Cato Events Podcast

The legal sale of recreational marijuana remains limited to a handful of states, but 29 states plus the District of Columbia allow the prescription and distribution of medical marijuana. Ten of those states—which represent 115 electoral votes—went for President Trump in the 2016 election. National polling shows that just over half of Americans favor marijuana legalization, but a much larger majority want the federal government to leave marijuana alone in states where it is legal.

While candidate Trump promised to protect medical marijuana on the campaign trail, President Trump's Justice Department wants to be more aggressive against state-legal marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Ultimately, Congress holds the reins on the Department of Justice's ability to enforce particular provisions of the CSA and determines which substances should be under federal control.

While marijuana decriminalization is often thought to be a Democrat-friendly topic, some of the best arguments for federal recognition of state marijuana policy rest in traditional Republican values of federalism, deference to local policy choices, and a limited federal government. Moreover, businesses that have no direct ties to cannabis cultivation or distribution like banks and financial institutions can benefit from clear federal rules that tolerate state-legal marijuana transactions.

Join us for a lunchtime discussion to explore several ways Congress can reshape federal marijuana policy in a manner that is more consistent both with public opinion and the conservative values of limited government, federalism, and local policymaking.

A key question in debates over whether states should implement Obamacare's Medicaid expansion, and whether Congress should repeal Obamacare entirely, is whether government expansions of health insurance coverage improve health, and if so, how much. A new study by Bernard Black and colleagues finds that the uninsured "consume fewer healthcare services, but their health (while alive) does not deteriorate relative to the insured, and, in our central estimates, they do not die significantly faster than the insured." Come hear Professor Black and leading scholars discuss one of the most important but least understood aspects of health reform.

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

A key question in debates over whether states should implement Obamacare's Medicaid expansion, and whether Congress should repeal Obamacare entirely, is whether government expansions of health insurance coverage improve health, and if so, how much. A new study by Bernard Black and colleagues finds that the uninsured "consume fewer healthcare services, but their health (while alive) does not deteriorate relative to the insured, and, in our central estimates, they do not die significantly faster than the insured." Come hear Professor Black and leading scholars discuss one of the most important but least understood aspects of health reform.

Why is Westeros mired in 8,000 years of economic stagnation? Should Daenerys firebomb King's Landing to prevent a longer war? The world of Game of Thrones is teeming with fascinating interactions between institutions, incentives, and power that creates a sweeping geopolitical mega-saga just begging to be theorized. An examination of these issues through the lens of economics, law, international relations, and power politics promises to be both instructive and entertaining. The day after the Season 7 finale airs, join the Cato Institute and the R Street Institute in an exploration of the intrigue and game theory (and inevitable analogies to our current political landscape) that pervade the world of ice and fire.

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

Why is Westeros mired in 8,000 years of economic stagnation? Should Daenerys firebomb King's Landing to prevent a longer war? The world of Game of Thrones is teeming with fascinating interactions between institutions, incentives, and power that creates a sweeping geopolitical mega-saga just begging to be theorized. An examination of these issues through the lens of economics, law, international relations, and power politics promises to be both instructive and entertaining. The day after the Season 7 finale airs, join the Cato Institute and the R Street Institute in an exploration of the intrigue and game theory (and inevitable analogies to our current political landscape) that pervade the world of ice and fire.

What are the biggest challenges facing U.S. foreign policy? While much of the current foreign policy debate in Washington and around the world is focused on the Trump administration, policymakers must also look further ahead in order to address potential conflicts and issues that will shape the world in the first half of the 21st century.From the Middle East to Russia to the rise of China, world affairs and the U.S. role in it is constantly changing.  Indeed, the world has changed a great deal since the Cato Institute was founded 40 years ago. This discussion presents an opportunity to explore the next 40 years and how Cato scholars plan to approach these issues.  Emma Ashford, research fellow in the defense and foreign policy studies department, and John Glaser, associate director of foreign policy studies, will join the 40th Anniversary Sponsor e-Briefing Series to offer their thoughts on the biggest challenges and opportunities facing U.S. foreign policy and address your questions.  They look forward to your participation, which will guide this thought-provoking discussion.The 40th Anniversary e-Briefing Series offers Cato Sponsors a special opportunity to engage with Cato’s leadership and scholars as the Institute commemorates this milestone while also examining the future of liberty and achieving our mission of creating a free society. Forty years ago, the Cato Institute opened its doors as a new public policy research organization dedicated to liberty. Today, through our independent, nonpartisan research, worldwide events, vast online resources, and media outreach, Cato engages millions on the timeless principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and peace. Cato’s success is a testament to our Sponsors’ commitment to the Institute and our work. Thank you for your continued support.

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

What are the biggest challenges facing U.S. foreign policy? While much of the current foreign policy debate in Washington and around the world is focused on the Trump administration, policymakers must also look further ahead in order to address potential conflicts and issues that will shape the world in the first half of the 21st century.

From the Middle East to Russia to the rise of China, world affairs and the U.S. role in it is constantly changing.  Indeed, the world has changed a great deal since the Cato Institute was founded 40 years ago. This discussion presents an opportunity to explore the next 40 years and how Cato scholars plan to approach these issues.  Emma Ashford, research fellow in the defense and foreign policy studies department, and John Glaser, associate director of foreign policy studies, will join the 40th Anniversary Sponsor e-Briefing Series to offer their thoughts on the biggest challenges and opportunities facing U.S. foreign policy and address your questions.  They look forward to your participation, which will guide this thought-provoking discussion.

The 40th Anniversary e-Briefing Series offers Cato Sponsors a special opportunity to engage with Cato’s leadership and scholars as the Institute commemorates this milestone while also examining the future of liberty and achieving our mission of creating a free society. 

Forty years ago, the Cato Institute opened its doors as a new public policy research organization dedicated to liberty. Today, through our independent, nonpartisan research, worldwide events, vast online resources, and media outreach, Cato engages millions on the timeless principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and peace. Cato’s success is a testament to our Sponsors’ commitment to the Institute and our work. Thank you for your continued support.

North Korea remains a vexing, high-stakes puzzle. With so little known about the “hermit kingdom” leadership, how should the United States respond to North Korea’s growing nuclear capabilities? Doug Bandow provides his insights after a rare visit to the isolated nation. Join us for a live discussion about the North Korea problem.

Send your questions and join the conversation with #CatoConnects.

Libertarians and conservatives alike claim to be advocates of individual liberty, limited government, and free markets. In some policy spheres, these shared values lead libertarians and conservatives to similar conclusions about public policy. As a result, popular political discourse often conflates libertarianism with conservatism, and proponents of “fusionism” go so far as to regard a libertarian-conservative alliance as being both natural and politically useful.

However, the differences between the two political philosophies are at least as significant as the similarities. On matters such as national security and foreign policy, immigration, criminal justice, drugs, surveillance, marriage and the family, and the role of religion in public policy, libertarians and conservatives often clash with one another.

Despite whatever similarities they may have, libertarianism and conservatism are substantially different political philosophies—so which one provides better answers to today’s most important political questions?

We invite you to a debate about the two political philosophies and their associated policy implications. Interns from the Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation will go head-to-head to answer the question: Is libertarianism or conservatism the superior political philosophy?