Mike

By: AIF Staff

Washington, DC – Earlier this week, former Speaker of the House Paul Ryan spoke with Fox News’ Chief National Security Correspondent Jennifer Griffin and Virtu Financial Founder Vincent Viola at the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ (CSIS) 2026 Global Security Forum.

The panel conversation, premised on the question: “What Must America Defend?”, featured Ryan  and Viola discussing the future of America’s defense industrial base and detailing the public policies necessary to meet America’s 21st national security and economic challenges. Ryan, who serves on CSIS’ Board of Directors, also expounded on Iran, the rise of populism, and the resilience of America’s democracy.

Video of the panel is accessible here and excerpts of Ryan’s responses, edited lightly for clarity, follow.

On the resilience of the American system:

“I think democracy is being stress tested in two profound ways. From within, with the polarization that is sort of making it difficult for us to reach consensus on critical things, and from without, with the tyrants trying to use our freedoms against us to try and polarize us and undermine us.”

“So those are stress tests that I think we will pass. I really believe at this 250th anniversary — this system we have, freedom, capitalism, private property rights, liquid capital markets, rule of law, all those things and the innovation that comes with it is going to beat the tyrants. It’s going to beat the tyrannies. It’s going to beat the state-owned enterprises. I’m confident we’re going to get there, but we’re going to do it in our own way and our own timeline.”

Assessing America’s hard and soft power:

“In Venezuela… I think we’ve demonstrated our hard power is pretty darn lethal and effective. Our soft power I think has atrophied. I’m not a big fan of all the protectionist gambits. I think the better bet would have been to group with our allies to jointly take on China together—to ring-fence China and promote trade with allies…. I’m glad NATO is stepping up to 5% if they actually hit those bogeys, but I think we have done more to estrange allies than to bring them toward us. And with our allies, we’re a whole lot stronger.”

Assessing the Iranian threat & Trump Administration’s MOU:

“I don’t think we can accept Iran controlling the straits and I don’t think it will be acceptable. So, I see this as an intermission. I just hope during this intermission that there’s relief in the markets that we can refill oil stocks and that the Mullahs, the IRGC doesn’t get much more money to restock for the fight that’s going to come.”

Revitalizing the Defense Industrial Base:

“We’re probably in Version 2.0 of Pentagon procurement reform. We’re getting off the cost-plus contracting for big primes. We’re bringing disruptors in. Version 3.0 is where I hope we go.

Version 2.0 is where we bring Silicon Valley economics to the defense industrial base so that private capital is being put at risk to find the R&D and bring the cost-effective weapons system at the speed we need…. Version 3.0 is what we were talking about: interoperability versus compatibility. We want to have compatible systems so that these costs are flattened, so we can get exquisite, quick-to-deploy weapons systems at low-cost structures, like other countries are doing and have shown us how to do it.

It’s just reforming this system from within Congress, from within the Pentagon is a generational effort. I think Steve Feinberg and his team are doing everything they can to make it happen. I believe there are people in Congress who really want to make this happen.”

Modernizing the workforce to meet 21^st century national defense needs:

“That’s one of my theses of my private equity firm: We’re investing in that workforce. We just bought the biggest welding school so we can train more welders across America. There has got to be a better investment in our workforce, and the private sector can do a lot to carry this burden and get people into these vocations. We can get people this education and we can have a smart immigration system that makes sure that we can meet this demand. We have the workforce and we have the intellectual power, just look at all the things that are being designed.”

Moving from ‘grievance’ to ‘growth populism’:

“This is not problem-solving populism. What happens with populism that is not tethered to principles, but that is tethered to personalities or grievances, is it doesn’t deliver the goods. It doesn’t actually solve problems. So, sooner or later, the country is going to get sick of that and want something better — like their problems being solved.

So, I see this as a moment. It’s temporary. My hope and prayer is that what comes after it is going to take us from grievance populism to growth populism, going to a type of populism that is effectively saying: ‘Let’s solve problems. Let’s stop hating each other because we all want this social contract.’

We want the dollar to prevail. We don’t want to debase everyone’s savings. We want these things and we actually know what we need to do to get there. We have just got to get better politics and the populism that gets us better politics is not here now, but hopefully it is here later.”

By: Paul Ryan

—

In an op-ed published in the Wisconsin State Journal, former Speaker of the House Paul Ryan shared his thoughts on America’s past, present, and future as the nation marks its 250th anniversary.

We mark a milestone this week that once seemed impossible: the 250th anniversary of the United States of America.

Two and a half centuries ago, a band of idealistic rebels shook the world order, toppled an empire, and gave rise to a system of government that has generated more peace and prosperity than any before it.

We owe those patriots a debt of gratitude—not just for their courage, but for their vision, because at its core, our nation was founded on a precious thing: The American Idea.

It is the radical belief that our rights don’t come from government. They come from nature and nature’s God.

Our Founders knew that the government’s job is to preserve those rights. This idea is both simple and profound. It gave us the rule of law, our system of checks and balances, and a free enterprise system that has lifted millions out of poverty.

Because of these principles, the condition of your birth does not determine the outcome of your life. In America, your zip code isn’t your destiny. I’ve lived this myself. My own journey—from mowing lawns in Janesville to serving as Speaker of the House—could only happen here.

America’s history has never been a straight line. Every generation faces a test—whether it’s a fiscal crisis, the trials of World War, or rapid technological change. We have consistently passed these tests because of an indefatigable spirit and a deep-seated optimism.

At every crossroad, our institutions have persevered. We have emerged stronger. And I know that if our founding principles remain our North Star, America will remain a beacon of light for a world that can often be very dark.

Today, we hear a lot about what divides us. But the American Idea is bigger than our disagreements, and every citizen has a responsibility to preserve it. So, let’s raise our gaze, remember what unites us as Americans, and commit to tackling our future challenges together.

If we do that – if we stay faithful to the principles that made us exceptional, our best days are most certainly ahead of us, and our next 250 years will be even brighter than the first.

Paul Ryan served as Speaker of the U.S. House (2015-2019) and represented Wisconsin’s First District in the House of Representatives (1999-2019). He is a Partner at Solamere Capital, Vice Chairman at Teneo, and a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

By: AIF Staff

Washington, DC – Last week, AIF President Paul Ryan was named as the Co-Chair of the Commission on Artificial Intelligence and the Future of the American Workforce. The Commission, which is a joint effort undertaken by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the Urban Institute, will spend the next year developing various policy recommendations and proposals to the challenges facing American workers with the increased adoption and utilization of Artificial Intelligence. 

In a virtual event featuring Ryan, his Commission Co-Chair Secretary Gina Raimondo, AEI President Robert Doar, and Urban Institute President Sarah Rosen Wartell, Ryan answered questions on several topics related to the Commission and Artificial Intelligence. 

Excerpts of Ryan’s responses, edited lightly for clarity, follow. Video of the Commission’s launch is accessible here.

  

Ryan on the Key Objectives of Commission on AI and the Future of American Workforce

“I’ve seen a lot of Commissions come and go. I’ve been on Commissions – ones that have been effective and meaningful, and ones that have fallen flat and collected dust, so I think there are three things we want to do. 

We want to provide policymakers with solutions focusing on interoperability and economic growth, and show people from both sides of the aisle, from different parts of the political spectrum, coming together around a consensus so they can attract policymakers’ support. 

We want to provide a forum. We want to provide a forum for a variety of views — from tech to labor, from left to right — to be represented on this Commission, to discuss complex components of the forthcoming revolution of AI, and to do it in a way that leads to consensus-driven ideas rather than delving into polarizing sound bites. 

We want to be leading by example, providing a forum, promoting the consensus ideas that come from that, and then showcasing the high-quality work and the research of AEI and the Urban Institute…. 

[With] the kind of data, the kind of scholarly rigor that AEI and Urban have, and the kind of people we’re bringing on to this commission, which really is a great cross-section, I believe we can show policymakers real evidence-based solutions so that they can consider real policy responses. 

Policy responses are going to occur. It doesn’t matter who’s running Congress, and we can show what consensus looks like and assist these policymakers by assembling this kind of evidence. I’ve seen very successful commissions, including those from outside of Congress, come to Congress and show policymakers a way forward. I think we can do just that.”

Ryan on Pope Leo’s recent Encyclical on AI: 

“It’s very important that this Pope picked his name the way he picked it, because the prior Pope Leo, Leo XIII, wrote an encyclical, Rerum Novarum, during the Industrial Revolution to help society navigate labor and capital at a time of enormous upheaval. 

This Pope, Leo XIV, wrote a fantastic encyclical. It is a timeless contribution. It’s called Magnifica Humanitas. 

Now, a lot of non-Catholics don’t even know what encyclicals are or what they mean, but this is worthwhile reading for everybody who cares about the issue [of Artificial Intelligence]. It’s worthwhile reading for every American Catholic, every conservative, and quite frankly, anybody who cares about human dignity. 

Popes don’t write technical jargon. It’s not a technical manual. He is reminding us that technology needs to serve the human person, not the other way around. He grounds the policy debate….  It is basically a clear, moral statement that grounds the policy debate in one core truth: Economic progress is meaningless if it breaks the dignity of the individual worker. 

So, Pope Leo XIV is bringing a sense of moral clarity, which is exactly what we need as we meet these policy challenges not just in America, but across the world.”

Ryan on upskilling and augmenting America’s Workforce with AI

“I spend most of my time talking with CEOs and business leaders and I’ll make one macro policy observation: Our economic stabilizers that we have from state, local and federal governments are 100 years old. 

They were written and built for a different time. So, what we’re going to do with this Commission is explore how do you change that approach so that it meets the moment? That’s the first point. 

The second point is: I get basically 2 reactions from CEOs and employers. They’re excited and they’re intimidated. Most employers want to augment their workforce and skate to where the puck is going to be and seize opportunities. 

What they’re worried about is that their competitor may use AI to cut labor costs and then outcompete them. So, they’re worried that this becomes a game where the first company who cuts labor costs wins, but they really don’t want to be first. That tension is really rising in this economy.  I think there are going to be good solutions that can help get employers away from that thinking, because they really want to go toward augmentation….

The third point I’ll make is, and I spend a lot of my time specifically in this, there’s going to be a skilled labor renaissance in America….  America is reindustrializing. There’s going to be a renaissance of skilled workers. And the question is: How does that Renaissance play out in this new AI-augmented world? 

There’s a slice of workers in the middle that are the most vulnerable. And so, I think there are a lot of good, private sector solutions to reskilling and upskilling that workforce, so they can seize those better jobs and have those new opportunities.”

To learn more about the Commission on Artificial Intelligence and the Future of the American Workforce, click here.