Offers policy recommendations from Cato Institute experts on every major policy issue. Providing both in-depth analysis and concrete recommendations, the Handbook is an invaluable resource for policymakers and anyone else interested in securing liberty through limited government.
American public education has been under assault for the last few decades as a “broken” system that needs a complete overhaul. In large part, these opinions are offered by people and organizations who know little about schools. But who are these influencers? This book is about conservative philanthropies, the organizations and individuals within their networks, and the strategies they use to shape educational policy and practice in K-12 and higher education. Each chapter examines a philanthropy, philanthropic network, or corporation focused on pushing an agenda of individualism, privatization, and conservative ideologies. Based in extensive research, including the tax filings of specific philanthropic foundations, the authors demonstrate how the philanthropic elite work within federal, state, and local governmental contexts to influence policy and practice. Within a global context of increasing wealth inequality, the authors question the motivations of these privileged few to withhold tax dollars from the US treasury where duly elected representatives can determine how tax dollars are used to benefit society. By allowing these philanthropic organizations tax exemptions under the guise of assumed benevolence, are citizens giving up their ability to hold these organizations accountable for how the money is spent? This book, aimed at a general audience of educators, provides the in-depth knowledge necessary to understand and resist private control of public policies and institutions.
From 1969 to 1977 the executive branch of the U.S. government was dominated by politicians and their advisers who called themselves "conservatives." In their speeches they professed belief in such values and institutions as social order, military strength, market capitalism, governmental decentralization, and traditional morality. But did these social ideas have much influence on their actual policy decisions? Or were their decisions, as some observers have argued, largely based on personal ambition, partisan interest, and pragmatic response to the day-to-day problems of government? To answer these questions, A. James Reichley examines the effects of conservative ideology on the formation of specific administration policies under the presidencies of Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. The policies covered include the development of detente with the Soviet Union, welfare reform, revenue sharing, resistance to "busing," the imposition of wage and price controls in 1971, and governmental reorganization under Nixon; and, under Ford, adjustment to the rise of the third world and problems with detente, the drive for decontrol of oil prices, and the fight against inflation. In the last chapter Reichley considers whether the Nixon and Ford administrations can be truly described as conservative, and suggests what the future role of conservatism in American politics is likely to be.
Now in its 20th year, the Cato Supreme Court Review brings together leading legal scholars to analyze key cases from the Court's most recent term, plus cases coming up. Topics in the 2020-2021 edition include public disclosure of charitable donations (Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta), the off-campus speech (Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L.), union access onto agribusiness land (Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid), police acting as "community caretakers" and warrantless police entries (Caniglia v. Strom), and Arizona's new voting laws (Brnovich v. DNC).
NAMED ONE OF THE BEST BOOKS OF 2021: POLITICS BY THE WALL STREET JOURNAL "A must-read for anyone interested in the Supreme Court."—MIKE LEE, Republican senator from Utah Politics have always intruded on Supreme Court appointments. But although the Framers would recognize the way justices are nominated and confirmed today, something is different. Why have appointments to the high court become one of the most explosive features of our system of government? As Ilya Shapiro makes clear in Supreme Disorder, this problem is part of a larger phenomenon. As government has grown, its laws reaching even further into our lives, the courts that interpret those laws have become enormously powerful. If we fight over each new appointment as though everything were at stake, it’s because it is. When decades of constitutional corruption have left us subject to an all-powerful tribunal, passions are sure to flare on the infrequent occasions when the political system has an opportunity to shape it. And so we find the process of judicial appointments verging on dysfunction. Shapiro weighs the many proposals for reform, from the modest (term limits) to the radical (court-packing), but shows that there can be no quick fix for a judicial system suffering a crisis of legitimacy. And in the end, the only measure of the Court’s legitimacy that matters is the extent to which it maintains, or rebalances, our constitutional order.