Cato Event Podcast

Argentina’s chronically undisciplined monetary and fiscal policies have resulted in economic stagnation and recurring debt crises, devaluations, and defaults. This year, the inflation rate has surpassed 100 percent. The leading presidential candidate, Javier Milei, has proposed dollarization as a necessary policy to fix the economy. Economist Emilio Ocampo, Milei’s adviser on dollarization, will explain the need for Argentina to replace the peso with the dollar and discuss how the country can accomplish that goal. He will address issues related to monetary sovereignty, the sufficiency of reserves to carry out the reform, and central bank debt. Manuel Hinds will draw on the successful dollarization of El Salvador that he implemented in 2001 and that of other dollarized countries in the region to provide remarks on the particular case of Argentina. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The United States has traditionally taken a more permissionless approach to new technologies, allowing entrepreneurs to connect directly with consumers in the market, while Europe has taken a more regulatory approach that requires government approval first.Europe seems to be continuing its more regulatory approach when it comes to AI, but will the United States continue its less regulatory one? What impact might regulations around issues like privacy or content moderation have on the development of AI around the globe? With the EU and UK already acting on AI, is the United States risking losing global policy leadership through its policy inaction?Like many general‐​purpose technologies, we should be hesitant of the rush to regulate AI out of fear or disruption. We also must consider the benefits as well as risks when it comes to new technologies and their accompanying policy framework. How can we take the lessons of the United States’ leadership in technology and technology in the past and apply them to this latest technology? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On July 7, 2023, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Labor, and the Department of the Treasury released a notice of proposed rulemaking to modify the definition of short‐​term, limited‐​duration insurance. During this policy forum, Michael F. Cannon and Brian Blase will discuss why the proposed rule would adversely impact individuals by eliminating consumer protections, which would throw sick patients out of their health insurance and leave them to face sky‐​high medical bills without insurance for up to a year. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A prominent narrative claims that global inequality is increasing as improvements in the standard of living accrue mainly to a small elite, leaving much of the world’s population behind and even worse off than before. But is this true? Chelsea Follett and Vincent Geloso will discuss their work on a new, more comprehensive way of measuring global inequality, the Inequality of Human Progress Index, and their recent findings showing that global inequality is in fact shrinking. They will argue that the evidence demonstrates that the world is not only better off than many people appreciate but that it is also far more equal. Nicholas Eberstadt will provide comments on how to best assess the true state of global inequality. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Part three of this year’s Summer with Sphere series is all about preparing for the upcoming school year! As you think about how you will set your students up for success from their classroom environment to their curriculum for the year, consider the benefits of implementing strategies that foster civil discourse into your approach. In this webinar, we will equip you with tools and resources that will help you effectively embed healthy habits of conversation into your classroom experience for students through class norm setting, learning environment, and fostering a strong home‐​to‐​school connection at the start of the year. You will hear from Sphere’s Content Development Manager Elyse Alter about engaging interdisciplinary classroom content you can supplement your current curriculum with and Sphere’s Educator Engagement Specialist John Snoad about professional development opportunities available to you and your school with Sphere on the Road Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The United States has been a leader in the innovative technology sector. Its light touch policy approach has been key to allowing innovation to flourish and brought benefits to consumers both domestically and internationally.Increasingly, however, the highly regulatory approach seen in the EU and UK is both formally and informally impacting the approach these leading tech companies must take on issues including speech, privacy, and competition.How should we think about the “Brussels Effect” in technology, and what does this mean for American policy, American companies, and American citizens? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Why has the health sector of the economy uniquely resisted changes in products, productivity, and services that improve consumer satisfaction or reduce prices and spending? One reason, according to the book Seemed Like a Good Idea: Alchemy versus Evidence‐​Based Approaches to Healthcare Management Innovation, is that decisionmaking on medical delivery or insurance innovations is often not evidence‐​based and sometimes contradictory to evidence. This book explores reasons why the health sector lacks such evidence and why managers often don’t use the evidence that does exist. Please join us for a discussion with the authors and Cato director of health policy studies Michael F. Cannon that will explore government policies that cause producers and consumers to leave money on the table. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Recent legislation in Congress has proposed designating Mexican cartels as Foreign Terrorist Organizations; pushing the administration to designate fentanyl precursor chemicals as chemical weapons; and even authorizing the use of military force in Mexico. As the fentanyl crisis persists in the United States, several Republican presidential candidates have echoed these calls for using the U.S. military to combat fentanyl. What would these bills and proposals do, practically? What are the likely consequences of using the U.S. military in this way? And what policies hold greater hope of lessening the harm of fentanyl inside the United States? Please join our panel for an examination of these and other pressing questions surrounding proposals for militarizing the drug war at the border. A happy hour reception will follow. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As fertility rates fall in much of the world, many policymakers are considering expensive policies intended to raise birth rates and support families more broadly. But do those policies work, and should government play a role in trying to reverse this trend? And is the best way to support families an expansion in government programs or it is simply getting government out of parents’ way? Experts on fertility and family policy, Vanessa Brown Calder, Chelsea Follett, Julie Gunlock, and Elizabeth Nolan Brown will address these critical issues. In addition to discussing fertility trends, participants will consider government policies that make it difficult for parents to obtain the flexibility, resources, and peace of mind needed to thrive in their roles, including policies that drive up the cost of housing, childcare, and other family essentials. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On July 27, 1953, an armistice took effect, pausing the Korean War. Although much has changed over the last 70 years—North Korea becoming a nuclear state, South Korea becoming a democracy and major economic power, and China becoming Asia’s dominant force—the war remains frozen. Today, escalating tensions, including a shift in the U.S.-South Korea alliance toward competition with China, are creating new challenges to peace and stability on the Korean peninsula. As the Korean War armistice turns 70, how can the United States best prevent conflict and preserve peace?Our second panel focuses on North Korea and how the United States can move beyond the armistice to a more durable peace regime. How can the United States advance this worthy goal given the current nuclear impasse? What can the United States do to revive diplomacy with North Korea? Does a focus on denuclearization blind Washington to other opportunities, including arms control, and if so, how should the United States proceed? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On July 27, 1953, an armistice took effect, pausing the Korean War. Although much has changed over the last 70 years—North Korea becoming a nuclear state, South Korea becoming a democracy and major economic power, and China becoming Asia’s dominant force—the war remains frozen. Today, escalating tensions, including a shift in the U.S.-South Korea alliance toward competition with China, are creating new challenges to peace and stability on the Korean peninsula. As the Korean War armistice turns 70, how can the United States best prevent conflict and preserve peace?Our first panel examines pressing topics in the U.S.-South Korea relationship. How is the rise of China affecting alliance management? Will growing protectionism in the United States hurt both countries’ economies? Do recent South Korean calls for nuclear weapons undermine the U.S. defense commitment? Is extended deterrence in America’s interest? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On July 27, 1953, an armistice took effect, pausing the Korean War. Although much has changed over the last 70 years—North Korea becoming a nuclear state, South Korea becoming a democracy and major economic power, and China becoming Asia’s dominant force—the war remains frozen. Today, escalating tensions, including a shift in the U.S.-South Korea alliance toward competition with China, are creating new challenges to peace and stability on the Korean peninsula. As the Korean War armistice turns 70, how can the United States best prevent conflict and preserve peace?Representative Brad Sherman (D‑CA) will begin the event with a keynote address via live teleconference on legislative efforts to replace the armistice with a peace treaty. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Biden administration recently launched ambitious private sponsorship programs for Ukrainians, Venezuelans, Haitians, Cubans, and Nicaraguans, which could be the largest expansion of legal migration in decades. These initiatives create new legal opportunities for Americans to sponsor foreigners from these troubled countries for legal entry and residence in the United States. The new entry categories have already facilitated hundreds of thousands of legal entries and are helping reduce unlawful migration across the U.S.-Mexico border. What is the sponsorship experience like? How can the government improve upon these policies? What can be done to expand the program to immigrants from other countries? Explore these issues and others with Cato’s panel of experts. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This year has seen an explosion of new, big, school choice initiatives. Most important have been education savings account (ESA) programs, which offer the most freedom of any school choice vehicle by allowing parents to apply funds to everything from tutoring, to science equipment, to private school tuition. But with this comes many challenges, and the sudden takeoff of ESAs might leave people who are tasked with implementing them scrambling.In this forum, we will tackle the challenges of implementing ESAs with people who have thought hard about it, who have done it, and who are doing it now. Among the difficulties we’ll tackle are spreading the word about ESAs; helping families unaccustomed to school choice navigate a new way of obtaining education; ensuring funds are used for legitimate educational purposes (including defining what constitutes “legitimate”); and dealing with possible misrepresentations of ESA uses and outcomes by choice opponents.We hope you’ll join us as we discuss implementing the school choice revolution. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This year has seen an explosion of new, big, school choice initiatives. Most important have been education savings account (ESA) programs, which offer the most freedom of any school choice vehicle by allowing parents to apply funds to everything from tutoring, to science equipment, to private school tuition. But with this comes many challenges, and the sudden takeoff of ESAs might leave people who are tasked with implementing them scrambling.In this forum, we will tackle the challenges of implementing ESAs with people who have thought hard about it, who have done it, and who are doing it now. Among the difficulties we’ll tackle are spreading the word about ESAs; helping families unaccustomed to school choice navigate a new way of obtaining education; ensuring funds are used for legitimate educational purposes (including defining what constitutes “legitimate”); and dealing with possible misrepresentations of ESA uses and outcomes by choice opponents.We hope you’ll join us as we discuss implementing the school choice revolution. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From cases about free speech and religion, to the role of affirmative action in college admissions, this year’s Supreme Court docket covered some of the most important issues in America. Join Sphere Education Initiatives and a panel of Constitutional scholars to explore the major decisions of the court. Covering both the arguments of the majority and the dissents, this conversation will position you to bring these cases to life for your students this fall. This is the first of our four‐​part professional development series, Summer with Sphere ‘23 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The failures of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank have shed light on the need for a major overhaul of the United States’ banking laws. For a century, the government has increased federal backing, regulation, and micromanagement of the financial sector. The approach has repeatedly failed. Yet, after recent bank failures, Congress immediately began flirting with even more federal backing, regulation, and micromanagement. Is there any way out of this vicious cycle?Join us for a conversation with Jeb Hensarling, former chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and Jelena McWilliams, former chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as they discuss the bank failures, the federal government’s response, and a path forward for banking regulation. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Al Qaeda’s attacks on the United States plunged America into multiple military campaigns abroad in pursuit of the attackers. It also ushered in new surveillance programs before any investigations into the causes of the 9/11 intelligence failure had even begun. The first new, secret mass electronic surveillance program authorized by then president George W. Bush, Stellar Wind, was initiated just days after the attacks and with no judicial notification, much less review, as required by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). In a parallel public track, the Bush administration pushed for and received even more sweeping surveillance authorities via the congressionally approved Patriot Act. By the end of the Bush presidency, the FBI had been granted vast new domestic surveillance powers, gaining authority to open investigations on individuals or groups without needing a criminal basis to do so.The Obama era was marked not by reevaluations of these programs but instead by their continuity and political normalization. The Stellar Wind program was made nominally lawful through the passage of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. And after National Security Agency contractor‐​turned‐​whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed in 2013 secret mass surveillance of Americans’ phone calls under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, Congress passed the USA Freedom Act ostensibly to partially curtail that program. Yet subsequent oversight actions and investigations would find that neither the Stellar Wind program nor the Section 215 telephone metadata surveillance program had stopped a single attack on the United States, all the while accumulating vast reams of information on innocent Americans.Have officials in the executive branch and Congress learned anything from these mistakes and overreaches? How many other surveillance programs and authorities that potentially threaten the privacy and even constitutional rights of Americans have yet to be subjected to meaningful oversight? Our panel will explore these and related issues Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On New Year’s Eve 2023, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act will expire absent congressional action to renew it. This controversial surveillance power was enacted in 2008 following over two years of debate in Congress after its secret, illegal predecessor—the National Security Agency’s Stellar Wind mass electronic surveillance program—was exposed by the New York Times in December 2005. Since that time, Section 702 has been renewed twice—once under President Obama and again under President Trump. And it has been renewed despite repeated, serious violations of the law by the FBI via so‐​called “back door” searches—literally millions of Section 702 database queries by FBI personnel for information on U.S. persons not necessarily wanted for a crime.What do we actually know about the alleged effectiveness of this sweeping surveillance power? What is the scope of the legal and compliance problems with Section 702? Should it be renewed unchanged, retained in modified form, or allowed to expire? Does the narrow focus on Section 702’s fate obscure the larger surveillance reform problems we face? The panel will tackle all these questions. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Extreme political views and speech have been a feature of American political and social life virtually since the founding of the republic. The Founders intended for the First Amendment to protect governmental infringements on speech, but throughout the republic’s history those protections have been breached on multiple occasions. The Alien and Sedition Acts, the Anarchist Exclusion Act, and the Espionage Act are just some of the examples of federal laws that have criminalized certain kinds of speech. But in a landmark 1969 Supreme Court decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio, the high court ruled that speech deemed inflammatory or even threatening could only be prohibited by the government if it is “directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action” and is “likely to incite or produce such action.” Ever since, that decision has provided protection against government attacks on speech by individuals or groups across the political spectrum deemed offensive or politically disfavored.But what happens when adherents of extremist ideologies no longer feel shouting their views is enough? The rise of the Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, John Brown Gun Club chapters, and other organized, armed groups raises the specter of a confrontation that morphs from a shouting match into a firefight in an American community between two ideological, violent factions. Does inflammatory speech always result in real violence? Does the Supreme Court’s decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio still draw the right line between constitutionally protected speech and that which is not? Has the rise and proliferation of social media platforms made the transition from violent speech to violent action easier and faster? Our panelists will examine all these issues and more. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The explosion in the use of facial recognition and other biometric technologies by government and private‐​sector entities has sparked a national debate about such systems. Just over a year ago, a Pew Research Center survey of American attitudes toward artificial intelligence also asked how people felt about law enforcement use of facial recognition. Among those surveyed, 46 percent thought the use of facial recognition by law enforcement is a good idea, even though two‐​thirds of respondents said police “would be able to track everyone’s location at all times and that police would monitor Black and Hispanic neighborhoods much more often than other neighborhoods.”How reliable is facial recognition? Can biases be unconsciously worked into the algorithms that make facial recognition possible? How many cases of mistaken identity have been attributed to facial recognition to date? How does the law at the federal, state, or local level impact the use of biometric technology? Is the technology advancing faster than the law and policy designed to govern its use? What is the state of the Transportation Security Administration’s facial recognition and biometrics programs for air travel? Can a person be forced to put their finger on their phone to open it for law enforcement officers absent a criminal predicate? Can private companies field facial recognition technology for the purpose of deciding who can or cannot buy a product or service, attend a concert, or even enter a building absent a safety concern? Our expert panel will tackle these and related questions. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

There are legitimate concerns about the safety and well‐​being of children online. This has stimulated the interest of policymakers, and numerous legislative and regulatory proposals are being debated. Like many areas, however, civil society—not government—likely holds the best solutions. Government intervention is a blunt instrument and will itself create additional problems—particularly in the areas of freedom of expression and privacy—as compared with individual solutions undertaken by parents and families themselves.This virtual policy forum brings together policy and child safety experts to discuss the risks and benefits young people may experience online and the tools parents and policymakers can consider to encourage a positive online experience and respond to concerns that they may face without sacrificing speech or privacy more generally. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This panel explores the impacts and outcomes of critical social justice ideology on black wellbeing in k‑12 and higher ed. Starting in pre‑K and ending in the university, education that claims to empower students within a liberal arts education often seems disempowering and quite illiberal. This toxic tutelage, according to the team at Free Black Thought, does more harm than good. Hear members of Free Black Thought have a conversation on what needs to be done, what can be done, and what is already being done to combat the detriments of critical social justice pedagogy in our schools.Panelists for this webinar include Dr. Tabia Lee, a founding member of Free Black Thought, Jason Littlefield, executive director of EmpowerED Pathways, Connie Morgan, author and UX researcher, and Erec Smith, associate professor of rhetoric at York College of Pennsylvania and visiting scholar at the Cato Institute. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Letters in Black and White is an epistolary correspondence between a white woman and black man who are both concerned with the condition of contemporary race relations. The book is a defense of classical liberalism as a guiding ideology for understanding and improving race in America. The authors object to the use of race as a rigid identity, especially in schools, universities, and the workplace. As Twyman starts his correspondence with Richmond: “There are 40,000,000 black individuals with 40,000,000 different stories. Not everyone can correspond with everyone else, but we can get to know and see each other as individuals.” And thus starts an extraordinary correspondence across the color line that sees these two strangers become friends as they wrestle with their different ideas; a diversity, equity, and inclusion bureaucracy; and a vocal illiberal minority on how to imagine a new American identity. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In May 2018, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) became effective. The immediate impact was seen in the millions of dollars and man hours spent on compliance; the loss of certain websites or services from the European Union, such as the Los Angeles Times; and changes to user experiences and privacy choices. Advocates of the GDPR have argued that the tradeoffs are worth it for improved cybersecurity and the increased privacy rights of EU citizens, but critics have pointed to the potential impact on other values, such as speech and innovation, and have questioned if the GDPR has actually led to improvements or just increased red tape.Five years on, the impact of the GDPR on Americans and American companies as well as their European counterparts continues to be felt. As the United States debates its own potential federal data privacy law and sees an emerging patchwork of state laws, what lessons can we learn from the GDPR about benefits and consequences of data privacy regulation? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Join us for a discussion of Eric Claeys’s forthcoming book, Natural Property Rights (forthcoming, Cambridge University Press). The book introduces and defends a theory of property relying on labor, natural rights, and traditional principles of natural law. Justified on those grounds, property rights protect individual freedom, but they also help government officials resolve the basic resource conflicts that arise in property law. Natural Property Rights illustrates this with examples from real estate, oil and gas, tangible personal property, water rights, government regulatory and taking powers (and constitutional limits on those). Claeys’s work in this area was recently the focus of a symposium hosted by Texas A&M University’s Journal of Property Law.Matthew Cavedon will respond by commenting on the historical context for John Locke’s work, on which Claeys relies. Cavedon will argue that Spanish Renaissance scholar Francisco Suárez offers nuances regarding the relationship between natural law and property rights that correct for deficiencies in Lockean theory. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Association of American Medical Colleges projects a shortage of as many as 48,000 primary care physicians by 2034. Yet there are not enough residency positions for the number of medical school graduates. Missouri became the first state to address this problem by launching a new licensure category: assistant physician (AP). APs are essentially apprentice physicians. The reform lets graduates without a residency position provide primary care in clinics while enhancing their knowledge and skills. Six other states have passed similar laws: Arkansas, Kansas, Utah, Arizona, Louisiana, and Idaho.Please join Kevin D. Dayaratna, PhD, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis; Keith J. Frederick, DO, a former Missouri legislator who spearheaded the country’s first AP law; and Lyman Wostrel, MD, a primary care physician practicing under Missouri’s AP law, to discuss this issue. Cato Institute senior fellow Jeffrey A. Singer, MD, will moderate the discussion. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Sunday, May 14, NATO’s most controversial ally will hold perhaps its most fateful elections since its founding in 1923. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who has been ruling Turkey for 21 years in an increasingly authoritarian and erratic fashion, may win and drag the nation further toward dictatorship. But there is also a chance that the opposition may win, as the race is tight and as Turkey’s elections are still competitive despite dramatic deterioration in the country’s freedoms and rule of law.Please join us for a discussion of what is at stake just two days prior to what may turn out to be a historic election for Turkey and East‐​West relations. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Join us online for the launch of an inspiring new book from Anthony Sanders of the Institute for Justice, Baby Ninth Amendments: How Americans Embraced Unenumerated Rights and Why It Matters (University of Michigan Press, 2023). The book tells the unheralded story of how Americans carefully sought to protect liberty from overweening government by including in most state constitutions specific provisions (so‐​called Baby Ninths) that expressly protect unenumerated rights.Sanders explains why it is impossible to itemize every right a constitution should protect and shows that however many rights are specifically enumerated, other important rights will inevitably go unmentioned. So what is a constitutional drafter to do? Sanders argues that early in American history, a solution was advanced by drafters of state constitutions in the form of what he calls an “etcetera clause” that contains language borrowed directly from the Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. As a result, two‐​thirds of states today contain these “Baby Ninth Amendments” that even skeptics of unenumerated rights must not only acknowledge but also give meaningful substance to. This has important implications for state courts, which have thus far largely ignored these important provisions, and for the larger question of whether it is ever appropriate—or indeed even mandatory—for judges to protect unenumerated rights. The short answers, as Sanders makes clear, are yes and yes.Clark Neily will talk with Sanders about his new book. Join us online on May 10 at noon. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What is money? What makes money better or worse? And how can the past inform our future? Between the rise of cryptocurrencies and the risks posed by central bank digital currencies, these questions have become more important than ever. The Cato Institute is therefore pleased to welcome both Lawrence White and Dror Goldberg to present their latest books, Better Money: Gold, Fiat, or Bitcoin? and Easy Money: American Puritans and the Invention of Modern Currency, respectively, which seek to answer these questions and more. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Does the future of environmental stewardship depend more on innovation or regulation? In Time to Think Small, Todd Myers argues that protecting the planet requires small, decentralized technologies, like smartphone apps, rather than sweeping top‐​down government programs. The book explores how these brand‐​new approaches are already helping to win some of the most important environmental struggles humanity faces, including fighting climate change, combating pollution in drinking water, protecting endangered animals, and keeping plastic out of the oceans. Personal technologies are transforming how we address environmental challenges by enhancing the power of individuals to conserve nature. This tremendous power is not only growing but also has the benefit of being independent of shifts in political leadership. And while governments act slowly, lightly regulated companies and nonprofits are comparatively nimble innovators in a marketplace of ideas. Can human ingenuity and free enterprise sidestep political gridlock, diplomatic friction, and bureaucracy to create solutions to our most pressing environmental problems? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Over the span of 30 years, NATO went from an alliance of 16 states optimized to contain the Soviet Union to a grouping of 31 (soon to be 32) states spread across Europe, divided by threat perception and capability. In Evaluating NATO Enlargement: From Cold War Victory to the Russia‐​Ukraine War, Cato nonresident senior fellow Joshua Shifrinson and coeditor Jim Goldgeier of the Brookings Institution capture the debates about the effects of NATO enlargement and the alliance’s impact on European and global security. On the eve of NATO’s annual summit and at a time when debates over NATO’s role in the Russia‐​Ukraine war hang over international politics, please join us for an online book forum with Shifrinson, Goldgeier, and two of the volume’s contributors for a discussion of how NATO enlargement has affected U.S. national security, transatlantic politics, and relations with Moscow. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Recently, De Anza Community College fired Tabia Lee as its faculty director for the Office of Equity, Social Justice and Multicultural Education for taking an inclusive and dialogical approach to her job that did not align with the school’s particular version of social justice. What makes this different from others who have lost their jobs for not toeing this ideological line? Lee is black, and she was accused of being a white supremacist. Erec Smith of York College of Pennsylvania has also been vilified for questioning the efficacies of contemporary anti‐​racist theories and practices.In this online forum, Lee and Smith will discuss their experiences and theorizations about being black academics who embrace classical liberal values in academic spaces that seem to grow increasingly hostile to such views, especially from people of color. As cofounders of Free Black Thought, an organization that celebrates viewpoint diversity among black Americans, their perspective may provide a different and nuanced understanding of social justice and anti‐​racist initiatives in higher education (and beyond). Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For longer than modern health insurance has existed—and nearly as long as there has been a federal income tax—the federal tax code has treated employee health benefits differently from cash compensation. Cash compensation is subject to income and payroll taxes. When employers instead pay workers with health insurance, that compensation avoids both types of tax.Economists have argued for decades that Congress should limit or eliminate the tax exclusion for employer‐​sponsored health insurance. They argue that the exclusion distorts labor and health care markets, such as by increasing medical prices and health insurance premiums. Some say the exclusion is the single most harmful federal intervention in health care. Others say it is simply a tax cut that benefits workers by making health care coverage more accessible.Please join our panel of experts to explore the impact of the tax exclusion and whether Congress should reform or end it. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The United States has expansive goals in Europe, the Middle East, and the Indo‐​Pacific, and spends nearly a trillion dollars per year on defense. Yet the strategy is still arguably insolvent. Former Acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller argues that the defense budget should be cut dramatically to support a fundamentally different grand strategy. Please join Secretary Miller and Justin Logan, Cato’s director of defense and foreign policy studies, for a conversation on defense budgets and strategy. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Few 20th‐​century figures have had as much impact, and been so criticized, as Friedrich Hayek—Nobel Prize‐​winning economist, social theorist, leader of the Austrian School of Economics, and champion of classical liberalism.In Hayek: A Life, historians of economics Bruce Caldwell and Hansjoerg Klausinger draw on never‐​before‐​seen archival and family material to produce an authoritative account of Hayek’s first five decades. This includes portrayals of his early career in Vienna; his relationships in London and Cambridge; his family disputes; and definitive accounts of the creation of The Road to Serfdom and of the founding meeting of the Mont Pèlerin Society. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Senator Tim Kaine (D‑VA) will conclude the event with a keynote address covering the efforts to repeal the 1991 and 2002 Authorizations for the Use of Military Force against Iraq. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On March 20th, 2003, the United States and an allied coalition launched a bombing campaign against Iraq and began the Iraq War to overthrow Saddam Hussein. A protracted campaign led to U.S. occupation and nation‐​building long after the fall and capture of Hussein. Twenty years later, the Cato Institute invites you to join us for a discussion about the war and the state of affairs today.Our first panel examines the political climate and context surrounding the run‐​up to war in 2002–2003. To what extent was the debate surrounding the war characterized by groupthink? Does the phrase “marketplace of ideas” accurately describe that debate? What were the major factors shaping that debate, and what were their effects?Our second panel contrasts the climate of opinion in politics and media today with that of 2002–2003. Is there more debate surrounding U.S. foreign policy today than there was then? Why or why not? Are there meaningful constraints on executive action in foreign policy from Congress, the media, or elsewhere? What are the keys to a productive debate about security policy? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On March 20th, 2003, the United States and an allied coalition launched a bombing campaign against Iraq and began the Iraq War to overthrow Saddam Hussein. A protracted campaign led to U.S. occupation and nation‐​building long after the fall and capture of Hussein. Twenty years later, the Cato Institute invites you to join us for a discussion about the war and the state of affairs today.Our first panel examines the political climate and context surrounding the run‐​up to war in 2002–2003. To what extent was the debate surrounding the war characterized by groupthink? Does the phrase “marketplace of ideas” accurately describe that debate? What were the major factors shaping that debate, and what were their effects?Our second panel contrasts the climate of opinion in politics and media today with that of 2002–2003. Is there more debate surrounding U.S. foreign policy today than there was then? Why or why not? Are there meaningful constraints on executive action in foreign policy from Congress, the media, or elsewhere? What are the keys to a productive debate about security policy? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Parents and pundits have expressed concerns about the online content young people are consuming as well as their overall online experience. Policymakers have responded by introducing various regulatory proposals they feel will improve children and teenagers’ online safety. For example, President Biden highlighted the impact of technology on young people and expressed a desire to improve their online privacy in his State of the Union address in February. Legislative proposals focused on improving child online safety have been introduced in the United Kingdom, Congress, and various U.S. states, but there are also concerns that these proposals will negatively impact online speech and privacy. Are these proposals a solution to children’s online safety, or do they create new issues for parents and young people? Join us as we discuss these policy developments and their potential consequences. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As deaths from drug overdoses and drug‐​related diseases continue increasing, policymakers in cities across the United States have become more willing to consider implementing overdose prevention centers (OPCs) as the next step toward a more effective harm reduction strategy. For more than 30 years, OPCs have prevented overdose deaths, HIV and hepatitis, and other diseases and helped people with substance use disorder find treatment. OPCs, also known as safe consumption sites or drug consumption rooms, began in Europe in the mid‐​1980s. Governments and harm reduction organizations now operate OPCs in 16 developed countries, including many European countries, Canada, Mexico, and Australia. Unfortunately, a federal law that prosecutors and harm reduction opponents call the “crack house” statute makes them illegal in the United States. Yet New York City sanctions two such facilities in defiance of federal law.Joining us to discuss the worldwide experience with OPCs, and to share data and experiences at sanctioned OPCs in North America, are Chelsea Boyd, research fellow in the R Street Institute’s integrated harm reduction program; Darwin Fisher, Senior Program Manager at PHS Community Services Society in Vancouver, British Columbia, and manager of Insite, North America’s oldest sanctioned overdose prevention center; and Kailin See, Senior Director of Programs for OnPoint NYC and program and development lead for New York City’s two sanctioned overdose prevention centers, the first approved OPCs in the United States. Cato Institute senior fellow Jeffrey A. Singer will moderate the discussion. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Interest in central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) has dramatically increased over the past few years. What was once limited to passing ideas in academic papers has now become a leading policy discussion. Yet with it has also come a growing concern for the future of freedom. Will CBDCs spell doom for financial privacy? Do they pose a fundamental threat to the banking system? And how should policymakers think about the future of money?The Cato Institute is pleased to welcome Representative Tom Emmer (R‑MN) to provide an opening address as the first member of Congress to introduce legislation prohibiting the Fed from launching a retail CBDC. Following Rep. Emmer’s address, Norbert Michel, vice president and director of the Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives at Cato, will moderate a panel discussion with Greg Baer, Christina Skinner, Christian Kameir, and Nicholas Anthony. Come join us on March 9 for this important conversation. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Freedom of the press is a cornerstone of our democratic political system. But reporters, pundits, and editors face intense pressure to adopt and amplify government messages in their coverage of U.S. foreign policy. In Unreliable Watchdog, Ted Galen Carpenter focuses on the nature and extent of the American news media’s willingness to accept official accounts and policy justifications, too often throwing skepticism aside. Unreliable Watchdog jump‐​starts a badly needed conversation about how the press must improve its coverage of foreign policy and national security issues if it is to serve its proper role for the American people. Join us as the author and discussant explore why so many journalists―as well as social media platforms―seem willing to collaborate with government officials in pushing an activist foreign policy. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.