Cato Event Podcast

In Everyone Loses: The Ukraine Crisis and the Ruinous Contest for Post-Soviet Eurasia, Samuel Charap (Senior Fellow for Russia and Eurasia, IISS) and Timothy J. Colton (Morris and Anna Feldberg Professor of Government and Russian Studies and Chair of the Department of Government, Harvard University) examine the roots of the Ukraine crisis, which saw the Russian annexation of the Crimean peninsula, offering a coherent narrative of Western and Russian policies in post-Soviet Eurasia since 1991, and providing a balanced assessment of both Russia and the West’s actions post-2014. The authors argue that all governments involved must recognize the failure of current policies and commit to finding mutually acceptable alternatives. Everyone Loses provides a timely and readable analysis of how we arrived at this dangerous juncture and how we might get out of it. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Republicans and Democrats agree that more effort should be made to restore America’s infrastructure. But how should we decide what projects are funded? How much should be spent on new infrastructure and how much on reconstruction? How does funding and finance influence priorities? Should the goal be to create short-term jobs, long-term economic growth, or simply new transportation alternatives?Join four leading transportation experts in a discussion of highways, transit, high-speed rail, airports and air traffic control, and transportation finance. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Can states that possess nuclear weapons better coerce adversaries than states without nuclear weapons? In Nuclear Weapons and Coercive Diplomacy, Todd S. Sechser and Matthew Fuhrmann argue that the empirical record undermines the case that nuclear weapons are a useful coercive tool. They show that states with nuclear weapons don’t have more leverage in settling territorial disputes, they don’t initiate military challenges more often, they are not more likely to escalate ongoing disputes, they are not more likely to blackmail rivals, and they are just as likely as nonnuclear states to make concessions in high-stakes confrontations.This is not to say nuclear weapons are unimportant. They are extremely useful for deterrence. But it turns out they don’t enable states to get their way with ease.These findings have important implications for foreign policy and our understanding of complex issues ranging from Iran and North Korea, to the prospect of conflict in the South China Sea, to America’s own approach to

Republicans and Democrats agree that more effort should be made to restore America’s infrastructure. But how should we decide what projects are funded? How much should be spent on new infrastructure and how much on reconstruction? How does funding and finance influence priorities? Should the goal be to create short-term jobs, long-term economic growth, or simply new transportation alternatives? Join four leading transportation experts in a discussion of highways, transit, intercity rail, airports and air traffic control, transportation finance, and regulation. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Is the Supreme Court "pro-business?" That's a claim often heard from critics of the Roberts Court, now circulating once more amid a likely battle over the confirmation of a successor to the late Justice Antonin Scalia. But what does the claim mean? Does it charge the Court with ruling wrongly in favor of business litigants, with shaping legal doctrine in unprincipled ways, or with something else? In Business and the Roberts Court, Professor Jonathan Adler assembles essays from scholars who consider how and whether Roberts Court decisions can or cannot be fairly deemed favorable to business. One pattern is that this Court follows doctrinal commitments — in areas from free speech to federalism to employment and securities law — that sometimes though not always coincide with the interests of producers and employers in the national economy. As the Senate considers President Trump's nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the vacant seat on the Court, join us for a book forum on one of the most important element

Should the United States continue to use its military to guarantee the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf?For more than 30 years, U.S. foreign policy has been shaped by a commitment to safeguard the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf. Yet profound changes in international oil markets, growth in domestic U.S. energy production, and dramatic shifts in the Middle Eastern balance of power suggest that it may be time to reconsider whether this commitment is still warranted.In Crude Strategy, a multidisciplinary team of political scientists, economists, and historians set out to explore the links between Persian Gulf oil and U.S. national security. Their essays explore key questions such as the potential economic cost of disruption in oil supply, whether disruptions can be blunted with nonmilitary tools, the potential for instability in Saudi Arabia, and the most effective U.S. military posture for the region.By clarifying the assumptions underlying the U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf, the authors conclude

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 t

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. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out 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. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out informati

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. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out 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. See acast.com/priv

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. See acast.com/priv

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. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out 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. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out 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. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out 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. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Is the modern welfare state still viable? Can it be reformed? Or do we need a new model that relies less on government redistribution and regulation and more on free markets and competition? In his latest book James Bartholomew examines welfare systems around the world and documents the strength and weaknesses of their approaches to poverty, education, health care, retirement, and other issues. Bartholomew offers a new framework for expanding liberty, while battling See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Donald Trump's inconsistency on foreign policy as a candidate has left experts confounded about what to expect over the next four years. Nevertheless, as he takes office, Trump will inherit a number of serious foreign policy challenges from his predecessor. How the Trump administration handles five key decisions, in particular, will shape the course of foreign policy over the next four years.Will President Trump decide to intervene more aggressively in Syria? choose confrontation or cooperation with Russia regarding Syria, NATO, Ukraine, and nuclear weapons? take sides in the brewing Middle East cold war between Saudi Arabia and Iran? expand the U.S. military presence in the Middle East and North Africa to combat terrorism? double down on the pivot to Asia or find a new way to deal with China's rise?With Barack Obama gone and Donald Trump in the White House, should we expect a more activist and hawkish U.S. foreign policy in 2017? Or is the new president more likely to follow his "America Firs

Ten years after controlling the executive branch and both chambers of Congress, the Republican Party has once again been entrusted to take the reins of power under a nominally unified brand.Yet, the widely covered initiatives of the incoming GOP president have been roundly praised and condemned with equal fervor. Likewise, for advocates of limited government, free markets and a peaceful view towards international relations, the pitch has been mixed. On one hand, there is a cautious optimism for fiscal and regulatory reforms, but conversely, many fear that protections of our most basic civil liberties are now under threat.Join us for a lively discussion as Cato scholars outline a vision for Congress that honors those classic liberal values of freedom, a restrained federal government and an ongoing commitment to peace and prosperity for all. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

More men in their prime are out of work than ever before. In his new book Men without Work, noted political economist Nicholas Eberstadt describes a new population of men—beyond the “employed” and “unemployed”—who are “unemployed but not looking for work.” Eberstadt concludes that researchers have been too quick to blame joblessness on general economic conditions rather than the personal behaviors and motivations of those men who have given up on work. David Bier, immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute, will comment on Eberstadt’s book, focusing on reasons why immigrants have avoided this worrying trend. Join us for a discussion of the future of work in the United States. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.