Open to Debate

Whether to extend four trillion dollars in tax cuts or raise them next year is in question, with 34.1 trillion dollars in federal debt hanging in the balance. Some argue that tax cuts don’t do enough to pay off the debt and not raising taxes imbalances the federal budget. Others argue our debt is caused by government overspending and will be helped by tax cuts that help promote a flourishing economy. Now we debate: Is the Republican Party’s Refusal to Raise Taxes Fiscally Irresponsible? Arguing Yes: Oren Cass, Executive Director of American Compass Arguing No: David McIntosh, President of the Club for Growth Nayeema Raza, Journalist at New York Magazine and Vox, is the guest moderator. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The American Dream – the idea that anyone can achieve success in the U.S. through hard work and determination – is under scrutiny, and some worry it’s no longer achievable for the broader population. Those who agree say increasing healthcare, education, and housing costs create difficulty in having financial stability. Those who disagree argue that the U.S. still offers more opportunities for personal and financial growth than elsewhere. Now we debate: Is the American Dream in Decline? Arguing Yes: David Leonhardt, Pulitzer Prize-winning Senior Writer for The New York Times and The Morning; Author of “Ours Was the Shining Future: The Story of the American Dream” Arguing No: Michael Strain, Political Economy Scholar and Director of Economic Policy Studies at American Enterprise Institute; Author of “The American Dream Is Not Dead: (But Populism Could Kill It)” Nayeema Raza, Journalist at New York Magazine and Vox, is the guest moderator. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

At the moment of this episode’s release, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are neck-and-neck in election polls. How do you embrace risk, make informed decisions, and be prepared for any possible changes? In this episode, FiveThirtyEight founder and author of “On the Edge” Nate Silver discusses with Reason magazine’s Editor-at-Large Nick Gillespie his thoughts on which direction the 2024 election may go and the ways risk-takers cultivate power and drive change. Our Guest: Nate Silver, Leading Political Forecaster; Best-Selling Author; Founder and Former Editor-in-Chief of FiveThirtyEight Nick Gillespie, Editor-at-Large of Reason, is the guest moderator. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Five American presidents — two in the last 20 years — have assumed office without winning the popular vote. As the nation gears up for another contentious presidential election, some are calling for an end to the Electoral College. They argue that the college subverts the will of the American people by unfairly prioritizing rural and swing states over the nation’s majority. But others say the Electoral College, which the Founders established in the Constitution, is necessary to ensure voters in less populous states have a voice in picking our president. Has the Electoral College outlived its usefulness? This debate is presented in partnership with the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law as part of the Newt and Jo Minow Debate Series. Motion: The Electoral College Has Outlived Its Usefulness For the Motion: Jamelle Bouie - Columnist, New York Times Kate Shaw - Law Professor & Supreme Court Contributor, ABC News Against the Motion: Tara Ross - Author, "Why We Need the Electoral College" Bradley A. Smith - Law Professor & Former Chairman, Federal Election Commission Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Would Vice President Kamala Harris or Donald Trump be better for America? In a unique twist on political debate, two comedians, Pete Dominick, host of the “Stand Up! With Pete Dominick” podcast, and Fox News host Jimmy Failla, step into each candidate’s shoes where they will debate hot-button issues like the economy, immigration, and foreign policy that have defined the 2024 election. Arguing for the Left: Pete Dominick, Stand-Up Comic; Activist and Advocate; Host of "Stand Up! With Pete Dominick" Podcast; Warm-Up Comedian for “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver” Arguing for the Right: Jimmy Failla, Host of FOX News Saturday Night (Saturday, 10 PM/ET on FOX News Channel) and FOX News Radio’s FOX Across America (weekdays, 12-3 PM/ET) Nayeema Raza, Journalist and Co-Host of the Semafor Podcast “Mixed Signals”, is the guest moderator. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Tensions between Iran and Israel have escalated in recent months and are at a low point after a series of assassinations and rocket strikes. Is it time for a larger military response? Those who urge Israel to strike argue Iran is an existential threat to their survival. Those who are against striking Iran in an unprecedented way say that there are high risks and better options. Now we debate: Should Israel Strike Iran? Arguing Yes: Michael Doran, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Peace and Security in the Middle East at the Hudson Institute Arguing No: Shira Efron, Senior Director of Policy Research at the Israel Policy Forum Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Israel-Hamas War has led to increasing death tolls and instability in the Middle East. Was Israel’s response to October 7th justified? Those who believe Israel’s actions have been disproportionate point to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, including a rising civilian death toll. Those who argue in support of Israel's response argue Israel had the right to defend itself when under attack, secure the safety of the hostages taken, and must do all it can to defeat Hamas. Now we debate: Were Israel’s Actions in the Gaza War Justified? Arguing Yes: Eylon Levy, Former Spokesperson for Israel in the October 7th War; Co-Founder of the Israeli Citizen Spokespersons' Office; Host of the “State of a Nation” Podcast Arguing No: Mehdi Hasan, Founder, Editor-in-Chief, and CEO of Zeteo; Host of Al Jazeera’s “Head to Head”; Award-Winning Journalist Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

During election seasons, Democrats and Republicans leverage identity-based platforms to engage voters. Those who think identity politics isn’t holding us back argue identity politics offers a pathway for inclusion and empowerment for historically-sidelined groups. Those who believe it does hold us back argue it prevents constructive dialogue on solutions that benefit everyone, and risks alienating large segments of the population. Now we debate: In the 2024 Presidential Election, Are Identity Politics Holding Us Back? Arguing Yes: Coleman Hughes, Host of the “Conversations with Coleman” podcast and Contributing Writer at The Free Press Arguing No: Alicia Garza, Founder of Black Lives Matter and Black Futures Lab Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

There are currently 103,000 people in the U.S. waiting for life-saving organ transplants and 17 people die each day waiting for one. The demand for organ transplants worldwide far exceeds the supply due to a reliance on altruistic donations in most countries. Some economists and health experts wonder whether creating a free or regulated market for selling human organs would solve this issue. Those in support of a market argue that each person has a choice to decide what they want to do with their bodies and that with proper regulations, it can be safe, ethical, and financially beneficial for both sellers and buyers. Those who don’t support it have ethical and practical concerns about turning body parts into market commodities and worry about the risks of abuse that would be difficult to control and could undermine the integrity of the medical system, even with regulation. With this background, we debate the following question: Should We Legalize the Market for Human Organs? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The ICC has requested an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu concerning possible war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Israel-Hamas War. Is it fair to put his actions on the same level as Hamas? Those who disagree argue that the ICC doesn’t have legal jurisdiction in this case and it’s politically motivated. Those who agree argue it’s a necessary step in enforcing international law and holding accountability. Now we debate: Is the ICC’s Warrant Against Netanyahu Justified? Arguing Yes: Kenneth Roth, Former Executive Director of Human Rights Watch; Professor at the Princeton School of International Affairs Arguing No: Eugene Kontorovich, Law Professor at George Mason University; Executive Director of Scalia Law School’s Center for the Middle East and International Law Xenia Wickett, Geopolitical strategist, moderator at Wickett Advisory, and Trustee of Transparency International UK, is the guest moderator. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Public schools have in recent years begun incorporating topics around race, sex, and gender into K-12 classrooms. Are public schools moving in the right direction to address students’ needs? Those who say students benefit argue that learning them helps create socially aware, empathetic, and responsible citizens. Those who argue they harm students say children may be learning what should be left to parents to discuss. Now we debate: Wokeness in Public Schools: Helping or Hurting Students? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

While the two-party system has been the standard in the US government, third parties have often challenged this status quo and now advocates to be added to election ballots permanently. Those who agree say third parties offer non-partisan solutions and are more representative of ideologies, unlike the polarized partisanship present now. Those who disagree say the two-party system fosters stability and simplifies voting decisions. Now we debate: Does America Need A Third Party? Arguing Yes: Andrew Yang, Founder of the Forward Party, Former Presidential Candidate Arguing No: Daniel DiSalvo, Senior Fellow at Manhattan Institute; Political Science Professor at City College of New York–CUNY Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Effective altruism is a philosophical and social movement that uses empirical data to maximize the impact of charitable efforts. Those who champion EA praise its methodological framework for maximizing the effectiveness of donations, thus ensuring equal consideration for all individuals. Those who challenge EA argue that its emphasis on measurable outcomes may overlook important yet hard-to-quantify causes, potentially restricting the scope of what's considered beneficial. Now we debate: Does the Effective Altruism Movement Get Giving Right? Arguing Yes: Peter Singer, Author of “The Most Good You Can Do”; Philosopher and Professor Emeritus of Bioethics at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University Arguing No: Alice Crary, Co-Editor of “The Good it Promises, The Harm it Does: Critical Essays on Effective Altruism”; University Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at The New School for Social Research Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

American politics today has been marred by increasing levels of “us vs. them” thinking, leading to the destruction of our social fabric and democracy. But critical thinking, facts, and reason can lead us out of that path. In this episode, YouTube sensation, podcaster, and MSNBC contributor Brian Tyler Cohen joins guest moderator and Reason magazine’s Editor-at-Large Nick Gillespie to discuss his book “Shameless”, the future of democracy in America, and advises how to engage young voters. Our Guest: Brian Tyler Cohen, YouTuber and Content Creator; Author of “Shameless” Nick Gillespie, Editor-at-Large of Reason, is the guest moderator. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

After the October 7th attack, Israel vowed to eradicate Hamas and began its counteroperation in Gaza. Now, after ten months of war, a hostage crisis, and an increasing death toll, Israel and Hamas have been in negotiation talks, which could be complicated by the death of Hamas’s political leader Ismail Haniyeh. Should Israel agree to a permanent ceasefire? Those who think Israel should make peace with Hamas argue that while Hamas’s actions are indefensible, a de-escalation of violence is necessary, and conditions in Gaza need to be improved to prevent starvation and further loss of life. Those who believe Israel should not back down say that Hamas’s desire to kill Israelis will never change regardless of any deal created. They also point out that past ceasefires have been used by Hamas to rearm and regroup, which could happen again and lead to more conflicts. As the war goes on, we debate the question: Can Israel Make Peace with Hamas? Arguing Yes: Cenk Uygur, Founder and Host of The Young Turks Network Arguing No: Mosab Hassan Yousef, Ex-Palestinian Militant, Former Israeli Spy, Son of Hamas Co-Founder, and Author, “From Hamas to America.” Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The two-state solution proposes establishing a separate Palestinian state alongside Israel as one way to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But post-October 7th and the ongoing war, is it still a possible outcome? Those who say “yes” argue it’s the most logical path toward achieving regional peace. Those who disagree say that the current circumstances and previous failed attempts makes the solution unlikely. Now we debate, in partnership with the Council on Foreign Relations: Is the Two-State Solution Still Viable? Arguing Yes: Ambassador Dennis Ross, Counselor and Distinguished Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy; Mohammed Dajani Daoudi, Palestinian Peace Activist and Scholar; Founding Director of the Wasatia Academic Institute Arguing No: Elliott Abrams, Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations; Fleur Hassan-Nahoum, Former Deputy Mayor of Jerusalem, Israel’s Special Envoy for Trade & Innovation Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Donald Trump was found guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, but legal scholars question whether it could be overturned in an appeal or due to a new Supreme Court ruling. Those arguing for New York say no individual, even a president, is above the law. Those arguing for the defendant say his actions were within the scope of his official duties. Now we debate: Mock Trial: Should Trump’s Conviction Stand? For the Appellee: Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law For the Appellant: Randy Zelin, Trial Attorney; Adjunct Law Professor at Cornell Law School Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

President Biden continues to dismiss concerns about seeking re-election. But after a disappointing debate performance, some Democratic leaders are increasingly concerned about whether he’s still fit to lead. Those in support of Biden argue his withdrawal would fragment Democrats and they don’t want to risk losing undecided voters to Trump. Those calling for him to step aside argue that a new candidate could re-energize the Democratic base and improve election chances. Now, we debate: Should Biden Step Aside? Arguing Yes: Michelle Goldberg, Opinion Columnist at The New York Times Arguing No: Dmitri Mehlhorn, Co-Founder of Investing In US Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Please note: This discussion was recorded on July 11th before the assassination attempt on former President Trump. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

From AI to the political climate during an election year, our modern world is constantly changing and facing more polarization than before. How can we combat it and adapt to a changing America? CNN host and bestselling author Fareed Zakaria says you have to be open-minded and embrace compromise. In this conversation with John Donvan, Zakaria discusses our current revolutionary times, how past revolutions can help us understand our present, and why despite everything, he’s still hopeful. Our Guest: Fareed Zakaria, Host of CNN's Fareed Zakaria GPS; Author of "Age of Revolutions: Progress and Backlash from 1600 to the Present" Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

What George Carlin jokes would be deemed offensive today? What makes us laugh has come under scrutiny. Old jokes or skits are often off-limits in today's context, leading to public apologies and cancellations. Some argue political correctness stifles comedic creativity, thus affecting their ability to tackle tough subjects. Those who disagree say comedy has always evolved with changing norms and it can still flourish within wokeness. This week we revisit one of our favorite debates from the past year: is Wokeness Killing Comedy? Against this background, we debate the question: Is Wokeness Killing Comedy? This debate will take place in front of a live audience, on Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at The Comedy Cellar’s Village Underground in New York City. Warning that this content is not made for kids. Arguing Yes: Lou Perez, Comedian, Producer, Author of "That Joke Isn't Funny Anymore" Arguing No: Michael Ian Black, Actor and Comedian Nick Gillespie, Editor-at-Large of Reason, guest moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices