Cato Daily Dispatch for November 7, 2005
Subscribe to the Daily Dispatch via email
Subscribe to the Daily Dispatch via PDA (AvantGo)
(Links to outside sources were active as of the date of this dispatch; however, not all news sources maintain links to current stories indefinitely. Some links also may require registration.)
Taxing "Excessive" Oil Profits?Senators Question PATRIOT Act Abuse
Abort the Abortion Debate
Taxing "Excessive" Oil Profits?
"With both industry and the Republican Party drawing fire from Americans over high gasoline prices, Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) this week will call in top oil executives and their Washington, D.C., lobbyists for private meetings to discuss why industry profits are soaring," Roll Call reports.
"Hastert spokesman Ron Bonjean suggested that the oil companies could be hit with a windfall profits tax if they do not respond to the concerns of lawmakers and consumers. 'We're not in favor of a windfall profits tax,' he said. 'However, there is momentum on the Hill on this issue right now. Oil companies should get engaged as soon as possible to provide good solutions instead of having us all trying to fight bad policy.'"
In "The Best Energy Policy Is No Energy Policy," Jerry Taylor, Cato's director of natural resource studies, writes: "Political saber rattling about the alleged profiteering of 'big oil' actually makes the crisis worse. That's because the only hedge against supply disruptions in the near term is inventories. But inventories are costly to maintain. If companies can't cash them in at a profit during price run-ups because they fear criminal investigations or the imposition of 'windfall profit' taxes, companies won't bother maintaining inventories in the first place."
Senators Question PATRIOT Act Abuse
"Lawmakers expressed concern yesterday that the FBI was aggressively pushing the powers of the anti-terrorist USA PATRIOT Act to retrieve private phone and financial records of ordinary people," reports the Washington Post.
"'It appears to me that this is, if not abused, being close to abused,' said Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), who is a member of the Judiciary Committee. Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), a member of the Select Committee on Intelligence, agreed, saying the government's expanded power highlights the risks of balancing national security against individual rights. 'It does point up how dangerous this can be,' said Hagel."
In Chapter 19 of the Cato Handbook on Policy, Timothy Lynch, Cato's director of the project on criminal justice, states: "American institutions tend to look for 'quick-fix' solutions to problems. American policymakers must recognize, however, that the danger posed by Al Qaeda is not a short-term crisis but a long-term security dilemma for the United States. Of course, the electorate wants safety, but it wants the federal government to secure that safety by fighting the terrorists themselves, not by turning America into a surveillance state."
Abort the Abortion Debate
"Samuel Alito should get an up-or-down vote on his Supreme Court nomination, a Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee said yesterday, playing down the chances of a filibuster," according to the Associated Press. "Some Democrats have raised the prospect of a filibuster until they get a fuller sense of his views on abortion and other social issues on which O'Connor has been a swing vote."
In "The Key Issue for the Court Isn't Abortion," Cato's president Edward Crane writes: "For too long conservatives who understand the Enumerated Powers doctrine and the role the Constitution plays in limiting the power of government have allowed the religious right and Planned Parenthood to control the debate over the future of the judiciary in America. The litmus test for any judge must always be his or her view on Roe v. Wade, as though abortion and abortion alone should determine who sits on the federal bench.
"Now, abortion is a serious issue -- one in which I've always believed neither side gave due credit to the valid arguments of the other. But the fact that the abortion debate so controls the debate over judicial philosophy is unfortunate. There are more important issues out there, such as federalism and private property rights, the cornerstones of our liberty."
Greg Garner, editor, ggarner@cato.org
/div>