Cato Institute
1000 Massachusetts Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20001-5403
Phone (202) 842 0200
Fax (202) 842 3490
 Contact Us
Support Cato

Cato Daily Dispatch for December 2, 2002

Subscribe to the Daily Dispatch via email

(Links to outside sources were active as of the date of this dispatch; however, not all news sources maintain links to current stories indefinitely. Some links also may require registration.)

Social Security Is More Than Election Issue
Court May Reconsider University Use of Racial Preferences
Appeals Court Considers Detainees

Social Security Is More Than Election Issue

Defying conventional political wisdom, a number of Republicans discussed Social Security reform during the fall 2002 campaign -- albeit not necessarily explaining what, exactly, that reform would entail -- and triumphed at the polls. But now that the election cycle has ended, this may be the last chance to talk calmly about Social Security for a long time, and the opportunity shouldn't be missed, says an editorial in The Washington Post.

Because of lower birthrates and longer life spans, the United States is rapidly approaching the time when the current system, in which taxpayers effectively pay the benefits of current retirees, will become untenable: The 12.5 percent payroll tax that now funds Social Security will no longer be sufficient. A few years ago, many had thought budget surpluses would cover the costs, but those have vanished. So it makes sense to consider the merits of a pension system in which at least part of the money that ordinary workers pay into Social Security is invested in the private sector.

In his policy analysis, "'Saving Social Security Is Not Enough", Michael Tanner, director of Cato's Project on Social Security Choice, makes a strong case for the creation of individual investment accounts to solve the mounting problems that Social Security faces. In the study, Tanner notes that "instead of saving Social Security, we should begin the transition to a new and better retirement system based on individually owned, privately invested accounts. The new system would allow workers to accumulate real wealth that would prevent their retiring to poverty."

Cato will host a forum on Capitol Hill December 4th addressing Social Security and the 2002 elections featuring New Hampshire Senator-Elect John Sununu (R) and Rep. Pat Toomey (R-PA).

Court May Reconsider University Use of Racial Preferences

The long constitutional battle over whether university admissions may favor racial minorities is back at the Supreme Court, a quarter-century after justices split on the Bakke case and later confronted a parade of imitators without resolving the dispute, The Washington Times reports.

At issue this time is whether University of Michigan admissions programs that consider race as part of the admissions process violate the Constitution's 14th Amendment requirement that a state not "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

In the Cato Journal article, "Affirmative Action Can't Be Mended," Walter E. Williams explains why "affirmative action, in the form of racial preferences, has worn out its political welcome." In "Setbacks Won't Stop Drive For True Civil Rights," Ward Connerly writes that "it is important for us to redefine our thinking with regard to that term, 'civil rights,' and to understand that indeed civil rights are individual rights for every citizen." The vision of American civil rights is the subject of the Cato book, The Affirmative Action Fraud: Can We Restore the American Civil Rights Vision?.

Appeals Court Considers Detainees

Detainees in the war on terrorism are fighting for access to American courts, contending they should not be held at the U.S. Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, without seeing a lawyer and without being charged with a crime, according to the Associated Press.

The Bush administration argued in a D.C. federal appeals court today that 12 Kuwaitis, two Australians and two British Muslims captured in Afghanistan and Pakistan in the months following the Sept. 11 attacks are "unlawful combatants."

Four months ago, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled in favor of the U.S. Justice Dept. that the Guantanamo detainees have no right to court hearings, meaning the military can hold them indefinitely without filing charges.

The prisoners are not in the United States and thus do not fall under the jurisdiction of federal courts, the judge said.

Robert A. Levy, senior fellow in constitutional studies, wrote in "Citizen Padilla: Dangerous Precedent" that "the Constitution does not distinguish between the protections extended to ordinary citizens on one hand and unlawful-combatant citizens on the other . . . . The administration has decided that it will set the rules, prosecute infractions, determine guilt or innocence, then review the results of its own actions. That's too much unchecked power in the hands of the executive branch."

Jonathan Block, editor, jblock@cato.org