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.
How Measurement Choices Shape the Housing Debate—and the Charts in the President’s Economic Report
English Summary
This Cato Institute analysis argues that the President’s Economic Report of the President’s framing of the housing debate is heavily reliant on selective measurement choices that distort the reality of affordability. The report criticizes the report’s use of comparisons between house prices and income, highlighting that increased housing size and features contribute to higher costs, not necessarily a lack of affordability. Furthermore, the report challenges the interpretation of declining homeownership rates and birth rates, demonstrating how convenient endpoints can create a misleading narrative. Ultimately, the analysis suggests that focusing solely on supply-side interventions without acknowledging consumer preferences and market dynamics is a flawed approach to housing policy, advocating for minimal federal interference.
中文摘要
本 Cato 研究所的分析認為，總統的經濟報告對住房辯論的闡述過於依賴選擇性的衡量標準，扭曲了可負擔性的真實情況。報告批評報告使用房價與收入的比較，強調增加的住房面積和設施是導致成本上升的原因，而非缺乏可負擔性。此外，報告質疑了 declining homeownership rates (下降的房產擁有率) 和 birth rates (生育率) 的解釋，並展示了如何通過選擇性的終點來製造誤導性的敘事。總體而言，該分析認為，僅僅關注供應端干預措施，而沒有考慮消費者偏好和市場動態，是一種不恰當的住房政策方法，並主張盡可能減少聯邦政府的干預。
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.