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.
There Are No Good Arguments for a Massive Fed Balance Sheet
English Summary
This CATO Institute analysis argues against the continued expansion of the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet, asserting that the current size is primarily a result of past leadership failures to normalize operations after financial crises. The core argument rejects common justifications, including the claim that costless reserves promote efficiency, citing significant taxpayer losses through forgone Treasury remittances. Furthermore, the article dismisses concerns about market volatility, attributing the 2019 repo episode to regulatory factors rather than a fundamental imbalance in reserves. Finally, the analysis suggests a phased reduction through a congressional mandate ending Interest on Reserves (IOR) as a manageable strategy, emphasizing that the challenge lies in implementation, not the principle of balance sheet contraction.
中文摘要
本 Cato 研究所的分析認為，應停止聯邦儲備系統（Fed）資產負債表的持續擴張，理由是目前規模主要源於過去領導層未能於金融危機後正常化運作的失誤。該報告駁斥了常見的辯稱，例如無需成本的儲備能促進效率，並引用了因未發放聯邦政府債務而造成的巨大稅收財政損失。此外，該報告還否認了對市場波動的擔憂，認為 2019 年的購回操作（repo）事件源於監管因素而非儲備基礎的失衡。最後，該分析建議透過國會 mandated 的方式進行逐步縮減，即終止儲備利息（IOR），並強調挑戰在於實施，而非縮減資產負債表的原則。
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.