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.
If Congress Uses Reconciliation Again, It Must Significantly Reduce the Deficit
English Summary
Congress should require at least $600 billion in net deficit reduction if it uses reconciliation for new spending on the Iran war ($200 billion) and immigration enforcement, given the nation's unsustainable fiscal trajectory with federal debt projected to exceed GDP this year and reach 175% by 2056. The article identifies mandatory entitlements (Medicare and Social Security) as the primary drivers of persistent $2 trillion annual deficits, with the proposed $200 billion spending addition carrying a true cost of $287 billion including interest and indirect expenses. Multiple cost-saving reforms to Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, and tax provisions could easily exceed $1 trillion in savings, providing ample offsets. The article argues Congress should restore fiscal rules like the Conrad Rule or implement a 2:1 offset requirement to ensure reconciliation becomes a tool for fiscal discipline rather than deficit expansion, preventing the bipartisan abuse that plagued previous reconciliation efforts.
中文摘要
國會若利用預算和解程序用於伊朗戰爭（2000億美元）及移民執法的新支出，應要求至少進行6000億美元的淨赤字削減，鑑於國家不可持續的財政軌跡——聯邦債務預計將在今年超越GDP，並到2056年達到GDP的175%。該文章指出強制性支出（醫療保險及社會安全保障）是持續2萬億美元年度赤字的主要驅動因素，提議的2000億美元支出增加的真實成本（包括利息及間接支出）為2870億美元。對醫療保險、醫療補助、補充營養援助計畫及稅收條款的多項節支改革可輕易超過1萬億美元的節支，提供充足的抵減。該文章主張國會應恢復財政規則（如康拉德規則）或實施2:1抵減要求，以確保預算和解成為財政紀律的工具而非赤字擴張，防止困擾先前預算和解努力的兩黨濫用。
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.