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 Effect of the Massachusetts Health Care Cost Growth Benchmark on Hospital Revenues and Other Spending Outcomes: Associations with Hospital Revenue, Hospital Prices, and Insurance Premiums
English Summary
This RAND report analyzes the effectiveness of Massachusetts's health care cost growth benchmark, a state policy designed to constrain escalating healthcare expenditures. Using advanced statistical methods, the study assesses the benchmark's impact on key spending outcomes, including hospital revenues, prices, and insurance premiums, while carefully controlling for confounding factors like the Affordable Care Act. The research provides a detailed, data-driven framework for determining whether state-level cost controls genuinely reduce spending growth relative to a counterfactual scenario. The findings are highly relevant for policymakers in other states considering adopting or modifying similar benchmarks to manage rising healthcare costs.
中文摘要
這份RAND報告分析了麻薩諸塞州醫療成本增長基準的有效性。該州政策旨在限制不斷攀升的醫療開支。研究利用進階統計方法，評估了該基準對關鍵支出結果的影響，包括醫院收入、價格和保險費，同時仔細控制了諸如《平價醫療法案》等混淆因素。本研究提供了一個詳細、數據驅動的框架，用以判斷州級成本控制是否確實能相較於反事實情境，降低支出增長。這些發現對於其他州在考慮採用或修改類似基準來管理醫療成本上升的政策制定者具有高度參考價值。
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.