Featuring Cato Institute Interns; and Heritage Foundation Interns; with an introduction by Mark Houser, Student Programs Coordinator, Cato Institute; moderated by Christopher Bedford, Senior Editor, Daily Caller.
A limited constitutional government calls for a rules-based, freemarket monetary system, not the topsy-turvy fiat dollar that now exists under central banking. This issue of the Cato Journal examines the case for alternatives to central banking and the reforms needed to move toward free-market money.
The more widespread use of body cameras will make it easier for the American public to better understand how police officers do their jobs and under what circumstances they feel that it is necessary to resort to deadly force.
Americans are finally enjoying an improving economy after years of recession and slow growth. The unemployment rate is dropping, the economy is expanding, and public confidence is rising. Surely our economic crisis is behind us. Or is it? In Going for Broke: Deficits, Debt, and the Entitlement Crisis, Cato scholar Michael D. Tanner examines the growing national debt and its dire implications for our future and explains why a looming financial meltdown may be far worse than anyone expects.
The Cato Institute has released its 2014 Annual Report, which documents a dynamic year of growth and productivity. “Libertarianism is not just a framework for utopia,” Cato’s David Boaz writes in his book, The Libertarian Mind. “It is the indispensable framework for the future.” And as the new report demonstrates, the Cato Institute, thanks largely to the generosity of our Sponsors, is leading the charge to apply this framework across the policy spectrum.
Featuring Alan Gura, Gura & Possessky, Lead Counsel, District of Columbia v. Heller; Robert Levy, Chairman, Cato Institute, Co-counsel, District of Columbia v. Heller; Clark Neily, Senior Attorney, Institute for Justice, Co-counsel, District of Columbia v. Heller; and Emily Miller, Senior Editor, Washington Times, Author, Emily Gets Her Gun (forthcoming, Regnery); moderated by Tim Lynch, Director, Project on Criminal Justice, Cato Institute.
Five years ago, the Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. By a 5-4 vote, the Court ruled that the strict gun-control laws in the nation’s capital—which amounted to a complete ban on any usable weapon for self-protection, even in the home—were unconstitutional. The Court finally confronted a long-simmering controversy over the scope of the Second Amendment and declared that, yes, that amendment does secure an individual the right to keep and bear arms. Now, five years later, with gun controls being debated both in the Congress and state legislatures, it is a good time to assess the impact of the Heller precedent. Please join us for a wide-ranging discussion of the Second Amendment, self-defense, and the right to keep and bear arms.