Tariff Escalation: A Timeline, and More from CRS
The Trump Administration has moved aggressively to impose tariffs and other restrictions on foreign imports, “but it is unclear what specific outcomes the Administration is seeking,” according to the Congressional Research Service.
“Increasing U.S. tariffs or imposing other import restrictions through these laws potentially opens the United States to complaints that it is violating its WTO and free trade agreement (FTA) commitments,” CRS said. Meanwhile, retaliation by other countries “may be amplifying the potential negative effects of the U.S. tariff measures.”
A new CRS publication provides “a timeline of key events related to each U.S. trade action, as well as the range of potential trade volumes affected by the U.S. tariffs and U.S. trading partners’ retaliations.” See Escalating Tariffs: Timeline and Potential Impact, CRS Insight, July 31, 2018.
Other new and timely publications from the Congressional Research Service include the following.
The World Trade Organization (WTO): U.S. Participation at Risk?, CRS Insight, July 31, 2018
U.S.-China Trade Issues, CRS In Focus, August 2, 2018
Taiwan: Select Political and Security Issues, CRS In Focus, July 31, 2018
Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts, CRS In Focus, August 1, 2018
Family Separation at the Border and the Ms. L. Litigation, CRS Legal Sidebar, July 31, 2018
Pipeline Safety: Overdue Statutory Mandates, CRS Insight, July 27, 2018
Wildfire Statistics, CRS In Focus, August 2, 2018
Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Education, CRS In Focus, August 1, 2018
Iran’s Ballistic Missile and Space Launch Programs, CRS In Focus, August 1, 2018
North Korea: U.S. Relations, Nuclear Diplomacy, and Internal Situation, July 27, 2018
North Korea’s Nuclear and Ballistic Missile Programs, CRS In Focus, August 2, 2018
This report serves as a landscape assessment and toolbox from which local governments can negotiate an informed position when it comes to the levers available to them and includes a first-of-its kind analysis of eight executed community benefits agreements.
When a hurricane hits, it’s all hands on deck – that goes for federal data, too. Pulling back from our investments in timely, accurate, and accessible public data will only make us less prepared and put us all at greater risk.
This is bigger than a singular elimination of race and ethnicity questions. It could accelerate the second wave of widespread reductions to demographic data, leaving public health officials with even less information to deliver better health outcomes for all Americans.
Soft law was never meant to be a permanent solution. Treating it as one, and letting the sandcastle stand in for the skyscraper indefinitely, is how we end up with a decade of voluntary commitments and no enforceable accountability to show for it.