• SUPPORT CATO
• FOR STUDENTS
• FOR MEDIA
• FREE NEWSLETTERS

• HOME

• ABOUT

• BLOG

• BOOKSTORE

• EVENTS

• EXPERTS

• MULTIMEDIA

• PUBLICATIONS

Books

Reviews & Journals

Public Filings

Policy Studies

Opinion & Commentary

• RESEARCH AREAS

• SPEAKERS BUREAU

• SUPPORT CATO

• CATO UNBOUND

• DOWNSIZING
  GOVERNMENT.ORG

• ELCATO.ORG

Cato Daily Dispatch for December 14, 2001

Bush Pulls U.S. Out of ABM Treaty

Rejecting Russian and Chinese opposition, President Bush gave formal notice on Thursday that the United States is abandoning the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty to press ahead with a missile defense system., according to the Associated Press.

In the White House Rose Garden, Bush said the Sept. 11 attacks proved the need to develop ways "to protect our people from future terrorists or rogue state missile attacks."

"We know that the terrorists and some of those who support them seek the ability to deliver death and destruction to our doorstep via missile. And we must have the freedom and the flexibility to develop effective defenses against those attacks," Bush said.

Cato Institute defense analysts Ivan Eland and Charles Peņa offered the following comments on the President's announcement:

"We support the development of a limited national missile defense to protect the U.S. homeland and acknowledge that withdrawal from the ABM Treaty eventually may be necessary. But now is not the time to make that decision.

"First, the testing program for the most mature elements of a limited land-based missile defense system is still in its infancy. The results to date are largely positive and promising. But it is too early to make a deployment decision, which would require either amending, renegotiating or withdrawing from the treaty. Adequate testing of a limited land-based system can continue within the constraints of the treaty. Therefore, there is no immediately compelling reason to unilaterally withdraw from the treaty.

"Second, President Bush claims that the ABM Treaty "hinders our government's ability to develop ways to protect our people from future terrorist or rogue-state missile attacks." However, ballistic missiles are the least likely means by which terrorists would attack the United States because missiles provide an immediately known point of origin, which would result in immediate U.S. retaliation. If a threat from rogue states (e.g., Iran, Iraq, and North Korea) emerges, it will not materialize for a number of years. Since both the threat and a thoroughly tested limited land-based missile defense system are still in the future, the United States does not need to abandon the ABM Treaty now. It can continue testing until a well-informed deployment decision can be made."

Bush Invokes Executive Privilege in Mob-FBI Case

President Bush invoked executive privilege today for the first time in his administration to block a congressional committee trying to review documents about a decades-long scandal involving FBI misuse of mob informants in Boston, according to The New York Times.

Bush's action produced angry criticism from the chairman of the committee, Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana, a fellow Republican. At the same time, several of the committee's Democrats agreed at a hearing today that Mr. Bush's decision was an excessive use of executive power. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) even offered an unexpected tribute to Burton for his persistence in seeking the documents about the FBI's behavior in Boston.

The subpoena the White House denied concerns a well-documented scandal in which FBI agents had a close relationship with two mobsters long notorious in Irish-dominated South Boston, James Bulger and Stephen Flemmi.

Last month, the Cato Instiute hosted a forum for Boston Globe reporter Ralp Ranalli's new book, "Deadly Alliance: The FBI's Secret Partnership with the Mob." Panelists discussed how the FBI's unorthodox informant program went awry and its policy implications. Video of the event is available online.

Senate Still Slow on Judicial Confirmations

The Senate moved yesterday toward confirming its last judges of the year, as Republicans renewed their complaints about Democratic treatment of President Bush's judicial and non-judicial nominees, according to the Associated Press.

The Senate confirmed three U.S. District Court judges, while the Senate Judiciary Committee sent five more District Court nominees to the full chamber for confirmation in what senators expect to be its last hearing of the year.

In "Craving Comity ... And Losing at Hardball," Vice President for Legal Affairs Roger Pilon explains that "this year there have been 117 vacancies on the federal courts -- half the seats on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals are now vacant. The president has thus far nominated 60 candidates to fill those vacancies. Yet only 12 of those nominees have been confirmed by the Senate, and two of those were Democratic holdovers from the Clinton years, renominated by President Bush as a gesture to the Democrats. Some of the most qualified candidates have languished since early May; yet the Senate Judiciary Committee, controlled by the Democrats since late May, has refused even to hold hearings on their nominations."

"What Democrats have done instead is try to thoroughly politicize the confirmation process," Pilon says.