The article argues that the Federal Reserve's recent rate hike decision, while justifiable on inflation grounds, highlights a critical lack of an underlying, transparent policy framework. The core problem is that the Fed's decisions appear discretionary, leading to market uncertainty because the committee's judgment, rather than clear data, dictates policy shifts. The author proposes that the Fed adopt a formal monetary policy rule—an algebraic formula linking the target rate to indicators like inflation and unemployment—to replace subjective guidance. Implementing such a rule would provide market predictability, enhance transparency, and shield the Fed from political attacks by making deviations from the standard easily quantifiable.
What’s the state of our Union?
English Summary
Brookings scholars characterize the current state of the U.S. Union as a period of significant institutional imbalance and 'dissonance' across governance, economics, and security. Evidence includes a depleted federal workforce due to administrative layoffs, the politicization of military leadership, and persistent household frustration over structural affordability despite moderate official inflation. These trends imply a weakening of the separation of powers and a potential breakdown in traditional global alliances, leading to a more volatile and less predictable policy environment. Consequently, the U.S. faces a heightened risk of institutional instability that could impair its ability to respond to future domestic and international crises.
中文摘要
布魯金斯學會學者指出，美國目前的國情處於治理、經濟與安全領域顯著體制失衡與「不協調」的時期。具體證據包括行政裁員導致聯邦政府人力枯竭、軍事領導層政治化，以及儘管官方通膨溫和，民眾對結構性生活成本負擔能力仍感持續挫敗。這些趨勢預示著權力分立制衡的削弱，以及傳統全球同盟可能瓦解，進而導致更動盪且難以預測的政策環境。因此，美國正面臨體制不穩定性上升的風險，恐將削弱其應對未來國內外危機的能力。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The ongoing Ebola outbreak in the DRC serves as a critical warning that the global health security system is fundamentally unprepared for future biological threats. The difficulty in containing this outbreak is compounded by the rising risk of emerging pathogens and the growing potential for AI misuse in bioweapon development. Policy must therefore shift from reactive, crisis-driven funding to sustained, proactive investment in resilient public health infrastructure, particularly in conflict zones. Addressing this requires strengthening global surveillance, ensuring consistent international cooperation, and mitigating the intersection of conflict, climate change, and disease spread.
-
3.A Design Lab Pilot to Inform Strategies for Expanding Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in Community Mental Health Centers (RAND)
Despite MOUD being the standard of care for opioid use disorder, access remains severely limited in Community Mental Health Centers (CMHCs), which serve the primary population with co-occurring disorders. A Design Lab pilot identified payment limitations and regulatory complexity as the chief barriers to implementation. The most feasible and high-impact strategy identified was establishing a structured learning exchange between CMHC leaders and insurers to improve reimbursement understanding. Policymakers and payers are therefore advised to pilot this learning exchange model to initiate broader payment reform and expand evidence-based care for this vulnerable population.
-
4.
The article argues that modern conflicts are increasingly defined by attrition, driven by three strategic gaps: the difference between nominal military power and usable capacity; the difficulty of achieving breakthroughs in a technologically advanced battlefield; and the detachment of military means from clear political objectives. Evidence from Ukraine and the Middle East demonstrates that sustained logistics, rapid technological adaptation, and proxy networks are now more decisive than sheer military size. For policymakers, this implies a strategic shift away from seeking short, decisive victories toward preparing for prolonged, high-cost engagements, requiring a focus on sustainable supply chains and defining concrete, attainable political end-states.
-
5.
Congress has significantly expanded presidential tariff authority by passing the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, allowing the executive to impose up to 100% tariffs on key buyers of Russian energy and sanctions enablers. The article argues that this legislation represents a dangerous abdication of Congress's Article I authority, as it grants the executive vast, discretionary power without specifying criteria for enforcement. Historically, the executive could claim tariffs were its own doing; however, by writing and passing this new authority, Congress now owns the resulting trade policy and its economic consequences. This shift implies that future tariffs will be viewed by the public as a direct legislative action, potentially undermining the administration's credibility and creating political vulnerability.