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.
Can Trump Get a New Nuclear Deal With Iran?
English Summary
The analysis concludes that any future nuclear deal with Iran must fundamentally differ from the 2015 JCPOA, as Iran's capabilities have advanced significantly since the treaty's inception. Key evidence shows that Iran has improved its centrifuge technology and installation speed, shifting the threat from merely enriching uranium to rapidly achieving weaponization. Consequently, a viable policy strategy must mandate comprehensive oversight, requiring Iran to fully implement the Additional Protocol and allowing inspectors access to military and non-nuclear research sites to monitor both fissile material production and covert weaponization activities.
中文摘要
分析結論指出，未來與伊朗簽署的任何核協議，必須從2015年《聯合全面行動計畫》（JCPOA）產生根本性差異，因為自該協議簽署以來，伊朗的能力已顯著提升。關鍵證據顯示，伊朗改善了其離心機技術和安裝速度，使得威脅已從單純富集鈾，轉變為快速實現武器化。因此，可行的政策策略必須要求實施全面監管，要求伊朗完全執行《附加議定書》，並允許檢查員進入軍事和非核研究設施，以監測裂變物質的生產和秘密武器化活動。
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.