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.
Transition in Iraq: The July 1 Deadline and Beyond
Featuring John Hendren, Los Angeles Times; Amb. Edward Peck, Former Chief of Mission in Baghdad; Christopher Preble, Cato Institute and Johanna Mendelson-Forman, UN Foundation.
The Bush administration insists that the United States will meet the July 1 deadline for handing the government of Iraq to the Iraqi people. But many important issues remain unresolved, including the question of the new government being picked by appointed caucuses (the U.S. plan) or by direct elections (called for by the leading Shiite cleric, Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani). As the deadline gets closer, the administration seems to be moving further away from its original vision of a democratic Iraq in America’s image. And two parties previously excluded from the process—the United Nations and Ayatollah Sistani—are now seen as key to the success of the transition. But even if the July 1 deadline is met, the question of a continued U.S. military presence still looms. How much responsibility does the United States have for rebuilding Iraq? Should the United Nations be more involved? What are the implications for U.S. foreign policy and the war on terrorism?