Kevin Roberts

They agree 100%.

We at Heritage agree 100% on political Zionism.

But we have to, as a non-sectarian organization, allow this theological disagreement, which really, inside the workings of Heritage, don't have a place because we're not a religious organization.

And I think one of the fruits that's come out of the last few months is heritage playing a role in reminding people of that delineation.

And it's helped some of the fracturing of the conservative movement because people, whether through ignorance, just not having read about this or maybe having forgotten, they have conflated political Zionism and theological Zionism.

They're two different things.

And I think that may be a helpful way for people like you and me who are in the middle of those questions

although 100% supportive of Israel's right to exist, that we remind people of that.

Sure.

Let me take back up one step real briefly, if I may, because this is a really important context, although it's going to sound like nerdy think tank talk.

Heritage is famous for something called its one voice policy.

Unlike other policy organizations in D.C.

where different scholars at the same organization can have different voices, different positions on issues, Heritage, if we speak on something, it's as an institution, a single voice, one voice.

Why?

Because we're advocating for policy change.

You can't write a white paper.

Publicly, we have to have one position, the same position on a policy issue.

There has to be, right?

Okay, I got it.

So, that's important context for the story I'm going to tell.