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.
Tracking Trump’s Trade Deals
English Summary
CFR argues that Trump’s second-term trade strategy is not a single tariff reset but a rolling, country-by-country restructuring of U.S. trade relations through mostly nonbinding framework deals. The tracker shows that while Liberation Day tariffs set high baselines, subsequent bilateral agreements and exemptions lowered effective rates unevenly and exchanged tariff relief for market-access concessions, purchase pledges, investment commitments, and alignment with U.S. economic-security measures. It also finds these deals are highly flexible and unilateral in design, with weak legal durability, quick-termination provisions, and little congressional constraint, making them closer to instruments of leverage than traditional trade agreements. The policy implication is a less predictable global trade environment where partners must continuously bargain with Washington and balance access to the U.S. market against sovereignty costs and geopolitical exposure, especially vis-a-vis China.
中文摘要
CFR 主張，川普第二任期的貿易策略並非一次性的關稅重置，而是透過多數不具法律拘束力的框架性協議，按國別持續重構美國對外貿易關係。該追蹤報告顯示，儘管「解放日」關稅設定了高基準，後續雙邊協議與豁免措施卻以不均衡方式降低了實際稅率，並以關稅減讓交換市場准入讓步、採購承諾、投資承諾，以及與美國經濟安全措施的一致性。報告亦指出，這些協議在設計上高度彈性且偏向單邊，法律持久性薄弱，包含快速終止條款，且幾乎不受國會制衡，因此更接近施壓槓桿工具，而非傳統貿易協定。其政策意涵是，全球貿易環境將更難預測，各國夥伴必須持續與華府談判，並在取得美國市場准入與主權成本及地緣政治曝險（尤其相對於中國）之間權衡。
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.