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.
Trump’s repeal of landmark climate ruling is a strategic own goal
English Summary
Chatham House argues that repealing the 2009 EPA endangerment finding is a strategic own goal: it may reduce near-term regulatory pressure, but it undermines US long-term economic and technological power. The paper cites estimates that rollbacks could add 7.9-15.3 billion metric tons of emissions by 2055, while also locking US automakers into legacy internal-combustion technologies as global EV adoption accelerates. It contends that lower regulation does not solve competitiveness because EVs often have lower lifetime operating costs, and global demand is shifting toward cleaner vehicles, with EV sales reaching 20.7 million in 2025. Strategically, the implication is that US policy should treat emissions and efficiency standards as industrial policy, sustaining investment in batteries, electrification, and clean-tech supply chains to avoid ceding market share and influence to China.
中文摘要
研究所主張，撤銷美國環保署（EPA）2009年「危害認定」（endangerment finding）是一種戰略性自傷：此舉或可在短期內減輕監管壓力，卻會削弱美國長期的經濟與科技實力。該文援引估算指出，相關鬆綁措施到2055年可能額外增加79億至153億公噸排放，同時在全球電動車加速普及之際，將美國汽車製造商鎖定於傳統內燃機技術路徑。文章認為，放寬監管無法解決競爭力問題，因為電動車在全生命週期營運成本上往往更低，且全球需求正轉向更潔淨車輛；2025年電動車銷量已達2,070萬輛。從戰略角度看，美國政策應將排放與能效標準視為產業政策工具，持續投入電池、電氣化與潔淨科技供應鏈，以避免將市場份額與影響力讓渡給中國。
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.