I am listening to a presentation on Liberty, as produced by The Cato Institute. Although I haven't yet searched out specific evidence, I'm pretty sure this institute is conservative in nature when it comes to economic and political issues. Not the political issues of those extremists that have forced abdication of more mainstream conservatives of today, but the traditional conservatism of limited government and sound fiscal policy.

In this presentation, they talk about Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations. I found this passage very interesting:

The interest of the dealers, however, in any particular branch of trade or manufactures, is always in some respects different from, and even opposite to, that of the public. To widen the market and to narrow the competition, is always the interest of the dealers. To widen the market may frequently be agreeable enough to the interest of the public; but to narrow the competition must always be against it, and can serve only to enable the dealers, by raising their profits above what they naturally would be, to levy, for their own benefit, an absurd tax upon the rest of their fellow-citizens. The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order, ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men, whose interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it.

When conservative leaders today espouse Smith's work, they simply state talking points such as 'free trade', and 'the invisible hand'. Left out are the passages like the one above, that directly oppose systems that govern the interaction of our legislative process and private players in the world of economics. The passage above could be cited as an argument against the institution of lobbying that permeates our government today. These lobbyists should be "carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention."