Last June, the White House issued a set of proposals to reform and reorganize government functions in dozens of executive branch agencies. The proposals range from cosmetic (e.g., renaming the Department of Health and Human Services) to substantial (e.g., combining the Departments of Labor and Education) with significant implications for domestic and foreign policy, as well as for national security.
A memorandum prepared by the Congressional Research Service provides brief summaries and analyses of the most important proposals, assessing their feasibility and describing the uncertainties involved. See Trump Administration Reform and Reorganization Plan: Discussion of 35 “Government-Wide” Proposals, CRS memorandum, July 25, 2018.
New and updated reports issued by the Congressional Research Service last week include the following.
Air Force B-21 Raider Long Range Strike Bomber, updated October 12, 2018
Religious Intolerence [sic] in Indonesia, CRS In Focus, October 10, 2018
Post-election Issues in Bosnia and Herzegovina, CRS Insight, October 11, 2018
Hurricane Michael: Brief Overview of FEMA Programs and Resources, CRS Insight, updated October 11, 2018
Temporary Protected Status: Overview and Current Issues, updated October 10, 2018
Vehicle Fuel Economy and Greenhouse Gas Standards, CRS In Focus, updated October 11, 2018
Expiration of the 2014 Farm Bill, October 11, 2018
House Passes Bill to Amend the Federal “Crime of Violence” Definition, CRS Legal Sidebar, October 11, 2018
Deference and its Discontents: Will the Supreme Court Overrule Chevron?, CRS Legal Sidebar, October 11, 2018
After months of delay, the council tasked by President Trump to review the FEMA released its final report. Our disaster policy nerds have thoughts.
FAS and FLI partnered to build a series of convenings and reports across the intersections of artificial intelligence (AI) with biosecurity, cybersecurity, nuclear command and control, military integration, and frontier AI governance. This project brought together leaders across these areas and created a space that was rigorous, transpartisan, and solutions-oriented to approach how we should think about how AI is rapidly changing global risks.
Investment should instead be directed at sectors where American technology and innovation exist but the infrastructure to commercialize them domestically does not—and where the national security case is clear.
AI is already consequential, but its future trajectory remains contested. Policymakers should make their assumptions explicit, focus on what can be shaped rather than what can be perfectly predicted, and build institutions that can learn and respond as evidence changes.