The article argues that recent executive overreach and politicization have severely undermined established norms of U.S. civil-military relations. To restore professional standards, the incoming Congress must actively exercise its oversight powers, moving beyond mere criticism to demanding transparency in defense policy and personnel decisions. Key reforms include enforcing meritocratic promotion processes, requiring documented justification for senior officer removals, and preventing the partisan use of the military. These actions are crucial for bolstering public trust and ensuring the military remains a nonpartisan instrument of civilian control.
The GSIB Surcharge Is Un-American — But That’s Just the Start of the Problem
English Summary
The article argues that modern banking regulations, specifically the Global Systemically Important Bank (GSIB) surcharge and complex risk-weighted capital frameworks, are overly punitive and counterproductive to economic health. The author contends that the GSIB concept is flawed, as bank failure is not the primary systemic risk, and the existing regulatory rules are unnecessarily complex, creating compliance jobs rather than safety. For policy, the publication advocates for Congress to eliminate the GSIB surcharge and expand the use of simpler, non-risk-weighted ratios, ideally allowing banks, investors, and customers to determine optimal capital levels, aligning with free-market principles.
中文摘要
本文主張，當前的銀行監管規定，特別是全球系統重要性銀行（GSIB）附加費和複雜的風險加權資本框架，過度懲罰性，並阻礙了經濟的健康發展。作者認為，GSIB的概念存在缺陷，因為銀行倒閉並非主要的系統性風險；此外，現行的監管規則過於複雜，其結果是創造了合規性工作而非真正的安全保障。在政策建議方面，該出版物呼籲國會廢除GSIB附加費，並擴大採用更簡化的、非風險加權的比例，理想情況下應允許銀行、投資者和客戶自行決定最佳的資本水平，從而符合自由市場原則。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The article argues that Donald Trump's unique and prolonged lame-duck period, coupled with domestic political pressures, makes him dangerously prone to international instability. Having exhausted major diplomatic gambits, Trump is expected to channel his energy into high-stakes, unilateral actions, primarily targeting adversaries such as Iran and Cuba. These potential actions—ranging from fresh strikes in the Persian Gulf to attempts at regime change—carry a significant risk of destabilizing regional security and triggering a global economic crisis. Policymakers must anticipate this pivot to high-risk foreign policy to mitigate potential international flare-ups.
-
3.
The Blue Wave signals significant voter frustration with cost of living and inflation, giving Congress a mandate to prioritize affordability and cost-reduction measures. Economically, the rapid build-out of AI data centers is creating localized stress, driving up skilled labor wages and straining resources, while also facing constraints from power grids and potential local regulatory backlash. Policymakers must manage this 'sequencing issue'—addressing rising costs before full productivity gains from AI can materialize—and anticipate shifts in global data center infrastructure as the market matures.
-
4.
The built environment workforce, comprising 15.3 million workers across 95 occupations, is foundational to modern infrastructure and economic stability. While highly paid, the workforce suffers from significant demographic imbalances, being disproportionately white and male, and often lacking clear career progression pathways. To prevent project delays and cost overruns, policy must mandate that capital asset owners treat labor market forecasting as core to project planning. Strategic interventions are required to strengthen career pipelines through robust apprenticeships, improve retention, and actively recruit younger and more diverse workers.
-
5.
The U.S. is drastically reducing core funding to multilateral institutions, withdrawing from numerous bodies due to perceived misalignment with national interests. While multilateral channels offer critical advantages—such as pooling resources for global public goods and managing risk in fragile settings—the U.S.'s funding remains heavily 'earmarked,' which effectively 'bilateralizes' the system and undermines shared burden-sharing. This practice, coupled with deep cuts, diminishes the multilateral system's effectiveness and efficiency, particularly in humanitarian aid. Policy recommendations suggest the U.S. must adopt a systematic, published strategy for aid channel choice and shift from restrictive project-level earmarking to broader thematic funding to restore global cooperation.