: THE LIGHTHOUSE
"Enlightening Ideas for Public Policy..."
Vol. 7, Issue 36; September 6, 2005

------------------------------------------------------------- 

IN THIS WEEK'S ISSUE:
1. Hurricane Katrina and the Feds
2. The Drug War and the Sausage Effect
3. CAFTA Trade Treaty a Sweet Deal for Special Interests

-------------------------------------------------------------

Welcome to THE LIGHTHOUSE, the weekly e-mail newsletter of the Independent
Institute, the non-politicized public-policy research organization. Edited
by Carl P. Close, THE LIGHTHOUSE provides you with updates of the
Institute's current research, publications, events and media programs, plus
commentary on current affairs.

-------------------------------------------------------------

HURRICANE KATRINA AND THE FEDS

The federal government's much-criticized slow response to the devastation
wrought by Hurricane Katrina suggests that state and local governments "have
become too dependent on the federal government for help in such
emergencies," according to Ivan Eland, senior fellow and director of the
Independent Institute's Center on Peace & Liberty.

If state and local government planners expect FEMA (the Federal Emergency
Management Agency) to intervene quickly and effectively after a natural or
manmade disaster, they will have weaker incentives to plan for such
disasters, Eland argues in his latest op-ed. Louisiana planners, for
example, appear to have relied too much on federal funds to reinforce the
levees of Lake Pontchartrain, whose failure was responsible for the massive
flooding of New Orleans.

"The same state and local slothfulness is being encouraged in homeland
security efforts against terrorist attacks," writes Eland. "Federal efforts
are displacing and distorting what could be more effective state and local
actions."

What lesson might we draw from the response to Hurricane Katrina, according
to Eland?

"If federal efforts in both disaster relief and homeland security are
creating an unhealthy dependency by states and localities and distorting the
priorities of those on the frontline of disaster response, then, although
counterintuitive, cutting the budget for such federal activities might
actually improve results."

See "Will the Government's Abysmal Response to Katrina Recur During a
Terrorist Attack?" by Ivan Eland (9/2/05)
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1562
SPANISH TRANSLATION:
"¿Se Repetirá Durante un Ataque Terrorista la Pésima Respuesta Gubernamental
ante el Huracán Katrina?"
http://www.elindependent.org/articulos/article.asp?id=1562

To purchase THE EMPIRE HAS NO CLOTHES: U.S. Foreign Policy Exposed, by Ivan
Eland, see
http://www.independent.org/store/book_detail.asp?bookID=54

To purchase PUTTING "DEFENSE" BACK IN U.S. DEFENSE POLICY, by Ivan Eland,
see
http://www.independent.org/store/book_detail.asp?bookID=19

Center on Peace & Liberty (Ivan Eland, director)
http://www.independent.org/research/copal/

-------------------------------------------------------------

THE DRUG WAR AND THE SAUSAGE EFFECT

Squeeze one end of a sausage and the other end expands. The same has been
true of U.S efforts to eradicate cocaine production in South America,
according to Alvaro Vargas Llosa, senior fellow and director of the
Independent Institute's Center on Global Prosperity.

"While cultivation and production have diminished in Colombia, they have
substantially increased in Peru and Bolivia," writes Vargas Llosa in a new
op-ed. "There is no evidence yet that the flow of cocaine into the U.S. has
been reduced, as U.S. drug Czar John Walters admitted when I asked him about
it this week."

In the late 1990s, Vargas Llosa explains, the U.S. supported eradication
programs in Peru and Bolivia. This dramatically cut the cocaine production
in those two countries. But then cultivation and production moved to
Colombia. And when the U.S. focused on Colombia -- guess which two countries
saw a huge increase in coca growing and cocaine production?

"In the last four years cocaine has almost doubled in Bolivia and risen by
25 percent in Peru, while decreasing by 60 percent in Colombia. Billions of
dollars worth of U.S. training, military equipment, surveillance, and
alternative development programs have produced zero progress in the overall
war against cocaine-related market forces in the Andes."

There's an important new unintended consequence to this phenomenon, Vargas
Llosa explains. Politicians in both Bolivia (Evo Morales) and Peru (Carlos
Cuaresma) are now positioning themselves as opponents of U.S.-backed
eradication efforts in order to win stronger political support from local
coca farmers.

"Government officials in the U.S. have not recognized the failure of this
repressive approach," concludes Vargas Llosa. "They are confusing Colombian
President Alvaro Uribe's considerable success in other fronts with success
on the drug front and losing sight of the whole Andean picture. If the U.S.
does not want to encourage more Chávez and Morales types, it needs to
urgently rethink this 21st century remake of the Prohibition fiasco."

See "Drugs in the Andes -- The Sausage Effect," by Alvaro Vargas Llosa
(9/2/05)
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1561
SPANISH TRANSLATION:
"Drogas en los Andes -- El Efecto Salchicha"
http://www.elindependent.org/articulos/article.asp?id=1561

Also see:

LIBERTY FOR LATIN AMERICA, by Alvaro Vargas Llosa
http://www.independent.org/store/book_detail.asp?bookID=55

"People and Ecosystems in Colombia: Casualties of the Drug War," by Sarah
Peterson (THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW, Winter 2002)
http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?issueID=7&articleID=149

-------------------------------------------------------------

CAFTA TRADE TREATY A SWEET DEAL FOR SPECIAL INTERESTS

Although it will lower or eliminate tariffs on many U.S. goods bound for
Central America, CAFTA -- the recently passed Central American Free Trade
Agreement -- is a disappointment for advocates of genuine free trade. Rather
than simply rescind all existing tariffs, import quotas, and regulatory
restrictions, CAFTA grants plenty of favors to entrenched special
interests -- at the expense of consumers -- according to economist Benjamin
Powell (director of the Independent Institute's Center on Entrepreneurial
Innovation) and intern Nicolas Rotsko.

"CAFTA does ensure that import quotas are eased over several years, but this
reduction is too small for U.S. sugar consumers to celebrate," Powell and
Rotsko write in a new op-ed.

"Fifteen years after CAFTA goes into effect, sugar imports can rise to only
1.7 percent of the 10 million tons we consume. CAFTA doesn't introduce free
trade in sugar. It makes a trivial improvement while retaining sugar's
traditional protection."

The U.S. textile industry also won special favors in CAFTA -- mainly with
long tariff phase-outs and the perpetuation of import quotas -- as did U.S.
producers of cotton, tobacco, wool, cashmere, and even hairnets!

See "CAFTA 'Free Trade' Agreement Is a Sweet Deal for Special Interests," by
Benjamin Powell and Nicolas Rotsko (8/31/2005)
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1559
SPANISH TRANSLATION:
"El Tratado de 'Libre Comercio' del CAFTA es un Dulce Reparto para los
Intereses Especiales"
http://www.elindependent.org/articulos/article.asp?id=1559

Also:

See Benjamin Powell and Peter Laufer at the upcoming Independent Policy
Forum, "IMMIGRATION WARS: Open or Closed Borders for America?", on
Wednesday, September 21, 2005, at the Independent Institute's conference
center in Oakland, Calif.

Admission: $15 ($10 for Institute Members) OR $35 Special Admission includes
one copy of WETBACK NATION, by Peter Laufer ($30 for Members).

Note: Last week's LIGHTHOUSE mistakenly announced the wrong price for the
price of the Special Admission with book. The correct price of $35 ($30 for
Members), we are pleased to announce, reflects a 23 percent discount on the
price of the book.

For more information about this event, see
http://www.independent.org/events/detail.asp?eventID=110

-------------------------------------------------------------

THE LIGHTHOUSE, edited by Carl P. Close, is made possible by the generous
contributions of supporters of the Independent Institute. If you enjoy THE
LIGHTHOUSE, please consider making a donation to the Independent Institute.
For details on the Independent Associate Membership program, see
http://www.independent.org/membership/ or contact us by phone at
510-632-1366, e-mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED], or snail mail to: The
Independent Institute, 100 Swan Way, Oakland, CA 94621-1428. All
contributions are tax-deductible. Thank you!

-------------------------------------------------------------

For previous issues of THE LIGHTHOUSE, see
http://www.independent.org/publications/the_lighthouse/.

-------------------------------------------------------------

For information on books and other publications from The Independent
Institute, see
http://www.independent.org/publications/.

-------------------------------------------------------------

For membership information, see
http://www.independent.org/membership/

-------------------------------------------------------------

To subscribe or unsubscribe, please go to The Lighthouse page:
http://www.independent.org/publications/the_lighthouse/. Enter your email
address, select "Subscribe" or "Unsubscribe", and click "Submit".

-------------------------------------------------------------

THE LIGHTHOUSE
ISSN 1526-173X
Copyright © 2005 The Independent Institute
100 Swan Way
Oakland, CA 94621-1428
(510) 632-1366 phone
(510) 568-6040 fax




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/VpgUKB/pzNLAA/cUmLAA/KlSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian  
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to