Monday Links
- Obama spoke on Wall Street today about increasing regulation of the American financial system. But did deregulation really cause the financial crisis?
- Burnt rubber: Obama’s decision to slap a 35 percent tariff on Chinese tires whiffs of senseless protectionism.
- According to the Economic Freedom in the World report, the U.S. was ranked the second-freest economy in 2000. It has fallen to 6th place this year.
- A bold exit strategy for Afghanistan.
- Why it’s time for the U.S. to start doing less abroad.
- Podcast: China’s economy is on track to be larger than the U.S. economy in a few years. Trade expert Dan Griswold says, “So what?”
Hillary: The Movie
The Supreme Court is soon to hear a case that may drastically roll back campaign finance regulation in the United States:
The case involves “Hillary: The Movie,” a mix of advocacy journalism and political commentary that is a relentlessly negative look at Mrs. Clinton’s character and career. The documentary was made by a conservative advocacy group called Citizens United, which lost a lawsuit against the Federal Election Commission seeking permission to distribute it on a video-on-demand service. The film is available on the Internet and on DVD. The issue was that the McCain-Feingold law bans corporate money being used for electioneering.
The right position for the Court is that McCain-Feingold, and all other campaign finance regulation, constitutes unconstitutional limitation on free speech. This means reversing the Court’s 1974 Buckley v. Valeo decision, which held that government limits on campaign spending were unconstitutional but limits on contributions were not.
This distinction is meaningless. If it is OK for a millionaire to spend his own money promoting his own campaign, why can he not give that money to someone else, who might be a more effective advocate for that millionaire’s views, so that this other person can run for office?
More broadly, campaign finance regulation is thought control: it takes a position on whether money should influence political outcomes. Whether or not one agrees, this is only one possible view, and freedom of speech is meant to prevent government from promoting or discouraging particular points of view.
It would be a brave step for Court to reverse Buckley, but it is the right thing to do.
For more background on the case, watch this:
C/P Libertarianism, from A to Z
Bob Barr on Drug Reform
President Obama’s new drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske, says he wants to banish the idea of a “war on drugs” because the federal government should not be “at war with the people of this country.”
At a Cato policy briefing on Capitol Hill on July 7, former Republican congressman Bob Barr, once a leading drug warrior in the House, explained why carrying out an end to the “war on drugs” will require a bipartisan solution.
Gun Free School Zone Follies
As I have noted before, “gun free” zones are an exercise in fantasy. To some, a place without guns sounds like a great place to live. Unfortunately, others think they sound like a great place to plunder.
Some recent developments highlight the ability of armed citizens to defend themselves and how localized gun bans near schools or on universities make victims of law-abiding citizens.
A group of Georgia college students at a birthday party owe their lives to the fact that one of them had a gun. (H/T Of Arms & the Law) Two gunmen burst in to the apartment and separated males and females into different rooms. The gunmen began discussing whether they had enough bullets to kill everyone at the party. One of the students pulled a gun from his backpack and shot at the home invader holding the men, chasing the gunman out of the apartment. The armed student went to the next room, where the other gunman was preparing to rape his girlfriend. The student shot the second gunman, killing him.
If the birthday party had been in a dorm, the student probably would have left his gun at home because of the Georgia statute that bans guns on campus. The students would likely be dead as a result.
A second story comes from Wisconsin, one of the two states with no provision allowing for concealed carry. A man on a bicycle was hit and thrown to the ground by four young men. The bicyclist was carrying a handgun openly, a practice approved by the Wisconsin Attorney General. The bicyclist drew his revolver, pointed it in the air and yelled, “gun!” The four assailants fled. The bicyclist flagged down a police officer to report the incident.
The positive outcome to this story is countered by the fact that the bicyclist was accosted within 1,000 feet of a school. His possession of a gun is criminalized by both Wisconsin and federal statutes.
Although the local district attorney said that the bicyclist will not be prosecuted, the Milwaukee police chief and other Wisconsin law enforcement officials have promised to focus additional scrutiny on persons who openly carry a firearm.
All of this highlights the folly of “gun free” school zones. Using the law to target citizens who will not be protected by the police is a perverse policy. It gives thugs every incentive to focus their criminal activities in the areas around the schools the legislation intends to protect.
End the Drug War. Just Do It.
Obama’s new drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske, in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, says it is time to move away from the “war” rhetoric surrounding federal drug policy. Since Kerlikowske has just assumed office, this is exactly the right thing to do — set a whole new tone from the militarized approach we have seen over the past 20-30 years.
Drug abuse is a problem that must be dealt with, but we don’t need to send troops to Latin America, we don’t need former generals like Barry McCaffrey to oversee drug policy, and we don’t need police officers conducting raids on American homes with machine guns and flash bang grenades.
The political climate on drug policy is shifting. Republican governors like Arnold Schwarzenegger are calling for an open debate on legalizing marijuana. New York is finally discarding its Rockefeller drug laws. And Latin American leaders are urging the U.S. to reverse course. Obama seems interested in a new direction but the appointment of a sensible law enforcement official like Kerlikowske and talk of “more treatment” is not enough. We need more decisive action away from the criminalized approach to drug policy. The time is right to just do it.
For Cato research on this subject, go here.
White House Czar Calls for End to ‘War on Drugs’
This morning in The Wall Street Journal:
The Obama administration’s new drug czar says he wants to banish the idea that the U.S. is fighting “a war on drugs,” a move that would underscore a shift favoring treatment over incarceration in trying to reduce illicit drug use.
…Gil Kerlikowske, the new White House drug czar, signaled Wednesday his openness to rethinking the government’s approach to fighting drug use.
Mr. Kerlikowske’s comments are a signal that the Obama administration is set to follow a more moderate — and likely more controversial — stance on the nation’s drug problems.
…The Obama administration is likely to deal with drugs as a matter of public health rather than criminal justice alone, with treatment’s role growing relative to incarceration, Mr. Kerlikowske said.
Well, that’s at least a modest step in the right direction. However, I want to see how policies change (if they do) under the Obama administration. A change in terminology won’t mean much if the authorities still routinely throw people in jail for violating drug laws.
As for the international war on drugs, everyone in the Washington area is welcome to join us this Friday on Capitol Hill to discuss the consequences of the war on drugs abroad.
Filed under: Foreign Policy and National Security; General; Law and Civil Liberties
One Step Closer to Gambling Online?
Following on from the mildly good news of a few weeks ago, Barney Frank (D, MA) has announced that he will introduce a bill tomorrow to roll back current restrictions on gambling online (the restrictions are made operative by bans on U.S. banks from processing transactions to and from gambling websites). Although the details of the bill are yet to be released, this here article contains some good analysis.
Cato on Facebook
Cato on Twitter
Cato on YouTube
Cato Tweets