When Frank H. Buckley last joined the show, he surprised Bob with a cogent, intellectual case for the election of Donald Trump. Buckley, a Foundation Professor at George Mason University’s Scalia School of Law, advised Team Trump on campaign speeches, and geared his last book, The Way Back, towards a set of practical solutions to “restore the promise of America.”Read More
It’s been called Friedman’s Law, and it holds almost as constant as any law of physics:
It costs any government at least twice as much to do something as it costs anyone else.
But what's to be done when some amount of government spending is inevitable? People often bring up roads and infrastructure as the counterpoint to the libertarian injunction to “privatize it!” Chris Edwards – editor of the Cato Institute’s DownsizingGovernment.org – says that infrastructure isn't quite the exception government’s cheerleaders make it out to be. In a recent policy bulletin, Who Owns U.S. Infrastructure?, Edwards shows how the Federal Government can decrease its involvement in roads, bridges, ports and dams. The majority of infrastructure is already owned and operated by the private sector, with the next largest chunk owned by state and local governments – as it should be. “Asset ownership conveys responsibility;” Edwards says, “federal intervention diffuses it.” He joins Bob to discuss the true state of U.S. infrastructure (rumors of its demise have been greatly exaggerated) and the hands-off policies that can accelerate the right kind of infrastructure at the right price.
- @CatoEdwards | Twitter
- Who Owns U.S. Infrastructure? By Chris Edwards, Cato Tax & Budget Bulletin, June 1, 2017
- Will Privatizing Air Traffic Control Fly? By Chris Edwards, Newsweek.com, June 6, 2017
Latter-day patriots often speak of the U.S. Constitution as if it's sacred scripture – the wisdom of ages, revealed to men of letters through the divine faculties of reason. Although this makes for a good story, Bob and past guests have poked holes in that narrative, and revealed how certain compromises required for ratification were a bridge too far for some of the wisest Founding Fathers. The skeptics, known as the anti-federalists, worried that the limited powers outlined in the Articles of Confederation were not circumscribed clearly enough in the new constitution. Seeing the end result of these compromises – a too-powerful federal government – we must give credit to the anti-Federalists. William J. Watkins Jr., a research fellow at the Independent Institute and author of a new book, Crossroads for Liberty: Recovering the Anti-Federalist Values of America's First Constitution, says we should go a step further and seek the reforms they sought, as previewed in the Articles of Confederation. Widely viewed as a failure for granting states too much power, the short-lived Articles may be ripe for a revival, as Americans tire of a president who acts like a King, a congress removed from the people, and a judiciary that legislates from the bench. Join Bob and William as they discuss the relevance of anti-federalist ideals to current events, from Trump's executive orders to California’s new secession movement.
- Website: independent.org
- Crossroads for Liberty: Recovering the Anti-Federalist Values of America's First Constitution (Book)
Related Shows (Subscribe to the Podcast):
- All Powerful Federal Government – Did the Founders Blow It?, Clark Neilly III, April 6, 2014
Was The Ratification of the Constitution A Mistake?, Thomas Fleming, Oct. 21, 2012