Cato Daily Dispatch for December 17, 2002
Subscribe to the Daily Dispatch via email
Subscribe to the Daily Dispatch via PDA (AvantGo)
(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.)
Majority of Americans Support Immigration ReductionLibrarians Ponder Role in War on Terror
U.S. Has 'Problems' with Iraq's Weapons Declaration
Majority of Americans Support Immigration Reduction
According to The Washington Times, "Sixty percent of Americans believe present immigration levels are a 'critical threat to the vital interests of the United States,' but only 14 percent of the nation's leaders think so, a new analysis finds.
"And when asked whether immigration levels should be kept the same, increased or reduced, 55 percent of Americans opted for a reduction, while 18 percent of 'elites' thought so, according to a report being released today from the Center for Immigration Studies.
"The center advocates lower legal immigration and a stronger effort to prevent and expel illegal immigrants. They say the polls show that the public agrees with them. Those who defend the current immigration levels say their surveys reveal the opposite."
In the "Cato Handbook for the 107th Congress" (pdf), Dan Griswold, associate director of Cato's Center for Trade Policy Studies, writes, "The best long-term solution to illegal immigration from Mexico is sustained growth south of the border to create sufficient opportunities at home for Mexican workers. Meanwhile, the United States and Mexico should take steps toward a more open border across which citizens of both countries can eventually move freely and legally."
Librarians Ponder Role in War on Terror
USA Today reports, "At New York City's Queens Borough Public Library, director Gary Strong is an uneasy draftee on the front line of the war on terrorism.
"New surveillance legislation that has made it easier for FBI agents to obtain search warrants for library records has created a dilemma for librarians such as Strong: Should they unquestioningly help agents track what a patron has been reading, and perhaps help prevent a terrorist attack? Or should they resist, and try to protect individual liberties and the library's status as a haven of intellectual inquiry?"
"If administration critics have a single overriding concern about policies adopted in the wake of 9/11, it is this: The president and the attorney general have concentrated too much unchecked authority in the hands of the executive branch--compromising the doctrine of separation of powers, which has been a cornerstone of our Constitution for more than two centuries," writes Robert A. Levy, Cato Institute senior fellow in constitutional studies, in "Why Civil Libertarians Are Concerned". "Those persons who would unhesitatingly tradeoff civil liberties in return for national security proclaim that concentrated power is necessary for Americans to remain free. Yet there's an obvious corollary that's too often missed: Unless Americans remain free, they will never be secure."
U.S. Has 'Problems' with Iraq's Weapons Declaration
The Financial Times reports, "United Nations weapons inspectors are expected on Tuesday to circulate an edited version of Iraq's weapons declaration to the 10 non-permanent members of the Security Council, as Colin Powell, secretary of state, warned the United States had 'problems' with the document.
"Powell, giving the first official U.S. response to the document, yesterday told reporters: 'We said at the very beginning that we approached it with skepticism and the information I have received so far is that that scepticism is well-founded. There are problems with the declaration.'
"UN diplomats expect the United States to say the document constitutes a material breach, but not necessarily a cause for war. But the UK, France, and Russia have said that they will take guidance from the UN weapons inspectors before judging.
In a Cato Policy Analysis out today, "Why the United States Should Not Attack Iraq" ), Cato Director of Defense Policy Studies Ivan Eland and Bernard Gourley, an independent policy analyst, write, "Despite the furor over Hussein in the world media, there is no reason to believe that removing him from power is critical to American national security."
They go on to say that "the Bush administration should keep an eye on Iraq's actions and should maintain a deterrence posture vis-à-vis Hussein's regime, but the benefits of war with Iraq are unlikely to outweigh the costs."
Wyatt Dubois, editor, wdubois@cato.org
/div>