#united nations department of global communications

[developmentinformationday]

Launch of the 2024 mid-year update. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA).

Learn insights on the world’s economic outlook at the midpoint of 2024 and the way forward. Join us for the launch of the World Economic Situation and Prospects as of mid-2024 report!

[slaveryabolitionday]

Knowledge, History and Power: In conversation.

Objectives:

To increase awareness of the transformational and liberating power of accurate knowledge to end racism and racial discrimination.

To highlight some of the challenges in sharing accurate knowledge about the difficult history of enslavement and the Transatlantic Slave Trade.

To examine some of best practices in sharing accurate knowledge about enslavement, racism and racial discrimination through media and journalism.

To engender and mobilize greater support for racial justice in public education.

To consider the role of power in addressing white supremacy and systemic racism.

To understand how those whose ancestors profited from the trade enslaved in Africans can make amends and contribute to reconciliation.

To inspire a movement of shared humanity while empowering the audience

to fight for the rights of and justice for the global African diaspora.

[holocaustremembranceday]

Family and Memory, Home and Belonging.

Holocaust Remembrance Day 2023 (Yom HaShoah) – Holocaust survivors Edith Shapiro and Selma Rossen and family in conversation with Melissa Fleming, USG for United Nations Department of Global Communications, about Family and Memory, Home and Belonging

[unpublicserviceday]

Solutions for a Sustainable future through enhanced global cooperation.

Join us LIVE for the Civil Society Townhall with the 77th President of the United Nations General Assembly Mr. Csaba Korosi.

Tuesday, 27 June 2023 - 11 AM - 01 PM EDT

ECOSOC Chamber, United Nations Headquarters, NY.

[batboyblog]

Things the Biden-Harris Administration Did This Week #28

July 19-26 2024

The EPA announced the award of $4.3 billion in Climate Pollution Reduction Grants. The grants support community-driven solutions to fight climate change, and accelerate America’s clean energy transition. The grants will go to 25 projects across 30 states, and one tribal community. When combined the projects will reduce greenhouse gas pollution by as much as 971 million metric tons of CO2, roughly the output of 5 million American homes over 25 years. Major projects include $396 million for Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection as it tries to curb greenhouse gas emissions from industrial production, and $500 million for transportation and freight decarbonization at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

The Biden-Harris Administration announced a plan to phase out the federal government's use of single use plastics. The plan calls for the federal government to stop using single use plastics in food service operations, events, and packaging by 2027, and from all federal operations by 2035. The US government is the single largest employer in the country and the world’s largest purchaser of goods and services. Its move away from plastics will redefine the global market.

The White House hosted a summit on super pollutants with the goals of better measuring them and dramatically reducing them. Roughly half of today's climate change is caused by so called super pollutants, methane, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and nitrous oxide (N2O). Public-private partnerships between NOAA and United Airlines, The State Department and NASA, and the non-profit Carbon Mapper Coalition will all help collect important data on these pollutants. While private firms announced with the White House plans that by early next year will reduce overall U.S. industrial emissions of nitrous oxide by over 50% from 2020 numbers. The summit also highlighted the EPA's new rule to reduce methane from oil and gas by 80%.

The EPA announced $325 million in grants for climate justice. The Community Change Grants Program, powered by President Biden's Inflation Reduction Act will ultimately bring $2 billion dollars to disadvantaged communities and help them combat climate change. Some of the projects funded in this first round of grant were: $20 million for Midwest Tribal Energy Resources Association, which will help weatherize and energy efficiency upgrade homes for 35 tribes in Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, $14 million to install onsite wastewater treatment systems throughout 17 Black Belt counties in Alabama, and $14 million to urban forestry, expanding tree canopy in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.

The Department of Interior approved 3 new solar projects on public land. The 3 projects, two in Nevada and one in Arizona, once finished could generate enough to power 2 million homes. This comes on top of DoI already having beaten its goal of 25 gigawatts of clean energy projects by the end of 2025, in April 2024. This is all part of President Biden’s goal of creating a carbon pollution-free power sector by 2035. 

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen pledged $667 million to global Pandemic Fund. The fund set up in 2022 seeks to support Pandemic prevention, and readiness in low income nations who can't do it on their own. At the G20 meeting Yellen pushed other nations of the 20 largest economies to double their pledges to the $2 billion dollar fund. Yellen highlighted the importance of the fund by saying "President Biden and I believe that a fully-resourced Pandemic Fund will enable us to better prevent, prepare for, and respond to pandemics – protecting Americans and people around the world from the devastating human and economic costs of infectious disease threats,"

The Departments of the Interior and Commerce today announced a $240 million investment in tribal fisheries in the Pacific Northwest. This is in line with an Executive Order President Biden signed in 2023 during the White House Tribal Nations Summit to mpower Tribal sovereignty and self-determination. An initial $54 million for hatchery maintenance and modernization will be made available for 27 tribes in Alaska, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. The rest will be invested in longer term fishery projects in the coming years.

The IRS announced that thanks to funding from President Biden's Inflation Reduction Act, it'll be able to digitize much of its operations. This means tax payers will be able to retrieve all their tax related information from one source, including Wage & Income, Account, Record of Account, and Return transcripts, using on-line Individual Online Account.

The IRS also announced that New Jersey will be joining the direct file program in 2025. The direct file program ran as a pilot in 12 states in 2024, allowing tax-payers in those states to file simple tax returns using a free online filing tool directly with the IRS. In 2024 140,000 Americans were able to file this way, they collectively saved $5.6 million in tax preparation fees, claiming $90 million in returns. The average American spends $270 and 13 hours filing their taxes. More than a million people in New Jersey alone will qualify for direct file next year. Oregon opted to join last month. Republicans in Congress lead by Congressmen Adrian Smith of Nebraska and Chuck Edwards of North Carolina have put forward legislation to do away with direct file.

Bonus: American law enforcement arrested co-founder of the Sinaloa Cartel, Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada. El Mayo co-founded the cartel in the 1980s along side Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán. Since El Chapo's incarceration in the United States in 2019, El Mayo has been sole head of the Sinaloa Cartel. Authorities also arrested El Chapo's son, Joaquin Guzman Lopez. The Sinaloa Cartel has been a major player in the cross border drug trade, and has often used extreme violence to further their aims.

[zvaigzdelasas]

[H]undreds of legal experts and groups on Monday urged the global community—and the United States government in particular—"to comply with international law by ending the use of broad, unilateral coercive measures that extensively harm civilian populations."

In a letter to U.S. President Joe Biden, the jurists and legal groups wrote that "75 years ago, in the aftermath of one of the most destructive conflicts in human history, nations of the world came together in Geneva, Switzerland to establish clear legal limits on the treatment of noncombatants in times of war."

"One key provision... is the prohibition of collective punishment, which is considered a war crime," the letter continues. "We consider the unilateral application of certain economic sanctions to constitute collective punishment."

Suzanne Adely, president of the National Lawyers Guild—one of the letter's signatories—said in a statement that "economic sanctions cause direct material harm not only to the people living on the receiving end of these policies, but to those who rely on trade and economic relations with sanctioned countries."

"The legal community needs to push back against the narrative that sanctions are nonviolent alternatives to warfare and hold the U.S. Government accountable for violating international law every time it wields these coercive measures," she added.[...]

"Hundreds of millions of people currently live under such broad U.S. economic sanctions in some form, including in notable cases such as Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria, and Venezuela," the letter notes. "The evidence that these measures can cause severe, widespread civilian harm, including death, is overwhelming. Broad economic sanctions can spark and prolong economic crises, hinder access to essential goods like food, fuel, and medicine, and increase poverty, hunger, disease, and even death rates, especially among children. Such conditions in turn often drive mass migration, as in the recent cases of Cuba and Venezuela."

For more than 64 years, the U.S. has imposed a crippling economic embargo on Cuba that had adversely affected all sectors of the socialist island's economy and severely limited Cubans' access to basic necessities including food, fuel, and medicines. The Cuban government claims the blockade cost the country's economy nearly $5 billion in just one 11-month period in 2022-23 alone. For the past 32 years, United Nations member states have voted overwhelmingly against the U.S. embargo on Cuba. Last year's vote was 187-2, with the U.S. and Israel as the only dissenters.

According to a 2019 report from the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a progressive think tank based in Washington, D.C., as many as 40,000 Venezuelans died from 2017-18 to U.S. sanctions, which have made it much more difficult for millions of people to obtain food, medicine, and other necessities.

"Civilian suffering is not merely an incidental cost of these policies, but often their very intent," the new letter asserts. "A 1960 State Department memo on the embargo of Cuba suggested 'denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation, and overthrow of government.'"

"Asked whether the Trump administration's sanctions on Iran were working as intended, then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo responded that 'things are much worse for the Iranian people, and we're convinced that will lead the Iranian people to rise up and change the behavior of the regime,'" the signers added.

12 Aug 24

[afeelgoodblog]

The Best News of Last Week - March 13, 2023

🐝 - Did you hear about the honeybee vaccine? It's creating quite the buzz! But seriously, it's a major breakthrough in the fight against American foulbrood and could save billions of bees.

1. Transgender health care is now protected in Minnesota

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz signed an executive order protecting and supporting access to gender-affirming health care for LGBTQ people in the state, amidst Republican-backed efforts across the country to limit transgender health care. The order upholds the essential values of One Minnesota where all people, including members of the LGBTQIA+ community, are safe, celebrated, and able to live lives full of dignity and joy.

Numerous medical organizations have said that access to gender-affirming care is essential to the health and wellness of gender diverse people, while states like Tennessee, Arizona, Utah, Arkansas, Alabama, Mississippi, South Dakota, and Florida have passed policies or laws restricting transgender health care.

2. First vaccine for honeybees could save billions

The US government has approved the world's first honeybee vaccine to fight against American foulbrood, a bacterial disease that destroys bee colonies vital for crop pollination.

Developed by biotech company Dalan Animal Health, the vaccine integrates some of the foulbrood bacteria into royal jelly, which is then fed to the queen by the worker bees, resulting in the growing bee larvae developing immunity to foulbrood. The vaccine aims to limit the damage caused by the infectious disease, for which there is currently no cure, and promote the development of vaccines for other diseases affecting bees.

3. Teens rescued after days stranded in California snowstorm: "We were already convinced we were going to die"

The recent snowstorms in California have resulted in dangerous conditions for hikers and residents in mountain communities. Two teenage hikers were rescued by the San Bernardino County sheriff's department after getting lost in the mountains for 10 days.

The boys were well-prepared for the hike but were not prepared for the massive amounts of snow that followed. They were lucky to survive, suffering from hypothermia and having to huddle together for three nights to stay warm.

Yosemite National Park has had to be closed indefinitely due to the excessive snowfall.

4. La Niña, which worsens Atlantic hurricanes and Western droughts, is gone

The La Nina weather phenomenon, which increases Atlantic hurricane activity and worsens western drought, has ended after three years, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. That's usually good news for the United States and other parts of the world, including drought-stricken northeast Africa, scientists said.

The globe is now in what's considered a "neutral" condition.

5. Where there's gender equality, people tend to live longer

Both women and men are likely to live longer when a country makes strides towards gender equality, according to a new global study that authors believe to be the first of its kind.

The study was published in the journal PLOS Global Public Health this week. It adds to a growing body of research showing that advances in women's rights benefit everyone. "Globally, greater gender equality is associated with longer [life expectancy] for both women and men and a widening of the gender gap in [life expectancy]," they conclude.

6. New data shows 1 in 7 cars sold globally is an EV, and combustion engine car sales have decreased by 25% since 2017

Electric vehicles are the key technology to decarbonise road transport, a sector that accounts for 16% of global emissions. Compared with 2020, sales nearly doubled to 6.6 million (a sales share of nearly 9%), bringing the total number of electric cars on the road to 16.5 million.

Sales were highest in China, where they tripled relative to 2020 to 3.3 million after several years of relative stagnation, and in Europe, where they increased by two-thirds year-on-year to 2.3 million. Together, China and Europe accounted for more than 85% of global electric car sales in 2021

7. Lastly, watch this touching moment as rescued puppy gains trust in her new owners

By the way, this is my newly started YouTube channel. Subscribe for more wholesome videos :D

---

That's it for this week. If you liked this post you can support this newsletter with a small kofi donation:

Buy me a coffee ❤️

Let's carry the positivity into next week and keep spreading the good news!

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

by Adam Kredo

Kamala Harris's newly appointed head of Arab-American outreach once accused Zionists of "controlling" American politics, echoing an anti-Semitic trope that suggests Jews nefariously manipulate global affairs.

"The Zionists have a strong voice in American politics," Brenda Abdelall, an Egyptian-American lawyer and former Department of Homeland Security official, said in a 2002 interview with the New York Sun while attending the American Muslim Council's annual convention. "I would say they're controlling a lot of it."

Abdelall, whom Harris tapped earlier this week to help galvanize Arab voters, made the remarks after a speaker at the event, anti-Israel professor Jamil Fayez, said that "Zionists are destroying America." Responding to his remarks, Abdelall said that while "'destroying' is a harsh word," supporters of the Jewish state do control American politics.

The American Muslim Council's 2002 confab also provided attendees with a chance to meet anti-Semitic former congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (D., Ga.), who famously blamed Jews for the 9/11 terror attack and attended a 2009 Holocaust-denial gathering in London. Her father similarly blamed Jews when she lost her congressional seat shortly after the 2002 conference. "Jews have bought everybody. Jews. J-E-W-S," he said.

Abdelall's appointment comes as Harris works to appease members of her party's liberal flank who want her to more aggressively confront the Jewish state and undermine its war on Hamas, including by cutting off arms sales. Harris has praised pro-Hamas campus protesters as "showing exactly what the human emotion should be, as a response to Gaza." In March, she accused Israel of stoking "humanitarian catastrophe."

Abdelall joins several other Harris campaign advisers who have a history of pressuring Israel and advocating increased relations with Iran. They include Harris's national security adviser, Phil Gordon, who is the subject of a congressional probe into his ties to a member of an Iranian government influence network. Ilan Goldenberg, Harris's liaison to the Jewish community, has faced scrutiny for his ties to the anti-Israel group J Street, as well as championing closer ties to Tehran.

Harris also appointed a veteran Israel critic, the Rev. Jen Butler, to conduct outreach to the faith community. Butler has come under fire for working alongside anti-Semitic activist Linda Sarsour.

Abdelall also is a veteran of the anti-Israel advocacy world.

During the 2002 American Muslim Council event, she suggested that the election defeat of former congressman Earl Hilliard Sr. (D., Ala.) "shows the Jewish influence in politics," according to the Sun. At the time, Hilliard had faced criticism from pro-Israel groups for voting against a congressional resolution condemning Palestinian suicide bombers.

Abdelall's mother founded the American Muslim Council's Ann Arbor branch, helping the anti-Israel advocacy group expand its presence across the country, according to the Sun.

The Harris campaign defended Adelall, saying that as a DHS official, she "worked closely on the implementation of the country's first National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism" and "led efforts for the first United We Stand summit, a White House event to counter hate-fueled violence."

"We are proud to add her to the campaign."

The American Muslim Council has long courted controversy for spreading anti-Israel propaganda.

In 2003, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D., N.Y.) blasted the group's former executive director, Eric Erfan Vickers, for claiming "that the recent tragic loss of the Space Shuttle Columbia and its entire crew was an act of divine retribution against Israel, and attributable to the presence of the first Israeli astronaut on the mission."

Vickers at the time said he saw "a sign in the calamitous destruction of the one hundred and thirteenth space shuttle mission taking place over a city named Palestine, while on board was the first Israeli astronaut." Nadler described the remarks as "unthinkable."

[capybaracorn]

Australia challenged on ‘moral failure’ of weapons trade with Israel

Regular protests have been taking place outside Australian firms making crucial components for the F-35 fighter jet.

Melbourne, Australia – Israel’s continued assault on Gaza has highlighted a hidden yet crucial component of the world’s weapons manufacturing industry – suburban Australia.

Tucked away in Melbourne’s industrial north, Heat Treatment Australia (HTA) is an Australian company that plays a vital role in the production of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters; the same model that Israel is using to bomb Gaza.

Weekly protests of about 200 people have been taking place for months outside the nondescript factory, where heat treatment is applied to strengthen components for the fighter jet a product of US military giant Lockheed Martin.

While protesters have sometimes brought production to a halt with their pickets, they remain concerned about what’s going on inside factories like HTA.

“We decided to hold the community picket to disrupt workers, and we were successful in stopping work for the day,” Nathalie Farah, protest organiser with local group Hume for Palestine, told Al Jazeera. “We consider this to be a win.”

“Australia is absolutely complicit in the genocide that is happening,” said 26-year-old Farah, who is of Syrian and Palestinian origin. “Which is contrary to what the government might have us believe.”

More than 32,000 Palestinians have been killed since Israel launched its war in Gaza six months ago after Hamas killed more than 1,000 people in a surprise attack on Israel. The war, being investigated as a genocide by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), has left hundreds of thousands on the brink of starvation, according to the United Nations.

Nathalie Farah has been organising regular protests outside HTA’s factory [Ali MC/Al Jazeera]

According to Lockheed Martin, “Every F-35 built contains some Australian parts and components,” with more than 70 Australian companies having export contracts valued at a total 4.13 billion Australian dollars ($2.69bn).

Protesters have also picketed Rosebank Engineering, in Melbourne’s southeast, the world’s only producer of the F-35’s “uplock actuator system”, a crucial component of the aircraft’s bomb bay doors.

Defence industry push

In recent years, the Australian government has sought to increase defence exports to boost the country’s flagging manufacturing industry.

In 2018, former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull announced Australia aimed to become one of the world’s top 10 defence exporters within a decade. It is currently 30th in global arms production, according to the Stockholm International Peace Institute.

It is an aspiration that appears set to continue under the government of Anthony Albanese after it concluded a more than one-billion-Australian-dollar deal with Germany to supply more than 100 Boxer Heavy Weapon Carrier vehicles in 2023 – Australia’s single biggest defence industry deal.

Since the Gaza war began, the industry and its business relationship with Israel have come increasingly under the spotlight.

Last month, Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles insisted that there were “no exports of weapons from Australia to Israel and there haven’t been for many, many years”.

However, between 2016 and 2023 the Australian government approved some 322 export permits for military and dual-use equipment to Israel.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s own data – available to the public online – shows that Australian exports of “arms and ammunition” to Israel totalled $15.5 million Australian dollars ($10.1m) over the same period of time.

Officials now appear to be slowing the export of military equipment to Israel.

In a recent interview with Australia’s national broadcaster ABC, the Minister for International Development and the Pacific Pat Conroy insisted the country was “not exporting military equipment to Israel” and clarified this meant “military weapons, things like bombs”.

However, defence exports from Australia fall into two categories, items specifically for military use – such as Boxer Heavy Weapons vehicles for Germany – and so-called ‘dual use’ products, such as radar or communications systems, that can have both civilian and military uses.

[See the video embedded in the article]

Australia’s Department of Defence did not respond to Al Jazeera’s requests about whether the halt to defence exports to Israel also included dual-use items.

What is certain is that companies such as HTA and Rosebank Engineering are continuing to manufacture components for the F-35, despite the risk of deployment in what South Africa told the International Court of Justice in December amounted to “genocidal acts“.

In the Netherlands – where parts for the jet are also manufactured – an appeal court last month ordered the Dutch government to block such exports to Israel citing the risk of breaching international law.

The Australian government has also come under scrutiny for its lax “end-use controls” on the weapons and components it exports.

As such, while the F-35 components are exported to US parent company Lockheed Martin, their ultimate use is largely outside Australia’s legal purview.

Lauren Sanders, senior research fellow on law and the future of war at the University of Queensland, told Al Jazeera that the “on-selling of components and military equipment through third party states is a challenge to global export controls.

“Once something is out of a state’s control, it becomes more difficult to trace, and to prevent it being passed on to another country,” she said.

Sanders said Australia’s “end use controls” were deficient in comparison with other exporters such as the United States.

“The US has hundreds of dedicated staff – with appropriate legal authority to investigate – to chase down potential end-use breaches,” she said.

“Australia does not have the same kind of end-use controls in place in its legislation, nor does it have the same enforcement resources that the US does.”

The protesters say they will continue their action until manufacturing of F-35 components is stopped [Ali MC/Al Jazeera]

In fact, under legislation passed in November 2023, permits for defence goods are no longer required for exports to the United Kingdom and the US under the AUKUS security agreement.

In a statement, the government argued the exemption would “deliver 614 million [Australian dollars; $401m] in value to the Australian economy over 10 years, by reducing costs to local businesses and unlocking investment opportunities with our AUKUS partners”.

International law

This new legislation may provide more opportunities for Australian weapons manufacturers, such as NIOA, a privately owned munitions company that makes bullets at a factory in Benalla, a small rural town in Australia’s southeast.

The largest supplier of munitions to the Australian Defence Force, NIOA – which did not respond to Al Jazeera for comment – also has aspirations to break into the US weapons market.

At a recent business conference, CEO Robert Nioa said that “the goal is to establish greater production capabilities in both countries so that Australia can be an alternative source of supply of weapons in times of conflict for the Australian and US militaries”.

Greens Senator David Shoebridge told Al Jazeera that the government needed to “publicly and immediately refute the plan to become a top 10 global arms dealer and then to provide full transparency on all Australian arms exports including end users.

“While governments in the Netherlands and the UK are facing legal challenges because of their role in the global supply chain, the Australian Labor government just keeps handing over weapons parts as though no genocide was happening,” he said. “It’s an appalling moral failure, and it is almost certainly a gross breach of international law.”

The Dutch government has faced legal action over the export of F-35 fighter jet parts to Israel [File: Piroschka van de Wouw/Reuters]

Elbit has come under fire for its sale of defence equipment to the Myanmar military regime, continuing sales even after the military, which seized power in a 2021 coup, was accused of gross human rights violations – including attacks on civilians – by the United Nations and others.

Despite a recent joint announcement between the Australian and UK governments for an “immediate cessation of fighting” in Gaza, some say Australia needs to go further and cut defence ties with Israel altogether.

“The Australian government must listen to the growing public calls for peace and end Australia’s two-way arms trade with Israel,” Shoebridge said. “The Albanese government is rewarding and financing the Israeli arms industry just at the moment they are arming a genocide.”

Protests have continued both at the HTA factory in Melbourne and their premises in Brisbane, with organisers pledging to continue until the company stops manufacturing components for the F-35.

[mariacallous]

Let’s get one thing clear: the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris, was never the border czar, despite her political opponents’ attempts to label her as such. If Harris has ever had a Biden administration czarship—not with an official title but with broad authority to coordinate and direct multiple agencies, organizations, and departments on a multi-faceted policy priority—it was in artificial intelligence (AI). Strangely, this doesn’t seem to have come up a lot in the 2024 presidential contest, despite the presence of AI everywhere else these days. In fact, this role doesn’t even merit a passing mention on the “Meet Vice President Kamala Harris” page of her website even as she prepares to formally become the party’s presidential candidate at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago.

AI might lack the political resonance of the border today, but it is time we reconsider its significance to the average voter. As Harris graduates from a vibes campaign to one with more substance, the vice president should put a spotlight on the AI in her record. When AI is recast as a sweeping change that could affect jobs, income equality, national security, and the rights of ordinary citizens, it is rather quickly transformed from esoterica to an everyday concern. The Trump-Vance campaign has received support from the likes of Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, and Marc Andreessen—all major Silicon Valley and AI influencers and investors—but it is Harris, not former President Donald Trump, who has actual fingerprints on AI policy. So, what has been Harris’s track record in this area? And where is the vice president likely to take AI policy if she wins the White House?

Harris’s role as AI czar may be the political season’s best-kept secret. But if one were to trace AI policy development in the world’s leading AI-producing nation, all signs point to Harris. Remarkably, AI policy development has been led by the White House rather than the U.S. Congress. In fact, Congress has done precious little, despite the growing need for AI guardrails, while the White House, with Harris as the seniormost public official involved, has helped frame and follow up on its October 2023 executive order on AI.

That order was designed to ensure the “safe, secure, and trustworthy development and use of AI.” In addition, Harris has made a broader commitment to “establishing a set of rules and norms for AI, with allies and partners, that reflect democratic values and interests, including transparency, privacy, accountability, and consumer protections.” Significantly for a technology disproportionately reliant on a handful of industry players, Harris suggested and has led the important first step of bringing these players together to commit to a set of AI practices and standards that advances three critical objectives: safety, security, and trust.

Given the disproportionate influence of the United States on AI used around the world, it is critical for the country to have its public position clarified in international fora. Harris has represented the United States in key international convenings and led the country’s global advocacy efforts on ensuring safe AI, such as at the AI Safety Summit in Bletchley Park, England. At the other end of the stakeholder spectrum, Harris has also met with the communities most directly affected by the wider adoption of the technology, including consumer protection groups and labor and civil rights leaders, to discuss protections against AI risks.

Harris’ contact with AI has another dimension, too. As the ultimate political unicorn—a woman of color, an underrated and parodied vice president in the Biden administration, and an overnight sensation as presumptive presidential nominee of the Democratic Party after U.S. President Joe Biden stepped aside from the 2024 race—Harris’s narrative has been defined largely by others, whether it is through AI-assisted disinformation campaigns or viral memes. She has been personally targeted by deepfake videos of her supposedly making garbled statements, such as, “Today is today, and yesterday was today yesterday.” An AI-aided voice synthesis that led to a demeaning parody of her presidential campaign advertisement was reposted by Musk himself on X. Trump has also falsely claimed that the large crowds at Harris’s campaign rallies were AI generated. In other words, Harris can legitimately claim to have had AI weaponized against her personally.

Finally, Harris hails from the global capital of AI. As former attorney general and senator of California, she has been financially supported by many in the tech industry; more than 200 Silicon Valley investors have backed her run for the White House. One of her closest confidantes is her brother-in-law, Tony West, Uber’s chief legal officer (now on leave to work for the Harris campaign). It is legitimate to ask if she would be willing to confront the industry on difficult issues; at the same time, her closeness with industry leaders could help with greater government-industry collaboration.

What can we learn from Harris’s record as to what she would do in the presidency on this issue? As AI czar, Harris showed some clear patterns. For one, her primary focus has been promoting safety and addressing the risks of unregulated AI use, which can lead to bias or abuse. Second, the White House under her stewardship has accomplished a wide range of safety-, security-, and trust-enhancing actions since the issuance of the executive order—from AI testbeds and model evaluation tools developed at the Department of Energy to the Office of Management and Budget-issued government-wide policy on AI, the latter with safeguards to assess and monitor AI’s societal impact. There have been pilots at the departments of Defense and Homeland Security using AI to protect vital government software and a call to action from the Gender Policy Council and Office of Science and Technology Policy to combat AI-generated image-based sexual abuse. Harris has also been the seniormost official behind the release of a Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights, outlining principles for the ethical design and use of AI.

Another of Harris’s initiatives has been aimed at promoting authenticity as concerns about AI-generated content skyrocket. This includes proposing international standards for tracing authenticity of government-produced digital content and identifying AI-generated or manipulated content, through digital signatures, watermarking, and labeling.

While Harris is not, any means, an expert on AI, and much work remains to get a full-throated AI policy in place, the numbers tell a tale of steady early accomplishment. A list of 100 action items following the executive order has been completed by various federal agencies on issues ranging from developing new technical guidelines for AI safety to evaluating misuse of dual-use foundation models and developing frameworks for managing generative AI risks. Harris has obtained voluntary commitments from 15 companies to ensure safe, secure, and transparent development of AI technology. 31 nations have joined the United States in endorsing a declaration establishing norms for responsible development, deployment, and use of military AI capabilities. And the U.S. government has won commitments of up to $200 million from 10 leading foundations to fund work around five pillars that cover issues from democracy and rights to improving transparency and accountability of AI.

Harris’s campaign rests on the idea of looking to the future and “not going back.” The Democratic National Convention in Chicago presents an opportunity for Harris to communicate more to the public about a key part of that future: AI’s economic and societal implications and her role in influencing them. Time is running out on conveying this issue’s importance, especially to the working class. While the impact of AI on different occupations is a matter of debate, some argue that, in the near-term, higher-income workers are more likely to benefit from productivity improvements due to AI and the share of income going to capital is likely to increase at the expense of the share that goes to labor. Both trends would contribute to an increase in income inequality.

As for the impact on jobs, there are different schools of thought. Some believe AI could help make many services, such as medical care, or currently elite job responsibilities, such as research, writing. graphics design and software coding more accessible to the middle class. Others see a plausible scenario of a hollowing out of specialized job functions. Policy and election promises need to show how a Harris administration would help steer toward the former outcome.

On the global stage, there are numerous existential risks associated with AI. Autonomous lethal weapons are a critical concern as multilateral agreements to ban such weapons have failed. Tensions with major AI-producing nations such as China are escalating, with no roadmap for getting to common ground as both the United States and China have declared their aspirations to become the world’s AI leader. A recent seven-hour meeting between top officials of the two countries in Geneva advertised as a dialogue on managing AI risks reportedly ended with no concrete agreements or follow-up meetings scheduled.

In parallel, the atmosphere has only become more tense with U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports and restrictions on the export of high-end chips to China. The Commerce Department is considering further restrictions on exporting proprietary AI models to China. Meanwhile, Beijing and Moscow are discussing a strategic partnership on various issues, including technology, while the Chinese embassy in Washington has accused the United States of “economic coercion and unilateral bullying.” If mishandled, these tensions can escalate.

Harris’s campaign can distinguish her candidacy with an acknowledgement of her track record and momentum on AI policy development. It must make the case for at least three sets of issues her administration would address. First: understanding AI’s impact on jobs and the resulting impact on economic inequality, and setting forth a plan to mitigate risks and protecting the most vulnerable. Second: developing a strategy for harnessing AI that addresses key kitchen-table concerns, such as accessible healthcare and education and skill-building. And third: crafting a vision for U.S. leadership in AI that advances responsible innovation, reduces geopolitical tensions, and preserves American national security interests.

Going from czar to president is unusual and comes with unusual challenges. Czars are usually not formally appointed as such—Harris was never officially designated AI czar despite the clear czar-like nature of her involvement—but can work to bring multiple parties together, often doing so outside public view. Then-Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry, for example, played a key role as de facto climate czarin increasing cooperation on that issue with China without much fanfare.

In other instances, and when they are brought in during an acute crisis, czars come with enormous expectations: The city of Boston awaits a rat czar, and residents want to see quick results. Czars do not have executive powers but have the respect of many, which is the calling card that allows them to convene parties with differing agendas. Presidents enjoy none of these luxuries. They own the problems they take on and they do so in public view.

There’s no escaping the reality that we are—and this election is being held—firmly in the age of AI. It is important that Harris’s team conveys the significance of AI to people’s lives and lets voters know how Harris would build on her unique track record. American voters have a choice to make for the nation’s next president this November, and on this one critical issue at least one of the candidates has a running start.

[developmentinformationday]

Human Rights as Catalysts for Sustainable Development; Leveraging a Coordinated Approach by the UN development system to Leave No One Behind.

ECOSOC-OAS Side-event; conference room 11 - United Nations Inter-agency Network on Human Rights.

Watch Human Rights as Catalysts for Sustainable Development; Leveraging a Coordinated Approach by the UN development system to Leave No One Behind!

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Nick Anderson

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

April 17, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

APR 18, 2024

Yesterday on the social media site X, formerly Twitter, Miles Taylor wrote: “After 2016, I helped lead the US gov[ernmen]t response to Russia’s election interference. In 2024, foreign interference will be *worse.* Tech[nology is] more powerful. Adversaries more brazen. American public more susceptible. Political leaders across party lines MUST UNITE against this.” 

Taylor served as chief of staff in the Department of Homeland Security under Trump. 

Today, Catherine Belton of the Washington Post reported on a secret 2023 document from Russia’s Foreign Ministry calling for an “offensive information campaign” and other measures that attack “‘a coalition of unfriendly countries’ led by the United States. Those measures are designed to affect “the military-political, economic and trade and informational psychological spheres” of Russia’s perceived adversaries. 

The plan is to weaken the United States and convince other countries, particularly those in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, that the U.S. will not stand by its allies. By weakening those alliances, Russian leaders hope to shift global power by strengthening Russia’s ties to China, Iran, and North Korea and filling the vacuum left by the crumbling democratic alliances (although it is not at all clear that China is on board with this plan).

According to Belton, one of the academics who advised the authors of the Russian document suggested that Russia should “continue to facilitate the coming to power of isolationist right-wing forces in America,” “enable the destabilization of Latin American countries and the rise to power of extremist forces on the far left and far right there,” increase tensions between the U.S. and China over Taiwan, and “escalate the situation in the Middle East around Israel, Iran and Syria to distract the U.S. with the problems of this region.” 

The Russian document suggests that the front lines of that physical, political, and psychological fight are in Ukraine. It says that the outcome of Russia’s invasion of neighboring Ukraine will “to a great degree determine the outlines of the future world order.” 

Putin critic Mikhail Khodorkovsky told Belton: “The Americans consider that insofar as they are not directly participating in the war [in Ukraine], then any loss is not their loss. “This is an absolute misunderstanding.”

Media and lawmakers, including those in the Republican Party, have increasingly called out the degree to which Russian propaganda has infiltrated American politics through Republican lawmakers and media figures. Earlier this month, both Representative Michael R. Turner (R-OH), chair of the House Intelligence Committee, and Representative Michael McCaul (R-TX), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, warned about Russian disinformation in their party. Turner told CNN’s State of the Union that it is “absolutely true” that Republican members of Congress are parroting Russian propaganda. “We see directly coming from Russia attempts to mask communications that are anti-Ukraine and pro-Russia messages, some of which we even hear being uttered on the House floor.” When asked which Republicans had fallen to Russian propaganda, McCaul answered that it is “obvious.” 

That growing popular awareness has highlighted that House Republicans under House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) have for six months refused to pass a national security supplemental bill with additional aid for Ukraine, as well as for Israel and the Indo-Pacific, and humanitarian aid to Gaza. After the Senate spent two months negotiating border security provisions House Republicans demanded, Republicans killed that bill with the provisions at Trump’s direction, and the Senate then passed a bill without those provisions in February.

Johnson has been coordinating closely with former president Trump, who has made his admiration for Russia and his disregard for Ukraine very clear since his people weakened their support for Ukraine in the 2016 Republican Party platform. Johnson is also under pressure from MAGA Republicans in the House, like Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), who oppose funding Ukraine, some of them by making statements that echo Russian propaganda.

While the White House, the Pentagon, and a majority of both chambers of Congress believe that helping Ukraine defend itself is crucial to U.S. security, Johnson has refused to take the Senate measure up, even though the House would pass it if he did. But as Ukraine’s ability to defend itself has begun to weaken, pressure for additional aid has ramped up. At the same time, in the wake of Iran’s attack on Israel last weekend, Republicans have suddenly become eager to provide additional funds to Israel. It began to look as if Johnson might bring up some version of foreign aid.

But discussions of bringing forward Ukraine aid brought not only Greene but also Thomas Massie (R-KY) to threaten yesterday to challenge Johnson’s speakership, and there are too few Republicans in the House to defend him. 

Today, Johnson brought forward not the Senate bill, but rather three separate bills to fund Israel, the Indo-Pacific, and Ukraine, with pieces that House Republicans have sought. A fourth bill will include other measures Republicans have demanded. And a fifth will permit an up-or-down vote on most of the measures in the extreme border bill the House passed in 2023. At the time, that measure was intended as a signaling statement because House Republicans knew that the Democratic Senate would keep it from becoming law.

Johnson said he expected to take a final vote on the measures Saturday evening. He will almost certainly need Democratic votes to pass them, and possibly to save his job. Democrats have already demanded the aid to Gaza that was in the Senate bill but is not yet in the House bills. 

Reese Gorman, political reporter for The Daily Beast, reported that Johnson explained his change of heart like this: “Look, history judges us for what we do. This is a critical time right now…  I can make a selfish decision and do something that is different but I'm doing here what I believe to be the right thing.… I think providing lethal aid to Ukraine right now is critically important.… I’m willing to take personal risk for that.”

His words likely reflect a changing awareness in Republican Party leadership that the extremism of MAGA Republicans is exceedingly unpopular. Trump’s courtroom appearances—where, among other things, he keeps falling asleep—are unlikely to bolster his support, while his need for money is becoming more and more of a threat both to his image and to his fellow Republicans. Today the Trump campaign asked Republican candidates in downballot races for at least 5% of the money they raise with any fundraising appeal that uses Trump’s name or picture. They went on: “Any split that is higher than 5% will be seen favorably by the RNC and President Trump’s campaign and is routinely reported to the highest levels of leadership within both organizations.”

Nonetheless, Greene greeted Johnson’s bills with amendments requiring members of Congress to “conscript in the Ukrainian military” if they voted for aid to Ukraine. 

A headline on the Fox News media website today suggested that a shift away from MAGA is at least being tested. It read: “Marjorie Taylor Greene is an idiot. She is trying to wreck the [Republican Party].” The article pointed out that 61% of registered voters disapprove of the Republican Party while only 36% approve. That approval rating has indeed fallen at least in part because of the performative antics of the extremists, among them the impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas that made him the first cabinet officer to be impeached in almost 150 years. Today the Senate killed that impeachment without a trial.

As soon as Johnson announced the measures, President Joe Biden threw his weight behind them. In a statement, he said: “I strongly support this package to get critical support to Israel and Ukraine, provide desperately needed humanitarian aid to Palestinians in Gaza, and bolster security and stability in the Indo-Pacific. Israel is facing unprecedented attacks from Iran, and Ukraine is facing continued bombardment from Russia that has intensified dramatically in the last month.

“The House must pass the package this week and the Senate should quickly follow. I will sign this into law immediately to send a message to the world: We stand with our friends, and we won’t let Iran or Russia succeed.”

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from EcoWatch:

In an address in Belém, Brazil, United States Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen said the world needs $3 trillion in financing annually to reach its 2050 climate and biodiversity goals.

Yellen said transitioning to a low-carbon economy would require far more than the current amount of yearly financing, but that filling that gap is the greatest economic opportunity of this century, reported Reuters.

“Climate change poses a daily and existential threat to individuals, communities, and countries. It harms human health, damages homes and businesses, and strains government budgets,” Yellen said at the Goeldi Museum in Belém, considered Brazil’s gateway to the Amazon, according to a press release from the U.S. Department of the Treasury. “Put simply, neglecting to address climate change and the loss of nature and biodiversity is not just bad environmental policy. It is bad economic policy.”

Yellen also announced the Amazon Region Initiative Against Illicit Finance to combat nature crimes by battling their financing, as well as the international criminal organizations that benefit from it. The initiative is a partnership between the U.S., regional partners and Amazon basin countries Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Guyana and Suriname.

Yellen said reaching net-zero was one of the Biden-Harris administration’s top priorities, but that it would require expanding endeavors beyond the United States.

“We know that we can only achieve our climate and economic goals — from reducing global emissions to adapting and building resilience, from strengthening markets to bolstering supply chains — if we also lead efforts far beyond our borders,” Yellen said.

Yellen went on to say that she had seen the value of three specific aspects of the department’s approach to advancing the international climate, nature and biodiversity agenda of the administration. The first is strengthening ally and partner relationships, the second is making global financial architecture operate better for nations, and the third is putting to use the power of markets.

[kp777]

By Olivia Rosane

Common Dreams

May 15, 2024

"It's past time our leaders take this simple step and stop funding activities that are completely at odds with protecting our climate," one advocate said.

More than 200 environmental and climate advocacy groups sent a letter to Congress on Wednesday demanding that lawmakers stop funding the extraction of fossil fuels on public lands and waters.

The letter argues that Congress' annual approval of taxpayer funds to subsidize oil and gas drilling and coal mining "undermine" the international agreement reached at the United Nations COP28 climate conference last year on the need for "transitioning away from fossil fuels."

"Congress has coddled the fossil fuel industry for decades, scarring millions of acres of public lands in the process," Ashley Nunes, public lands policy specialist at the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement. "It's past time our leaders take this simple step and stop funding activities that are completely at odds with protecting our climate."

"Every year that Congress keeps supporting status quo drilling on public lands and offshore waters is a missed opportunity that locks us into a hotter and more dangerous future."

The Center for Biological Diversity was one of 234 groups behind the letter, which was addressed to Senate Appropriations Chair Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Appropriations Vice Chair Sen. Susan Collins (R-Me.), House Appropriations Chair Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) and House Appropriations Ranking Member Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.). Specifically, the letter asks that the lawmakers "zero out funding for all fossil fuel extraction on public lands and offshore waters" in the Department of the Interior's budget for the coming fiscal year.

"Despite the urgency of the climate crisis, year after year, and regardless of the which political party retains control of Congress, Congress continues to direct the Department of the Interior to authorize fossil fuel extraction on our public lands and oceans," the letter states. "This zombie funding continues despite its harmful and lasting impacts to tribal nations, frontline communities, and other groups, as well as its harm to public health, public lands, the climate, and wildlife populations."

The FY 2024 budget, for example, directed more than $160 million toward fossil fuel management on public lands and waters. The amount earmarked for oil and gas management on public lands alone jumped by almost 90% from 2016 to 2023, from $59.7 million to $112.9 million.

Despite calling the climate crisis an "existential threat," U.S. President Joe Biden has approved almost 10,000 permits for oil and gas drilling on public lands in three years, a similar rate to his predecessors and more in his first two years than former President Donald Trump. Under Biden's watch, the U.S. became the leading producer of oil both in the world and in human history. The groups who signed the letter attributed this in part to Congress' "status quo funding" of fossil fuel programs on public lands.

The letter comes as humanity just sweltered through its hottest year on record, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels made a record jump, and a vast majority of top climate scientists recently surveyed said they predicted 2.5°C of warming by 2100, largely because of a lack of "political will" to phase out fossil fuels and embrace the renewable energy transition.

Indeed, the latest Production Gap analysis concludes that governments' plans through 2030 would produce more than twice the amount of fossil fuels that would be compatible with limiting global heating to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels.

"Climate scientists around the world are pleading for change, but Congress continues to let fossil fuel polluters run wild on our public lands," Nunes said. "Every year that Congress keeps supporting status quo drilling on public lands and offshore waters is a missed opportunity that locks us into a hotter and more dangerous future."

In particular, the green groups made the following recommendations for FY2025:

Ending Bureau of Land Management (BLM) funding for new oil and gas approvals;

Ending BLM funding for new coal leases and permits;

Ending Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) funding for all new oil and gas exploration, production, and drilling leases;

Ending the provision of the Inflation Reduction Act that requires Interior to put up at least 2 million acres of land and 60 million of water annually for oil and gas leasing before it can install any new wind and solar;

Putting $80 million toward BLM renewable energy programs; and

Putting $80 million toward BOEM renewable energy programs.

"Congress must end business as usual funding of fossil fuel extraction on public lands and waters," the letter concludes. "If Congress fails to change course, it will simply be impossible to limit warming to below 1.5°C and ensure a livable planet for future generations."

[batboyblog]

The United States is experiencing scorching new levels of heat fueled by climate change this summer, with dozens of people dying in the West, millions sweating under heat advisories and nearly three-quarters of Americans saying the government must prioritize global warming.

But as the Republican Party opens its national convention in Milwaukee with a prime-time focus on energy on Monday night, the party has no plan to address climate change.

While many Republicans no longer deny the overwhelming scientific consensus that the planet is warming, party leaders do not see it as a problem that needs to be addressed.

“I don’t know that there is a Republican approach to climate change as an organizing issue,” said Thomas J. Pyle, president of the American Energy Alliance, a conservative research group focused on energy. “I don’t think President Trump sees reducing greenhouse gases, using the government to do so, as an imperative.”

When former President Donald J. Trump mentions climate change at all, it is mockingly.

“Can you imagine, this guy says global warming is the greatest threat to our country?” Mr. Trump said, referring to President Biden as he addressed a rally in Chesapeake, Va., last month, the hottest June in recorded history across the globe. “Global warming is fine. In fact, I heard it was going to be very warm today. It’s fine.”

He went on to dismiss the scientific evidence that melting ice sheets in Antarctica and Greenland are causing seas to rise, threatening coastal communities around the world. He said it would result in “more waterfront property, if you’re lucky enough to own.” And he lapsed into familiar rants against windmills and electric vehicles.

At the televised debate with Mr. Biden in June, Mr. Trump was asked if he would take any action as president to slow the climate crisis. “I want absolutely immaculate clean water and I want absolutely clean air, and we had it,” Mr. Trump responded, without answering the question.

Mr. Trump’s spokeswoman, Karoline Leavitt, later declined to clarify the former president’s position or discuss any actions he would take regarding climate change, saying only that he wants “energy dominance.”

The United States last year pumped more crude oil than any country in history and is now the world’s biggest exporter of natural gas.

A clear majority of Americans, 65 percent, wants the country to focus on increasing solar, wind and other renewable energy and not fossil fuels, according to a May survey by the Pew Research Center. But just 38 percent of Republicans surveyed said renewable energy should be prioritized, while 61 percent said the country should focus on developing more oil, gas and coal.

“Their No. 1 agenda is to continue producing fossil fuels,” said Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric sciences and the director of the Texas Center for Climate Studies at Texas A&M University. “Once you understand their main goal is to entrench fossil fuels regardless of anything else, everything makes sense.”

The party platform, issued last week, makes no mention of climate change. Instead, it encourages more production of oil, gas and coal, the burning of which is dangerously driving up global temperatures. “We will DRILL, BABY, DRILL,” it says, referring to oil as “liquid gold.”

By contrast, Mr. Biden has taken the most aggressive action of any president to cut emissions from coal, oil and gas and encourage a transition to wind, solar and other carbon-free energy. He has directed every federal agency from the Agriculture Department to the Pentagon to consider how climate change is affecting their core missions.

If Mr. Biden has taken an all-of-government approach to fighting climate change, Mr. Trump and his allies would adopt the opposite: scrubbing “climate” from all federal functions and promoting fossil fuels.

Mr. Trump and his allies want to end federal subsidies for electric vehicles, battery development and the wind and solar industries, preferring instead to open up the Alaskan wilderness to oil drilling, encourage more offshore drilling and expand gas export terminals.

Project 2025, a lengthy manual filled with specific proposals for a next Republican administration, calls for erasing any mention of climate change across the government. While Mr. Trump has recently sought to distance himself from Project 2025, he has praised its architects at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative research organization, and much of the plan was written by people who were top advisers during his first term and could serve in prominent roles if he wins in November.

When pressed to discuss climate change, some Republicans say the country should produce more natural gas and sell it to other countries as a cleaner replacement for coal.

While natural gas produces less carbon dioxide than coal when burned, it remains one of the sources of the greenhouse gases that are driving climate change. Scientists say that countries must stop burning coal, oil and gas to keep global warming to relatively safe levels. Last year, at the United Nations climate summit in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, the United States and nearly 200 countries agreed to transition away from fossil fuels.

But if elected, Mr. Trump has indicated he would pull back from the global fight against climate change, as he did when he announced in 2017 that the United States would be the first and only country to withdraw from the Paris Agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions. (The United States subsequently rejoined under Mr. Biden.)

And it’s possible he would go even further. Mr. Trump’s former aides said that if he wins in November, he would remove the country altogether from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the international body that works on climate policy and created the 2015 Paris deal.

When it comes to international relations, Project 2025 calls for an end to spending federal funds to help the world’s poorest countries transition to wind, solar and other renewable energy.

The blueprint also calls for erasing climate change as a national security concern, despite research showing rising sea levels, extreme weather and other consequences of global temperature rise are destabilizing areas of the world, affecting migration and threatening American military installations.

Federal research into climate change would slow or disappear under Project 2025, which recommends dismantling the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which conducts some of the world’s leading climate research and is also responsible for weather forecasting and tracking the path of hurricanes and other storms.

NOAA, according to the authors of Project 2025, is “one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry and, as such, is harmful to future U.S. prosperity.” At the agency’s research operation, which include a network of research laboratories, an undersea research center, and several joint research institutes with universities, “the preponderance of its climate-change research should be disbanded,” the blueprint said.

Project 2025 also calls for the president to issue an executive order to “reshape” the program that convenes 13 federal agencies every four years to produce the National Climate Assessment, the country’s most authoritative analysis of climate knowledge. The report is required by Congress and details the impacts and risks of climate change to a wide range of sectors, including agriculture, health care and transportation. It is used by the public, researchers and officials around the country to inform decisions about strategies and spending.

Project 2025 also calls for the elimination of offices at the Department of Energy dedicated to developing wind, solar and other renewable energy.

Waleed Abdalati, a former NASA chief scientist who is now at the University of Colorado Boulder, said downgrading climate science would be a disservice to the nation. “That’s a loss of four years in pursuit of creative solutions,” he said.

As president, Mr. Trump tried to replace top officials with political appointees who denied the existence of climate change and put pressure on federal scientists to water down their conclusions. Scientists refused to change their findings and attempts by the Trump administration to bury climate research were also not successful.

“Thank God they didn’t know how to run a government,” Thomas Armstrong, who led the National Climate Assessment program under the Obama administration, said at the end of Mr. Trump’s presidency, adding, “It could have been a lot worse.”

Next time, they would know how to run the government, Mr. Trump’s former officials said. “The difference between the last time and this time is, Donald Trump was president for four years,” Mr. Pyle said. “He will be more prepared.”

[lboogie1906]

Ambassador Charles R. Stith (August 29, 1949) is a businessman, diplomat, former educator, author, and politician. He is the Chairman of The Pula Group, LLC. He is the non-executive Chairman of the African Presidential Leadership Center. He established and directed Boston University’s African Presidential Center. He presented his Letter of Credence as Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the US to the United Republic of Tanzania. He served as the Ambassador during the traumatic period after the bombing of the US Embassy in Dar es Salaam.

He received an appointment to the Faculty of the Boston University Department of International Relations and taught a course on Africa and Globalization. He retired from Boston University. He was on the Advisory Committee of the Office of the US Trade Representative and is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Council of American Ambassadors. He is the author of For Such a Time as This: African Leadership Challenges and Political Religion. He is the Senior Editor of the annual African Leaders State of Africa Report and author of many articles, which have appeared in such publications as the African Business Magazine, Wall Street Journal, Denver Post, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Boston Globe, Boston Herald, USA Today, Los Angeles Times, New York Times, and Chicago Sun-Times.

He is a graduate of Baker University, the Gammon Theological Seminary, and Harvard University Divinity School (Th.M). He is the founder and former National President of the Organization for a New Equality.

He was one of the architects of the regulations redefining the Community Reinvestment Act.

Before heading ONE, he was the Senior Minister of the historic Union United Methodist Church in Boston. He was an appointee to the US Commission on International Religious Freedom. He has served on the National Advisory Boards of FannieMae and Fleet InCity Bank, the editorial board of WCVB-TV, and the boards of West Insurance, Inc. and the Wang Center for Performing Arts, among others. He is the recipient of several honorary doctorates. #africanhistory365 #africanexcellence #omegapsiphi