You are here

Cap and Trade, Private Roads and the Supreme Court on Obscenity

Daily Update

Title

Cap and Trade, Private Roads and the Supreme Court on Obscenity

National Journal asks what the cost will be if Congress fails to pass cap-and-trade legislation.

The private sector acquires an increasingly large role in transit infrastructure.

The Supreme Court strikes down a ban on videos depicting animal cruelty.

1. ENVIRONMENT

National Journal asks what the cost will be if Congress fails to pass cap-and-trade legislation.

CEI Expert Available to Comment: Senior Fellow Marlo Lewis on how we will all benefit from the failure.

“The U.S. economy won’t be hit by virtual or outright energy taxes in the midst of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, improving prospects for a recovery; Congress will not declare political warfare on coal, continuing America’s access to abundant, affordable base-load power; Congress will not adopt carbon tariffs, avoiding an era of trade warfare between the United States and emerging industrial powerhouses such as China and India; and the U.S. Government will lack a bully pulpit for pressuring poor countries to ban coal-based power, allowing them to escape from energy poverty.”

 

2. TRANSPORTATION

The private sector acquires an increasingly large role

CEI Expert Available to Comment: Policy Analyst Marc Scribner on the benefits of private transit.

“Prior to the middle of the 20th century, passenger rail infrastructure in the United States—including track used for intercity service, commuter service, and urban mass transit—had been privately built, owned, and operated. New York City’s subway and commuter rail systems, Chicago’s El, and the nation’s cross-country intercity rail network were all owned and managed by private firms.”

 

3. LEGAL

The Supreme Court strikes down a ban on videos depicting animal cruelty.

CEI Expert Available to Comment: Senior Counsel Hans Bader on the merits of the decision.

“The justices rejected the idea that the statute was OK because it contained an exception (or safe harbor) for speech that has serious political or artistic value.  Obscenity laws are deemed to be OK by the Supreme Court because they contain such an exception, but the Court said obscenity law is different, because obscenity was considered unprotected speech at the time the First Amendment was drafted.”