CGM Insights

Federalism divides power between the federal government and state governments and, in theory, brings government closer to the people. It restrains arbitrary power, encourages policy experimentation, and offers multiple points of access to public life. Federalism seems like the ideal design for securing these advantages in a territorially diverse democracy, including in the United States, where one in five Americans still live outside metropolitan areas. For rural communities—geographically dispersed, institutionally peripheral, and often culturally distinct—these features ought to be especially beneficial. The lived experience of people in rural communities tells a different story. Despite its theoretical appeal, federalism has too often underdelivered on its promise for those farthest from the centers of power. This policy brief uses examples from interjurisdictional competition that disregards place attachment, political representation that amplifies formal power without meaningful voice, and redistribution programs that fail to overcome local capacity constraints to demonstrate these gaps.

Right-wing extremism has emerged as one of the most extreme manifestations of political polarization, particularly in the context of long-term economic and social decline in the Rust Belt. Once the heart of American industrial power, Rust Belt communities have faced decades of deindustrialization, population loss, and institutional erosion-conditions that have produced not only economic despair but also fertile ground for political radicalization. Extremism is not a fringe phenomenon but rather a concept that is structurally linked to the broader processes of polarization and disaffection. These dynamics are especially acute in postindustrial communities with high concentrations of disaffected veterans, weakened civic institutions, and limited access to economic opportunity. These trends can be countered by a three-pronged strategy of socioeconomic revitalization, veteran support, and community policing-aimed at restoring resilience and undermining the appeal of extremist mobilization.

Modern societies are increasingly characterized by deep pluralism and complex diversity. Rapid technological advances, demographic shifts, and cultural globalization have intensified heterogeneity in values, beliefs, and lifestyles. This growing complexity challenges centralized governance systems, often resulting in inefficiencies, social conflict, and political polarization. Addressing these challenges requires governance models that can adapt to such diversity while fostering coexistence and cooperation.

This policy brief examines the evolving landscape of artificial intelligence governance in the United States and focuses on the tension between federal soft law approaches and emerging state-level regulations. Soft law refers to nonbinding guidelines, voluntary standards, and informal frameworks that aim to guide innovation without imposing rigid legal constraints. Whereas federal policy has favored voluntary standards and industry-led initiatives, several states have proposed or enacted binding regulations that mirror the more prescriptive models of the European Union and China. Through case studies of Virginia, Texas, and Colorado, the brief assesses the risks of regulatory fragmentation and argues that a more coordinated federal framework—grounded in soft law—can preserve innovation while guiding state-level governance. The brief concludes by offering recommendations for a model governance approach that balances flexibility, national coherence, and state autonomy.

China is currently the only major power actively engaging with the Taliban regime since the fall of Afghani- stan’s Republic in 2021. This policy brief examines China’s evolving security engagement with Taliban-led Afghanistan. Its emphasis is on the ways in which China uses its diplomatic and economic weight to protect its interests in Afghanistan. China’s approach—framed through diplomatic dialogues and strategic investments— is primarily driven by its national security concerns, particularly the threat posed by Uyghur militants. While China publicly supports an “Afghan-led, Afghan-owned” framework, it often engages in regional dialogues that exclude Afghan voices. The policy brief highlights China’s efforts to balance its economic interests and regional influence while avoiding military entanglements, and it critiques the limitations of a narrowly counterterrorism-focused policy.