Cato Video

Rights precede government. That's the core of the American founding, and George F. Will argues that it's worth preserving. His new book is The Conservative Sensibility.

Medicare expenditures as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) are now six times larger than they were in 1967. Forecasts for the next 75 years show that almost $1 of every $5 of GDP could be spent on Medicare. That is unaffordable. Without intervention, Medicare’s share of GDP will force some combination of substantial cuts in other government spending, significantly higher taxes, and unhealthy levels of public debt.   There are many policy issues concerning main­taining or redesigning Medicare. This paper looks only at the question of affordability. It identifies the minimum changes required to prevent further expansion of Medicare’s share of GDP, while retaining the existing structure of the program.   Three modifications can be phased in to meet that objective. About 41 percent of the required savings can be achieved by slowly raising the program’s eligibility age and by restoring the original criteria for disability benefits. The eligibility age could first be harmonized with the rising age for full retirement benefits from Social Security and then continue to increase consistent with rising life expectancy.   The remaining savings would require more cost sharing by beneficiaries. The first steps would be to increase deductibles and coinsurance to values that are typical for commercial insurance among the working population. Further increases would be required after another 30 to 50 years. These changes may seem large, but changes such as these are necessary to undo the substantial problem that history has given us. The good news is that if we begin soon, the changes can be made gradually, and current beneficiaries would face no benefit reductions.   By John F. Early

full 0:03:05 David B. Kopel

Featuring John F. Early, Former Assistant Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and President of Vital Few, LLC. Some political leaders are saying that income and wealth inequality are at unacceptable levels and need to be countered by higher taxes on the wealthy and more transfer payments. But the data used to support those arguments are often misunderstood and omit key elements of the picture. John Early will describe gaps in the official data used in the inequality debate and discuss alternative income measures that better capture the well-being of different groups. Early argues that policymakers need to get the facts right before imposing prescriptions on the economy. Learn more: Reassessing the Facts about Inequality, Poverty, and Redistribution

Cato’s Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies and its scholars take their inspiration from the struggle of America’s founding and Civil War generations to secure liberty through constitutionally limited government. The Center’s scholars address a wide range of constitutional and legal issues, especially by encouraging the judiciary to neither make nor ignore the law but rather to interpret and apply it through the natural rights tradition inherited from the Founders. Scholars affiliated with the Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, both resident and non-resident, conduct rigorous legal research on a wide range of subjects: constitutional theory and history, the Supreme Court, property rights, environmental law, and others. The Center publishes the annual Cato Supreme Court Review, released at its annual Constitution Day Conference, featuring leading legal scholars analyzing the most important decisions of the Court’s recent term. Center scholars also write and commission books, monographs, articles, and op-eds; conduct forums on legal issues of the day; lecture and debate across the country; and file amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs with the Supreme Court, all aimed at encouraging a climate of ideas conducive to liberty through constitutionally limited government.

From domestic policy to international news, healthcare reform to criminal justice, Cato’s scholars have their finger on the pulse of what’s happening inside the Beltway and around the world. They can be seen and heard on major networks and news outlets across the country.

Harm Reduction: Shifting from a War on Drugs to a War on Drug‐​Related Deaths, Policy Analysis By Jeffrey A. Singer The U.S. government’s current strategy of trying to restrict the supply of opioids for nonmedical uses is not working. While government efforts to reduce the supply of opioids for nonmedical use have reduced the volume of both legally manufactured prescription opioids and opioid prescriptions, deaths from opioid overdoses are nevertheless accelerating. Research shows the increase is due in part to substitution of illegal heroin for now harder-to-get prescription opioids. Attempting to reduce overdose deaths by doubling down on this approach will not produce better results. Policymakers can reduce overdose deaths and other harms stemming from nonmedical use of opioids and other dangerous drugs by switching to a policy of “harm reduction” strategies. Harm reduction has a success record that prohibition cannot match. It involves a range of public health options. These strategies would include medication-assisted treatment, needle-exchange programs, safe injection sites, heroin-assisted treatment, deregulation of naloxone, and the decriminalization of marijuana. Though critics have dismissed these strategies as surrendering to addiction, jurisdictions that have attempted them have found they significantly reduce overdose deaths, the spread of infectious diseases, and even the nonmedical use of dangerous drugs.

Those burgers you picked up at the grocery store may have originated in Hawaii. Hawaii's long-standing cattle trade is hampered by the Jones Act. For nearly 100 years the Jones Act has restricted the transportation of cargo between two points in the United States to ships that are U.S.-built, crewed, owned, and flagged. Meant to bolster the U.S. maritime industry and provide a ready supply of ships and mariners in times of conflict, the act has instead presided over a steady deterioration in the number of ships, sailors to crew them, and shipyards to build them. While failing to provide its promised benefits, the law has imposed a huge economic burden that manifests itself in various ways, ranging from higher transportation costs to increased traffic and pollution. Learn more at https://www.cato.org/jonesact

Fernanda (22) was born in Brazil, and her mother brought her to the United States when she was only 4 years old so she could attend school here. Before Fernanda got a scholarship from TheDream.US fund and went to Delaware State University, she worked for a doctor who paid for her to become a certified nursing assistant and phlebotomist. Watch her story and learn more about DACA and Dreamers at https://www.cato.org/research/immigration.

full 0:02:33 Jay Schweikert

Childcare is expensive. Economic evidence suggests childcare prices are driven higher by state-level regulations like input requirements designed to improve care quality, including staff-qualification requirements and minimum staff-to-child ratios, with little evidence that they actually work. In this video, Ryan Bourne, the Cato Institute's R. Evan Scharf Chair for the Public Understanding of Economics discusses the regressive effects of childcare regulations.

Passed in 1920, the Jones Act was meant to ensure a strong U.S. merchant marine. But the law has failed to prevent the U.S. maritime industry’s steady downward spiral, all while imposing significant economic costs.

full 0:05:27 Cato Institute Fri,

full 0:09:05 Andrea Millen Rich Fr

Presidential impeachments are vanishingly rare in American constitutional history: in the 230 years since ratification, only three presidents have faced serious attempts to remove them from office. And yet, as President Donald J. Trump’s tumultuous tenure continues, it seems increasingly plausible that we’ll see a fourth. In ordinary times, in ordinary presidencies, impeachment talk is considered taboo: the “I-word” is heard only on the political fringes, if it’s heard at all. Yet Trump’s first year in office saw four resolutions, containing a total of nine articles of impeachment against him, formally introduced in the House. Recent polls reveal strong support for an impeachment inquiry among the Democratic base. Should the Democrats recapture the House in the 2018 midterms, even reluctant members may find that pressure difficult to resist. The rancor engendered by our current impeachment debate bears out Alexander Hamilton’s prediction that impeachments would “seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community, and to divide it into parties.” But the scope of “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” shouldn’t turn on one’s opinion of any particular president. Partisans who lower the bar to impeachment in order to punish a president they revile — or raise it to save one they support — may, under future presidents, live to regret the standard they’ve set. This study touches on most of the specific charges directed against President Trump, but it does not answer the question of whether he should be impeached and removed from office. Instead, it is designed to serve as a primer on the purpose, history, and scope of the Constitution’s impeachment provisions — and a corrective to some of the popular myths that have grown up around the remedy. First among those myths is the notion that impeachment is reserved solely for criminal abuses of office. Perversely, as the power of the office has grown, that misconception has ensured that the federal official with the greatest capacity to do harm now enjoys stronger job protection than virtually any other American. But the remedy James Madison described as “indispensable … for defending the community against the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the Chief Magistrate” isn’t limited to violations of the law or abuses of official power. As the 1974 House Judiciary Committee report on “Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment” put it, impeachment was “intended to reach a broad variety of conduct by officers that is both serious and incompatible with the duties of the office.” “A good magistrate will not fear [impeachments],” Massachusetts’ Elbridge Gerry insisted at the Constitutional Convention, and “a bad one ought to be kept in fear of them.” Through the exercise of the “sole Power of Impeachment,” the House can call even the most powerful federal officer to account. That power should never be invoked lightly, but neither should Americans fear to wield it, should it become necessary.

full 0:02:55 Ryan Bourne

Why is America’s health care system so dysfunctional and expensive? Why do hospitalized patients receive bills laden with inflated charges that come out of the blue from out-of-network providers, or that demand payment for services that weren’t delivered? Why do we pay $600 for EpiPens that contain a dollar’s worth of medicine? Why is more than $1 trillion—one out of every three dollars that passes through the system—lost to fraud, wasted on services that don’t help patients, or otherwise misspent? In a new book published by the Cato Institute, Overcharged: Why Americans Pay Too Much for Health Care, Cato adjunct scholars Charles Silver and David Hyman answer these questions. Overcharged shows how government replaces competition and consumer choice with monopolies and third-party payment, making America’s health care system as expensive as possible.

After a brief overnight stay in a local hospital for snake bite treatment, Eric Ferguson was hit with a bill for $89,227. How could this possibly happen?  Hear Eric Ferguson tell his story. About the book: Overcharged: Why Americans Pay Too Much for Health Care

The Cato Institute presented Cuba’s Ladies in White (Damas de Blanco) with the 2018 Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty, a $250,000 biennial award presented to a group or individual who has made a significant contribution to advance human freedom. The Ladies in White have a simple message: The political prisoners of Cuba are our sons, brothers, and our husbands. They must not be forgotten. More about the Ladies in White

The Cato Institute presented Cuba’s Ladies in White (Damas de Blanco) with the 2018 Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty, a $250,000 biennial award presented to a group or individual who has made a significant contribution to advance human freedom. The Ladies in White have a simple message: The political prisoners of Cuba are our sons, brothers, and our husbands. They must not be forgotten. More about the Ladies in White

Judge Sérgio Moro has become a household name in his country thanks to Operation Car Wash, the massive scandal in which he has sent some of Brazil’s most powerful politicians and business elite to jail for corruption. He was the keynote speaker at the 2018 Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty Dinner.

President Donald Trump has promised to implement “extreme vetting” of immigrants and foreign travelers, asserting that widespread vetting failures had allowed many terrorists to enter the United States. This policy analysis provides the first estimate of the number of terrorism vetting failures, both before and after the vetting enhancements implemented in response to the September 11, 2001, attacks. Vetting failures are rare and have become much rarer since 9/11.

full 0:02:24 A. Trevor Thrall, Caroline Dorminey

Cato Institute‎ scholars respond to President Trump’s State of the Union Address on Twitter.

Watch the new Human Freedom Index video here to see which countries rank in the top and bottom, using data indicators that include personal, civil, and economic freedom.

Dr. Jeffrey A. Singer discusses the four myths of the ongoing opioid crisis. To learn more, please visit: https://www.cato.org/people/jeffrey-singer.

Trade terrorism hits the global aircraft industry as Boeing takes trade law abuse to a new level.

full 0:04:00 Emma Ashford, John Glaser

In the fall issue of Regulation magazine, Smith College economics professor Andrew Zimbalist writes about the Olympic experience and explains what drove a failed effort by Boston to get the 2024 Summer Olympics.

Since Donald Trump's surprising victory in the 2016 presidential election many have been looking for an explanation for his rise. But, there is no such thing as one type of Trump voter who voted for him for one single reason. Instead, five different types of Trump voters voted for him for different reasons — and these groups disagree with one another on even the core issues of the campaign. For updates on the study, follow #VOTERSSG on Twitter...

Since he started his bid for office, President Donald Trump has been a forceful detractor of the Iran nuclear deal, repeatedly vowing to dismantle it. But the nuclear deal affords the United States a number of opportunities, if the administration sustains it. Read the Policy Analysis: Preserving the Iran Nuclear Deal: Perils and Prospects

The United States maintains a veritable empire of military bases throughout the world—about 800 of them in more than 70 countries. This forward-deployed military posture incurs substantial costs and disadvantages, exposing the United States to vulnerabilities and unintended consequences. The strategic justifications for overseas bases—that they deter adversaries, reassure allies, and enable rapid deployment operations—have lost much of their value and relevance in the contemporary security environment. Read the Policy Analysis: Withdrawing from Overseas Bases: Why a Forward-Deployed Military Posture Is Unnecessary, Outdated, and Dangerous

Before committing to hundreds of billions more tax payer dollars on infrastructure spending, shouldn't we try to get the best bang for a buck from existing money? Want to learn more ways in which we can improve American infrastructure at a lower cost? Follow #InfraSolutions on Twitter and other social media platforms.

Cato Institute Board Member and former CEO and President John Allison discusses financial reform and regulation during a Trump presidency.

The Human Freedom Index presents the state of human freedom in the world based on a broad measure that encompasses personal, civil, and economic freedom. Human freedom is a social concept that recognizes the dignity of individuals and is defined here as negative liberty or the absence of coercive constraint. Because freedom is inherently valuable and plays a role in human progress, it is worth measuring carefully. The Human Freedom Index is a resource that can help to more objectively observe relationships between freedom and other social and economic phenomena, as well as the ways in which the various dimensions of freedom interact with one another. For more information, please visit: http://cato.org/human-freedom-index

All of President Obama's climate policy's were generated through executive orders. Expect that President Trump will issue a similar executive order invalidating the Clean Power Plan. Find out more about Climate, Energy, and other topics with Cato Institute’s new series "The Next Four Years." Produced by Cory Cooper and Tess Terrible

What’s the next four years going to look like under a Trump Administration? How will public K-12 and higher education change under this administration. Find out more about Education and other topics with Cato Institute’s new series “The Next Four Years.” Produced by Cory Cooper and Tess Terrible

What’s the next four years going to look like under a Trump Administration? President Elect Trump will bring big changes to foreign policy but we're still unsure what that will look like. Find out more about Foreign Policy and other topics with Cato Institute’s new series “The Next Four Years.” Produced by Cory Cooper and Tess Terrible

What’s the next four years going to look like under a Trump Administration? It is likely that about 25% of Americans will be living in states where it is legal for them to possess and smoke marijuana, but illegal under federal law. Find out more about Drug Laws and other topics with Cato Institute’s new series “The Next Four Years.” Produced by Cory Cooper and Tess Terrible.

What topic are you curious about? Tweet your questions at #AskACatoExpert. Dr. Kealey is a professor of clinical biochemistry at the University of Buckingham in the United Kingdom, where he served as vice chancellor until 2014. As a clinical biochemist Dr. Kealey studied human experimental dermatology. He published around 45 original peer-reviewed papers and around 35 scientific reviews, also peer-reviewed. His work attracted funding from government, charities and business. Produced by Caleb O. Brown, Cory Cooper and Tess Terrible.

Cato Institute scholars suggest questions for the final debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

The 2016 Fiscal Policy Report Card on America's Governors discusses fiscal policy trends and examines the tax and spending actions of each governor in detail. The hope is that the report encourages more state policymakers to follow the fiscal approaches of the top-scoring governors. For more information on the Fiscal Policy Report Card visit: https://www.cato.org/publications/white-paper/fiscal-policy-report-card-americas-governors-2016 Produced by Tess Terrible and Meaghan Leister

Law professor James Duane became a viral sensation in 2008 for a lively lecture that explained why people shouldn’t agree to answer questions from the police. In his new book, You Have the Right to Remain Innocent, Duane expands on that presentation, offering a vigorous defense of every citizen’s constitutionally protected right to avoid self-incrimination. By using case histories of innocent persons who were wrongfully imprisoned because of information they gave to police, Duane debunks the claim that “if you haven’t done anything wrong, then you don’t have anything to worry about. View the full event here: https://www.cato.org/events/you-have-right-remain-innocent.

So far missing from the presidential campaigns has been a serious discussion of long-run structural issues facing the U.S. economy, especially the large projected budget deficits. Continuing to delay action on fiscal imbalances is not an option for the next administration. Economic and fiscal realities will constrain future policy options, as noted in recent studies by the International Monetary Fund and the Cato Institute. View full event here: https://www.cato.org/events/economic-financial-issues-facing-next-president.

View the full event here: https://www.cato.org/events/15th-annual-constitution-day.