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 FCC’s Public Interest Notice Is a House of Cards
English Summary
CATO argues that the FCC's public-interest doctrine, which treats broadcasters as public trustees with diminished First Amendment rights, rests on an outdated spectrum-scarcity rationale that has been rendered obsolete by cable, streaming, and the internet. The article traces how successive administrations—from Kennedy and Nixon to Trump—have weaponized FCC licensing power to coerce and punish broadcasters over their editorial choices, citing recent actions against CBS, ABC/Disney, and others. CATO calls for courts to extend full First Amendment protections to broadcasters, for Congress to repeal tools like the equal-time and news-distortion rules, and ultimately for a property-rights approach to spectrum governance that would eliminate the FCC's leverage over editorial content.
中文摘要
CATO 主張，FCC 的公共利益原則將廣播業者視為公共受託人，並削弱其第一修正案權利，其所依據的頻譜稀缺性理論已因有線電視、串流媒體及網際網路的普及而過時。文章追溯歷屆政府——從乃迪與尼克森到川普——如何將 FCC 的執照核發權力武器化，藉此脅迫並懲罰廣播業者的編輯決策，並列舉近期針對 CBS、ABC/迪士尼等業者的行動。CATO 呼籲法院將完整的第一修正案保障延伸至廣播業者，敦促國會廢除平等時間規則與新聞扭曲規則等工具，並最終採取頻譜治理的財產權途徑，以消除 FCC 對編輯內容的干預槓桿。
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.