Cato Institute

The New York financiers’ donations to climate misinformation think tanks are finally attracting the scrutiny long reserved for the Koch brothers and Exxon Mobil.
The middle class and the poor are already paying less in federal taxes than they have in decades.
Trump's nuclear weapons position is incoherent. But the furor is largely misdirected.
For the past 20 years, I have had the great pleasure of working with Jennifer Grossman. A feminist and a libertarian, Jennifer's work ethic and integrity have impressed me endlessly.
The Soviet Union seemed permanent and invincible, until it didn't. When it fell, far more suddenly than anyone thought it would or could, the festering rot of decades was exposed to the world. We're seeing this happen, in real time, with the Republican Party.
The just-published book "Dark Money," penned by New Yorker staff reporter Jane Mayer, reveals that the Koch Brothers hired the former commissioner of the New York Police Department (NYPD) -- and his daughter, a former FBI agent -- to smear her as a "plagiarist" in the months after the release of her August 2010 bombshell article on the Kochs.
Caught in the crosshairs of an ongoing New York Attorney General investigation exploring its role in studying the damage climate change could cause since the 1970's and then proceeding to fund climate science denial campaigns, ExxonMobil has announced an interesting job opening.
With all the real scares at home and abroad, it is strange that we take such pleasure in imaginary ones. Several Republican presidential candidates, for example, appear to suffer from demonic possession.
The struggle is far from over to make higher education a place where student and taxpayer interests are placed at the forefront, where honest and effective education enterprises reap the greatest rewards, and where greedy and duplicitous operators are shown the door.
Wall Street and the Koch brothers have an agenda for America that, unless you are a top executive of a powerful corporate conglomerate, won't work out very well for you. The Democratic Party must embrace a progressive populist economic agenda if it wants to offer a winning alternative in 2016.
From the libertarian praise heaped upon these regulators, and from their own statements, it appears that they are big fans of deregulation. These men are charged with creating and enforcing the financial rules of the road, but they are anti-rule.
SEC Commissioner Michael Piwowar, said in a speech to Cato recently that the goal of the SEC should not be to "promote investor confidence," but instead to "promote investor skepticism." This is a scary example of a radically libertarian philosophy that could cause our financial system to melt down in a big way.
Only the worshipers of big business could root against George Bailey. The too-big-to-fail Wall Street banks that brought us the 2008 financial collapse and the Great Recession, the Koch brothers and their like, with their Ayn Randian "selfishness is good" philosophy, have sadly brought us an economy utterly dominated by the Henry Potters of the world -- except on steroids.
To my great sadness, the modern conservative movement has devolved into something quite different from the kind of Bob Dole conservatism I grew up around. It's not necessarily more conservative, mostly just a whole lot meaner. It is important to note, though, that there are two different kinds of meanness that animate it, and they are very different from each other.
Selgin also thinks deposit insurance should be eliminated, forcing consumers to thoroughly research bank balance sheets -- regardless of the financial savvy it would require for the average American to do so.
The energy and climate waters, it appears, are finally getting safer for thoughtful conservatives to test and navigate.
A recent op-ed in the New York Times chastises Rand Paul for being insufficiently libertarian. His critics are particularly upset over his "hawkish" foreign policy, accusing him of abandoning the ideal of individual liberty. The reverse, however, is true
Moving right-to-work (for less) from the state to the county level is the latest tactic in the relentless campaign by CEOs and corporations to reverse gains made by workers in the 1930s New Deal.
At least four million Americans will rejoin the ranks of the uninsured -- and consequently lose access to affordable health care -- if the Supreme Court sides with opponents of Obamacare in a case that hinges on the interpretation of a single sentence in the law.