By its actions and its refusals to act, the Trump Administration is changing the profile of the United States in global affairs.
Whether demonstrating disdain for longtime allies, disrupting diplomatic relationships and international agreements, or cultivating ties with authoritarian figures in Russia and elsewhere, President Trump seems to be radically altering the character and meaning of American foreign policy. But to what end?
A new report from the Congressional Research Service tries to sort through the situation, and to advise Congress on its options under the circumstances.
For the last 70 years, the U.S. has sought “to promote and defend the open international order that the United States, with the support of its allies, created in the years after World War II,” according to CRS. That may no longer be the case.
But exactly how the direction of U.S. policy is changing, whether it should change, and what it should change to are all subject to dispute. The new CRS report, by specialists Ronald O’Rourke and Michael Moodie, presents the fundamental policy questions on a fairly abstract level, without mentioning Putin, Merkel, Duterte, or other leaders with whom the Trump Administration has acted to modify U.S. relations.
See U.S. Role in the World: Background and Issues for Congress, July 12, 2017.
Scorning multilateral trade agreements, the Trump Administration risks diminishing the U.S. role in setting the rules for international trade, another new CRS publication said. A pending Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and Japan could also work to the disadvantage of U.S. firms by “increas[ing] the relative price of U.S. goods and services exports to both the EU and Japan, lowering their competitiveness in key U.S. markets.” See The Proposed EU-Japan FTA and Implications for U.S. Trade Policy, CRS Insight, July 14, 2017.
Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.
Foreign Affairs Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) Funding: Background and Current Status, CRS In Focus, July 19, 2017
Reform of U.S. International Taxation: Alternatives, updated July 21, 2017
Accounting and Auditing Regulatory Structure: U.S. and International, July 19, 2017
Economic Impact of Infrastructure Investment, July 18, 2017
Pending ACA Legal Challenges Remain as Congress Pursues Health Care Reform, CRS Legal Sidebar, updated July 13, 2017:
The Nuclear Ban Treaty: An Overview, CRS Insight, July 10, 2017
These ideas aim to advance the detailed policy solutions needed to foster public trust and implement fairness in the adoption of AI across diverse domains, from healthcare and government benefits to rural access, education, and worker protections.
The evidence is clear: algorithmic pay-setting is established in app-based work, and payroll/timekeeping failures show how software can produce systemic wage harm at scale
While a few states have taken steps to implement decision-making mechanisms for certain AI systems, too many leaders are simply accepting narratives about AI’s purported public benefit at face value – jumping to the “how” of AI implementation before thoroughly vetting potential systems and deciding whether they are appropriate to use at all.
When properly structured — with specific numeric targets, secured financial obligations, independent monitoring, and meaningful enforcement — CBAs transform data center deals into durable community partnerships.