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 Large Balance Sheet Is Costly Regardless of What the Fed Claims
English Summary
CATO’s analysis argues that the Federal Reserve’s large balance sheet, regardless of claims to the contrary, carries significant and ongoing costs. The core argument is that proponents, like Dallas Fed President Lorie Logan and Fed Governor Chris Waller, justify maintaining the current system by citing complexities arising from post-GFC regulations and fiscal flows, effectively blaming external factors for the Fed’s own policy choices. Specifically, the argument that the Fed’s marginal cost of supplying reserves is small is misleading, ignoring the broader economic consequences of artificially maintaining low interest rates and the impact of IOR on bank behavior. Reducing the balance sheet and ending IOR payments are therefore critical policy reforms to restore a clear separation between monetary and fiscal policy and mitigate these financial burdens.
中文摘要
CATO 的分析認為，聯邦準備銀行龐大的資產負債表，無論其否認聲明如何，都帶來了顯著且持續的成本。核心論點是，像達拉斯聯邦準備銀行主席 Lorie Logan 和聯邦準備銀行官員 Chris Waller 這樣的支持者，藉由引用因金融海嘯後（GFC）的法規和財政流動所產生的複雜性來合理化維持現狀，實際上將外部因素歸咎於聯邦準備銀行的政策選擇。 尤其，聲稱聯邦準備銀行提供儲備的邊際成本微乎其微的論點，忽略了維持低利率所帶來的更廣泛的經濟後果，以及 IOR（儲備金機構）對銀行行為的影響。 因此，縮減資產負債表並停止 IOR 支付，是恢復貨幣與財政政策之間明確分界線，並減輕這些財政負擔的關鍵政策改革。
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.