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.
Trump Opened the Door for Sanders’s Sovereign Wealth Fund
English Summary
This CATO analysis argues that Donald Trump’s aggressive pursuit of government ownership stakes in private companies, particularly through his executive order and subsequent investments, has paved the way for Senator Bernie Sanders’s proposal for an American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund. The plan, mirroring Trump’s approach, involves a tax on AI companies resulting in federal ownership and board representation to exert political control. Critics highlight the inherent conflict of interest given the government’s existing regulatory role over these companies and draw parallels to problematic models like Norway’s wealth fund, which relies on government-controlled resource revenues. Ultimately, the article suggests this trend represents a dangerous expansion of state power and could be exploited by either party, as evidenced by the bipartisan support for similar initiatives during the CHIPS Act debate.
中文摘要
本CATO分析認為，唐納·特朗普政府積極追求私人公司所有權，尤其是在他發布的行政命令和後續投資中，為參議員伯尼·桑德斯提出的美國人工智能主權財富基金計劃鋪平了道路。該方案仿效特朗普的做法，通過對人工智能公司的稅收，導致聯邦政府擁有股份並在董事會中佔有代表性，以行使政治控制權。批評者指出，鑒於政府現有的監管角色與這些公司之間的內在利益衝突，並將其與挪威財富基金等存在問題的模式進行比較，該基金依賴政府控制的資源收入。最終，文章認為這種趨勢代表著國家權力的擴張，並且可能被兩黨利用，正如在CHIPS法案辯論期間對類似倡議的支持所證明。
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.