Featuring Dorothy Robyn, Senior Policy Expert, Clinton and Obama Administrations; Stephen Van Beek, Vice President of Aviation Consulting, ICF International; and Chris Edwards, Editor, DownsizingGovernment.org, Cato Institute; moderated by Peter Russo, Director of Congressional Affairs, Cato Institute.
Of all the rights the U.S. Constitution protects, courts are probably most vigilant about protecting free speech. Freedom of expression is not only a cornerstone of democratic government, but also central to the more ordinary choices citizens make in their daily lives. Yet one class of speech has been almost entirely ignored by the courts: speech by professionals engaged in their business. In the new issue of Regulation, Cato scholar Timothy Sandefur argues that the Supreme Court should make it clear that censoring professionals is intolerable.
Published in the wake of the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Kelo v. New London, Cornerstone of Liberty: Property Rights in 21st Century America made a powerful contribution to the firestorm of interest in protecting property rights. Now in its second edition, Cornerstone of Liberty has been fully updated by authors Timothy and Christina Sandefur, and examines how dozens of new developments in courtrooms and legislatures across the country have shifted the landscape of private property rights since 2005.
The Cato Institute has released its 2014 Annual Report, which documents a dynamic year of growth and productivity. “Libertarianism is the philosophy of freedom,” 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.
Spending Cuts or Devaluation? Resolving the Financial Crisis in the Baltic Countries
Featuring Anders Aslund, Senior Fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics; and Desmond Lachman, Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; moderated by Marian L. Tupy, Policy Analyst, Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity.
In his new book, The Last Shall Be the First, Anders Aslund argues that the governments of the Baltic countries were right to respond to the 2008 financial crisis by slashing spending, while maintaining a fully fixed exchange rate between their domestic currencies and the euro. According to Aslund, this “internal devaluation” allowed the Baltics to quickly return to growth. Desmond Lachman contends that the sharp decline in the GDP in the Baltics in 2009 would not have happened if, instead of austerity measures, the Baltic governments had abandoned fixed exchange rates in favor of currency devaluation. Which of these two approaches is correct — and does the solution of the crisis in the Baltic countries hold any lessons for the United States and the European Union? Please join us for a spirited discussion.