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 Can Be Done About President Trump’s Slush Fund?
English Summary
CATO’s analysis reveals that President Trump reached a settlement with the federal government, establishing the $1.8 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund to compensate individuals allegedly targeted by ‘lawfare.’ This agreement stemmed from a dismissal of lawsuits against the IRS and involved the IRS forgoing certain audits related to Trump’s tax returns. The fund’s creation mirrors the Keepseagle v. Vilsack Judgment Fund, but raises significant legal questions regarding its constitutionality, potential expansion of presidential pardon power, and compliance with administrative procedures. Legal challenges to the fund’s operation, particularly regarding standing and potential constitutional violations, are ongoing, with initial lawsuits facing significant hurdles.
中文摘要
CATO 智庫的分析顯示，川普總統與聯邦政府達成和解，設立了 18 億美元的反武器化基金，以補償據稱受到『法律戰術』（lawfare）針對的個人。這項協議源於對國稅局（IRS）的訴訟被撤銷，並涉及國稅局放棄與川普個人稅務申報表相關的某些審計。該基金的設立與『凱普賽格案對維爾薩克判決基金』相似，但引發了關於其合憲性、擴大總統赦免權力的潛在可能性以及遵守行政程序方面的重大法律問題。針對該基金運作的法律挑戰，尤其是在立案資格和潛在憲法違規方面，正在進行中，最初的訴訟面臨著重大的障礙。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The brief challenges current border policies that allow agents to search travelers' digital devices without a warrant, arguing this violates the Fourth Amendment. Cato contends that the existing 'border-search exception' is being misused to grant the government an overly broad, warrantless window into private digital lives. The core argument is that personal possession of data should not be treated as a vulnerability, while third-party cloud storage should not be treated as a refuge. If upheld, these policies transform routine border crossings into invasive investigative checkpoints, significantly eroding constitutional privacy rights.
-
3.
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.
-
4.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.
-
5.
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.