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.
DSA’s Own Leaders Reveal Just How Far Outside the Mainstream the Movement Really Is
English Summary
The Cato Institute argues that while the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) are achieving electoral success by promoting highly radical platforms—such as abolishing the Senate or defunding the Pentagon—their views remain significantly outside the mainstream American consensus. Survey data indicates that only a small minority of Americans support tearing down and rebuilding government, suggesting most citizens value preserving existing institutions like the Constitution. Although socialism is proving appealing to voters (37% positive view), the authors caution that this appeal may be based on misunderstanding what the DSA actually advocates for. Policymakers should recognize that while radical leftism presents a challenge, the broader electorate still holds a strong desire to preserve established national structures.
中文摘要
卡托學會（Cato Institute）指出，儘管美國民主社會主義者（DSA）透過推動廢除參議院或削減國防部預算的等極具激進性的綱領而在選舉上取得成功，但其觀點仍顯著偏離主流的美國共識。調查數據顯示，只有少數美國人支持拆除並重建政府，這表明大多數公民更重視維護現有的制度，例如憲法。雖然社會主義對選民而言具有吸引力（正面看法佔 37%），但作者們警告說，這種吸引力可能源於對 DSA 實際主張的誤解。政策制定者應認識到，儘管激進左翼構成了挑戰，但更廣泛的選民群體仍然抱持著維護既有國家結構的強烈意願。
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.