Podcasts about budget omb

In early April 2025, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released two major policies on Federal Agency Use of AI and Federal Procurement of AI - OMB memos M-25-21 and M-25-22, respectively. These memos were revised at the direction of President Trump's January 2025 executive order, “Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence” and replaced the Biden-era guidance. Under the direction of the same executive order, the Department of Energy (DOE) also put out a request for information on AI infrastructure on DOE lands, following the announcement of the $500 billion Stargate project that aims to rapidly build new data centers and AI infrastructure throughout the United States. As the Trump administration is poised to unveil its AI Action Plan in the near future, the broader contours of its strategy for AI adoption and acceleration already seem to be falling into place.Is a distinct Trump strategy for AI beginning to emerge—and what will that mean for the United States and the rest of the world?  Show Notes:Joshua GeltzerBrianna Rosen  Just Security series, Tech Policy Under Trump 2.0Clara Apt and Brianna Rosen's article "Shaping the AI Action Plan: Responses to the White House's Request for Information" (Mar. 18, 2025)Justin Hendrix's article "What Just Happened: Trump's Announcement of the Stargate AI Infrastructure Project" (Jan. 22, 2025)Sam Winter-Levy's article "The Future of the AI Diffusion Framework" (Jan. 21, 2025)Clara Apt and Brianna Rosen's article, "Unpacking the Biden Administration's Executive Order on AI Infrastructure" (Jan. 16, 2025)Just Security's Artificial Intelligence Archive Music: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI

In this episode of The CX Tipping Point Podcast, we're joined by Steve Krauss from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management—recipient of the 2025 Service to the Citizen Award—to unpack the complexities of HR IT modernization in the federal government.Steve shares candid insights into the inefficiencies of the current HR IT ecosystem and underscores the urgent need for improved coordination, data interoperability, and shared services to streamline operations and cut costs. He also explores forward-looking solutions such as pooled hiring across agencies and the collaborative efforts underway with major federal agencies and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to advance modernization and elevate the customer experience.But the conversation goes beyond IT. They dive into the broader challenges surrounding federal hiring, agency funding for modernization initiatives, and the critical role of stakeholder engagement in driving lasting change. They discuss the funding barriers many agencies face, the strategic support OPM offers—including the use of the Technology Modernization Fund—and the importance of conducting a comprehensive inventory of federal contact centers.Together, they explore what it takes to lead through complexity, emphasizing the value of strong governance, smart incentive structures, and the impact of the recently enacted Government Service Delivery Improvement Act in shaping a more responsive and citizen-centered government.Thank you for listening to this episode of The CX Tipping Point Podcast! If you enjoyed it, please consider subscribing, rating, and leaving a review on your favorite podcast platform. Your support helps us reach more listeners! Stay Connected: Follow us on social media: LinkedIn: @DorrisConsultingInternational Twitter: @DorrisConsultng Facebook: @DCInternational Resources Mentioned: Citizen Services Newsletter 2024 Service to the Citizen Awards Nomination Form

On this episode, host Dave Wennergren talks with long time federal acquisition leader Lesley Field. Guest: Lesley Field, adjunct lecturer, School of Public Affairs at American University and former deputy administrator for Federal Procurement Policy at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).  https://www.linkedin.com/in/lesley-field-82097023/  Additional Resources: To learn more about ACT-IAC, please visit our website: https://www.actiac.org/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

CU KEEPS HIRING DEMOCRAT REJECTS And they keep getting really, really plush jobs. The latest is Andrew Maycock. From Completecolorado.com:Mayock, is the former chief sustainability officer under President Joe Biden. He led Biden's agenda on sustainability efforts.Biden was not his first role under U.S. presidents, having also served in both the Obama and Clinton administrations.Under Obama he served as Deputy Director for Management and Associate Director for General Government Programs at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).Under Clinton he worked at the White House and the U.S. Treasury Department. He also served on the steering committee of the Climate 21 Project.It is the second time in two years that a newly created position at CU has been filled by an outgoing Democrat loyalist. The two positions combined amount for more than $750,000 a year in salary and benefits. (emphasis mine)Weird, huh? That TWO new positions just HAPPENED to be created JUST IN TIME for a Democrat loyalist to get the job. WEIRD. I've Sherrie Peif on today at talk about it.

Nonprofits, the landscape is shifting under your feet, and the urgency to act has never been clearer. Hatsy Cutshall, Director of Government Awards Management at Your Part-Time Controller (YPTC), joined us to deliver an urgent message: communication and clarity are your best defense in these chaotic times. With executive orders rapidly reshaping your funding environment, understanding the roles of federal agencies such as the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is no longer optional—it's crucial for survival. Hatsy emphasizes, “Never assume that if you've got questions, don't assume one way or the other. Ask those questions because it's better to know up front.” The federal funding landscape is complex, and failure to act proactively can result in detrimental consequences.Hatsy highlights the critical importance of proactive communication with federal program officers, underscoring their role as partners rather than adversaries. Nonprofits should connect with these officers to clarify expectations, understand legal jargon in contracts, and adapt programs quickly in response to shifting circumstances. According to Hatsy, "Program officers are there to partner with you and help you succeed.”This chaotic environment doesn't only affect nonprofits directly receiving federal funds. Hatsy clearly warns that the impact trickles down, influencing state and local funding channels. Every nonprofit is vulnerable. Ignoring the warning signs can lead to missed opportunities, funding losses, and compliance disasters. The time to engage is now. Reach out proactively, communicate clearly, and build strategic relationships with federal program officers who are your allies, not your adversaries!#NonprofitAlert #FederalFundingFind us Live daily on YouTube!Find us Live daily on LinkedIn!Find us Live daily on X: @Nonprofit_ShowOur national co-hosts and amazing guests discuss management, money and missions of nonprofits! 12:30pm ET 11:30am CT 10:30am MT 9:30am PTSend us your ideas for Show Guests or Topics: HelpDesk@AmericanNonprofitAcademy.comVisit us on the web:The Nonprofit Show

This week on Breaking Battlegrounds, Congressman Brad Knott joins us to expose the Biden administration's deliberate dismantling of border security and its impact on crime, law enforcement, and national security. As a former federal prosecutor who fought organized crime and human trafficking, Knott brings firsthand insight into how the administration's policies have fueled illegal immigration and empowered dangerous cartels. Then, Jessica Anderson, president of the Sentinel Action Fund, breaks down the key Senate battleground states for 2026 and the Democrats' shifting strategy. Plus, investigative reporter Madeline Rowley uncovers a $20 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund fueling progressive nonprofits—many with deep ties to the Biden administration. And on Kiley's Corner, we dive into the latest twists in high-profile crime cases, including updates on the three men who died after watching the Chiefs game, the Idaho 4 murders, and the latest buzz around Casey Anthony. New movement in the JonBenét Ramsey case? Kiley's on the trail. Tune in for in-depth analysis and exclusive insights—only on Breaking Battlegrounds!www.breakingbattlegrounds.voteTwitter: www.twitter.com/Breaking_BattleFacebook: www.facebook.com/breakingbattlegroundsInstagram: www.instagram.com/breakingbattlegroundsLinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/breakingbattlegroundsTruth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@breakingbattlegroundsShow sponsors:Invest Yrefy - investyrefy.com4Freedom MobileExperience true freedom with 4Freedom Mobile, the exclusive provider offering nationwide coverage on all three major US networks (Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile) with just one SIM card. Our service not only connects you but also shields you from data collection by network operators, social media platforms, government agencies, and more.Use code ‘Battleground' to get your first month for $9 and save $10 a month every month after.Learn more at: 4FreedomMobile.comDot VoteWith a .VOTE website, you ensure your political campaign stands out among the competition while simplifying how you reach voters.Learn more at: dotvote.voteAbout our guests:Congressman Brad Knott represents North Carolina's 13th Congressional District including Wake, Johnston, Lee, Harnett, Franklin, Caswell, Person and Granville counties. Elected in 2024, Brad is serving his first term in the U.S. House of Representatives.In the 119th Congress, Brad serves on the House Judiciary, Transportation & Infrastructure and Homeland Security committees. Brad's focus in Congress is combatting pervasively serious crime, building an environment for continued economic growth in North Carolina's 13th District and across the nation and defending against persistent threats to our country from within our own borders.Prior to serving in Congress, Brad proudly worked alongside law enforcement at all levels to prosecute organized crime in cases that touched every corner of the country. This included drug cartels, human trafficking, financial crimes, national gangs and more. From this experience, Brad saw how harmful policies and weak law enforcement wounded communities all over the country. This, in large part, motivated Brad to run for office.Brad looks to pull from his experience to support robust law enforcement while strengthening the laws to simultaneously disincentivize illegal immigration and protect Americans from all types of crime.Brad and his wife Joanna are both lifelong North Carolinians and have two daughters. He holds a Juris Doctorate from Wake Forest University School of Law and a bachelor's degree from Baylor University.-Jessica Anderson is the founding president of Heritage Action's super PAC, the Sentinel Action Fund, and former executive director of Heritage Action for America, the political advocacy arm of The Heritage Foundation. During the Trump administration, she served as associate director of intergovernmental affairs and strategic initiatives at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). She is also a founding board member of the suburban-mom-focused nonprofit N2 America and founding president of the pro-Trump super PAC Moms for Safe Neighborhoods. Anderson's first political job was at the Civitas Institute, a free market think tank in North Carolina.In 2021, Democrats in Iowa's House of Representatives named Anderson in a lawsuit for violating the state's lobbying rules. That same year, Mother Jones reported on a leaked video in which she boasted to donors about Heritage Action's role in drafting and coordinating model voter suppression laws in Georgia, Iowa, Florida, and Arizona.An outspoken anti-abortion advocate, Anderson is a frequent guest on FOX News, FOX Business, and Newsmax, and is a regular contributor to the Daily Caller and the Daily Signal. She holds a bachelor's degree from the University of Florida.-Madeleine Rowley is an investigative reporter covering immigration, financial corruption, and politics. She is a 2023-2024 Manhattan Institute Logos Fellow with previous bylines in The Free Press, City Journal, and Public. As a U.S. Army spouse for almost a decade, she's lived in six states and spent two years in Jerusalem, Israel. She currently resides on the East Coast with her husband and daughter. Get full access to Breaking Battlegrounds at breakingbattlegrounds.substack.com/subscribe

A Project 2025 mastermind now holds the reins of the federal bureaucracyMother Jones, By Isabela Dias, on February 6, 2025https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/02/russell-vought-confirmed-senate-omb-project-2025-christian-nationalism/The panel dissects the appointment of Russell Vought as the new head of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), highlighting his concerning ties to extremist ideologies. The OMB wields significant power over the allocation of federal funds, affecting everything from defense to social programs. This means Vought, an open Christian nationalist with links to Project 2025, now has enormous influence over the financial workings of the U.S. government. His past includes advocating for the use of military force against protesters, dismantling federal agencies like the EPA, and cutting funding for social services, public education, and reproductive rights.Vought's think tank, the Center for Renewing America, promotes a theocratic vision for the U.S., openly stating its mission to establish a nation “under God” and dismantle federal protections against corporate and governmental overreach. His policies aim to consolidate executive power and undermine institutions designed to maintain democratic stability. The panel expresses alarm at his ambitions and notes the eerie historical parallels between his rhetoric and past authoritarian regimes.The discussion shifts to the structural issue of how the OMB interacts with Congress. While Congress technically controls the budget, the OMB has discretion in how funds are allocated, allowing someone like Vought to defund agencies by simply depriving them of resources. This loophole, which has existed for decades, now poses a dire risk given Vought's extremist agenda.Panelists Stephen and EJ, representing perspectives from Canada and Scotland, respectively, contrast their countries' political systems with the U.S. model. Stephen highlights how Canada's multi-party system prevents any single ideology from dominating, ensuring political diversity and negotiation. EJ warns that Europe has witnessed the consequences of unchecked fascism before and refuses to stand by while such forces gain traction in the U.S. Both express horror at the open rise of authoritarianism in American politics, particularly the normalization of fascist rhetoric and demonstrations.The conversation concludes on a somber note, with a recognition that while Vought's appointment is deeply troubling, the fight against authoritarianism is ongoing, and international allies remain committed to resisting its spread.The Non-Prophets, Episode 24.7.2 featuring Scott Dickie, Stephen Harder, Helen Greene and The Ejector SeatBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-non-prophets--3254964/support.

The Trump administration is ordering federal agencies to submit plans by April 14 to relocate bureaus and offices outside the Washington, D.C., area, and many are wondering what kind of major blow this could have on the economy. A new directive from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) instructs agency heads to identify which offices should be moved to other regions of the country. It aligns with Trump's broader push to reduce the federal government's real estate footprint and shift power away from Washington. At his first cabinet meeting, he singled out the Department of Education as a key agency that could downsize its D.C. presence. He has previously floated eliminating the department entirely, arguing states should control their own education policies. However, the political and economic impacts on the D.C. region are massive. Federal jobs make up nearly a quarter of the District's workforce and more than a quarter of its wages. With many federal leases locked in for years, the question remains: Will this plan shrink government or create a logistical nightmare? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this interview, we're excited to have Ilona Cohen to help us understand what changes this new US administration might bring, in terms of cybersecurity regulation. Ilona's insights come partially from her own experiences working from within the White House. Before she was the Chief Legal Officer of HackerOne, she was a senior lawyer to President Obama and served as General Counsel of the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). In this hyper-partisan environment, it's easy to get hung up on particular events. Do many of us lack cross-administration historical perspective? Probably. Should we be outraged by the disillusion of the CSRB, or was this a fairly ordinary occurrence when a new administration comes in? These are the kinds of questions I'll be posing to Ilona in this conversation. How the Change Healthcare breach can prompt real cybersecurity change 'Shift Left' feels like a cliché at this point, but it's often difficult to track tech and security movements if you aren't interacting with practitioners on a regular basis. Some areas of tech have a longer tail when it comes to late adopters and laggards, and application security appears to be one of these areas. In this interview, Jenn Gile catches us up on AppSec trends. Segment Resources: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Natively Integrates with Endor Labs 2024 Dependency Management Report How to pick the right SAST tool In the enterprise security news, Change Healthcare's HIPAA fine is vanishingly small How worried should we be about the threat of AI models? What about the threat of DeepSeek? And the threat of employees entering sensitive data into GenAI prompts? The myth of trillion-dollar cybercrime losses are alive and well! Kagi Privacy Pass gives you the best of both worlds: high quality web searches AND privacy/anonymity Thanks to the UK for letting everyone know about end-to-end encryption for iCloud! What is the most UNHINGED thing you've ever seen a security team push on employees? All that and more, on this episode of Enterprise Security Weekly. Visit https://www.securityweekly.com/esw for all the latest episodes! Show Notes: https://securityweekly.com/esw-395

In this interview, we're excited to have Ilona Cohen to help us understand what changes this new US administration might bring, in terms of cybersecurity regulation. Ilona's insights come partially from her own experiences working from within the White House. Before she was the Chief Legal Officer of HackerOne, she was a senior lawyer to President Obama and served as General Counsel of the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). In this hyper-partisan environment, it's easy to get hung up on particular events. Do many of us lack cross-administration historical perspective? Probably. Should we be outraged by the disillusion of the CSRB, or was this a fairly ordinary occurrence when a new administration comes in? These are the kinds of questions I'll be posing to Ilona in this conversation. How the Change Healthcare breach can prompt real cybersecurity change 'Shift Left' feels like a cliché at this point, but it's often difficult to track tech and security movements if you aren't interacting with practitioners on a regular basis. Some areas of tech have a longer tail when it comes to late adopters and laggards, and application security appears to be one of these areas. In this interview, Jenn Gile catches us up on AppSec trends. Segment Resources: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Natively Integrates with Endor Labs 2024 Dependency Management Report How to pick the right SAST tool In the enterprise security news, Change Healthcare's HIPAA fine is vanishingly small How worried should we be about the threat of AI models? What about the threat of DeepSeek? And the threat of employees entering sensitive data into GenAI prompts? The myth of trillion-dollar cybercrime losses are alive and well! Kagi Privacy Pass gives you the best of both worlds: high quality web searches AND privacy/anonymity Thanks to the UK for letting everyone know about end-to-end encryption for iCloud! What is the most UNHINGED thing you've ever seen a security team push on employees? All that and more, on this episode of Enterprise Security Weekly. Visit https://www.securityweekly.com/esw for all the latest episodes! Show Notes: https://securityweekly.com/esw-395

In this interview, we're excited to have Ilona Cohen to help us understand what changes this new US administration might bring, in terms of cybersecurity regulation. Ilona's insights come partially from her own experiences working from within the White House. Before she was the Chief Legal Officer of HackerOne, she was a senior lawyer to President Obama and served as General Counsel of the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). In this hyper-partisan environment, it's easy to get hung up on particular events. Do many of us lack cross-administration historical perspective? Probably. Should we be outraged by the disillusion of the CSRB, or was this a fairly ordinary occurrence when a new administration comes in? These are the kinds of questions I'll be posing to Ilona in this conversation. How the Change Healthcare breach can prompt real cybersecurity change Show Notes: https://securityweekly.com/esw-395

In this interview, we're excited to have Ilona Cohen to help us understand what changes this new US administration might bring, in terms of cybersecurity regulation. Ilona's insights come partially from her own experiences working from within the White House. Before she was the Chief Legal Officer of HackerOne, she was a senior lawyer to President Obama and served as General Counsel of the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). In this hyper-partisan environment, it's easy to get hung up on particular events. Do many of us lack cross-administration historical perspective? Probably. Should we be outraged by the disillusion of the CSRB, or was this a fairly ordinary occurrence when a new administration comes in? These are the kinds of questions I'll be posing to Ilona in this conversation. How the Change Healthcare breach can prompt real cybersecurity change Show Notes: https://securityweekly.com/esw-395

In this episode, we delve into essential discussions on federal policy, TikTok, and the balance of power in Washington that we know will resonate with you.Heidi and Joel explore the chaos caused by a recent Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memo concerning the freeze on federal expenditures. They provide a clear-eyed analysis of the memo's implications for Americans, particularly those relying on federal assistance programs, and question the legality of specific executive branch actions.In the second half of the episode, we're joined by David Dorfman, Deputy Staff Director and Chief Counsel of the House Select Committee on China. David provides an in-depth understanding of the critical legislation affecting TikTok, clarifying misconceptions about a so-called "ban" and diving into the platform's national security concerns.Lastly, hear from TikTok user Sayen Gates, a small business owner from South Carolina, who discusses how TikTok has been crucial in growing her life coaching business and how the threat of its ban poses challenges to entrepreneurs relying on the platform.Tune in to The Hot Dish every other week as we serve up hearty discussions that matter to the heartland. We aim to ensure that the voices of 'the rest of us' are heard loud and clear in Washington.To learn more, visit https://onecountryproject.orgVisit Sayen's site: www.shadowcornerlifecoaching.com 

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found Click On Picture To See Larger Picture The [DS][CB] is trying everything to stop Trump, he is exposing their money laundering system. DOGE is cutting waste so fast the [CB] [DS] does not know how to keep up. Trump places tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China. Mexico already folded. Trump is going to end the tax system that was put into place in 1913. The swamp continues to lose the fight. Trump and Elon are working so quickly and long hours that the [DS] does not know how to keep up. DOGE has now exposed the part of the criminal syndicate, USAID. The more the people see the more the people are believing that our Gov is one gigantic criminal operation. That is why they are trying to hold up the confirmations. The public will know everything soon, March madness coming.   (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Economy BREAKING: Obama Judge Blocks Trump's Federal Spending Freeze For 22 States   A federal judge on Friday temporarily blocked President Trump's order to freeze federal funding to 22 states on public loans and grants. On Monday, Trump's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) put a temporary pause of agency grant, loan and other financial assistance programs. US District Judge of the District Court for the District of Rhode Island, John McConnell, an Obama appointee, temporarily blocked Trump's freeze on federal funding in response to a request from 22 Democrat state attorneys general and DC. Reuters reported:   source: thegatewypundit.com https://twitter.com/DOGE/status/1886273522214813785 Trump to sign executive order installing 'massive' 10-for-1 deregulatory agenda  President Donald Trump will sign an executive order Friday that will significantly expand the "2-for-1" deregulatory goal he installed during his first stint in the White House. The White House detailed the order in a memo, obtained Friday morning by the Washington Examiner, which follows through on one of Trump's 2024 campaign promises. It requires federal agencies to "identify at least 10 existing rules, regulations, or guidance documents to be repealed" for every new proposed rule, regulation, or guidance. The order further directs the Office of Management and Budget to set "standardized measurement and estimation of regulatory costs" and "requires that for fiscal 2025, the total incremental cost of all new regulations, including repealed regulations, be significantly less than zero." Source: wnd.com https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1886185686392516627   Canadian exports to the US went to zero, it would be a cataclysm.” Bingo. (VIDEO) Trudeau Responds to Trump's Tariffs – CEO of Canada's Second Largest Company Slams Trudeau, Says Trump's Demands are “Things That Every Canadian Wants its Government to do” Justin Trudeau confirmed that Canada will impose tariffs on American goods in response to the Tariffs imposed by President Trump yesterday, and the CEO of Shopify, Canada's largest tech company and second-largest publicly traded company, slammed Trudeau's poor leadership.  Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/BehizyTweets/status/1886158287219167502 Mexico's President Claims She Has 'Plan A, Plan B, Plan C' In Response To Trump Tariffs First and foremost, Sheinbaum has threatened retaliatory tariffs on US exports to Mexico, her "Plan A".  Around 15% of US exports end up south of the border, however, Mexico is far more export dependent than the US.  Only 10% of the US economy is based on exports while 43% of Mexico's economy relies on exports according to the Worl...

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found Click On Picture To See Larger Picture The new transporation secretary is now reversing Biden policies in regards to EVs. Stephen Miller explains why getting rid of the illegals will not hurt the economy. Did China try to bring the market down? Trump is offering federal workers a buy out, drain the swamp. Fed pushing narrative that Trump will intervene, boomerang. The [DS] is panicking over everything that Trump is doing, he is cutting programs, firing people and draining the swamp. Lawsuits against what he is doing will fail. RFK jr confirmation hearing was full of corrupt Senators who are in the pocket of big pharma. Those who screamed the loudest have the most to lose. Follow the money. Big Pharma is now panicking. Trump is testing the waters to see how the [DS] reacts, Gitmo being prepared for illegals.   (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Economy https://twitter.com/ThomasCatenacci/status/1884427380665569688 https://twitter.com/ultrapepemqtter/status/1884470858040619283 TAKE A LISTEN BREAKING: Biden-Appointed Judge Blocks Trump Federal Spending Freeze  A judge temporarily blocked Trump's order to freeze federal funding on public loans and grants. Judge Loren AliKhan, a Biden appointee, granted a temporary stay on Trump's plan to freeze federal funding. On Monday, Trump's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) put a temporary pause of agency grant, loan and other financial assistance programs. This temporary pause will provide the Administration time to review agency programsand determine the best uses of the funding for those programs consistent with the law and thePresident's priorities. The temporary pause will become effective on January 28, 2025, at 5:00PM. Even before completing their comprehensive analysis, Federal agencies must immediatelyidentify any legally mandated actions or deadlines for assistance programs arising while thepause remains in effect. Federal agencies must report this information to OMB along with ananalysis of the requirement. OMB also directs Federal agencies to pause all activities associated with open NOFOs, such as conducting merit review panels,” the OMB added.   NBC News reported:   Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/BehizyTweets/status/1884376272932876295 https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1884412236459806811 Bank of Canada cuts interest rate by 25 basis points to 3% Bank of Canada governor Tiff Macklem and senior deputy governor Carolyn Rogers give a statement and answer questions after the bank cut the key interest rate by 25 basis points to three per cent. The Bank of Canada lowered its interest rate by 25 basis points to three per cent on Wednesday, the sixth consecutive reduction since June. Source: cbc.ca    The Federal Reserve may try something new: Pausing Source: msnc.com Fed expected to hold rates steady at FOMC meeting even as Trump dials up pressure The US president is threatening to impose tariffs on Mexico, Canada, and China as early as this Saturday, a stance that some economists predict will put upward pressure on inflation at a time when the central bank is trying to ensure that issue is finally under control. What makes things more complicated is that Trump is making it clear he wants policymakers to cut rates further. He hinted last week at a coming clash with Powell on that subject, saying he wants rates to come down "a lot" and that he expects to talk directly with the Fed chair "at the right time." Source: yahoo.com

On Wednesday, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) rescindeda memo that had paused trillions of dollars in federal grants, loans, and other financial assistance programs. The memo had called for agencies to perform a “comprehensive analysis” of their grant and loan programs to ensure compliance with President Donald Trump's executive orders, but was broadly written and created confusion over the scope of the funding freeze. Prior to the memo's rescission, a federal judge had paused its orders from going into effect after a coalition of nonprofits and businesses sued to stop its implementation. Ad-free podcasts are here!Many listeners have been asking for an ad-free version of this podcast that they could subscribe to — and we finally launched it. You can go to tanglemedia.supercast.com to sign up!You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠, our “Under the Radar” story ⁠here and today's “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.Take the survey: Do you think the president should reduce executive branch spending and employment, and through what methods? Let us know!You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Our podcast is written by Isaac Saul and edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Will Kaback, Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, and produced in conjunction with Tangle's social media manager Magdalena Bokowa, who also created our logo. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We discuss the Office of Management & Budget (OMB) memo that the Trump administration put out on Tuesday.Help Disaster Relief: https://www.samaritanspurse.org Freedom Marketplace: https://freedommarketplace.net Join our Inner Circle: http://toddhuffshow.com/join Sign up for our newsletter: https://www.toddhuffshow.com The Stack: https://www.toddhuffshow.com/stack-of-stuff Email: todd@toddhuffshow.comPhone: 317.210.2830Follow us on…Instagram: @toddhuffshowFacebook: The Todd Huff ShowTwitter: @toddhuffshowLinkedIn: The Todd Huff ShowTikTok: @toddhuffshowSupport Our Partners:https://www.toddhuffshow.com/partners Links:https://www.mypillow.com/todd Promo Code: TODDhttps://mystore.com/toddhttps://faith-lit.com Promo Code: TODD for 15% offhttps://harvardgoldgroup.com Promo Code: TODD for $250 credithttps://www.nicnac.com - Promo Code FREEDOM for 20% off your first purchasehttps://soltea.com - Promo Code TODD for $29.95 off your first orderhttps://zstacklife.com/todd - Promo Code TODD for 15% off your order

We discuss the Office of Management & Budget (OMB) memo that the Trump administration put out on Tuesday.  Help Disaster Relief: https://www.samaritanspurse.org Freedom Marketplace: https://freedommarketplace.net Join our Inner Circle: http://toddhuffshow.com/join Sign up for our newsletter: https://www.toddhuffshow.com The Stack: https://www.toddhuffshow.com/stack-of-stuff Email: todd@toddhuffshow.comPhone: 317.210.2830Follow us on…Instagram: @toddhuffshowFacebook: The Todd Huff ShowTwitter: @toddhuffshowLinkedIn: The Todd Huff ShowTikTok: @toddhuffshowSupport Our Partners:https://www.toddhuffshow.com/partners Links:https://www.mypillow.com/todd Promo Code: TODDhttps://mystore.com/toddhttps://faith-lit.com Promo Code: TODD for 15% offhttps://harvardgoldgroup.com Promo Code: TODD for $250 credithttps://www.nicnac.com - Promo Code FREEDOM for 20% off your first purchasehttps://soltea.com - Promo Code TODD for $29.95 off your first orderhttps://zstacklife.com/todd - Promo Code TODD for 15% off your order

We discuss the Office of Management & Budget (OMB) memo that the Trump administration put out on Tuesday.Help Disaster Relief: https://www.samaritanspurse.org Freedom Marketplace: https://freedommarketplace.net Join our Inner Circle: http://toddhuffshow.com/join Sign up for our newsletter: https://www.toddhuffshow.com The Stack: https://www.toddhuffshow.com/stack-of-stuff Email: todd@toddhuffshow.comPhone: 317.210.2830Follow us on…Instagram: @toddhuffshowFacebook: The Todd Huff ShowTwitter: @toddhuffshowLinkedIn: The Todd Huff ShowTikTok: @toddhuffshowSupport Our Partners:https://www.toddhuffshow.com/partners Links:https://www.mypillow.com/todd Promo Code: TODDhttps://mystore.com/toddhttps://faith-lit.com Promo Code: TODD for 15% offhttps://harvardgoldgroup.com Promo Code: TODD for $250 credithttps://www.nicnac.com - Promo Code FREEDOM for 20% off your first purchasehttps://soltea.com - Promo Code TODD for $29.95 off your first orderhttps://zstacklife.com/todd - Promo Code TODD for 15% off your order

We discuss the Office of Management & Budget (OMB) memo that the Trump administration put out on Tuesday.  Help Disaster Relief: https://www.samaritanspurse.org Freedom Marketplace: https://freedommarketplace.net Join our Inner Circle: http://toddhuffshow.com/join Sign up for our newsletter: https://www.toddhuffshow.com The Stack: https://www.toddhuffshow.com/stack-of-stuff Email: todd@toddhuffshow.comPhone: 317.210.2830Follow us on…Instagram: @toddhuffshowFacebook: The Todd Huff ShowTwitter: @toddhuffshowLinkedIn: The Todd Huff ShowTikTok: @toddhuffshowSupport Our Partners:https://www.toddhuffshow.com/partners Links:https://www.mypillow.com/todd Promo Code: TODDhttps://mystore.com/toddhttps://faith-lit.com Promo Code: TODD for 15% offhttps://harvardgoldgroup.com Promo Code: TODD for $250 credithttps://www.nicnac.com - Promo Code FREEDOM for 20% off your first purchasehttps://soltea.com - Promo Code TODD for $29.95 off your first orderhttps://zstacklife.com/todd - Promo Code TODD for 15% off your order

This week, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) ordered a freeze of funding across a broad array of federal programs, leading to mass confusion around the country from local governments, nonprofits, and individuals. While that particular order appears to have been rescinded, Molly Reynolds explains how it touches on foundational questions of Congress' spending power and constitutional authorities, and how it's just one of the Trump administration's first steps to try to dramatically remake the size and scope of the federal government.  Show notes and transcript: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/can-the-trump-administration-freeze-federal-spending  Follow The Current and all Brookings podcasts on Apple or Google podcasts, or on Spotify. Send feedback email to podcasts@brookings.edu.

On this episode of the podcast, we will talk about the deluge of executive orders and a new memo freezing funding that has come in at the start of Trump's new administration. How will they effect the work of non-profits and what can you do to support or oppose these and future executive orders.   Attorneys for this Episode Tim Mooney Brittany Hacker   Federal Funding Freeze Memo and Executive Orders • Memo issued by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). • Halt on grants and loans distributed by the federal government. • Implications for Medicaid, WIC, and other critical programs. Legal and Constitutional Challenges • Lawsuit filed against the funding freeze, citing violations of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). • Debate over the legality and scope of executive orders. Nonprofit Advocacy and Response • Importance of independent nonprofit organizations in countering these actions. • Guidelines for 501(c)(3) organizations to legally speak out against executive actions. Role of Funders • Call for funders to fill gaps caused by halted federal funds. • Encouragement for philanthropy to step up during this crisis. Resources ·   Being a Player ·   Executive Orders Affecting Charitable Nonprofits - National Council of Nonprofits  ·   Rules of the Game - Foundation Funding Tips

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found Click On Picture To See Larger Picture The [DS][CB] are struggling right now. Trump is the process of shutting down the money laundering by the criminal syndicate. Jerome Powell will try to fight back and those above will try everything. The people of this country have had enough and Trump is now seeding the narrative to restructure the Federal Reserve. Trump over the last eight years has studied the [DS]. He has looked into the agency and mapped where money has been flowing to. This is how Trump can move so quickly. This is why he was able to give DOGE and mandate of 7/4/26 because the leg work was done way ahead of time. What happens when a threat is dismantled and removed. Fire at will commander, we have a special place for GS.   (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Economy https://twitter.com/WallStreetApes/status/1884042010207695346   area I've been to and there ain't nobody out doing sh*t” “You see two of the trucks down there. I think they're supervisors. Maybe they're trying to verify and see if ICE is going to come out” “I ain't never seen it this quiet before. This is crazy.” https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1884243759468101778   put this into perspective, new vehicle sales were 17.4 million in 2000, or 9.2% above 2024 levels, even as the US population has grown by 20% since then. This comes as car prices remain historically high with the average retail transaction price coming in at $46,200 in December, according to JD Power. The car market continues to slow. President Trump's Administration Orders Sweeping Freeze on All Federal Grants and Loans Effective Today President Donald Trump's administration has enacted a temporary suspension of all federal grants and loans, effective today, Tuesday, January 28, 2025. This strategic pause, orchestrated by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), is designed to facilitate a comprehensive review of federal financial assistance programs, ensuring that taxpayer dollars are utilized efficiently and in accordance with the administration's objectives. This initiative reflects President Trump's unwavering commitment to fiscal responsibility and his dedication to eliminating wasteful spending. By reassessing financial assistance programs, the administration aims to redirect resources toward endeavors that bolster national security, stimulate economic growth, and uphold American values. In a two-page memo, the directive specifically targets programs associated with diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, woke gender ideology, and the Green New Deal. This temporary pause will provide the Administration time to review agency programs and determine the best uses of the funding for those programs consistent with the law and the President's priorities. The temporary pause will become effective on January 28, 2025, at 5:00 PM. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/TheStormRedux/status/1884309963104751760 The Fed Is About to Hit Pause on Rate Cuts. Here's Why. Faced with a solid economy and mounting inflation concerns, the U.S. central bank has said it will “move cautiously” on cutting interest rates. At the Federal Reserve's final gathering of 2024, Chair Jerome H. Powell announced that the U.S. central bank was embarking on a “new phase” in how it would set interest rates. The Fed planned to “move cautiously” with cuts going forward, Mr. Powell told reporters at the time, reflecting officials' thinking that they could afford to be patient with scant signs of an impending recession and ling...

One of Joe Biden's last acts as president was declaring the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) the law of the land. Many people are wondering, What's the ERA? To find the answer, we're rebroadcasting our two-part series on the godmother of conservatism - Phyllis Schlafly - with a new discussion on the hidden purpose of the ERA. Along the way we get insight from conservative icon Michelle Malkin and Ed Martin, President Trump's pick for chief of staff at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Phyllis Schlafly embarked on one of the most epic political battles in American history…and in the process, uncovered the surprising truth at how to win in politics.Support the show: https://redpilledamerica.com/support/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Tune in here to this Wednesday edition of the Brett Winterble Show! Brett kicks off the program by sharing some thoughts from the panel he participated in earlier today, they discussed various topics from this past election cycle, somewhat of a debrief of what each party did right and wrong. This panel was full of professors and political communication students from Emerson College, a largely left leaning group that offers Brett the opportunity to gain some insight into the mindset of the left. It's also a beautiful exercise of our first amendment rights, with people of all ages weighing in on the topics of the day, freely expressing their perspectives on various topics. We're joined by Coach Matt Doherty from Doherty Coaching to talk about the murder of United Healthcare CEO, Brian Thompson, and his killer Luigi Mangione. Brett and Coach discuss the potential outside influences on Mangione from social media to his time at UPenn. Young people who are living on their own for the first time are vulnerable to fall prey to peer pressure, and the fanciful ramblings of professors. Coach Doherty also shares the big guests he has coming up on his show, The Rebound, such as WBT's good friend RNC Chairman, Michael Whatley. Bo Thompson from Good Morning BT is also here for this Wednesday's episode of Crossing the Streams. Brett and Bo talk about President-elect Donald Trump's nomination of Congressman Dan Bishop from North Carolina as Deputy Director for Budget at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Bo also shares what he and Beth have coming up tomorrow on Good Morning BT! Later, we are joined by Kyle Bailey from WFNZ to share the groundbreaking news of Bill Belichick officially being announced as the head football coach of the North Carolina Tar Heels! Listen here for all of this and more on The Brett Winterble Show! For more from Brett Winterble check out his YouTube channel.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Elon Musk and entrepreneur-politician Vivek Ramaswamy presented their ambitious proposal to shrink federal spending and reduce government inefficiencies in Washington this week. Dubbed the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), their initiative proposes saving $2 trillion in federal spending, though specifics were notably scarce. The pair met with members of Congress, primarily Republicans, to gauge support and discuss the viability of their plan. Among those in attendance was Representative Tom Cole, a seasoned Republican from Oklahoma and the incoming House Appropriations Committee chair, who offered measured skepticism. Cole, reflecting on his conversations with Musk and Ramaswamy, noted their effort to understand "the full scope" of their proposal and the extent of executive authority they might wield. His remarks hinted at the constitutional limitations the duo could face. "How much would be done by executive action?" he asked, underscoring Congress's constitutional role in appropriations. Appropriations remain at the heart of federal spending, requiring Congress's active involvement. Legislative attempts to bypass this process, such as impoundment, often encounter resistance from the judiciary and Congress itself. The 1974 Budget Control and Impoundment Act, a legislative response to President Nixon's unilateral actions during his impeachment crisis, fortified Congress's role in spending decisions. Musk and Ramaswamy's DOGE initiative must therefore navigate not just political, but legal constraints. History suggests that lofty goals to overhaul federal spending have faced immense challenges. The proposed $2 trillion in savings is ambitious, but the absence of specific strategies raises doubts about its feasibility. To understand the hurdles facing DOGE, it's crucial to examine the lessons of past efforts to reform government spending. Efforts to reform federal spending have long been central to Republican policy agendas. During his 1980 presidential campaign, Ronald Reagan criticized the ballooning federal debt, which was nearing $1 trillion at the time—a figure that seemed unthinkable then. Reagan entrusted his first Office of Management and Budget (OMB) director, David Stockman, with implementing steep budget cuts. Stockman targeted social programs with fervor, equating budget excesses to moral failings. Yet, Stockman's efforts quickly ran into opposition from Democrats and even some Republicans. Reagan's broader fiscal policy, which included large tax cuts and increased military spending, further undermined his administration's deficit-reduction goals. By the end of his first term, the national debt had doubled, and by the time Reagan left office, it had tripled. Stockman, disillusioned, exited the administration and later published a memoir, The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed, chronicling his frustrations. Reagan's later attempts to streamline government included appointing J. Peter Grace to lead a commission on government efficiency. Though the commission unearthed useful recommendations, its impact was marred by revelations about Grace's company, W.R. Grace & Co., having paid minimal taxes. These optics undermined public confidence in the commission's efforts.

Brief intros: Nicholas Bagley was General Counsel to Governor Gretchen Whitmer. Kathy Stack served almost three decades at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Jenny Mattingley also served at the OMB, focusing on hiring reform and workforce efforts.Timestamps:(00:00) Introduction(04:42) “I think all three of you have something to say about the Paperwork Reduction Act.”(12:38) A one-way ratchet(22:16) How to get a new form approved(32:04) Why is there no natural constituency to improve this?(42:14) Inheriting judicial review from the Civil Rights era(59:13) What should be on the new administration's agenda? This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub

Chris and Sean record a special Thanksgiving episode. They cover Trump's transition, the delusion of the leftist Democrats, and how the next few weeks will play out. They talk particularly about the importance of Russ Vought at Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and why that matters for every American. Most of all, Happy Thanksgiving Follow Light Beer Dark Money on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/LightBeerDarkMoney/ Follow Light Beer Dark Money on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lightbeerdarkmoney/ Follow Light Beer Dark Money on Twitter: https://twitter.com/LBDMshow Follow Light Beer Dark Money on Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/company/light-beer-dark-money/ Link to the Light Beer Dark Money Blog: https://lightbeerdarkmoney.com/hypocrisy-and-the-aoc-oh-sandy/

Project 2025 is a strategic plan crafted by conservative groups to reshape the administrative state of the United States during the next Republican administration. This initiative has drawn attention due to its ambitious agenda and the notable figures associated with its development. Among these figures is Russell Vought, who previously served as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under President Donald Trump.Vought's involvement with Project 2025 highlights his significant role in shaping conservative policy frameworks. The project aims to streamline federal bureaucracy and implement drastic policy changes aimed at reducing government overreach. At its core, Project 2025 envisions a reorganization of federal agencies and a reorientation of regulatory priorities, aligning them more closely with conservative values and principles.One of the controversial aspects of Project 2025 is its proposal to diminish the influence of the U.S. Senate in approving key political appointments. Traditionally, the Senate plays a crucial role in vetting and confirming presidential nominees for various administrative positions. However, Project 2025 suggests exploring pathways to bypass or weaken this process, thereby accelerating the appointment of individuals who align with the administration's policy goals. This approach, proponents argue, would lead to more efficient governance and implementation of the administration's agenda. Critics, however, contend that it undermines the system of checks and balances intended to prevent executive overreach.Russell Vought's potential reappointment to lead the OMB underscores the importance of Project 2025 within Trump's political strategy. As a key architect of this initiative, Vought's policy priorities emphasize fiscal restraint, regulatory reform, and the scaling back of federal programs deemed inefficient or misaligned with conservative objectives. During his previous tenure as OMB Director, Vought championed efforts to cut federal spending and overhaul budgetary processes, initiatives he would likely continue if reinstated.Project 2025 has sparked a heated debate within political circles about the future of governance and the role of regulatory agencies in the United States. Supporters argue that the project offers a necessary corrective to what they perceive as decades of bureaucratic expansion and inefficiency. They believe that implementing its recommendations would bolster economic growth, enhance individual freedoms, and restore constitutional principles.Detractors, on the other hand, warn that such sweeping changes could destabilize essential government functions and erode public trust in federal institutions. They also highlight the potential risks associated with diminishing the Senate's role in political appointments, arguing that it could lead to a less transparent and accountable executive branch.The focus on Project 2025 illustrates the broader ideological battle over the size and scope of government in America. As the nation looks toward future elections, the ideas and proposals contained in this initiative are likely to remain pivotal points of discussion and debate among policymakers, political analysts, and the public at large. With Russell Vought at the helm, Project 2025 could significantly influence the Republican platform and reshape the administrative landscape of the United States for years to come.

Russell Vought, a key figure from the Trump administration, is drawing attention with his involvement in "Project 2025." This initiative outlines strategies to expand executive power, centralizing authority within specific government branches such as the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Vought, known for his tenure as the Director of the OMB under Trump, has historically pushed boundaries in shaping policy and administrative processes."Project 2025" serves as a blueprint for increasing presidential control over the executive branch, as envisioned by Vought and his allies. His contributions to the project emphasize restructuring governmental agencies to shift significant decision-making away from traditionally independent bodies into the hands of the executive. This involves streamlining operations and cutting bureaucratic hurdles that they argue hinder efficiency.The project's advocates argue that such centralization could lead to more effective governance, allowing swift implementation of policy agendas without the delays often encountered in a multi-faceted government structure. Critics, however, express concern about the erosion of checks and balances. They caution that consolidating power in this manner could undermine democratic institutions and lead to unchecked executive actions, reminiscent of an authoritarian regime.Vought's history as a staunch supporter of Trump's policies is underscored by his willingness to push legal limits if necessary to achieve political objectives. During his OMB leadership, Vought was involved in controversial decisions that drew bipartisan scrutiny. His role in withholding congressionally approved funds from Ukraine highlighted his readiness to interpret executive power expansively, leading to legal challenges and critiques regarding the separation of powers.The discussion surrounding "Project 2025" reflects broader debates about the balance of power in the U.S. government. Proponents of the project believe it could preemptively safeguard executive-led reforms from bureaucratic inertia or opposition-led obstruction. Detractors, however, view it as a threat to the fundamental principle of governmental checks and balances that serves to prevent the concentration of power.In sum, "Project 2025" and Russell Vought's associated influence signal a potential shift in governmental structure, emphasizing executive authority. As political landscapes evolve, the implications of such restructuring remain critical points of discussion for policymakers and citizens alike, weighing the benefits of efficiency against the risks of centralized power devoid of traditional accountability mechanisms.

In this podcast episode, Keith Coyle from Babst Calland discusses the final stages of the Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) rule and its regulatory journey. The conversation provides insights into the process, including the role of federal offices like the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Gas Pipeline Advisory Committee (GPAC), while also exploring the complexities surrounding regulatory reviews and implications for the pipeline industry. Visit PipelinePodcastNetwork.com for a full episode transcript, as well as detailed show notes with relevant links and insider term definitions. 

Welcome to Health-e Law, Sheppard Mullin's podcast exploring the fascinating health tech topics and trends of the day. In this episode, Sheppard Mullin's Phil Kim, Sara Shanti and Michael D. Sutton are joined by Ilona Cohen, Chief Legal Officer and Chief Policy Officer of HackerOne, to discuss creative and inspiring solutions for addressing the surge of data breaches in healthcare.   What We Discussed in this Episode: What does “data breach” mean in the healthcare context? What is driving the recent surge of threat actors targeting healthcare? How are healthcare stakeholders mitigating these risks? How is breached data being monetized or laundered back into legitimate businesses? What exposures should businesses be alert for after a breach? Can you tell us a bit about HackerOne and the work you do? What is ethical hacking? Has the healthcare sector embraced it?   About Ilona Cohen Ilona Cohen was formerly a senior lawyer to President Obama and served as General Counsel of the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Highly experienced with cybersecurity and ethical hacking solutions, she was part of a core group in the White House responsible for the development of President Obama's long-term strategy to enhance cybersecurity awareness and protection in the public and private sectors. These efforts resulted in the launch of the first U.S. government bug bounty program, Hack The Pentagon, run by HackerOne.  Prior to joining HackerOne in July 2022, Ilona served as Chief Legal and Compliance Officer at Aledade, another venture-backed tech company, where she successfully built and scaled the company's legal and compliance teams. At HackerOne, she's leveraging her extensive experience to build out the public policy team, mature the legal function to support expanded growth and provide strategic leadership to the rest of the company.    About Sara Shanti A partner in the Corporate Practice Group in the Sheppard Mullin's Chicago office and co-lead of its Digital Health Team, Sara Shanti's practice sits at the forefront of healthcare technology by providing practical counsel on novel innovation and complex data privacy matters. Using her medical research background and HHS experience, Sara advises providers, payors, start-ups, technology companies, and their investors and stakeholders on digital healthcare and regulatory compliance matters, including artificial intelligence (AI), augmented and virtual reality (AR/VR), gamification, implantable and wearable devices, and telehealth. At the cutting edge of advising on "data as an asset" programming, Sara's practice supports investment in innovation and access to care initiatives, including mergers and acquisitions involving crucial, high-stakes and sensitive data, medical and wellness devices, and web-based applications and care.   About Phil Kim A partner in the Corporate and Securities Practice Group in Sheppard Mullin's Dallas office and co-lead of its Digital Health Team, Phil Kim has a number of clients in digital health. He has assisted multinational technology companies entering the digital health space with various service and collaboration agreements for their wearable technology, along with global digital health companies bolstering their platform in the behavioral health space. He also assists public medical device, biotechnology, and pharmaceutical companies, as well as the investment banks that serve as underwriters in public securities offerings for those companies. Phil also assists various healthcare companies on transactional and regulatory matters. He counsels healthcare systems, hospitals, ambulatory surgery centers, physician groups, home health providers, and other healthcare companies on the buy- and sell-side of mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, and operational matters, which include regulatory, licensure, contractual, and administrative issues. Phil regularly advises clients on matters related to healthcare compliance, including liability exposure, the Stark law, anti-kickback statutes, and HIPAA/HITECH privacy issues. He also provides counsel on state and federal laws, business structuring formation, employment issues, and involving government agencies, including state and federal agencies.   About Michael D. Sutton As an associate in the Corporate Practice Group at Sheppard Mullin's Dallas office, Michael D. Sutton specializes in cutting-edge and disruptive areas of practice, blending healthcare, technology, and legal compliance. In particular, he focuses on HIPAA and privacy regulations, considering their relationship with technological advancements in both healthcare and consumer sectors. He is skilled in negotiations regarding data usage and ownership rights, guiding clients on marketing or integrating technological innovations while navigating emerging regulations in digital healthcare, including artificial intelligence, web tracking, information blocking, offshoring, and de-identification.   Michael has managed investigations, worked to resolve active breach incidents, and advised clients on healthcare privacy and technology matters. He supports clients navigating HIPAA and other privacy laws to ensure their objectives are achieved within all legal and regulatory requirements. Michael also provides comprehensive regulatory services to a range of healthcare participants, including investors, managed care organizations, health plans, and medical groups.  In particular, he has tackled operational and contractual negotiations, licensing, compliance, and fraud considerations and conducted regulatory due diligence for transactions, including mergers and acquisitions.   Michael also supports transactions involving tech companies and healthcare providers, guiding negotiations related to software and service relationships while identifying vulnerabilities in targets and devising creative solutions to address them.   Contact Info Ilona Cohen Sara Shanti Phil Kim Michael D. Sutton    Resources HackerOne   Thank you for listening! Don't forget to SUBSCRIBE to the show to receive new episodes delivered straight to your podcast player every month. If you enjoyed this episode, please help us get the word out about this podcast. Rate and Review this show on Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, or Spotify. It helps other listeners find this show. This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only. It is not to be construed as legal advice specific to your circumstances. If you need help with any legal matter, be sure to consult with an attorney regarding your specific needs.

Tune in to be in the know as Craig Hill, Mike Luken, and Andy Stewart explore the crucial role of quantum safe cryptography as we approach the quantum computing era and its potential impact on current encryption methods. Discover what you need to know and how Cisco is leading the way in delivering quantum safe cryptography. The discussion begins with an overview of the urgent need to migrate to post-quantum cryptography. In the U.S., Federal agencies have been mandated by National Security Memorandum 10 to transition their cryptographic systems to withstand quantum computing attacks by 2035. This directive, enforced by the President's Office, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the Office of the National Cyber Director, aims to mitigate future risks posed by quantum computers. Globally, governments, financial institutions, hospitals, and other entities requiring secure information protection are also taking steps to incorporate quantum-safe cryptography. Although quantum computers capable of breaking current encryption do not yet exist, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), in collaboration with over 100 countries and experts, has recently released the first three finalized Post-Quantum Encryption Standards. Listen in as Craig, Mike, and Andy delve into the nuances, needs, and technical details of quantum safe cryptography, and learn how Cisco is preparing for the post-quantum world.

John Knepper thought he would pursue a career in theater after graduating and performing at the Harvard Radcliffe summer theater. However, after  moving to Memphis, Tennessee, he took a left turn and started working in the marketing department of the nation's fifth largest security guard company. After nine months there, John quit his job and traveled around the country for six months. Working in Washington on Immigration Laws On the last leg of his travels, he was in Washington where, by chance, he met the assistant to the Chief of Staff for Senator Al Simpson of Wyoming. Six months later they called him for an interview and subsequently he started working on Capitol Hill. He talks about his work as a personal assistant for a senator before moving on to work for the Senate Judiciary Committee.  In 1995 and 1996, he worked on the 1996 immigration law, which was the last major piece of immigration legislation passed by Congress. John also worked for Senator Fred Thompson of Tennessee on the Governmental Affairs Committee and Homeland Security Committee for two years, where he worked on investigations into foreign influence in the 1996 Presidential election. John worked on campaign fundraising and regulatory reform, becoming one of the most knowledgeable staffers for the Senate Judiciary Committee without a law degree. From Washington to Law School In 1998, he decided to change careers and went to law school. He attended the University of Michigan School of Law, which was considered the best law school at the time. Upon graduating from law school in 2001, he worked for a federal judge for a year and later held a position with the US Department of Justice in the Federal Programs Branch. He was part of the team that defended the McCain Feingold campaign finance law, and John talks about  how the law faced constitutional challenges and the mistrust among the Republican and Democratic National Committees. John discusses his role in document review at the Republican and Democratic National Committees, and his decision to build an effective record of campaign finance regulations. He also talks about working on national security issues for President Bush, such as the freezing of assets of the Iraqi government and the question of how to give Iraq billions of dollars back to the government. Working as the Associate General Counsel of the OMB John was called to work as the Associate General Counsel of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in 2004. OMB is an agency within the White House responsible for ensuring that federal government actions are consistent with the President's priorities. Originating under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, OMB is responsible for reviewing all testimony, legislation, and major regulations issued by the executive branch to Congress.  He talks about working under President Bush and eventually becoming the deputy general counsel of the Office of Management and Budget. The office was responsible for supporting the President's views and clearing executive orders. The general counsel's office was also responsible for reaching out to other federal agencies to discuss concerns and ensure they understood the consequences of their actions. Fannie Mae,  Freddie Mac, and Financial Bailouts In summer 2008, a friend of John's, who had been in the White House Counsel's office, called him to discuss the economic concerns with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. John moved over to become the Deputy General Counsel of the Treasury. The conversation turns to the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the potential bankruptcy of AIG, and the impact of money market funds on the economy. He talks about the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) which was developed to provide an asset against which companies could borrow from the Federal Reserve. This allowed the government to keep the velocity of money in the system, and AIG was a prime example of how the US government managed to keep these businesses operating. He also discusses an unsung moment during the financial bailout and the collaboration between Merrill Lynch and Wachtell Lipton, Rosen and Katz, and one reason for the bailout. From Washington to Wyoming In 2009, John was unemployed due to elections having consequences. He moved to Wyoming, where the economy was buffered by long-term commodities contracts, and he started working for the city of Cheyenne Wyoming as an attorney, working on $50 million government programs. John talks about Wyoming's unique tax system, with no state income tax, so revenue is largely mineral taxation. He worked with people in Wyoming suing companies over tax burdens. John worked there for two years before falling into another position as the Attorney General of Wyoming. He was appointed as the Chief Deputy Attorney General of Wyoming, and for five years, from 2013 to 2019, he was the number two lawyer for the state where he worked on environmental, law enforcement, and gun rights issues. Establishing a Solo Practice  From March 2019 onwards, John moved on to solo private practice in Wyoming. He chose this path because he wanted to take on more controversial litigation and avoid moving their family to a different location. He discusses his experience as a political appointee of George W. Bush and involvement in pro life cases, including pre and post Dobbs litigation on pro life issues. John has also been involved in controversial cases, such as defending coverage of gender transition services and determining equal protection. Large law firms often avoid this area due to financial constraints. His practice is paid law, with clients ranging from wills for small to large corporations, and he works on multi-district litigation. Influential Professors and Courses at Harvard John mentions a class on the Holocaust and genocide by Professor Eric Goldhagen, which he found to be incredibly profound. This course changed his interest in understanding the reasons behind people's resistance to horrible decisions, such as murder and atrocities. He also took courses on resistance to authority from social psychologist Herb Kelman and his senior thesis on the concept of the witch at the Salem witch trials. He mentions Professor Orlando Patterson of the Sociology department at Harvard had a class on freedom, focusing on the origins of the western and American concepts of freedom and liberty. Timestamps: 05:00: Career path from Congressional staffer to lawyer 11:26: Defending campaign finance law in court 16:17: Legal questions related to Iraq invasion and asset recovery 21:47: White House roles and responsibilities 27:54: Government bailouts during the 2008 financial crisis 34:28: Financial crisis, bailouts, and government intervention 40:18: Tax compliance, job loss, and career changes 46:12: Legal work in Wyoming, including coal mining and environmental issues 51:40: Legal cases related to gender identity and health insurance coverage 55:24: Personal growth, career paths, and Holocaust education 59:57: The concept of freedom, heroism, and redemption 1:05:36: Life decisions, fountain pen hobby, and connecting with others Links:  Email:  john.knepper@gmail.com  Featured Non-profits The featured non-profits of this episode are the 52nd Street Project and Village Arts Theater, recommended by  Jeannie Simpson who reports: This is Jeannie Simpson, class of 1992 and the featured nonprofits for this episode are the 52nd Street Project and Village Arts Theater. The 52nd street project is in New York City, and my husband and I both volunteered there for about 10 years. It takes kids from Hell's Kitchen community and pairs them with theater professionals to write and perform original plays. It also offers homework help and mentor programs and all kinds of arts classes. It's free for the children who want to participate, and it's just a really awesome example of the transformative power of storytelling through theater. The second nonprofit I want to recommend is in Los Angeles, California, and it's called Village Arts Theater. It is a nonprofit that provides all kinds of arts classes and opportunities for kids from the community, ages four to 14 to participate in plays and in classes. It's an inclusive program, and no child is turned away because of financial need. And I have taught, volunteered, directed, choreographed for village arts for a decade. I still work with them, and both my children were raised in this theater program, and I have seen countless children benefit from all the amazing things that it has to offer. 52nd Street Project website is the numbers five, two and then the word project.org, and village arts website is one word, village arts theater with an R E at the end.org, 52 project.org, and villageartstheatre.org. And org, and they are both worth checking out and worthy of your time, your money, your talents, resources, whatever you might have to offer. And now here is Will Bachmann with this week's episode.  To learn more about their work visit:  52 project.org and villageartstheatre.org.

Russ Vought served as the director of President Trump's Office of Management and the Budget (OMB). When the OMB under Vought withheld military aid from Ukraine, House Democrats initiated an investigation that ultimately led to Trump's first impeachment.Vought now leads a think tank, the Center for Renewing America, and is reportedly building a “180-day playbook” for implementing a policy agenda for a second Trump term. On Monday, the Associated Press claimed “Vought is likely to be appointed to a high-ranking post in a second Trump administration.”Timestamps:[00:00] Introduction[00:18] How OMB works[06:53] The two approaches to running the executive branch[14:56] Why we have “an imperial Congress”[20:12] The Ukraine impeachment[33:21] Why there aren't more conservatives in government This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub

As federal agencies patiently await final modernization guidance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP) finds itself navigating through a transitional period. Congressman Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), a staunch advocate for federal IT modernization and the author of the FedRAMP Authorization Act, voiced his concerns about the program's current limbo, attributed to the absence of OMB's final guidance and exacerbated by factors like agency backlogs and the unfilled directorial role at FedRAMP. Despite these hurdles, Connolly highlighted several positive strides, noting that the situation has evolved from 'the inferno' to a more stable 'limbo.' He remains hopeful about FedRAMP's trajectory and ongoing reforms, such as the Emerging Technology Prioritization Framework spearheaded by the General Services Administration. Simultaneously, the White House is advocating for a substantial increase in cybersecurity budgets across federal agencies to fortify the nation's defenses, aligning with the broader goals of the Biden administration's national cyber strategy. In a pivotal memo, OMB Director Shalanda Young and National Cyber Director Harry Coker Jr. called for agency budget requests to include significant enhancements to cyber defenses, including the adoption of zero-trust architectures and the bolstering of open-source software security. The memo underscores the critical need for investments in department-wide, enterprise solutions to unify cybersecurity efforts across various mission areas, facilitating better information sharing and bolstering the nation's resilience against burgeoning cyber threats.

With the rise of Generative AI organisations across both the public and private sector in Ireland today are considering its impact on their domain. Across a range of sectors, there are expectations that AI, and especially GenAI, can increase productivity, enhance customer and citizen experience, and accelerate innovation. Across industry Generative AI is enhancing existing AI solutions or creating entirely new operating models. In the financial industry, for example, AI has long been used in areas such as market forecasting and fraud detection, Generative AI is now enhancing these use cases by opening up new data sources and allowing non-technical users access. While in healthcare, AI is enhancing patient experiences acting as an assistant to caregivers and helping scientists develop new treatments. When surveyed 7 in 10 business and IT decision-makers believe they are well-positioned competitively and have a solid strategy in place to harness the power of AI. However, 56% admit uncertainty about what the next three to five years will bring to their industry, and 49% are struggling to keep pace with the disruption. This is leading to the appointment of a senior executive to have oversight of AI initiatives; in many cases a Chief AI officer (CAIO) is appointed to manage the transition to an AI led organisation. The United States Office of Management and Budget (OMB) recently issued a government-wide policy asking all federal agencies to name a Chief AI Officer, and according to FedScoop, as many as two-thirds of U.S. federal agencies have done so. According to the recent findings from Dell research, almost 20% of organizations surveyed globally identified a central team or individual to set AI strategy, and a separate report found that the number of 'head' of AI jobs has tripled over the last five years. AI can drive innovation in business and enhance access for citizens to government services, but whether in private or public institutions organisational objectives must align with AI strategies for successful outcomes, and this is where the role of the CAIO is paramount. For AI leaders looking to embrace the technology, there are some key considerations. Understand your organisations overall AI strategy. Without exactly knowing the outcome, it is hard to align the people, process and technology to achieve it. Understanding the overall AI strategy and not just some discrete use cases will lead to smarter investments. Having the big picture of the overarching strategy for AI organisations can align with the right governance and security frameworks, The good news is that 9 in 10 IT and business leaders think Irish organisations can use GenAI responsibly, according to Dell Technologies Innovation Catalysts Study. There is no one-size-fits-all approach when it comes to adopting AI While some there are some standard patterns to follow when implementing AI within an organization there is no on size fits all. What works for one organization may not work for other, and not every use case will require the same level of investment. As per Dell's latest study majority of the respondents said investing in modern, scalable data infrastructure was the number one area of improvement for business with 66% saying they prefer an on-prem - right where the data is or hybrid model to address the challenges, they foresee with implementing GenAI. There is also a wide spectrum of models emerging from industry-specific large language models (LLMs) to purpose-built smaller models that can run efficiently at the edge. Approach AI with a holistic focus, beyond just the technology itself AI is not just technical. Leaders across organisations from business, from IT and beyond need to come together to realise the transformative potential of AI. Organisations should consider uses for AI across all their business units, from HR, Finance, legal, communications, and beyond. The IT teams should, of course, be involved from the inception to develop a deep unders...

The General Services Administration (GSA) has launched a new initiative to prioritize generative AI technologies in the FedRAMP cloud authorization process, aligning with a 2023 executive order. This effort focuses on accelerating the approval of AI capabilities such as chat interfaces, code generation, and image generators to enhance their integration into government systems. Additionally, the Chief Data Officers (CDO) Council is facing significant challenges due to the absence of essential Phase Two guidance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which is necessary for implementing effective data governance practices. Despite these hurdles, the CDO Council continues to support federal agencies in managing and disseminating data effectively, underscoring ongoing efforts to incorporate advanced technologies and robust data management within the federal government.

Newt talks with Dr. Vance Ginn, former Chief Economist for the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). They discuss the current state of the U.S. economy, including the negative impact of inflation, with the cost of groceries and gas being a top concern for many Americans. He also noted that housing affordability is a crucial factor for 91% of Gen Z when choosing the next president. Dr. Ginn criticized the Biden administration's economic policies, arguing that they have led to high inflation and a weak economy. He also calls for reforms to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and a reduction in government spending and regulation.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

While AI doomers proselytize their catastrophic message, many politicians are recognizing that the loss of America's competitive edge poses a much more real threat than the supposed “existential risk” of AI. Today on Faster, Please!—The Podcast, I talk with Adam Thierer about the current state of the AI policy landscape and the accompanying fierce regulatory debate.Thierer is a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, where he promotes greater freedom for innovation and entrepreneurship. Prior to R Street, he worked as a senior fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, president of the Progress and Freedom Foundation, and at the Adam Smith Institute, Heritage Foundation, and Cato Institute.In This Episode* A changing approach (1:09)* The global AI race (7:26)* The political economy of AI (10:24)* Regulatory risk (16:10)* AI policy under Trump (22:29)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversationA changing approach (1:09)Pethokoukis: Let's start out with just trying to figure out the state of play when it comes to AI regulation. Now I remember we had people calling for the AI Pause, and then we had a Biden executive order. They're passing some sort of act in Europe on AI, and now recently a senate working group in AI put out a list of guidelines or recommendations on AI. Given where we started, which was “shut it down,” to where we're at now, has that path been what you might've expected, given where we were when we were at full panic?Thierer: No, I think we've moved into a better place, I think. Let's look back just one year ago this week: In the Senate Judiciary Committee, there was a hearing where Sam Altman of OpenAI testified along with Gary Marcus, who's a well-known AI worrywart, and the lawmakers were falling all over themselves to praise Sam and Gary for basically calling for a variety of really extreme forms of AI regulation and controls, including not just national but international regulatory bodies, new general purpose licensing systems for AI, a variety of different types of liability schemes, transparency mandates, disclosure as so-called “AI nutritional labels,” I could go on down the list of all the types of regulations that were being proposed that day. And of course this followed, as you said, Jim, a call for an AI Pause, without any details about exactly how that would work, but it got a lot of signatories, including people like Elon Musk, which is very strange considering he was at the same time deploying one of the biggest AI systems in history. But enough about Elon.The bottom line is that those were dark days, and I think the tenor of the debate and the proposals on the table today, one year after that hearing, have improved significantly. That's the good news. The bad news is that there's still a lot of problematic regulatory proposals percolating throughout the United States. As of this morning, as we're taping the show, we are looking at 738 different AI bills pending in the United States according to multistate.ai, an AI tracking service. One hundred and—I think—eleven of those are federal bills. The vast majority of it is state. But that count does not include all of the municipal regulatory proposals that are pending for AI systems, including some that have already passed in cities like New York City that already has a very important AI regulation governing algorithmic hiring practices. So the bottom line, Jim, is it's the best of times, it's the worst of times. Things have both gotten better and worse.Well—just because the most recent thing that happened—I know with this the senate working group, and they were having all kinds of technologists and economists come in and testify. So that report, is it really calling for anything specific to happen? What's in there other than just kicking it back to all the committees? If you just read that report, what does it want to happen?A crucial thing about this report, and let's be clear what this is, because it was an important report because senator Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer was in charge of this, along with a bipartisan group of other major senators, and this started the idea of, so-called “AI insight forums” last year, and it seemed to be pulling some authority away from committees and taking it to the highest levels of the Senate to say, “Hey, we're going to dictate AI policy and we're really scared.” And so that did not look good. I think in the process, just politically speaking—That, in itself, is a good example. That really represents the level of concern that was going around, that we need to do something different and special to address this existential risk.And this was the leader of the Senate doing it and taking away power, in theory, from his committee members—which did not go over well with said committee members, I should add. And so a whole bunch of hearings took place, but they were not really formal hearings, they were just these AI insight forum working groups where a lot of people sat around and said the same things they always say on a daily basis, and positive and negatives of AI. And the bottom line is, just last week, a report came out from this AI senate bipartisan AI working group that was important because, again, it did not adopt the recommendations that were on the table a year ago when the process got started last June. It did not have overarching general-purpose licensing of artificial intelligence, no new call for a brand new Federal Computer Commission for America, no sweeping calls for liability schemes like some senators want, or other sorts of mandates.Instead, it recommended a variety of more generic policy reforms and then kicked a lot of the authority back to those committee members to say, “You fill out the details, for better for worse.” And it also included a lot of spending. One thing that seemingly everybody agrees on in this debate is that, well, the government should spend a lot more money and so another $30 billion was on the table of sort of high-tech pork for AI-related stuff, but it really did signal a pretty important shift in approach, enough that it agitated the groups on the more pro-regulatory side of this debate who said, “Oh, this isn't enough! We were expecting Schumer to go for broke and swing for the fences with really aggressive regulation, and he's really let us down!” To which I can only say, “Well, thank God he did,” because we're in a better place right now because we're taking a more wait-and-see approach on at least some of these issues.A big, big part of the change in this narrative is an acknowledgement of what I like to call the realpolitik of AI policy and specifically the realpolitik of geopoliticsThe global AI race (7:26)I'm going to ask you in a minute what stuff in those recommendations worries you, but before I do, what happened? How did we get from where we were a year ago to where we've landed today?A big, big part of the change in this narrative is an acknowledgement of what I like to call the realpolitik of AI policy and specifically the realpolitik of geopolitics. We face major adversaries, but specifically China, who has said in documents that the CCP [Chinese Communist Party] has published that they want to be the global leader in algorithmic and computational technologies by 2030, and they're spending a lot of money putting a lot of state resources into it. Now, I don't necessarily believe that means they're going to automatically win, of course, but they're taking it seriously. But it's not just China. We have seen in the past year massive state investments and important innovations take place across the globe.I'm always reminding people that people talk a big game about America's foundational models are large scale systems, including things like Meta's Llama, which was the biggest open source system in the world a year ago, and then two months after Meta launched Llama, their open source platform, the government of the UAE came out with Falcon 180B, an open source AI model that was two-and-a-half times larger than Facebook's model. That meant America's AI supremacy and open source foundational models lasted for two months. And that's not China, that's the government of the UAE, which has piled massive resources into being a global leader in computation. Meanwhile, China's launched their biggest super—I'm sorry, Russia's launched their biggest supercomputer system ever; you've got Europe applying a lot of resources into it, and so on and so forth. A lot of folks in the Senate have come to realize that problem is real: that if we shoot ourselves in the foot as a nation, they could race ahead and gain competitive advantage in geopolitical strategic advantages over the United States if it hobbles our technology base. I think that's the first fundamental thing that's changed.I think the other thing that changed, Jim, is just a little bit of existential-risk exhaustion. The rhetoric in this debate, as you've written about eloquently in your columns, has just been crazy. I mean, I've never really seen anything like it in all the years we've been covering technology and economic policy. You and I have both written, this is really an unprecedented level of hysteria. And I think, at some point, the Chicken-Littleism just got to be too much, and I think some saner minds prevailed and said, “Okay, well wait a minute. We don't really need to pause the entire history of computation to address these hypothetical worst-case scenarios. Maybe there's a better plan than that.” And so we're starting to pull back from the abyss, if you will, a little bit, and the adults are reentering the conversation—a little bit, at least. So I think those are the two things that really changed more, although there were other things, but those were two big ones.The political economy of AI (10:24)To what extent do you think we saw the retreat from the more apocalyptic thinking—how much that was due from what businesses were saying, venture capitalists, maybe other tech . . . ? What do you think were the key voices Congress started listening to a little bit more?That's a great question. The political economy of AI policy and tech policy is something that is terrifically interesting to me. There are so many players and voices involved in AI policy because AI is the most important general-purpose technology of our time, and as a widespread broad base—Do you have any doubt about that? (Let me cut you off.) Do you have any doubt about that?I don't. I think it's unambiguous, and we live in a world of “combinatorial innovation,” as Hal Varian calls it, where technologies build on top of the other, one after another, but the thing is they all lead to greater computational capacity, and therefore, algorithmic and machine learning systems come out of those—if we allow it. And the state of data science in this country has gotten to the point where it's so sophisticated because of our rich base of diverse types of digital technologies and computational technologies that finally we're going to break out of the endless cycle of AI booms and busts, and springs and winters, and we're going to have a summer. I think we're having it right now. And so that is going to come to affect every single segment and sector of our economy, including the government itself. I think industry has been very, very scrambled and sort of atomistic in their approach to AI policy, and some of them have been downright opportunistic, trying to throw each other's competitors under the busNow let me let you go return to the political economy, what I was asking you about, what were the voices, sorry, but I wanted to get that in there.Well, I think there are so many voices, I can't name them all today, obviously, but obviously we're going to start with one that's a quiet voice behind the scenes, but a huge one, which is, I think, the National Security community. I think clearly going back to our point about China and geopolitical security, I think a lot of people behind the scenes who care about these issues, including people in the Pentagon, I think they had conversations with certain members of Congress and said, “You know what? China exists. And if we're shooting ourselves in the foot, we begin this race for geopolitical strategic supremacy in an important new general-purpose technology arena, we're really hurting our underlying security as a nation. I think that that thinking is there. So that's an important voice.Secondly, I think industry has been very, very scrambled and sort of atomistic in their approach to AI policy, and some of them have been downright opportunistic, trying to throw each other's competitors under the bus, unfortunately, and that includes OpenAI trying to screw over other companies and technologies, which is dangerous, but the bottom line is: More and more of them are coming to realize, as they saw the actual details of regulation and thinking through the compliance costs, that “Hell no, we won't go, we're not going to do that. We need a better approach.” And it was always easier in the old days to respond to the existential risk route, like, “Oh yeah, sure, regulation is fine, we'll go along with it!” But then when you see the devilish details, you think twice and you realize, “This will completely undermine our competitive advantage in the space as a company or our investment or whatever else.” All you need to do is look at Exhibit A, which is Europe, and say, if you always run with worst-case scenario thinking and Chicken-Littleism is the basis of your technology policy, guess what? People respond to incentives and they flee.Hatred of big tech is like the one great bipartisan, unifying theme of this Congress, if anything. But at the end of the day, I think everyone is thankful that those companies are headquartered in the United States and not Beijing, Brussels, or anywhere else. It's interesting, the national security aspect, my little amateurish thought experiment would be, what would be our reaction, and what would be the reaction in Washington if, in November, 2022, instead of it being a company, an American company with a big investment from another American company having rolled out ChatGPT, what if it would've been Tencent, or Alibaba, or some other Chinese company that had rolled this out, something that's obviously a leap forward, and they had been ahead, even if they said, “Oh, we're two or three years ahead of America,” it would've been bigger than Sputnik, I think.People are probably tired of hearing about AI—hopefully not, I hope they'll also listen to this podcast—but that would all we would be talking about. We wouldn't be talking about job loss, and we wouldn't be talking about ‘The Terminator,' we'd be talking about the pure geopolitical terms that the US has suffered a massive, massive defeat here and who's to blame? What are we going to do? And anybody at that moment who would've said, “We need to launch cruise missile strikes on our own data centers” for fear. . . I mean! And I think you're right, the national security component, extremely important here.In fact, I stole your little line about “Sputnik moment,” Jim, when I testified in front of the House Oversight Committee last month and I said, “Look, it would've been a true ‘Sputnik moment,' and instead it's those other countries that are left having the Sputnik moment, right? They're wondering, ‘How is it that, once again, the United States has gotten out ahead on digital and computational-based technologies?'” But thank God we did! And as I pointed out in the committee room that day, there's a lot of people who have problems with technology companies in Congress today. Hatred of big tech is like the one great bipartisan, unifying theme of this Congress, if anything. But at the end of the day, I think everyone is thankful that those companies are headquartered in the United States and not Beijing, Brussels, or anywhere else. That's just a unifying theme. Everybody in the committee room that day nodded their head, “Yes, yes, absolutely. We still hate them, but we're thankful that they're here.” And that then extends to AI: Can the next generation of companies that they want to bring to Congress and bash and pull money from for their elections, can they once again exist in the United States?Regulatory risk (16:10)So whether it's that working group report, or what else you see in Congress, what are a couple, three areas where you're concerned, where there still seems to be some sort of regulatory momentum?Let's divide it into a couple of chunks here. First of all, at the federal level, Congress is so damn dysfunctional that I'm not too worried that even if they have bad ideas, they're going to pursue them because they're just such a mess, they can't get any basic things done on things like baseline privacy legislation, or driverless car legislation, or even, hell, the budget and the border! They can't get basics done!I think it's a big positive that one, while they're engaging in dysfunction, the technology is evolving. And I hope, if it's as important as I think you and I think, more money will be invested, we'll see more use cases, it'll be obvious—the downsides of screwing up the regulation I think will be more obvious, and I think that's a tailwind for this technology.We're in violent agreement on that, Jim, and of course this goes by the name of “the pacing problem,” the idea that technology is outpacing law in many ways, and one man's pacing problem is another man's pacing benefit, in my opinion. There's a chance for technology to prove itself a little bit. That being said, we don't live in a legislative or regulatory vacuum. We already have in the United States 439 government agencies and sub-agencies, 2.2 million employees just at the federal level. So many agencies are active right now trying to get their paws on artificial intelligence, and some of them already have it. You look at the FDA [Food and Drug Administration], the FAA [Federal Aviation Administration], NHTSA [National Highway Traffic Safety Administration], I could go all through the alphabet soup of regulatory agencies that are already trying to regulate or overregulating AI right now.Then you have the Biden administration, who's gone out and done a lot of cheerleading in favor of more aggressive unilateral regulation, regardless of what Congress says and basically says, “To hell with all that stuff about Chevron Doctrine and major questions, we're just going to go do it! We're at least going to jawbone a lot and try to threaten regulation, and we're going to do it in the name of ‘algorithmic fairness,'” which is what their 100-plus-page executive order and their AI Bill of Rights says they're all about, as opposed to talking about AI opportunity and benefits—it's all misery. And it's like, “Look at how AI is just a massive tool of discrimination and bias, and we have to do something about it preemptively through a precautionary principle approach.” So if Congress isn't going to act, unfortunately the Biden administration already is and nobody's stopping them.But that's not even the biggest problem. The biggest problem, going back to the point that there are 730-plus bills pending in the US right now, the vast majority of them are state and local. And just last Friday, governor Jared Polis of Colorado signed into law the first major AI regulatory measure in Colorado, and there's a bigger and badder bill pending right now in California, there's 80 different bills pending in New York alone, and any half of them would be a disaster.I could go on down the list of troubling state patchwork problems that are going to develop for AI and ML [Machine Learning] systems, but the bottom line is this: This would be a complete and utter reversal of the winning formula that Congress and the Clinton administration gave us in the 1990s, which was a national—a global framework for global electronic commerce. It was very intentionally saying, “We're going to break with the Analog Era disaster, we're going to have a national framework that's pro-freedom to innovate, and we're going to make sure that these meddlesome barriers do not develop to online speech and commerce.” And yet, here with AI, we are witnessing a reversal of that. States are in the lead, and again, like I said, localities too, and Congress is sitting there and is the dysfunctional soup that it is saying, “Oh, maybe we should do something to spend a little bit more money to promote AI.” Well, we can spend all the money we want, but we can end up like Europe who spends tons of money on techno-industrial policies and gets nothing for it because they can't get their innovation culture right, because they're regulating the living hell out of digital technology.So you want Congress to take this away from the states?I do. I do, but it's really, really hard. I think what we need to do is follow the model that we had in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the Internet Tax Freedom Act of 1998. We've also had moratoriums, not only through the Internet Tax Freedom Act, but through the Commercial Space Amendments having to do with space commercial travel and other bills. Congress has handled the question of preemption before and put moratoria in place to say, “Let's have a learning period before we go do stupid things on a new technology sector that is fast moving and hard to understand.” I think that would be a reasonable response, but again, I have to go back to what we just talked about, Jim, which is that there's no chance of us probably getting it. There's no appetite in it. Not any of the 111 bills pending in Congress right now says a damn thing about state and local regulation of technology!Is the thrust of those federal bills, is it the kinds of stuff that you're generally worried about?Mostly, but not entirely. Some of it is narrower. A lot of these bills are like, “Let's take a look at AI and. . . fill in the blank: elections, AI and jobs, AI and whatever.” And some of them, on the merits, not terrible, others, I have concerns, but it's certainly better that we take a targeted sectoral approach to AI policy and regulation than having the broad-based, general-purpose stuff. Now, there are broad-based, general-purpose measures, and here's what they do, Jim: They basically say, “Look, instead of having a whole cloth new regulatory approach, let's build on the existing types of approaches being utilized in the Department of Commerce, namely through our NIST [National Institute of Standards and Technology], and NTIA [National Telecommunications and Information Administration] sub-agencies there. NIST is the National Standards Body, and basically they develop best practices through something called the AI Risk Management Framework for artificial intelligence development—and they're good! It's multi-stakeholder, it's bottom up, it's driven by the same principles that motivated the Clinton administration to do multi-stakeholder processes for the internet. Good model. It is non-regulatory, however. It is a consensus-based, multi-stakeholder, voluntary approach to developing consensus-based standards for best practices regarding various types of algorithmic services. These bills in Congress—and there's at least five of them that I count, that I've written about recently—say, “Let's take that existing infrastructure and give it some enforcement teeth. Let's basically say, ‘This policy infrastructure will be converted into a quasi-regulatory system,'” and there begins the dangerous path towards backdoor regulation of artificial intelligence in this country, and I think that's the most likely model we'll get. Like I said, five models, legislative models in the Senate alone that would do that to varying degrees.AI policy under Trump (22:29)Do you have any feel for what a Trump administration would want to do on this?I do, because a month before the Trump administration left office, they issued a report through the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and it basically laid out for agencies a set of principles for how it should evaluate artificial intelligence systems, both that are used by the government or that they regulate in the private sector, and it was an excellent set of principles. It was a restatement of the importance of policy, forbearance and humility. It was a restatement of a belief in cost-benefit analysis and identifying not only existing regulatory capacity to address these problems, but also non-regulatory mechanisms or best practices or standards that could address some of these things. It was a really good memo. I praised it in a piece that I wrote just before the Trump administration left. Now, of course, the Trump administration may change.Yes, and also, the technology has changed. I mean, that was 2020 and a lot has happened, and I don't know where. . . . I'm not sure where all the Republicans are. I think some people get it. . .I think the problem, Jim, is that, for the Republican Party, and Trumpian conservatives, in particular, they face a time of choosing. And what I mean by this is that they have spent the last four to six years—and Trump egged this on—engaging in nonstop quote-unquote “big tech bashing” and making technology companies in the media out to be, as Trumps calls them, “the enemy of the American people.” And so many hearings now are just parading tech executives and others up there to be beaten with a stick in front of the public, and this is the new thing. And then there's just a flood of bills that would regulate traditional digital technologies, repeal things like Section 230, which is liability protection for the tech sector, and so on, child safety regulations.Meanwhile, that same Republican Party and Mr. Trump go around hating on Joe Biden in China. If it's one thing they can't stand more than big tech, it's Joe and China! And so, in a sense, they've got to choose, because their own policy proposals on technology could essentially kneecap America's technology base in a way that would open up the door to whether it's what they fear in the “woke DEI policies” of Biden or the CCP's preferred policy agenda for controlling computation in the world today. Choose two, you don't get all three. And I think this is going to be an interesting thing to watch if Mr. Trump comes back into office, do they pick up where that OMB memo left off, or do they go right back to beating that “We've got to kill big tech by any means necessary in a seek-and-destroy mission, to hell with the consequences.” And I don't know yet.Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

James Simpson is an investigative journalist, businessman and former economist and budget examiner for the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). He has authored, The Red-Green Axis 2.0: An Existential Threat to America and the World   In this exclusive Schilling Show Unleashed Podcast interview, Simpson discusses the unlikely components of the Red-Green Axis, how they are working together to destroy America and the West, and glimmers of hope on the horizon.

The Constitution gives citizens the right to petition the government. In the 21st century, that is a complicated and expensive process, unless you are a professional lobbyist. Now the White House has launched an effort to make it easier for people to engage with the government. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calls the effort a new federal framework for public participation. For details, Federal Drive Host Tom Temin talks with OMB's Associate Director for Performance and Personnel Management, Loren Schulman. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A recent update by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to the Uniform Grants Guidance, aims to give state, local, and tribal governments more autonomy on how they spend federal grant money. The update engenders more importance, with substantial amounts of money coming in from the Inflation Reduction Act. For one view of how this could all play out, Federal News Network's Eric White spoke with the assistant director for policy at the union-oriented Jobs to Move America, Valerie Lizarraga. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode of “Answers From the Lab,” host Bobbi Pritt, M.D., chair of the Division of Clinical Microbiology at Mayo Clinic, is joined by William Morice II, M.D., Ph.D., CEO and president of Mayo Clinic Laboratories. They discuss the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) progress on making a final rule around regulating laboratory-developed tests (LDTs). Their discussion includes:How the FDA's proposed rule on regulating LDTs has advanced to the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, and what to expect in the coming months.Ongoing work around the Saving Access to Laboratory Services Act (SALSA).How laboratorians and pathologists can stay engaged on these important issues. 

In this week's podcast episode, Troy Edgar meets in Washington D.C. with his colleague and mentor Dan Chenok, Executive Director for IBM's Center for the Business of Government. This was an important show for the podcast as Dan provides a great overview of “What is Meritocracy.”  Dan also talks about his recently released book “Transforming the Business of Government: Insights on Resiliency, Innovation, and Performance.” This book has been getting a lot of attention because of its focus on providing government leaders with practical and actionable insights on how best to manage and lead through uncertain and disruptive periods. Dan also shares an interesting fact of his relationship to Ron Chernow, the author of “Alexander Hamilton.” As frequent collaborators at the IBM Center and the Partnership for Public Service, Troy and Dan discuss the important role that think tank organizations play in the ecosystem of Washington, D.C.  Lastly, they talked about their ideas for improving the effectiveness of the federal government, performance tracking, and the important role of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to measure performance and assist the President in meeting policy, budget, management, and regulatory/statutory responsibilities. Recommended Reading: “Alexander Hamilton” by Ron Chernow Recommended Reading: “Transforming the Business of Government: Insights on Resiliency, Innovation, and Performance” by Dan Chenok and Michael J. Keegan Recommended Reading: “The Rise of Meritocracy” by Michael Young   Ameritocracy™ is produced by Prospect House Media and recorded in studio locations in Los Angeles and Washington D.C.

Exploring the Conservative Approach to Budgeting in Iowa Iowa continues to stand at the crossroads of fiscal conservatism, where balancing the budget isn't a mere financial exercise but a deep-seated principle that resonates across the state's governance. As part of this ongoing narrative, the dialogue around conservative budgeting within the state has intensified, particularly in light of similar efforts experienced throughout the country. An Interview with Economist Vance Ginn Vance Ginn, with an impressive roster of roles including Chief Economist at the *Pelican Institute for Public Policy* and Senior Fellow at *Americans for Tax Reform*, has emerged as a notable figure in this movement toward fiscal prudence. His deep-rooted experience extends beyond think tanks and into the halls of the White House, where he previously served as the Associate Director for Economic Policy at the *Office of Management and Budget (OMB)* during the Trump administration. During his tenure at the OMB, Ginn's work added an insightful perspective to the federal budgeting conversation. He played a pivotal role in crafting the President's budget to identify substantial savings, although these measures did not wholly balance the budget. His initiatives aimed to improve budgetary directions and provided him with firsthand insights into the federal budget's complexities, particularly concerning entitlements like Social Security and Medicare. Lessons from the Federal Level Moving from broad strokes painted at the national canvas, Ginn's tenure at the White House offered him unique insights into the inner workings of federal budgeting. He participated in critical discussions during formative times, such as the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. This critical period showcased the government's response to unforeseen economic challenges and the decisions that affect national fiscal health. Ginn's experience at the federal level highlighted the dichotomy of discretionary versus mandatory spending, with the former being more susceptible to budget cuts than the latter. These learnings underpin Ginn's expertise in fiscal policy and provide essential framing for understanding how government spending directly correlates to the extent of government's reach. State-Level Fiscal Responsibility Ginn is an advocate for the effectiveness of state-level governance, where action is not only more pronounced but also essential for maintaining economic equilibrium. States are often seen as laboratories for democracy, wherein policy experimentation is more feasible, and its results more keenly felt by the constituents. Ginn underscores the significance of states having balanced budget amendments or similar provisions, which necessitate revenues equaling expenditures. This requirement is lacking at the federal level, where debt has surged, and fiscal responsibility seems markedly more abstract. With states constrained in their fiscal operations and unable to resort to deficit spending as readily as the federal government, there is an inherent drive towards responsible budgeting. The Conservative Iowa Budget: A Paradigm of Fiscal Conservatism The conservative Iowa budget represents a paradigm shift towards restrained government expenditure and sustainable fiscal policy. Ginn's advocacy for conservative budgeting – an approach that emphasizes living within our means – has transcended his work in Texas and permeated his influence across multiple states, including Iowa. This approach to budgeting, which focuses on the growth of government spending not exceeding certain economic benchmarks, aims to safeguard taxpayers from unchecked fiscal expansionism. In Iowa, like in Texas, the goal is to instill a robust spending limit that aligns with taxpayers' ability to pay. The root of conservative budgeting in Iowa is a profound understanding that the burden of government is more accurately reflected in spending rather than in taxation or regulation.

This week on Facing the Future our guests were former U.S. Senators, Kent Conrad (D-ND) and Rob Portman (R-OH). They have been lending their voices to the push for a new bipartisan fiscal commission that would propose solutions to our nation's unsustainable budget outlook. Conrad chaired the Senate Budget Committee from 2001 to 2003, and again from 2007 to 2013. Portman served as Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under President George W. Bush.

Protecting our government and private sector networks from state-backed hackers and cybercriminals is more important than ever and starts with having robust cybersecurity teams. However, as the demand for cybersecurity professionals rapidly grows, the supply has not matched pace, leading to hundreds of thousands of unfilled cybersecurity positions across the U.S. federal government and private sector. To address this gap, the Biden Administration released the National Cyber Workforce and Education Strategy, a document with the ambitious goals on educating and training students and professionals to expand the cybersecurity workforce.To discuss the implementation of the strategy and strengthening the federal cyber workforce, FDD and CSC 2.0 are hosting an event with Camille Stewart Gloster, deputy national cyber director for technology and ecosystem security; Seeyew Mo, assistant national cyber director for workforce, education, and awareness; Jason Barke deputy associate director for strategic workforce planning at the Office of Personnel Management; Kristy Daphnis, senior executive in the Office of Performance and Personnel Management at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB); and RADM (Ret.) Mark Montgomery, senior director of FDD's Center on Cyber and Technology Innovation and CSC 2.0 executive director. The panel will be moderated by Natalie Alms, staff reporter at Nextgov/FCW.

From helping lead implementation of the Evidence Act to providing technical assistance on activities and initiatives, the Evidence Team at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is on the frontlines of evidence building and use across the federal government. Led by Diana Epstein (Team Lead), Erica Zielewski (Senior Evidence Analyst), Danielle Berman (Senior Evidence Analyst), and Erika Liliedahl (Senior Evidence Analyst), the OMB Evidence Team spends their days doing “anything and everything to help make sure that government uses the best possible evidence to make decisions.” On this episode of Mathematica's On the Evidence podcast—I speak with Diana, Erica, and Danielle to better understand Evidence Act implementation and federal evaluation, and the role the Evidence Team plays in efforts to improve government-wide effectiveness. Among several topics, the episode covers: • Successes and challenges of the Evidence Act • Evidence Act Title I and OMB's Evidence Act implementing guidance • The Evidence Team's role in interagency collaboration • The ongoing culture change around evidence-based decision-making • The Evaluation Officer Council A full transcript of this episode is available here: https://www.mathematica.org/blogs/the-omb-evidence-team-on-evidence-based-policymaking-and-federal-evaluation Learn more about the OMB Evidence Team: https://www.evaluation.gov/about/ Read a fact sheet from the Bipartisan Policy Center on the Evidence Act: https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/fact-sheet-foundations-for-evidence-based-policymaking-act/ Read OMB's Evidence Act implementing guidance: https://www.evaluation.gov/2021-09-27-OMB-M-21-27-guidance/ Learn more about the Evaluation Office Council: https://www.evaluation.gov/about-evaluation-officers/

In Today's episode of "Moment of Truth," Saurabh sits down with Russ Vought, former OMB Director and President of Center for Renewing America and Dan Caldwell, U.S. Marine (ret.) and Vice President of Center for Renewing America, to discuss the weaponization of government against the American people, the future of the war in Ukraine, and how the debt limit fight is an opportunity to defund woke federal bureaucracies destroying America.#RussVought #DanCaldwell #CenterforRenewingAmerica #DebtLimit #Deficit #FinanceRuss Vought is President of Center for Renewing America, which exists to renew a consensus of America as a nation under God with unique interests worthy of defending that flow from its people, institutions, and history, where individuals' enjoyment of freedom is predicated on just laws and healthy communities. Before CRA he was Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under President Trump.Dan Caldwell is Vice President for Center for Renewing America. Dan is a veteran of the United States Marine Corps. He deployed to Iraq with 2nd Battalion, 1st Marines in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and conducted operations in the Al Anbar and Ninawa provinces. Following his service in the Marines, Dan worked for Congressman David Schweikert (R-AZ), focusing on veterans and defense issues. Dan is also an advisor to Concerned Veterans for America.Learn more about Russ Vought & Dan Caldwell's work:https://americarenewing.comhttps://twitter.com/RussVoughthttps://twitter.com/dandcaldwell––––––Follow American Moment across Social Media:Twitter – https://twitter.com/AmMomentOrgFacebook – https://www.facebook.com/AmMomentOrgInstagram – https://www.instagram.com/ammomentorg/YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4qmB5DeiFxt53ZPZiW4TcgRumble – https://rumble.com/c/ammomentorgOdysee – https://odysee.com/@AmMomentOrgFollow Us on Twitter:Saurabh Sharma – https://twitter.com/ssharmaUSNick Solheim – https://twitter.com/NickSSolheimAmerican Moment's "Moment of Truth" Podcast is recorded at the Conservative Partnership Center in Washington DC, produced by American Moment Studios, and edited by Jake Mercier an Jared Cummings.Subscribe to our Podcast, "Moment of Truth"Apple Podcasts – https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/moment-of-truth/id1555257529Spotify – https://open.spotify.com/show/5ATl0x7nKDX0vVoGrGNhAj Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.