Intelligence Squared U.S.

Intelligence Squared U.S. / Intelligence Squared U.S.

Airs Sunday, October 15, 2017, at 6 p.m. Against the backdrop of North Korea's nuclear advances and escalating regional tensions, we ask: How should the U.S. respond to its most urgent national security threats? Staged with our new "Unresolved" debate format, the debaters argue for or against a number of motions including: Is Donald Trump making China great again? Is China destined for regional dominance? And can we strike a deal with Beijing to contain North Korea’s nuclear program? The debaters are Ian Bremmer, Elizabeth Economy, Noah Feldman, and David Shambaugh.

Airs Sunday, December 15 at 6 p.m. To prevent the collapse of the global financial system in 2008, The Treasury committed 245 billion in taxpayer dollars to stabilize America’s banking institutions. Today, banks that were once “too big to fail” have only grown bigger. Were size and complexity at the root of the financial crisis, or do calls to break up the big banks ignore real benefits that only economies of scale can pass on to customers and investors? Arguing for the motion are Richard Fisher, President & CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas and Simon Johnson, Professor of Entrepreneurship at MIT. Arguing against the motion are Douglas Elliott, a Fellow in Economics Studies at the Brookings Institution and Paul Salzman, President of the Clearing House association.

Airs Sunday, August 25 at 6 p.m. Political gridlock in Washington triggered across-the-board spending cuts, known as the sequester, in March. As a result, the Pentagon was given six months to eliminate $41 billion from the current year’s budget, and unlike past cuts, this time everything is on the table. In 2011, America spent $711 billion dollars on its defense—more than the next 13 highest spending countries combined. But the burdens it shoulders, both at home and abroad, are unprecedented. Could the sequester be a rare opportunity to overhaul the armed forces, or will its impact damage military readiness and endanger national security?

Airs Sunday, July 28 at 6 p.m.  The Food and Drug Administration, the oldest comprehensive consumer protection agency in the U.S. federal government, is charged with protecting the public health.  Under this mandate, it regulates drugs and medical devices for their safety and effectiveness.  But is it a failing mandate?  It’s long been argued that the FDA’s long and costly approval processes stifle innovation and keep life-changing treatments from the market.  But the question remains: when it comes to public health, is it ever okay to sacrifice safety for speed?

Arguing for the motion are Dr. Scott Gottlieb, Resident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and Peter Huber, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and Author. Arguing against the motion are Dr. Jerry Avorn, Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Dr. David Challoner, VP for Health Affairs Emeritus at the University of Florida.

Airs Sunday, July 21 at 6 p.m. 2012 was a disappointing year for Republicans.  The failure to win key swing states in the presidential election and surprising losses in the House and Senate has prompted some reflection.    Was their embrace of small government, low taxes, and a strong conservative stance on social issues at odds with shifting American demographics?  Or did the GOP embrace the right platform, but the wrong candidates?

Arguing for the motion are David Brooks, Op-Ed Columnist for The New York Times and Mickey Edwards, Former US Congressman (R) from Oklahoma. Arguing against the motion are Laura Ingraham, Host of The Laura Ingraham Show and Ralph Reed, Chairman of the Faith & Freedom Coalition.

Pages