here in America.
The question is, are we going to continue moving in that direction
and embrace that freedom or will we retreat from it?
Next week on the Kevin Robert Show,
Kevin's added again, he's engaged in debates
with all those oh so smart liberal intellectuals.
This time at Yale and the proposition before the room was,
liberalism has failed.
I do think Kevin came down on that issue.
Well, you'll have to tune in next week to see it.
The Kevin Roberts Show with Larry O’Connor

