On December 4, 2020, a decision is to be made in Stuttgart on who will take over the chairmanship of the CDU. The elected chairman could
also be a candidate for chancellor. Rarely has a directional decision by the CDU been as important as it is now.

After thorough examination we are of the opinion that Friedrich Merz should become party chairman and candidate for chancellor,

because of the following reasons:

• Europe finally needs convincing and clear leadership again. As Chancellor of the economically most important EU country, Friedrich Merz could set the right course again. Key points would be more market economy and federalism instead of a redistribution of financial resources, which is unfair and is no longer perceived as fair by the citizens. In particular, the lifetime achievements of thrifty and hard-working citizens are no longer appreciated accordingly. In the areas of energy and infrastructure there are great future opportunities for ecological renewal in line with the market economy. Friedrich Merz stands for change.
• the ECB must once again secure stable money instead of redistributing it centrally. Financial and climate policy is not the task of an ECB. The actions of the ECB are no longer democratically legitimized. Friedrich Merz is in the best position to turn the tide here.
• a coalition government with the FDP would strengthen the economy again, not least the middle class. Otherwise, there is a threat of a continuing wave of insolvencies with the result of widespread deindustrialization. The situation for the economy and the workforce has rarely been so serious. A new mass unemployment threatens. Instead of continuing a redistribution policy that is still considered without alternative, the experienced budget expert Merz would find the right balance again.
• Friedrich Merz would once again fight for the social market economy. He knows it and would not deliberately misinterpret it. In the new cabinet led by Friedrich Merz, Economics Minister Altmaier (he will probably no longer win the Ludwig Erhard Prize) would have to be replaced by a more convincing supporter of the social market economy. Carsten Linnemann would be a possible Minister of Economics who knows the middle class well and is as convincing in terms of regulatory policy as Friedrich Merz.
• Friedrich Merz would advocate less state and lower taxes for the citizens. Not a morality that annoys foreign countries, but a solution-oriented pragmatism must again shape our politics. Measure and middle!
• He stands in for fairness in performance instead of quotas and against an overregulated economy. Quota socialism must stop. Otherwise there will be discrimination and those who receive funding must let them ask whether they got the job through the quota or whether they really can. Our chancellor has not only failed with the energy turnaround and migration, but the economy as a whole has been increasingly manhandled and overregulated during her time in office.
• he is again standing up for the rule of law. The ‘Berlin Republic’ must not be a moral world champion or a guardian of virtue that is increasingly unpopular in the world; it must also seek a sense of moderation and balance and – if necessary – say no once in a while (see Eric Gujer in the NZZ on the German solo runs in migration policy on October 3, 2020, p. 1). The experienced lawyer Merz is also a beacon of hope in this respect.
• Friedrich Merz would strengthen the domestic capital market again. Here, too, he has special expertise, not least through his work for BlackRock.
• The relationship with our most important protective power, the USA, would return to normal with Friedrich Merz, regardless of the outcome of the elections in the USA. Either way, the motto ‘America first’ will more or less continue to apply. Only a recognized interlocutor of the Americans (“at eye level”) can gradually restore trust. Friedrich Merz can be trusted not to carry out experiments in the sense of Konrad Adenauer. One does not play with German security. A fickle, dreamy and weak Germany could provoke new conflicts.
• Friedrich Merz would be an honest broker for our French friends, who would more clearly than before put the brakes on the industrial policy and central government ambitions of our neighboring country. In the area of foreign and security policy, Germany must once again become a credible partner for France. At present, German policy here is no longer at all predictable.
• Better education and more technology-friendliness would again improve our future prospects. Here, too, Friedrich Merz would be a promising innovator. Digitization offers many new business opportunities. A more innovation-friendly environment must be created for this. In Estonia, one can observe how this can be done (while respecting the necessary data protection). For the future, too, the following applies: without a functioning economy, there is no state.

We hope that this time the delegates will seize the opportunity to renew the party and that they will not lose any more important years for Germany and Europe to introduce urgent reforms for a functioning Europe of market economies.

The Institute Europe of Marketeconomy