Cato Event Podcast

In a May 9 preliminary decision, the U.S. International Trade Commission determined "there is a reasonable indication that a U.S. industry is materially injured by reason of imports of sugar from Mexico that are allegedly subsidized and sold in the United States at less than fair value." As a result, antidumping and countervailing duty investigations into the questions of domestic injury, dumping, and subsidization will proceed with final determinations expected in early 2015.If duties are imposed on imports of sugar from Mexico, the decision will mark the latest U.S. government intervention on behalf of domestic sugar producers to ensure higher-than-world-average sugar prices in the United States. This raises costs of production for sugar-using industries and discourages domestic value-added activity.What have been the real costs of U.S. sugar protection? How has it impacted consumers, industrial users, and trade relations? What mechanisms exist to prevent the U.S. trade laws from enabling one U.S. industry to impose injurious costs on another? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The United States, argues Barry R. Posen, has grown incapable of moderating its foreign policy ambitions. Since the collapse of Soviet power, it has pursued a grand strategy that has tended to overreach, generating a host of failures and encountering many unexpected difficulties along the way.In this new book, Posen explains why the dominant view among the nation’s foreign policy elites, what he calls “liberal hegemony,” has proved unnecessary, counterproductive, costly, and wasteful. His alternative — restraint — would resist the impulse to use U.S. military power, and focus the military’s and the nation’s attention on the most urgent challenges to national security. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Attorney General Eric Holder’s Department of Justice has faced much criticism in the past six years. From “Fast and Furious” to the surveillance of Fox News reporter James Rosen, Holder has attracted the ire of congressional Republicans, and even some Democrats. In 2012 Holder became the first sitting cabinet member in American history to be held in contempt by Congress.  In their new book, Obama’s Enforcer: Eric Holder’s Justice Department Hans von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation and John Fund of National Review argue that Holder’s Justice Department has become an enclave of radical progressive legal activism that serves as a heat shield to protect the Obama administration. In addition, argue the authors, Holder’s DOJ helps push the administration’s hidden agenda, from the war on Fox News to the targeting of Tea Party groups. Join us for a discussion of the book with Hans von Spakovsky and comments by former DOJ official J. Christian Adams. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In his new book Immigration Economics, author and noted immigration scholar George J. Borjas will discuss how immigrants affect the wages of American workers, government budgets, and virtually every other aspect of the American economy and workforce. Professor Borjas brings his years of research and his own voluminous work to bear on this issue–reaching some controversial conclusions along the way. Borjas will be joined by Amelie Constant, another well-known immigration researcher and economist, who will comment on Borjas’ new book and spark a lively discussion on immigration and the American economy. Join us as two of the most respected immigration economists discuss this timely issue. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In an article that went viral in 1989, Francis Fukuyama advanced the notion that with the death of communism history had come to an end in the sense that liberalism — democracy and market capitalism — had triumphed as an ideology. Fukuyama will be joined by other scholars to examine this proposition in the light of experience during the subsequent quarter century. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In an article that went viral in 1989, Francis Fukuyama advanced the notion that with the death of communism history had come to an end in the sense that liberalism — democracy and market capitalism — had triumphed as an ideology. Fukuyama will be joined by other scholars to examine this proposition in the light of experience during the subsequent quarter century. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When law in America can be made by executive “pen and phone” alone — indeed, by a White House press release — we're faced starkly with a fundamental constitutional question: Is administrative law unlawful? Answering in the affirmative in this far-reaching, erudite new treatise, Philip Hamburger traces resistance to rule by administrative edict from the Middle Ages to the present. Far from a novel response to modern society and its complexities, executive prerogative has deep roots. It was beaten back by English constitutional ideas in the 17th century and even more decisively by American constitutions in the 18th century, but it reemerged during the Progressive Era and has grown ever since, regardless of the party in power. Please join us for a discussion of the most pressing constitutional issue before the nation today. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Financial history is characterized by a consistent fear of bank runs, especially during times of crisis. The financial crisis of 2007-09 was no exception. The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission identified no less than 10 cases of runs. Those runs were a major consideration in the shifting policy responses that authorities employed during the crisis. In the early stages, troubled institutions facing runs were dealt with through a scattered blend of voluntary mergers, outright closures, and bailouts. By late 2008 and thereafter, panic had descended on the major financial agencies. That resulted in the decision to backstop the full range of large institutions, as government officials feared a collapse of the entire financial system. However, serious analysis of the risks facing the financial sector was sorely lacking. In a recent Cato Policy Analysis, Vern McKinley provides such an analysis, asking whether many of the crisis decisions were appropriate. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In November 2012 voters in Colorado and Washington passed landmark measures to legalize the production and sale of cannabis for social use—a first not only in the United States but also the world. Medical cannabis is now legal in 21 states and Washington, D.C., and more than one million Americans have turned to it in place of conventional pharmaceuticals. Public opinion continues to shift toward policies that favor increased personal liberty on the issue of cannabis.In A New Leaf: The End of Cannabis Prohibition, investigative journalists Alyson Martin and Nushin Rashidian present an expert analysis of how recent milestones toward legalization will affect the war on drugs both domestically and internationally. Reporting from nearly every state with a medical cannabis law, the book features in-depth interviews with patients, growers, doctors, entrepreneurs, politicians, activists, and regulators. The result is a unique account of how legalization is manifesting itself in the lives of millions.Please join us for a discussion of this book and the changing tide of public opinion on prohibition. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Public opinion polls show that, by overwhelming margins, Americans believe that the United States “has a unique character because of its history and Constitution that sets it apart from other nations as the greatest in the world.” However dissatisfied they are with the characters who run it, Americans take great pride in our system of government, with its separation of powers and independently elected president.Should they? That’s the question F. H. Buckley asks in his powerfully argued new book, The Once and Future King: The Rise of Crown Government in America. Buckley points out that “parliamentary governments, which lack a separation of powers, rank significantly higher on measures of political freedom” than presidential systems. There are good reasons for that, he argues, among them: parliamentary systems make executives more accountable to the legislature; they discourage political cults of personality by separating the roles of “head of state” and “head of government”; and they make it easier to “throw the bum out” if all else fails. Should we celebrate our presidential system, or, as Buckley suggests, count ourselves lucky that, for more than 200 years, we’ve “remained free while yet presidential”? Please join us on May 29th for a lively discussion of these foundational issues. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.