Contesting a Presidential Election, & More from CRS
The procedures for challenging the outcome of a presidential election are summarized in a new publication from the Congressional Research Service.
“The initial responsibility for resolving challenges, recounts, and contests to the results of a presidential election” lies with each individual state, CRS noted. But under some circumstances, challenges to a presidential election can work their way up to Congress for resolution. See How Can the Results of a Presidential Election Be Contested?, CRS Legal Sidebar, August 26, 2016.
Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following:
Saudi Military Campaign in Yemen Draws Congressional Attention to U.S. Arms Sales, CRS Insight, August 30, 2016
Bahrain: Reform, Security, and U.S. Policy, updated August 29, 2016
Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations, updated August 26, 2016
Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations in Brief, updated August 26, 2016
Gangs in Central America, updated August 29, 2016
American Agriculture and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement, updated August 30, 2016
Tolling U.S. Highways, August 26, 2016
Labor Day Speech Resources: Fact Sheet, August 26, 2016
Supreme Court: Length of the Scalia Vacancy in Historical Context, CRS Insight, August 26, 2016
Americans are paying too much for almost everything, because the United States has long treated its trucking industry as an artifact to be preserved rather than as an opportunity for innovation.
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.