Cato Event Podcast

The last round of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) occurred in 2005. Since then, Congress has repeatedly failed to authorize another one despite well documented evidence of overcapacity from the Department of Defense. Last year, in a thoroughgoing review, the Pentagon concluded that the U.S. military will have 22 percent excess capacity as of 2019. The Army will be carrying the greatest excess overhead—33 percent—while the Air Force will have a 32 percent surplus. The Navy and Marine Corps combined will have 7 percent surplus in 2019. Over the interim years, opponents have given a number of reasons to block another BRAC round, citing a weak economy, or saying that closing bases amounts to inefficient expenditures of public money, or that widespread economic hardship would irreparably affect the civilian support jobs surrounding closed bases. These outcomes need not be so, and proponents have a very different tale to tell based on the careful examinations of previous closures.Join us as our experts survey the political landscape and take a look at the real impact from past BRACs. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the 2016 campaign, Donald Trump said that he would stop Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan, “cancel” the 2015 Paris Accord on greenhouse gases, and end what he called “the war on coal.” Now, the President says, is the time for action. What will he do regarding energy? How can he do it? What will be the consequences? Beyond those questions of the moment lies the larger issue: What should he be doing? Please join us for a lively look at energy policy in the new administration on February 22 at 4pm. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Join us for a special briefing to celebrate the release of the 2017 edition of the Cato Handbook for Policymakers. This invaluable resource sets the standard in Washington for reducing the power of the federal government and expanding freedom to all Americans. Each chapter provides analysis of the critical issues of the day and provides policy recommendations for staffers interested in individual liberty, free markets, and peace.And while clearly dedicated to advancing a market-liberal policy agenda, the Cato Institute has always carefully avoided partisanship. It has been our position that, with some exceptions, Republicans, Democrats, and independents all share the same basic policy goals of peace, prosperity, and personal liberty. It is in that nonpartisan spirit that we invite staff and representatives from both parties to join us as we launch this eighth edition, introduce some of the key contributors, and chart a path toward a better tomorrow. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Predominantly Muslim societies suffer from low levels of political, economic, and civil liberties. Authoritarian political regimes, rigid social structures, and radical religious movements that suppress human liberty in the name of God loom large in the Muslim world. Is this liberty deficit due to a “dark age” of Islam, which can be overcome with reform and a different religious interpretation? Can Islam make its peace with liberal democracy, as Christianity and other religions did after their own illiberal ages? Or is there something different about Islam, making it inherently incompatible with a secular government and a free society? Mustafa Akyol, a longtime defender of "Islamic liberalism,” is optimistic. Shadi Hamid is more pessimistic, arguing that Islam is “exceptional,” in the sense of being essentially resistant to liberalism. Please join us for this timely and provocative debate. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

If you own a cell phone, you’re carrying a miniature tracking device in your pocket — a fact law enforcement agencies are increasingly taking advantage of to investigate crimes and monitor suspected criminals. “Cell-site simulators” or “Stingrays” — first designed for military use, but increasingly in the hands of local police forces — are the technology that makes it possible. Yet those agencies have fought fiercely against efforts to inform the public about how they are used, and a recent bipartisan report by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform found there’s no consensus on the rules that should regulate their deployment, or even what legal authorities govern Stringray tracking.At this Cato Policy Forum, Rep. Jason Chaffetz will present his committee’s findings, followed by a panel discussion in which policy experts and technologists explore how law enforcement can exploit this powerful tool to fight crime — while also checking its enormous power to encroach on privacy. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

If you own a cell phone, you’re carrying a miniature tracking device in your pocket — a fact law enforcement agencies are increasingly taking advantage of to investigate crimes and monitor suspected criminals. “Cell-site simulators” or “Stingrays” — first designed for military use, but increasingly in the hands of local police forces — are the technology that makes it possible. Yet those agencies have fought fiercely against efforts to inform the public about how they are used, and a recent bipartisan report by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform found there’s no consensus on the rules that should regulate their deployment, or even what legal authorities govern Stringray tracking.At this Cato Policy Forum, Rep. Jason Chaffetz will present his committee’s findings, followed by a panel discussion in which policy experts and technologists explore how law enforcement can exploit this powerful tool to fight crime — while also checking its enormous power to encroach on privacy. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

During the 2016 presidential election, Donald Trump promised to “open up” libel laws to make it easier to sue news organizations. He also criticized political donors for fostering corruption and misrule. Later, as president-elect, Trump criticized First Amendment protections accorded to flag burning. His critics say these statements indicate President Trump may seriously undermine free speech. His defenders doubt that, and note that Trump has actually fought censorship by confronting political correctness. He has also pioneered using social media to campaign and, in all likelihood, to govern. Finally, apart from his own actions, President Trump will nominate new members of the U.S. Supreme Court, the final arbiter in First Amendment cases. Will President Trump be good or bad for free speech? Please join us as three First Amendment experts assess what’s to come. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

House Republicans have proposed to replace the corporate income tax with a destination-based cash flow tax. Proponents say this new tax is desirable because it is “border adjustable,” which means that exports would be exempt from tax and all imports would be subject to tax. Critics, by contrast, say such a tax violates the rules of the World Trade Organization and worry that an adverse WTO decision could set the stage for a value-added tax. Moreover, there are concerns that destination-based taxes undermine tax competition, thus making it easier for politicians to raise tax rates and increase the burden of government spending.Join us for a lively discussion as top scholars comb through the implications and provide their considered analysis on the merits and demerits of these important reforms. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The 2016 election saw new arguments over the old ideas of populism and nationalism. Both had seemed doomed in this new era of technocracy and globalization. New research from Democracy Fund Voice examines how populism, nationalism, and immigration affected the 2016 election. Many voters who strongly favored Donald Trump feel alienated from government, community, and a changed and changing America. What are the implications of these frustrations and fears for the Trump administration and its critics? Do the new populism and nationalism bode well or ill for the preservation of a free society?Please join us for an intriguing look at the 2016 electorate and the implications of populism and nationalism for public policy and future debates. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

With the potential repeal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act comes an opportunity for Congress to replace it with reforms that could dramatically improve health care by expanding choice, lowering costs, and improving quality. The discipline of economics can be of tremendous help in defining the contours of a plan that would accomplish those goals. It can also help predict whether any ideas from the vast array of proposed reforms can plausibly achieve these outcomes. Of the leading options under discussion, which are likely to work and which will lock in bad incentives and sustain harmful market distortions?Join us for a lively presentation as we explore the options through an economic lens and identify the kinds of reforms that are most likely to satisfy the health care needs of Americans, sick and healthy alike. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.