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.
FCC Threats and the Fog of War: The Government Cannot Be the Arbiter of Truth
English Summary
The article argues that the FCC's threat to revoke broadcast licenses over allegedly inaccurate war reporting represents a dangerous government overreach into content regulation and free expression. Drawing on the FCC chairman's warning to broadcasters during the Iran conflict, CATO traces how outdated Supreme Court precedents (NBC v. United States, Red Lion) grant the FCC unusually broad authority to police broadcast content under a 'public interest' standard, effectively giving broadcasters 'junior varsity' First Amendment rights. The piece contends that truth emerges through open debate in the media marketplace, not government diktat, and that wartime conditions have historically been exploited to suppress dissent—from the 1798 Sedition Act to Cold War-era broadcast suppression. CATO recommends abolishing the FCC's public interest licensing framework entirely and moving to spectrum auctions, which would eliminate the legal basis for government content regulation of broadcasters.
中文摘要
本文主張，聯邦通訊委員會（FCC）以戰爭報導allegedly不實為由威脅撤銷廣播執照，代表政府對內容監管與言論自由的危險越權。文章援引FCC主席在伊朗衝突期間對廣播業者的警告，追溯過時的最高法院判例（NBC訴美國案、紅獅案）如何賦予FCC在「公共利益」標準下異常廣泛的廣播內容管制權限，實質上使廣播業者僅享有「次等」的第一修正案權利。文章認為，真相應透過媒體市場中的公開辯論而非政府命令來呈現，而戰時環境歷來被用於壓制異見——從1798年的《煽動法》到冷戰時期的廣播審查皆然。CATO建議徹底廢除FCC的公共利益執照框架，改採頻譜拍賣制度，從根本上消除政府對廣播業者進行內容監管的法律依據。
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.