Podcasts about george mason university's schar school

Remember, you can watch the Superpowers for Good show on e360tv. To watch the episode, download the #e360tv channel app to your streaming device–Roku, AppleTV or AmazonFireTV–or your mobile device. You can even watch it on the web.Devin: What is your superpower?Janelle: I believe it's that I do not shy away from large challenges.Jobs for America's Graduates (JAG) is a “43-year-old national nonprofit created specifically to reach young people who may be facing academic, environmental, social, economic challenges,” says CEO Janelle Duray.“We wanted to ensure that they were invited to a program, that they could feel safe, that they could tackle those challenges and move beyond them and have the space to dream big about their future, to recognize their interests, their aptitudes, and then connect those interests and aptitudes to relevant opportunities in their communities,” she explains.There may never have been a scarier time to enter the workforce, with artificial intelligence threatening to dramatically change or eliminate many traditional roles, from truck drivers to the practice of law and journalism.Janelle says that preparing youth for lifelong learning is the antidote, enabling youth to have confidence in their ability to succeed in the long run.JAG operates with three pillars that support what it calls the JAG advantage: trauma-informed care, project-based learning and employer engagement.JAG was founded by state governors working closely with Fortune 100 companies, giving the organization a unique role as an intermediary between some of the best career opportunities in the country and the youth otherwise least likely to find them.“What I love about working so closely with leading companies, Fortune 100, is that when we develop these intentional partnerships across multiple locations across multiple states, they will say they learn just as much from our students as our students learn from them,” Janelle says.Since joining the organization, Janelle has worked to elevate the students, making them the focus of the work, moving corporate executives from the limelight–while strategically keeping them in the loop.Janelle uses her superpower, her ability to tackle large challenges, to make a difference in the world.AI Episode SummaryAI Episode Summary* JAG stands for Jobs for America's Graduates, a national program that supports young people in graduating high school and launching successful careers.* JAG's mission is to empower young people with the skills and support to succeed in education, employment, and life.* The program was created to reach young people facing challenges that hindered their success in high school and to connect them with opportunities in their communities.* JAG focuses on trauma-informed care, project-based learning, and employer engagement to support students in their education and career development.* Janelle Duray has been with JAG for 13 years and recently became the CEO, bringing her experience in the public and nonprofit sectors to the organization.* JAG works closely with Fortune 500 executives, governors, and employers to provide opportunities for students and build diverse talent pipelines.* Lifelong learning and adaptability are crucial in preparing young people for a future influenced by AI and technological advancements.* Janelle's superpower is not shying away from large challenges and being driven to be part of the solution. She emphasizes the importance of balance and enjoying the present while working towards future goals.* JAG has focused on positioning students as the flagship of the organization, investing in their leadership skills, and giving them a platform to advocate for themselves and their future.* To learn more about JAG, donate, or get involved, visit their website at jag.org or follow their social media channels at JAGNational. How to Develop Tackling Large Challenges As a SuperpowerJanelle grew up in a tiny town in rural Minnesota. “There were no stoplights in my entire county,” she says. Significant challenges appealed to her despite–or maybe because of–her situation. At JAG, she faced a big challenge. She wanted to shift focus and attention from the corporations to the students, making them the stars of the show. It was a big challenge in the context of a national nonprofit organization led and sponsored by the people she wanted to move out of the spotlight. A dozen years later, however, she can say, “mission accomplished.”For developing the ability to tackle big challenges, she offers a simple formula: “increments, increments, increments.” She adds that looking back can allow you to see progress and measure it.By following her example and advice, you can strengthen your ability to tackle large challenges. With time, you could make it a superpower that enables you to do more good in the world.Guest ProfileJanelle Duray (she/her):President & CEO, Jobs for America's GraduatesAbout Jobs for America's Graduates: Our mission is to empower the nation's young people with the skills and support to succeed in education, employment, and life.Website: www.jag.orgTwitter Handle: @JAGnationalInstagram Handle: @jag.nationalFacebook Page: facebook.com/jagnationalBiographical Information: Janelle Duray has over fifteen years of experience in education and workforce development consulting and nonprofit management. In October 2023, she was named as the second President & CEO of Jobs for America's Graduates, a national nonprofit that has served 1.6 million youth since its inception 40+ years ago and currently serves over 75,000 youth across 1,500 communities. In her role, Janelle is charged to cast JAG's future vision by blending her passion to serve others and innovating and elevating organizations to bring JAG services to a broader scale. Janelle has served in many roles at JAG since 2012. In January 2020, she was named Executive Vice President and subsequently led the organization through the COVID-19 pandemic, making critical investments in technology, student engagement programming, Federal procurement infrastructure, and overall organizational development for the JAG National Office and its national network. Her leadership throughout the pandemic led the Board of Directors to adopt JAG's Youth Opportunity and Outcomes 2024 Strategic Goals – the most ambitious goals in JAG's history. Prior to her commitment to JAG, Janelle has consulted with leading Fortune 500 companies and national nonprofits, including ADM, HCA, United Way Worldwide, the AARP Foundation, the National Urban League, and more, to grow their fund development, external affairs efforts, and overall strategy. Janelle received her Master of Arts in Public Administration from George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government and her Bachelor of Arts in Global Studies from the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Throughout her post-secondary education, Janelle held positions at the Association of American Law Schools and former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty's office.Outside of JAG, Janelle enjoys traveling, concerts, musing about the cosmos, and her first passion, playing piano.Twitter Handle: @JanelleDurayLinkedin: linkedin.com/in/janelle-duraySuperpowers for Good is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Superpowers for Good at www.superpowers4good.com/subscribe

From February 16, 2021: The Biden administration has promised significant changes to the U.S. relationship with Iran that could have a marked impact on the Middle East. What is the likelihood that this new administration will be successful? And how will other regional developments—from the Abraham Accords between Israel and a few Arab states, to the healing of the rift within the Gulf Cooperation Council, to the ongoing morass in Syria—affect the dynamics here?To address these questions, David Priess hosted a panel discussion on February 11 for the Michael V. Hayden Center for Intelligence, Policy and International Security at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. He sat down with Norman Roule, a 34-year veteran of the CIA, who served as the national intelligence manager for Iran for more than eight years; Kirsten Fontenrose, formerly the senior director for the Persian Gulf on the National Security Council staff and currently the director of the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council; and Ambassador Dennis Ross, who has served in U.S. government positions pertaining to the Middle East for some 40 years, and who is now a distinguished fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Facing the Future was in Washington DC this week for the national finals of the annual "Fiscal Challenge" competition among college students all over the country. The students put forward some thorough and well-researched plans to reduce the national debt as a share of the American economy over the next 30 years. Concord Coalition Communications Director Av Harris spoke in detail with the college teams about their proposals to raise revenue, reduce federal spending, and grow the economy. He also spoke with professor Sita Slavov of George Mason University's Schar School of Public Policy, who evaluated and scored these plans as one of the fiscal challenge judges.

Facing the Future was in Washington DC this week for the national finals of the annual "Fiscal Challenge" competition among college students all over the country. The students put forward some thorough and well-researched plans to reduce the national debt as a share of the American economy over the next 30 years. Concord Coalition Communications Director Av Harris spoke in detail with the college teams about their proposals to raise revenue, reduce federal spending, and grow the economy. He also spoke with professor Sita Slavov of George Mason University's Schar School of Public Policy, who evaluated and scored these plans as one of the fiscal challenge judges.

Photo: No known restrictions on publication. @Batchelorshow #Taiwan: More flashy threats. Gerrit van der Wees, adjunct professor at George Washington University's Elliott School of Foreign Affairs and George Mason University's Schar School of Goverment, on the McCarthy-Tsai meeting @GordonGChang, Gatestone, Newsweek, The Hill  https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2023/04/02/2003797176

High-risk, high-reward projects are changing the future of technology Catherine Marsh, director of Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity, discusses new projects being worked on by the organization.Reforming US intelligence communityRon Marks, visiting professor at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government, discusses changes to the U.S. intelligence community.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

We continue our Best of 2022 episodes with an  episode from the Village SquareCast podcast, hosted by the Village Square.How do societies respond to great demographic change? This question lingers over the contemporary politics of the United States and other countries where persistent immigration has altered populations and may soon produce a majority minority milestone. Or where the original ethnic or religious majority loses its numerical advantage to one or more foreign-origin minority groups. Until now, most of our knowledge about large-scale responses to demographic change has been based on studies of individual people's reactions, which tend to be instinctively defensive and intolerant. We know little about why and how these habits are sometimes tempered to promote more successful coexistence.Dr. Justin Gest is an Associate Professor of Policy and Government at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. He is the author of six books, primarily on the politics of immigration and demographic change—all from Oxford University Press or Cambridge University Press.Dr. Gest's research has been published in journals including the British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Comparative Political Studies, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Global Governance, Global Policy, International Migration Review, Migration Studies, Polity, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. He is the editor of Silent Citizenship: The Politics of Marginality in Unequal Democracies (Routledge, 2016), special issues of Citizenship Studies, and the Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies.He has also provided commentary, analysis, or reporting to a number of broadcast networks, including ABC, BBC, CBC, CNN, and NPR, and news publications including The Atlantic, The Boston Globe, The Guardian, Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, POLITICO, Reuters, The Times, Vox, and The Washington Post.Find this program online at The Village Square.This podcast series is presented in partnership with Florida Humanities.Additional InformationThe Village SquareCast PodcastMore shows from The Democracy Group

How do societies respond to great demographic change? This question lingers over the contemporary politics of the United States and other countries where persistent immigration has altered populations and may soon produce a majority minority milestone, where the original ethnic or religious majority loses its numerical advantage to one or more foreign-origin minority groups. Until now, most of our knowledge about large-scale responses to demographic change has been based on studies of individual people's reactions, which tend to be instinctively defensive and intolerant. We know little about why and how these habits are sometimes tempered to promote more successful coexistence. To anticipate and inform future responses to demographic change, Justin Gest looks to the past. In Majority Minority, Gest wields historical analysis and interview-based fieldwork inside six of the world's few societies that have already experienced a majority minority transition to understand what factors produce different social outcomes. Gest concludes that, rather than yield to people's prejudices, states hold great power to shape public responses and perceptions of demographic change through political institutions and the rhetoric of leaders. Through subsequent survey research, Gest also identifies novel ways that leaders can leverage nationalist sentiment to reduce the appeal of nativism—by framing immigration and demographic change in terms of the national interest. Grounded in rich narratives and surprising survey findings, Majority Minority reveals that this contentious milestone and its accompanying identity politics are ultimately subject to unifying or divisive governance. Justin Gest is an Associate Professor of Policy and Government at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. He is the author of six books, primarily on the politics of immigration and demographic change—all from Oxford University Press or Cambridge University Press. Robert Misik, Author and Journalist

In Dying to Learn: Wartime Lessons from the Western Front (Cornell UP, 2021), Michael Hunzeker develops a novel theory to explain how wartime militaries learn. He focuses on the Western Front, which witnessed three great-power armies struggle to cope with deadlock throughout the First World War, as the British, French, and German armies all pursued the same solutions-assault tactics, combined arms, and elastic defense in depth. By the end of the war, only the German army managed to develop and implement a set of revolutionary offensive, defensive, and combined arms doctrines that in hindsight represented the best way to fight. Hunzeker identifies three organizational variables that determine how fighting militaries generate new ideas, distinguish good ones from bad ones, and implement the best of them across the entire organization. These factors are: the degree to which leadership delegates authority on the battlefield; how effectively the organization retains control over soldier and officer training; and whether or not the military possesses an independent doctrinal assessment mechanism. Through careful study of the British, French, and German experiences in the First World War, Dying to Learn provides a model that shows how a resolute focus on analysis, command, and training can help prepare modern militaries for adapting amidst high-intensity warfare in an age of revolutionary technological change. Michael A. Hunzeker is Assistant Professor in George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. Follow him on Twitter @michaelhunzeker Sam Canter is a policy and strategy analyst, PhD candidate, and Army Reserve intelligence officer. His views are his own and do not reflect any institution, organization, or entity with which he is affiliated. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/military-history

In Dying to Learn: Wartime Lessons from the Western Front (Cornell UP, 2021), Michael Hunzeker develops a novel theory to explain how wartime militaries learn. He focuses on the Western Front, which witnessed three great-power armies struggle to cope with deadlock throughout the First World War, as the British, French, and German armies all pursued the same solutions-assault tactics, combined arms, and elastic defense in depth. By the end of the war, only the German army managed to develop and implement a set of revolutionary offensive, defensive, and combined arms doctrines that in hindsight represented the best way to fight. Hunzeker identifies three organizational variables that determine how fighting militaries generate new ideas, distinguish good ones from bad ones, and implement the best of them across the entire organization. These factors are: the degree to which leadership delegates authority on the battlefield; how effectively the organization retains control over soldier and officer training; and whether or not the military possesses an independent doctrinal assessment mechanism. Through careful study of the British, French, and German experiences in the First World War, Dying to Learn provides a model that shows how a resolute focus on analysis, command, and training can help prepare modern militaries for adapting amidst high-intensity warfare in an age of revolutionary technological change. Michael A. Hunzeker is Assistant Professor in George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. Follow him on Twitter @michaelhunzeker Sam Canter is a policy and strategy analyst, PhD candidate, and Army Reserve intelligence officer. His views are his own and do not reflect any institution, organization, or entity with which he is affiliated. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In Dying to Learn: Wartime Lessons from the Western Front (Cornell UP, 2021), Michael Hunzeker develops a novel theory to explain how wartime militaries learn. He focuses on the Western Front, which witnessed three great-power armies struggle to cope with deadlock throughout the First World War, as the British, French, and German armies all pursued the same solutions-assault tactics, combined arms, and elastic defense in depth. By the end of the war, only the German army managed to develop and implement a set of revolutionary offensive, defensive, and combined arms doctrines that in hindsight represented the best way to fight. Hunzeker identifies three organizational variables that determine how fighting militaries generate new ideas, distinguish good ones from bad ones, and implement the best of them across the entire organization. These factors are: the degree to which leadership delegates authority on the battlefield; how effectively the organization retains control over soldier and officer training; and whether or not the military possesses an independent doctrinal assessment mechanism. Through careful study of the British, French, and German experiences in the First World War, Dying to Learn provides a model that shows how a resolute focus on analysis, command, and training can help prepare modern militaries for adapting amidst high-intensity warfare in an age of revolutionary technological change. Michael A. Hunzeker is Assistant Professor in George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. Follow him on Twitter @michaelhunzeker Sam Canter is a policy and strategy analyst, PhD candidate, and Army Reserve intelligence officer. His views are his own and do not reflect any institution, organization, or entity with which he is affiliated. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

In Dying to Learn: Wartime Lessons from the Western Front (Cornell UP, 2021), Michael Hunzeker develops a novel theory to explain how wartime militaries learn. He focuses on the Western Front, which witnessed three great-power armies struggle to cope with deadlock throughout the First World War, as the British, French, and German armies all pursued the same solutions-assault tactics, combined arms, and elastic defense in depth. By the end of the war, only the German army managed to develop and implement a set of revolutionary offensive, defensive, and combined arms doctrines that in hindsight represented the best way to fight. Hunzeker identifies three organizational variables that determine how fighting militaries generate new ideas, distinguish good ones from bad ones, and implement the best of them across the entire organization. These factors are: the degree to which leadership delegates authority on the battlefield; how effectively the organization retains control over soldier and officer training; and whether or not the military possesses an independent doctrinal assessment mechanism. Through careful study of the British, French, and German experiences in the First World War, Dying to Learn provides a model that shows how a resolute focus on analysis, command, and training can help prepare modern militaries for adapting amidst high-intensity warfare in an age of revolutionary technological change. Michael A. Hunzeker is Assistant Professor in George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. Follow him on Twitter @michaelhunzeker Sam Canter is a policy and strategy analyst, PhD candidate, and Army Reserve intelligence officer. His views are his own and do not reflect any institution, organization, or entity with which he is affiliated. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

In Dying to Learn: Wartime Lessons from the Western Front (Cornell UP, 2021), Michael Hunzeker develops a novel theory to explain how wartime militaries learn. He focuses on the Western Front, which witnessed three great-power armies struggle to cope with deadlock throughout the First World War, as the British, French, and German armies all pursued the same solutions-assault tactics, combined arms, and elastic defense in depth. By the end of the war, only the German army managed to develop and implement a set of revolutionary offensive, defensive, and combined arms doctrines that in hindsight represented the best way to fight. Hunzeker identifies three organizational variables that determine how fighting militaries generate new ideas, distinguish good ones from bad ones, and implement the best of them across the entire organization. These factors are: the degree to which leadership delegates authority on the battlefield; how effectively the organization retains control over soldier and officer training; and whether or not the military possesses an independent doctrinal assessment mechanism. Through careful study of the British, French, and German experiences in the First World War, Dying to Learn provides a model that shows how a resolute focus on analysis, command, and training can help prepare modern militaries for adapting amidst high-intensity warfare in an age of revolutionary technological change. Michael A. Hunzeker is Assistant Professor in George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. Follow him on Twitter @michaelhunzeker Sam Canter is a policy and strategy analyst, PhD candidate, and Army Reserve intelligence officer. His views are his own and do not reflect any institution, organization, or entity with which he is affiliated. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

In Dying to Learn: Wartime Lessons from the Western Front (Cornell UP, 2021), Michael Hunzeker develops a novel theory to explain how wartime militaries learn. He focuses on the Western Front, which witnessed three great-power armies struggle to cope with deadlock throughout the First World War, as the British, French, and German armies all pursued the same solutions-assault tactics, combined arms, and elastic defense in depth. By the end of the war, only the German army managed to develop and implement a set of revolutionary offensive, defensive, and combined arms doctrines that in hindsight represented the best way to fight. Hunzeker identifies three organizational variables that determine how fighting militaries generate new ideas, distinguish good ones from bad ones, and implement the best of them across the entire organization. These factors are: the degree to which leadership delegates authority on the battlefield; how effectively the organization retains control over soldier and officer training; and whether or not the military possesses an independent doctrinal assessment mechanism. Through careful study of the British, French, and German experiences in the First World War, Dying to Learn provides a model that shows how a resolute focus on analysis, command, and training can help prepare modern militaries for adapting amidst high-intensity warfare in an age of revolutionary technological change. Michael A. Hunzeker is Assistant Professor in George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. Follow him on Twitter @michaelhunzeker Sam Canter is a policy and strategy analyst, PhD candidate, and Army Reserve intelligence officer. His views are his own and do not reflect any institution, organization, or entity with which he is affiliated. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/national-security

In Dying to Learn: Wartime Lessons from the Western Front (Cornell UP, 2021), Michael Hunzeker develops a novel theory to explain how wartime militaries learn. He focuses on the Western Front, which witnessed three great-power armies struggle to cope with deadlock throughout the First World War, as the British, French, and German armies all pursued the same solutions-assault tactics, combined arms, and elastic defense in depth. By the end of the war, only the German army managed to develop and implement a set of revolutionary offensive, defensive, and combined arms doctrines that in hindsight represented the best way to fight. Hunzeker identifies three organizational variables that determine how fighting militaries generate new ideas, distinguish good ones from bad ones, and implement the best of them across the entire organization. These factors are: the degree to which leadership delegates authority on the battlefield; how effectively the organization retains control over soldier and officer training; and whether or not the military possesses an independent doctrinal assessment mechanism. Through careful study of the British, French, and German experiences in the First World War, Dying to Learn provides a model that shows how a resolute focus on analysis, command, and training can help prepare modern militaries for adapting amidst high-intensity warfare in an age of revolutionary technological change. Michael A. Hunzeker is Assistant Professor in George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. Follow him on Twitter @michaelhunzeker Sam Canter is a policy and strategy analyst, PhD candidate, and Army Reserve intelligence officer. His views are his own and do not reflect any institution, organization, or entity with which he is affiliated. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/british-studies

In Dying to Learn: Wartime Lessons from the Western Front (Cornell UP, 2021), Michael Hunzeker develops a novel theory to explain how wartime militaries learn. He focuses on the Western Front, which witnessed three great-power armies struggle to cope with deadlock throughout the First World War, as the British, French, and German armies all pursued the same solutions-assault tactics, combined arms, and elastic defense in depth. By the end of the war, only the German army managed to develop and implement a set of revolutionary offensive, defensive, and combined arms doctrines that in hindsight represented the best way to fight. Hunzeker identifies three organizational variables that determine how fighting militaries generate new ideas, distinguish good ones from bad ones, and implement the best of them across the entire organization. These factors are: the degree to which leadership delegates authority on the battlefield; how effectively the organization retains control over soldier and officer training; and whether or not the military possesses an independent doctrinal assessment mechanism. Through careful study of the British, French, and German experiences in the First World War, Dying to Learn provides a model that shows how a resolute focus on analysis, command, and training can help prepare modern militaries for adapting amidst high-intensity warfare in an age of revolutionary technological change. Michael A. Hunzeker is Assistant Professor in George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. Follow him on Twitter @michaelhunzeker Sam Canter is a policy and strategy analyst, PhD candidate, and Army Reserve intelligence officer. His views are his own and do not reflect any institution, organization, or entity with which he is affiliated. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/french-studies

Are the midterm elections the most important in our time? Maybe, maybe not. Jennifer Victor, associate professor of political science in George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government, and Mason president Gregory Washington wrestle with that, and you might be surprised at the answer. Want more surprises? Then hear why high voter turnout could be a double-edged sword for our democracy and how the parties misread the electorate. And just what is “thermostatic politics?”

The Coast Guard, the National Nuclear Security Administration and the Internal Revenue Service all have cyber struggles according to overseers. Their challenges are representative of the issues every agency faces. Ron Marks, president of ZPN Cyber and National Security Strategies and visiting professor at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government, discusses the overarching theme of these cyber challenges and what organizations can do moving forward. A Department of Veterans Affairs facility in Harlingen, Texas is struggling with some basic blocking and tackling for technology security. That's despite an agency-wide effort to improve security. John Zangardi, president and CEO of Redhorse Corporation and former Department of Homeland Security chief information officer, explains the issues large enterprises face and how it can be prevented. The cloud is the driver behind U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' digital transformation. USCIS Chief Information Security Officer Shane Barney tells Scoop News Group's Wyatt Kash about his organization's move from paper to digital, and the work it takes to keep that transformation secure. This interview is part of FedScoop's “Federal Zero Trust: Moving from Aspiration to Transformation” video campaign, underwritten by Forcepoint. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every weekday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify and Stitcher. And if you like what you hear, please let us know in the comments.

On today's episode of The Daily Scoop Podcast, only two Department of Justice components have followed supply chain risk management requirements over the last six years. DOJ is boosting its cyber technological capabilities as part of a new strategic plan. Grant Schneider, senior director for cybersecurity services at Venable LLP and former federal chief information security officer, discusses the department's cybersecurity mission delivery initiative. U.S. Cyber Command is asking companies to share more cyber intelligence they collect to help improve defensive digital operations. Ron Marks, president of ZPN Cyber and National Security Strategies and visiting professor at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government, explains what that relationship between the combatant command and industry looks like and possible issues in coordinating that communication. The Department of Defense expects to award its Joint Warfighting Cloud Capability contract later this year. Air Force Chief Information Officer Lauren Knausenberger tells Billy Mitchell on the latest episode of Let's Talk About IT discusses the progress her organization has already made building a cloud environment. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every weekday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify and Stitcher. And if you like what you hear, please let us know in the comments.

How do societies respond to great demographic change? This question lingers over the contemporary politics of the United States and other countries where persistent immigration has altered populations and may soon produce a majority minority milestone. Or where the original ethnic or religious majority loses its numerical advantage to one or more foreign-origin minority groups. Until now, most of our knowledge about large-scale responses to demographic change has been based on studies of individual people's reactions, which tend to be instinctively defensive and intolerant. We know little about why and how these habits are sometimes tempered to promote more successful coexistence.Dr. Justin Gest is an Associate Professor of Policy and Government at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. He is the author of six books, primarily on the politics of immigration and demographic change—all from Oxford University Press or Cambridge University Press. Dr. Gest's research has been published in journals including the British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Comparative Political Studies, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Global Governance, Global Policy, International Migration Review, Migration Studies, Polity, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. He is the editor of Silent Citizenship: The Politics of Marginality in Unequal Democracies (Routledge, 2016), special issues of Citizenship Studies, and the Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies.He has also provided commentary, analysis, or reporting to a number of broadcast networks, including ABC, BBC, CBC, CNN, and NPR, and news publications including The Atlantic, The Boston Globe, The Guardian, Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, POLITICO, Reuters, The Times, Vox, and The Washington Post.Additional InformationThe Village SquareCast PodcastMore shows from The Democracy Group

“Trenchant and groundbreaking work.” —Molly Ball, National Political Correspondent, TIME Magazine “The go-to source for understanding how demographic change is impacting American politics.” —Jonathan Capehart, The Washington Post and MSNBC How do societies respond to great demographic change? This question lingers over the contemporary politics of the United States and other countries where persistent immigration has altered populations and may soon produce a majority minority milestone. Or where the original ethnic or religious majority loses its numerical advantage to one or more foreign-origin minority groups. Until now, most of our knowledge about large-scale responses to demographic change has been based on studies of individual people's reactions, which tend to be instinctively defensive and intolerant. We know little about why and how these habits are sometimes tempered to promote more successful coexistence. Dr. Justin Gest is an Associate Professor of Policy and Government at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. He is the author of six books, primarily on the politics of immigration and demographic change—all from Oxford University Press or Cambridge University Press.  Dr. Gest's research has been published in journals including the British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Comparative Political Studies, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Global Governance, Global Policy, International Migration Review, Migration Studies, Polity, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. He is the editor of Silent Citizenship: The Politics of Marginality in Unequal Democracies (Routledge, 2016), special issues of Citizenship Studies, and the Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. He has also provided commentary, analysis, or reporting to a number of broadcast networks, including ABC, BBC, CBC, CNN, and NPR, and news publications including The Atlantic, The Boston Globe, The Guardian, Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, POLITICO, Reuters, The Times, Vox, and The Washington Post. Find this program online at The Village Square. This podcast series is presented in partnership with Florida Humanities. Village SquareCast is part of The Democracy Group. Check out one of our fellow network podcasts here: How Do We Fix It?

On today's episode of The Daily Scoop Podcast, two experts in the federal government community select the three most important news stories of the week. Ron Marks, president of ZPN Cyber and National Security Strategies and visiting professor at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy, and Government and Larry Allen, president of Allen Federal Business Partners, list their top three stories of the week on the first FedScoop News Countdown. Ron's list: 3. CISA, FBI, NSA and international partners lay out the top 15 cyber vulnerabilities 2. The General Services Administration is looking into facial recognition technology 1. U.S. intel coordination with the Ukrainian military to defend against the Russian invasion Larry's list: 3. NITAAC hit with another CIO-SP4 bid protest 2. The Small Business Administration looking to invest in equity initiatives with its 2023 budget request 1. Ellen Lord tells the Senate Armed Services Committee that the Department of Defense isn't fully taking advantage of acquisition authorities The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every weekday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify and Stitcher. And if you like what you hear, please let us know in the comments.

Demographic changes at both the national and local levels continue to have tremendous impacts on America's political system. As diversity in the United States continues to flourish, the United States is evolving into a true multi-racial society. Yet the country remains deeply divided. What roles are demographic changes and a backlash to those shifts playing in shaping America's civic life? Leading demographer and political commentator Justin Gest believes he has some answers to these questions as the country 's citizens continue to grapple with what happens to the country when there is no longer a majority demographic group. In his new pathbreaking book Majority Minority, Dr. Gest uses the case studies of six societies that have undergone the majority-minority transition to reveal insights as to the role of government in tempering nationalist sentiment and allowing diversity to flourish. He argues that the state and politicians can be powerful actors to help groups integrate and form a common identity for the benefit of all, while still respecting and celebrating the differences between them. Supplementing his analysis with surveys, studies and careful analysis of trends in the United States, Gest explains that the coming years will be formative in how diversity lives on in America, and how our society can gracefully transition into a majority-minority country. The 2022 elections and, of course, the 2024 presidential election will be shaped by the impact of America's demographic changes. To help put these issues into context, Gest has invited former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and political journalist Molly Ball to discuss his new book and the critical moment in which the United States finds itself as its future as a cohesive multiracial democracy is regularly called into question. Please join us for an important discussion on how we got here, what it means, and where we can go to remain an inclusive society for all Americans, regardless of origin. SPEAKERS Justin Gest Associate Professor of Policy and Government, George Mason University's Schar School; Author, Majority Minority Antonio Villaraigosa Former Mayor, City of Los Angeles Molly Ball National Political Correspondent, Time In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we are currently hosting all of our live programming via YouTube live stream. This program was recorded via video conference on April 19th, 2022 by the Commonwealth Club of California. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

My guest today is Justin Gest, an associate professor of Policy and Government at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. He is the author of six books, primarily on the politics of immigration and demographic change, all from Oxford University Press or Cambridge University Press. His research has been published in journals including the British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Comparative Political Studies, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Global Governance, Global Policy, International Migration Review, Migration Studies, Polity, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The topic is his book Majority Minority. In this episode of Trend Following Radio we discuss: Immigration Democracy and dramatic demographic change Controversy Why is there no rational immigration policy for America? How does Singapore compare to a big city in America? Demographic balance and demographic distribution Jump in! --- I'm MICHAEL COVEL, the host of TREND FOLLOWING RADIO, and I'm proud to have delivered 10+ million podcast listens since 2012. Investments, economics, psychology, politics, decision-making, human behavior, entrepreneurship and trend following are all passionately explored and debated on my show. To start? I'd like to give you a great piece of advice you can use in your life and trading journey… cut your losses! You will find much more about that philosophy here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/trend/ You can watch a free video here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/video/ Can't get enough of this episode? You can choose from my thousand plus episodes here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/podcast My social media platforms: Twitter: @covel Facebook: @trendfollowing LinkedIn: @covel Instagram: @mikecovel Hope you enjoy my never-ending podcast conversation!

My guest today is Justin Gest, an associate professor of Policy and Government at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. He is the author of six books, primarily on the politics of immigration and demographic change, all from Oxford University Press or Cambridge University Press. His research has been published in journals including the British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Comparative Political Studies, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Global Governance, Global Policy, International Migration Review, Migration Studies, Polity, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The topic is his book Majority Minority. In this episode of Trend Following Radio we discuss: Immigration Democracy and dramatic demographic change Controversy Why is there no rational immigration policy for America? How does Singapore compare to a big city in America? Demographic balance and demographic distribution Jump in! --- I'm MICHAEL COVEL, the host of TREND FOLLOWING RADIO, and I'm proud to have delivered 10+ million podcast listens since 2012. Investments, economics, psychology, politics, decision-making, human behavior, entrepreneurship and trend following are all passionately explored and debated on my show. To start? I'd like to give you a great piece of advice you can use in your life and trading journey… cut your losses! You will find much more about that philosophy here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/trend/ You can watch a free video here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/video/ Can't get enough of this episode? You can choose from my thousand plus episodes here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/podcast My social media platforms: Twitter: @covel Facebook: @trendfollowing LinkedIn: @covel Instagram: @mikecovel Hope you enjoy my never-ending podcast conversation!

In this episode of “Keen On”, Andrew is joined by Justin Gest, the author of “Majority Minority”. Justin Gest is an Associate Professor of Policy and Government at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. He is the author of six books, primarily on the politics of immigration and demographic change—all from Oxford University Press or Cambridge University Press. Visit our website: https://lnkd.in/gZNKTyc7 Email Andrew: a.keen@me.com Watch the show live on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ajkeen Watch the show live on LinkedIn: https://lnkd.in/gatW6J8v Watch the show live on Facebook: https://lnkd.in/gjzVnTkY Watch the show on YouTube: https://lnkd.in/gDwPgesS Subscribe to Andrew's newsletter: https://lnkd.in/gzwFsxPV Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On today's episode of The Daily Scoop Podcast, research and development contractors are spotty in securing Defense Department controlled unclassified information, according to the Pentagon's Inspector General office. Voluntary cyber assessments are coming for vendors in the defense industrial base. Ron Marks, president of ZPN Cyber and National Security Strategies and visiting professor at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government, discusses what's next for the DIB as CMMC 2.0 rolls out. The Department of the Navy is outlining its transition to a zero trust strategy. Navy officials say one of their pain points during the transition will be the culture shift. Terry Halvorsen, general manager of federal market for IBM and former DOD and Navy CIO, explains how organizations can solve the culture shift during these transformations. Director of External Affairs for the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board Kim Weaver discusses the FRTIB's new app that is coming this summer and will allow you to manage your TSP account from your phone. Plus, an update on the organization's financial system modernization efforts. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every weekday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify and Stitcher. And if you like what you hear, please let us know in the comments.

In this Roots of Reality Experiences episode, historian Ben Baumann talks with Dr. Layla Hashemi about the illicit trade of counterfeit drugs and medical devices around the world. (Layla M. Hashemi is a researcher and data analyst at the Terrorism, Transnational Crime and Corruption Center (TraCCC) focusing on international supply chains, cybercrime and illicit trade. On the NSF project Disrupting Operations of Illicit Supply Networks (D-ISN), she is analyzing the supply chains of counterfeit PPE, fentanyl and pharmaceuticals. She earned her PhD in Public Policy at George Mason University's Schar School and her Masters in International Relations and Comparative Politics at New York University with a concentration in Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies. She has held positions at governmental and non-governmental organizations including Forum 2000 and the Journal of Civil Society where she is currently Managing Editor. Hashemi's volunteer work includes moderating the Anti-Corruption Advocacy Network (ACAN), board member and research manager at the Security, Gender and Development Institute (SGDI) and Political Economy Project (PEP) coordinator at the Arab Studies Institute (ASI). She has presented her research — among other places — at NATO, the United Nations and professional conferences, workshops and webinars. Her work has been published in the Washington Post, academic journals, books and other outlets. She co-edited and contributed to the TraCCC Routledge Volume Antiquities Trafficking in the Real and Virtual World (2022) with TraCCC's director, Dr. Louise Shelley. While earning her PhD at GMU, she was president of the Schar PhD Student Association (SPSA) and the recipient of the Daniel Druckman Fellowship and the Joseph L. Fisher Doctoral Fellowship in Public Policy. In 2019, she attended the Institute of Qualitative and Multi Method Research (IQMR) and was selected to be a Women in International Security (WIIS) Gender, Peace and Security (GPS) Next Generation Fellow. She has over ten years' experience as an adjunct professor of Political Science at Montgomery College where she was recently awarded the Part Time Outstanding Faculty Award for Excellence in Scholarly or Professional Accomplishment. She has taught a variety of courses including Comparative Politics, International Conflict Resolution and a course she co-developed on Global Human Rights. Her current work focuses on illicit trade, transnational crime, human rights and corruption.) Twitter- twitter.com/tokyomay Terrorism, Transnational Crime and Corruption Center- traccc.gmu.edu/ Book: Antiquities Smuggling in the Real and Virtual World- https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09P5NZF38/ref=dp_kinw_strp_1 (The memories, comments, and viewpoints shared by guests in the interviews do not represent the viewpoints of, or speak for Roots of Reality)

In this episode of Intelligence Matters, host Michael Morell moderates a conversation among a panel of experts including former Deputy Secretary General of NATO Rose Gottemoeller, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Russia and Eurasia Andrea Kendall-Taylor, and former senior CIA operations officer John Sipher about the state of the Russia-Ukraine crisis and whether diplomatic options remain viable. The panel evaluates Russian President Vladimir Putin's immediate and long-term objectives and discusses how deterrent measures might be enhanced. They also discuss possible post-conflict scenarios in the European security landscape. This episode was produced in partnership with the Michael V. Hayden Center for Intelligence, Policy, and International Security at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode of Intelligence Matters, host Michael Morell moderates a conversation among three top experts on China's geopolitical ambitions and their implications for the United States. Harvard University Professor Graham Allison, Johns Hopkins Professor Hal Brands, and George Mason University Assistant Professor Ketian Zhang discuss President Xi Jinping's near and long-term political objectives, the domestic challenges he may face, and how the United States should develop its own strategies for confronting or cooperating with Beijing. This episode was produced in partnership with the Michael V. Hayden Center for Intelligence, Policy, and International Security at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

COVID-19 has shown us all that pandemics aren't just a public health issue, but a national security one as well. Are America's national security institutions prepared to address this threat? And what role should the intelligence community play in addressing pandemics? To address these questions, Lawfare's David Priess moderated a live recording of the Lawfare Podcast featuring a discussion with Congressman Eric Swalwell, who represents California's 15th congressional district and sits on the House Intelligence Committee; Dr. Julie Gerberding, who served as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 2002 to 2009 and now is a senior leader at the pharmaceutical company Merck; and Matt Berrett, a former CIA assistant director and head of its Global Issues Mission Center, and now cofounder of the Center for Anticipatory Intelligence at Utah State University. The event was held in conjunction with two programs at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy & Government: the biodefense program and the Michael V. Hayden Center for Intelligence, Policy, and International Security.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode of Intelligence Matters, host Michael Morell speaks with the country's first National Cyber Director, Chris Inglis, about his office's mandate, its mission, and the top cyber threats facing the U.S. today. Inglis and Morell discuss the prevalence of ransomware and why countries like Russia and China might tolerate the presence of criminal hackers on their soil. Inglis also details why deterrence in cyberspace is difficult, and how the U.S. government is engaging the private sector to bolster cyber defenses. This episode was produced in partnership with the Michael V. Hayden Center for Intelligence, Policy, and International Security at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode of .think Atlantic, IRI's Thibault Muzergues is joined by special guest Justin Gest to discuss “Europe's Path Back from the Fringe” written by Gest and co-authored by Jeremy Ferwerda and Tyler Reny. This publication, published on November 17, 2021, evaluates the motivations and future of fringe political parties across the transatlantic space. The findings of this report guide the discussion of this week's episode. Justin Gest is an Associate Professor of Policy and Government at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. His teaching and research interests include comparative politics, immigration, and demographic change. His research has been published in numerous well-respected journals. Dr. Gest has also provided commentary, analysis, or reporting to several broadcast networks including ABC, BBC, CBC, CNN, and NPR, and news publications including The Atlantic, The Guardian, The New York Times, POLITICO, Reuters, The Washington Post, and many more. Find Justin on Twitter: @_JustinGest Find Thibault on Twitter: @tmuzergues Visit IRI's website at www.iri.org See the publication on IRI's website at: IRI and Partners Release New Study on Triggers to Fringe Party Voting in Europe | IRI

Only twice in history have two women who served as CIA officers been elected to Congress. The first time was 2018, and the second was 2020—both of them featuring Abigail Spanberger and Elissa Slotkin. David Priess hosted an event for the Michael V. Hayden Center at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government, speaking with both of them about their careers, both in the intelligence community and in Congress. Abigail Spanberger represents Virginia's 7th congressional district and was a CIA operations officer from 2006 to 2014. Elissa Slotkin represents Michigan's 8th congressional district. She served as a CIA analyst, as well as a National Security Council staffer and Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs. They talked about joining CIA, their experiences there, leaving the intel world, how their CIA experiences help them as legislators, and a few pressing national security issues.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Guadalupe Correa-Cabrera, associate professor in George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government and global fellow in the Wilson Center's Latin America Program, leads a conversation on the future of U.S.-Mexico relations.   CASA: Welcome to today's session of the CFR Fall 2021 Academic Webinar Series. I am Maria Casa, director of the National Program and Outreach at CFR. Thank you all for joining us. Today's discussion is on the record and the video and transcript will be available on our website, CFR.org/academic if you would like to share it with your colleagues or classmates. As always CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy. We are delighted to have Guadalupe Correa-Cabrera with us to discuss the future of U.S.-Mexico relations. Dr. Correa-Cabrera is associate professor in the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University and global fellow in the Latin America Program at the Wilson Center. She also serves as nonresident scholar at the Center for the United States and Mexico in Rice University's Baker Institute, is a fellow at Small Wars Journal-El Centro, and is co-editor of the International Studies Perspectives Journal. Previously Dr. Correa-Cabrera was principal investigator of a research grant to study organized crime and trafficking in persons in Central America and Mexico, supported by the U.S. Department of State's Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons. She is past president of the Association for Borderland Studies and the author of several books. Welcome, Guadalupe. CORREA-CABRERA: Thank you, Maria. CASA: Thank you very much for speaking with us today. CORREA-CABRERA: Thank you, Maria. Thank you very much to everyone, especially the Council on Foreign Relations, for the opportunity to talk to you about the relationships of my two countries, the United States and Mexico. So today, I'm going to start by explaining what is the current state of Mexico-U.S. relations, but in the context of a very important event that took place some days ago, in the context of the U.S.-Mexico Bicentennial Framework for Security, Public Health, and Safe Communities. The bicentennial—so-called Bicentennial Understanding. There was a concern at the beginning of the current administration in the United States that the relationships between the United States and Mexico were going to be difficult. Notwithstanding the last, the current year has been extremely productive in many areas. And with this new understanding, the Bicentennial Understanding, that it states in the Bicentennial Framework for Security, Public Health, and Safe Communities, the United States and Mexico's relation has been reframed in a very important way. There is an understanding that the Mérida initiative that had been the center of the relationship between the United States and Mexico, focused on security, needed to be reframed. And then, you know, that was—that was considered that the priorities remained the same, the priorities of the two countries, with some changes that I'm going to be talking about. But the three—I mean, the high-level understanding, this high-level meeting told us what's supposed to be—I mean, where we're going to see in the future. So I just wanted to point out some of the points that were discussed. This framework was informed by each country's security priorities, that I'm going to be talking about. And the focus is addressing violence, but through a response that's driven by justice and use of intelligence against organized crime, and based on tactical cooperation in law enforcement, based on the previous mistakes that had been identified. But currently, the focus would be on public health and development as a part of the strategy of cooperation between the two countries. I'm taking some words from the—from the communique of this understanding. And, you know, with the consideration of—for a more secure and prosperous region, the Mexico-U.S. Bicentennial Framework serves to reaffirm the friendship and cooperation that exists between the two nations. You know, as you see, the language is very friendly. It's based on an understanding that the relationship is important, cooperation is important. Apparently the two countries are in the same boat in this regard. The United States recognizes that support of militarization is not the way probably to go. And a greater focus on public health and development to address the root causes of violence in the southern hemisphere, particularly in Mexico, is probably the way to go, with an understanding to promote a more secure and prosperous region. There are four themes—I mean, this is the idea. This was—I mean, that was the conversation that's on the table. We don't necessarily know ourselves today how this is going to be implemented, what are the particular policies that—or, the collaboration, or the amounts of money to make this happen. But this is kind of like the idea of the future of this collaboration. However, I am going to be talking about the opportunities, and particularly the challenges, considering the priorities of the two nations that, in a way, and when we have the meetings of this type, and when we listen to the language and read the media and talk to the politicians that were present, we have a sense. But then when everybody goes home, we kind of, like, think about this better and we see opportunities, but more challenges than we initially thought. So there are four main things in the United States-Mexico relations that need to be highlighted, plus one that has been also always important but today is more important due to the pandemic. Which is the theme of public health, where an important collaboration between Mexico and the United States has been observed but at the same time poses certain challenges with regard to the border management. Title 42 is still in place and the borders are going to be opened gradually, considering, you know, the vaccination status of people. But that has had a major impact on border communities, and certain impacts on trade and development, particularly at the U.S.-Mexico border. The other four main themes of U.S. Mexico relations that I want to talk about are immigration, security, trade, and energy. I mean, I don't want to place them in order of priority. I think that energy is going to define the future of Mexico-U.S. relations, but I'm going to mention the four in the context of the present—I mean, the present situation. So with regards to trade, the successful passage and, you know, implementation of renegotiation of NAFTA, today in the shape of USMCA, has been extremely successful. Poses some challenges, of course. And this is going to be connected with the last subject we'll be talking about, the proposal of the Mexican government to reform the electricity sector. This is something that is going to be very, very important, and what are the priorities of the United States in the framework of build back better? But with regards to trade, apparently their relationships could not be, you know, better than today. There are some challenges, of course, that have to be with labor rights and unions in Mexico that would cause some loss of competitiveness in the manufacturing sector. And in the framework build back better, of course, this is going to benefit the United States and it's going probably to affect the manufacturing sector of Mexico. Let's see how it works. But with regards to trade, things are mainly, you know, stable, with exception of the future. And this is going to be very, very important. The potential passage, we don't really know, it's very difficult that the electricity reform in Mexico will pass. But anyway, the president—the current president of Mexico, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, has a very important amount of—I mean, segment of the population, and a very important support from his base that might help him to achieve his goal. I see it very differently, but we'll talk about that. So the next area that I would like to talk about is immigration. Here we have enormous challenges, enormous challenges that have been visualized with, you know, the current situations at the border that started since the beginning of this administration. During the past years, I mean, they had started to be increasing in magnitude, or at least in visibility. As I mentioned, Title 42 is maintained, and the migration protection protocol—Migrant Protection Protocols, so Stay in Mexico program, where a number of asylum seekers would have to wait for their cases to be decided in Mexico, there's a new definition in this framework. The Supreme Court of the United States very recently made a decision with regards to the reinstatement of the Migrant Protection Protocols. In the beginning the Department of Homeland Security, you know, made the declaration that they would—they would continue with that, but very recently they intention is not to continue with the Migrant Protection Protocols. In the end, and this is why this is very important in the very current conversation, in the end the continuation of this—of this program that has been highly criticized. Then it's also—it has put the human rights of undocumented migrants and asylum seekers at risk. That might—this will not work if Mexico—if the government of Mexico does not accept it. We have to see what is going to be the result. But we have a definition in this regard. The role of Mexico is key in the management of the U.S.-Mexico border, in the management of what some call migrant crisis, and then a crisis at the border. We observed that crisis very recently with a number of Haitian citizens that all left their country, went to South America, and from South America—from countries such as Ecuador, Brazil, Chile—traveled north through different countries, finding different challenges and dangers, and arrived to one point of the U.S.-Mexico border, with the help of a number of actors, such as migrant smugglers and corrupt authorities, but with the aim of making—I mean, escaping a terrible life and making a better life in the United States. We have a caravan that's now in direction to Mexico City. They were going go—they will put their demands on the table, but their intent is to continue going to the United States. There is a very big definition with regards to the migrant crisis, or what some call the migrant crisis, and the immigration issues that the government of the United States has recognized very accurately, and the Mexican government too, that there need to be collaboration to address the root causes of the situation that has to do with the development of the countries of Central America, of South America. And, you know, to achieve stability in South America, probably not through militarization. Secretary Blinken in a very surprising statement has led us to believe that today the United States is also reframing its aid to Latin America, to Central America and the Caribbean. And the focus is not going to be in aid in military equipment or in the militarization of the region. This is very important. And this brings me to talk about the third important—the third theme in the U.S.-Mexico relations. Mexico's security—the relationship of Mexico and the United States in the past few years has been focused on this connection between security and immigration. That's in the end centered on a specific attention of border enforcement, of border security cooperation. The situation in Mexico has deteriorated in the past few years, and the situation has not improved in an important way. Mexico's homicides remained at high levels, despite the pandemic. During the pandemic the decrease was very small, but today and we expect that this year the homicide rate continues growing in a trend that does not seem to be going down. The approach of the Mexican government since the transition period was—I mean, I can be summarized in the phrase talks not bullets. Which means, like, a completely—I mean, a complete shift of the declaration of Mexico's war on drugs to some other, like, approaches that will focus as well to solve the root causes of violence insecurity in Mexico, mainly development frameworks. However, the prior militarization of criminal groups in different parts of the country, and the events—the shootings and the diversification of criminal activities by armed groups in the country—has also caused a very complicated situation. The count of homicides in Mexico shows that killings remain essentially unchanged, more than 36,000 homicides in the year 2020. As I mentioned before, this year we expect an important increase. I don't know what will be the magnitude, but we have observed since the beginning of the year very unfortunate events. For example, at the U.S.-Mexico border, in the city of Reynosa, the massacre of migrants, and also assassinations and disappearances in a very key highway of Mexico from Nuevo Laredo and Monterrey. We still remember the Culiacanazo in the year 2019, which was a very complicated year. And today the situation in states like Michoacán, Guerrero, and Sinaloa, the massacres that be found, and people who disappear—or, that remain disappeared, is a very big concern, both to Mexico and the United States. There is not really an understanding of how this collaboration with regards to security will be framed. However, there was a very big advancement in the Bicentennial Understanding initial talks that the Mérida Initiative, at least on paper, supposed to be ending. But there's going to be a focus on dismantling transnational criminal organizations, probably in a different way and not with a focus on the military sector or on armed forces. At least, this is what we have on the paper. Mexico has been very straightforward with regards—and very critical with regards to the role of the DEA. And that has caused several tensions in this relationship. We also have the issue of security and the—I mean, the priorities of the United States with regards to build back better proposal or reform. And then we have, as I said, the reform of the electric sector in the Mexico state, who want to recover the control of the management of electricity, of the electricity market, and the capacity of the state to manage the lithium. So Mexico has—and the Mexican government has three main projects: the construction of the refinery in—the Dos Bocas in Tabasco, the Santa Lucia airport, and the Maya Train. There is a tension between Mexico and the United States with regards to priorities. Mexico has a priority to continue with the support of oil and gas. This is—this is reflected in the construction of the refinery. And here, we're probably going to see the main point of tension. Because of build back better and the commitment with build back better, and also focus on U.S. internal markets where Mexico has been benefitting from the growth of its manufacturing sector. We don't really know how this is going to be playing out, but at least, you know, on paper things are going to be good. But definitely the priorities with regards to energy are very different, and the focus of the U.S.-Mexico government on the lessening of climate change. And this focus is going to be very different—very difficult. The United States is committed to meet its climate goals, create millions of jobs inside the United States. And that has really changed their relationship. So we can talk more about these. Thank you for listening to this. And as I said, we'll probably be talking a lot about energy and the inequalities that public health and vaccination rates, that will also cause tensions. And immigration is another point that we need to talk about in greater depth. Thank you. CASA: Thank you, Guadalupe, for that introduction. There certainly is a lot to talk about. Now let's open this up to questions from our participants. (Gives queuing instructions.) Let's see. We will start with a written question from Paul Haber, who's a professor at University of Montana. He asks: Can you please provide some detail regarding the changes in labor required in Mexico by the USMCA? And what has happened to date? And do you expect a real deepening of the reforms between now and the end of the AMLO administration? CORREA-CABRERA: This is a very important question. With regard to the USMCA, mainly the main point that might cause tensions have to do—has to do with labor unions, particularly in the maquiladora sector, in manufacturing sector. The United States has been very clear with regards to that requirement, but that would, at the same time, lower the competitiveness of Mexico's manufacturing sector. As I said, there have been, I mean, in the past couple of years an attempt to create independent labor unions in the maquiladora sector, but there are still extreme tensions. And there have not been a real advance in this—in this sense. But at the same time, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, with his theme of primero los pobres, the poor first, and a support of Mexican labor, an increase—a very important increase since the beginning of his administration of wages, he is supposedly committed to help Mexican workers and to—and he has been focused as well on supporting not only the labor unions or the labor sector, but with his social programs that have been, I mean, advertised a great extent. Such as Jóvenes Construyendo el Futuro, the Youth Constructing Future, which is a very important, for him, but also very criticized program. And the support of mothers without—I mean, single mothers. And, I mean Youth Constructing Future for those who don't have jobs. So on the one hand Andrés Manuel López Obrador, also in order to continue building his base of support or maintaining his base of support, focused—has focused on these programs, these social programs, that are not necessarily just focused on labor, as the way that the United States wants this to be seen in order to also rebuild the economy by changing the focus to internal development. I don't see in that regard if what—if your interest comes from the United States, what has happened with the union is—with the labor unions and their capacity to really, I mean, grow in the Mexican manufacturing sector—I don't see—I don't see a lot of advancement in that area. And definitely in this regard, there are very different priorities in Mexico versus the United States. But Andrés Manuel López Obrador has been able to convince a number of his supporters, a number of Mexican workers, because he has increased in a very important way Mexican wages. And he is probably going to be able to achieve more increases when the elections—the presidential elections approach. But definitely we don't see very definite changes with regards to this area as the USMCA has been posed. CASA: Next we have a raised hand from Sherice Nelson, assistant professor at Southern University in Baton Rouge. Sherice. Q: Good afternoon. Thank you so much for your talk. And I appreciate you leaving time for us to ask questions. As a professor, how do—the biggest challenge often is to get students to back away from some of the stereotypical information they get about U.S.-Mexico and the relationship, and the centering of that—of that relationship on immigration, when there's far—as you mentioned—there are far other issues that define our relationship. Where are places that we can lead students to, to get better information that is not as stereotypical about the relationship, that will pique their interest? Thanks so much. CORREA-CABRERA: That's a very important question. Thank you for asking. And absolutely, there is a way to present the issue on immigration, to place it in a political perspective—either from the right side or the left. The problem with immigration and the quality development and the access for jobs—I mean, it has been studied in depth by Mexican academics, United States academics. Issues have more to do with development and with the jobs that are offered in the United States, the pull and push factors of undocumented immigration, for example. And we have very different areas to be thinking about migration or immigration. And the focus recently has been at the border, has been with regards to asylum seekers, has been politicized in the United States, while many other areas have been, to some extent, ignored. There are—for educators, there are a number of analyses. One particular area that's important to know, it's United States—I mean, immigrants—how immigrants in the United States, coming from different countries, have been able to develop, have been able to make this country great. That's one area that we have to focus on. And there is a lot of information in that regard. Another, I mean, issue that it's important to know are the pull and push factors of undocumented immigration. And one important factor that usually we're not focused on are the jobs that exist in the United States, and the perspective from—I mean, the undocumented immigration from the perspective of employers. And that is connected to this analysis of the role of immigrants in the United States. Where are they coming from? What are they doing? How they came here, and not just of those who want to come. Another issue that has been widely covered is the one that has to do with migration. Migration flows that start in countries such as Chile, that dangerous journey where that media has been focused on, without analyzing this as a whole, without analyzing this understand that there are jobs in the United States, there is a comprehensive immigration reform that's on the table, and that that comprehensive immigration reform will definitely help to solve the problems of a system that needs the, I mean, immigrants to continue working, but it's creating all sorts of problem. The disfunctions of U.S. immigration system have been identified. There is a proposal that's bipartisan to solve these issues with temporary visas, pathway towards citizenship for those that are already here, that already have jobs, that already contribute to this economy. But unfortunately, immigration is definitely, as you correctly mention, a subject that has been utilized, that has been polarized, because it touches very important sentiments of the electorate. And we don't understand it. Definitely the immigration system in the United States needs to change. And there are—there is a very important amount of articles, of studies that analyze not just those who want to come or the so-called migrant crisis at the border, but how the market in the United States works, the labor markets, what undocumented migrants do in the United States, how to solve these issues with these bipartisan efforts that have been put together in documents, such as the Comprehensive Immigration Reform, and also those that want to work. And many of these problems would probably be solved through the mechanisms that think tanks, and analysts, and academics have done. Important work by think tanks like the Migration—MPI, the Migration Policy Institute, or the—I mean, other initiatives in Mexico. There have been a lot of—there's a lot of information about the possible policies to solve these issues. It's important to consider that information is there, that the work is done, but the problem is the coverage. And definitely our students need to go to understand the suggested—the suggested solutions, creating legal pathways to migration, to temporary work in the United States, is probably the way to go. But unfortunately, we got into these politicized moments, and these electoral moments, and the discourse gets politicized. But there is a lot there, a lot of analysis, a lot of proposals that you can find. Amazing work, both in the United States, in Mexico, and in many other countries of the Americas, because right now the issue of undocumented immigration, irregular immigration does not only have to do with Mexico and the United States. Immigrants have to pass through Mexico in order to get to where they want to go in order to go where the works are located. But we know and we have seen that a number of people, for example, that what was called the Haitian crisis at the border, like, the journey was done from countries as far as Chile, and so many countries have to deal with that. For example, the situation in Venezuela—many migrants that have been—I mean, finding jobs and a home in Colombia temporarily are also going—also moving up and are going to the border. So there's a lot there, and our students, you know, can find a lot of information. It's just to get out of the media discourses that are presented and that do not allow us to see the reality. But there is a lot out there that we can access, particularly for our students. CASA: Our next question is a written question and comes from Pedro Izquierdo, a graduate student at George Mason University. He asks, what improvements and flaws do you see in the bicentennial framework regarding arms trafficking, unlike the Mérida Initiative? CORREA-CABRERA: Well, it's—the Bicentennial Understanding is not—at this point it's just a number of good wishes and the recognition of certain problems. Arms trafficking has been recognized in this Bicentennial Understanding. As of today, we don't really know what the United States is going to be able to do with regards to arms trafficking, and there is a very important and complicated situation here because in the United States it's not by decree, it's not by—I mean, the arms possession and the way that United States citizens understand their rights with regards to bearing arms. It's a constitutional right; therefore—and there's a lot of—you know, there's a very, very big business that will not end so easily. Therefore, the two countries might, you know, might agree on—I mean verifying or collaborating to end or to lessen the issue of arms smuggling. However, this is going to be very difficult unless something important happens in the United States with regards to the legislation to place some limits on the bearing of arms. This is very important. As of today, Pedro, there is not a concrete plan of how the two countries are going to collaborate in this regard. As we know, the minister of foreign affairs—I mean the Mexican government through the minister of foreign affairs, I mean, has a lawsuit against United States arms manufacturers with regards to the arms that come to Mexico and end up in the hands of drug traffickers. There is nothing else that it's current today where we will know what the two countries are going to be doing. And this is the same with many of the good wishes, many of the areas of the collaboration, the end of the Mérida Initiative and the beginning of this understanding. We really don't know what specific programs are going to be implemented and how these programs are going to be implemented, how much money is going to be directed to these programs at this time. We just have an understanding of how the priorities can get together to improve and to reframe, to some extent, the collaboration in terms of security and development. CASA: Next we are going to a raised hand; we have Terron Adlam, an undergraduate student at Delaware State University. Please go ahead, Terron. Q: Can you hear me now? CASA: Yes. Q: Hi. Yes. So I'm thinking about more the energy sector of this talk. So in Mexico I know there's a lot of geothermal activity, so isn't there a more effective way of, like—because global warming is increasing more and more as time goes on, like, the flooding, the overheating of the ozone, stuff like—couldn't geothermal usage be more effective in Mexico and solar too, versus the oil refineries? CORREA-CABRERA: This is a very important question. The understanding of climate change in the United States is very different from Mexico. In the developed world, the concern about the environment has been focused—I mean, this has now been the center of the discussion and the center of the development programs and projects. In the developing nations, there are more immediate needs to be covered. With regards specifically to Mexico, there is not—climate change is not in the center of the discourse and the priorities of the Mexican government. Mexico has oil and gas and the current Mexican president—I mean, notwithstanding the analysis of other actors. What the Mexican government has had as a priority since the beginning of the administration has more to do with the development from the state, more centralization of the state, a greater role of the state in the sector of oil and gas. The climate change priority comes from the United States. Today, you know, the diplomatic efforts are going to be done to make Mexico to turn into the renewable sector, but at this point, it is not the priority of the Mexican government, neither the priority of a majority of the Mexican people, because in the developing world, climate change is important but it's more important sometimes in certain parts of Mexico, such as Guerrero, Michoacán, and Tamaulipas, and it's particularly the poorest regions of Mexico—Oaxaca or Chiapas—where there are several problems and, you know, immediate needs of people are not covered. And I'm talking about food. I'm talking about security very particularly. These pictures of children with arms in Guerrero and Michoacán tell us what the emergency situation is for a number of people, and the Mexican president has been able to create a discourse around these needs, around the needs for poor people, around the needs of those who can listen to that better, and he has a priority today—I mean, he sent a proposal to achieve an electric reform; well, the state is going to have more involvement and also a focus on electricity with the technologies that the Mexican state has been managed, which is not connected to solar or wind or the mindset that the United States has had in the past few years. So the priorities are very different and the studies are not directed there. The Department of Energy of the United States, through one of the laboratories of renewable energies, conducted a—I mean conducted a study and released the results of this report talking about the—according to the report—the negative effects in terms of emissions of carbon by Mexico and the increase in the cost of producing electricity. The Mexican government—the president alleged that that study was not based in reality. And you can see, then, what Mexico wants. And, you know, currently, Mexico has actively participated in the COP26 and it's been involved in the conversation, but definitely we don't know how much money or how this—(inaudible)—is going to be made. This is a very important question because I wasn't able to go in depth with this. This is probably going to be the main point of tensions between the two countries in the future—definitely for Andrés Manuel López Obrador. Andrés Manuel López Obrador was a very big critic of the recent energy reform of 2013, 2014, the energy reform that allowed private capital to get into the oil sector. He was a pretty big critic. There have been a number of events that link corrupt Mexican governments with the concessions in the oil sector, oil and gas sector, so this is probably going to be—continue to be discussed. And if the president has the capacity of passing the reform—that I see it very difficult because of the numbers that he needs—the situation is going to become more tense, because his vision is nationalistic and it's not—and nationalism—Mexican nationalism of today is not looking at climate change as its main priority. And you can see the supporters of Andrés Manuel López Obrador are really not discussing climate change. Mexican elites are discussing climate change and, of course, the opposition against Andrés Manuel López Obrador against the government of the Fourth Transformation, but they have an important majority—they don't have a majority, sorry, the opposition. The important majority is within the government of the Fourth Transformation, and their support for electric reform is important. I don't know how this is going to play out in the end, but in the United States and in Mexico, climate change is perceived in a very different way. That has to be understood very clearly because we don't see the media, we don't see how in the schools and how in Mexico overall the issue is well-ingrained into the society, because, of course, the society, the Mexican society, particularly the most vulnerable ones in the country, the very important number of poor people in the country has other priorities that have to do with food insecurity—have to do with food insecurity. CASA: Thank you. Our next question is a written question; it's from Yuri Mantilla, professor of law at Liberty University, and he writes, can you please analyze the influence of political ideologies in Mexico and the U.S. that are shaping both international relations between the two countries and perceptions of the Mexican and American people regarding the current political contexts under the Biden administration in the U.S. and the López Obrador leadership in Mexico? CORREA-CABRERA: That's an amazing question, but that is a very difficult question to answer very quickly. OK, let me try to do it. It's a very big challenge. This is a very challenging question. As I mentioned with regards to climate change, the ideologies in Mexico and the United States, what is right and what is left in the two countries is quite—it's, to some extent, different in the United States, the left and right. And today, because we have a president that ran on a left-wing platform and he was recognized as a left-wing president and also a very big critic of so-called neoliberal reforms and the neoliberal system that were represented by the previous administrations and that by the administrations that achieved democratization in Mexico. I'm talking about the National Action Party and all the parties that supported those reforms, the democratization in the country. And because of that, today, the ideology has transformed, to some extent; it's not about—I mean, support for the Washington consensus as it was in the previous decades versus—which was represented in the government—versus another project that direct—the relationship more with the people. Now that mindset, that discourse, sometimes propagandistic in certain ways, is in the government. So the government presents itself as a left-wing government. Nationalism and a conception of first the poor—the poor first, very big criticism, in discourse only, about neoliberalism, without, you know, a real perspective what neoliberalism is because of the support that the current Mexican government has provided to USMCA, which is one of the foundation parts of what is perceived as neoliberalism, which is mainly liberalism in—not in the perspective of the United States overall—free markets, the importance of free markets in the economy. It's a very challenging question because in the United States and Mexico there are important concepts that mean different things for people. Liberalism or neoliberalism for Mexicans mean support of markets and a support of the right, while in the United States, when we talk about liberalism, we think about progressive thinking; we think about equality but in a different way. In Mexico the center is equality in the economic regard, and the president today, the government, you know, is governing with the flag of equality, is governing with the flag of the left. And the so-called left is with the Mexican—or allegedly voted for the current Mexican president, but now some of them are debating themselves in different areas. So it's not as easy to place the right and the left as it is more in the United States; even in the United States there are many issues with regards to position yourself in right and left. We have the progressive part of the electorate in the United States versus a more moderate left, and, as you all know, the Republican Party or the conservative segment of the U.S. population that's more connected with Republican candidates, it's kind of like a very different conception in Mexico. The right wing in Mexico in many ways support, for example, the Democratic Party in the United States. What is conceived as the opposition to Andrés Manuel López Obrador even are very critical of Andrés Manuel López Obrador's relationship with feminism or the feminist movement. Andrés Manuel López Obrador is not supporting the feminist movement because Andrés Manuel López Obrador alleges the feminist movement has been supported by other countries and the opposition. So for the alleged left that is represented by the government, feminism is not a part of their agenda, while in the United States the LGBTQIA movement, the feminist movement, support for climate change, those important values are part of the progressive movement of the left. I mean, in Mexico, and I explain this is why this is very, very important and a very challenging question to answer—I mean, just very quickly—is that, for example, climate change is not in the agenda and climate change is in the—it has been taken by the opposition to the Mexican government. Many representatives of the opposition are criticizing the current Mexican government but not focusing on not going and continuing with the desire of constructing the Dos Bocas refinery and going with oil and gas and focusing on electricity as in the previous times of the PRI. So a number of the Mexican elite that is in opposition—I mean that's considered the opposition are supporting climate change. Why—not supporting climate change but are supporting, like, you know, the development of renewable energies and have as an objective climate change but mainly to criticize what the Mexican government is doing. So in that regard, we see a very big polarization between the ones that supported previous administrations versus this current government that connects with the left, while in the United States we see what is the ideological spectrum. A number of those who represent, as I said, the opposition are connected with the current administration objectives. For example, President Felipe Calderón Hinojosa presents very frequently his photographs with members of the Democratic Party, the current president, Joe Biden, and he's very critical of Andrés Manuel López Obrador, so there's a confusion that we can have based on our own ideologies that's not very easy to understand in very quick explanation. But I hope that I was, to some extent, clear in this regard. CASA: Next we're going to a raised hand. Ellen Chesler, who's senior fellow at the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies at the CUNY Graduate Center. Ellen? Q: I actually had put my question in the chat, I thought, but I'll ask it. Thank you so much for this interesting overview. I wanted to—I'm a historian by training and was going to ask you to historically frame some of your introductory remarks in a little bit more depth. First, of great interest to me, your comments about the importance of public health, specifically reproductive health policy. Have United States policies and support of Mexico in the last, you know, twenty-five years or so, in your view, been positive for the country, and what are the challenges that remain? And in a way linked to that, from your introductory comments, a question about labor: You mentioned, of course, that NAFTA, in your view, was successful, certainly from Mexico's standpoint, but has remaining challenges, largely relating to labor organization and the raising of wages in Mexico to equalize the situation between the two countries. Can you comment on what prospects there are for that happening today in Mexico? CORREA-CABRERA: Very interesting questions. With regards to reproductive health, this also has to do with the ideology. The left in Mexico, which is now represented, in a way, by the current Mexican government, the current Mexican government has adamantly—since Andrés Manuel López Obrador was head of the government of Mexico City there have been, you know, an advancement with regards to reproductive rights, reproductive health, and that is not under question of the current administration, which is very interesting because in the United States the—I mean, there's a different type of tension. And in other countries of the hemisphere too, we can see—you know, because we're Catholic countries we can see that area as very complex and a lot of opposition with regards to that. In Mexico, there needs to be an opposition because of the mentality, because of the culture, but there has been an advancement in the courts, and recently there was a decision in one state of Mexico that decriminalized—and it's very interesting how the Mexican government has been able to build a different discourse that has allowed the current government to advance in that direction. Decriminalization of abortion is a way that this has advanced. So I believe that possibly—I dare to say that possibly in the Americas, Mexico is one of the most progressive governments with regards to this subject, reproductive health and reproductive rights. It is very interesting—there must be a number of studies coming from this decision of the courts of one state of Mexico that's going to be defining the future of reproductive rights in the country. With regards to the second question about NAFTA, labor rights, there is an understanding in the United States that NAFTA has been good, particularly for Mexico. In the technocracy sector, particularly those that, you know, contributed to renegotiate NAFTA—I mean, the Mexican elites recognize the gains of Mexico in the framework of NAFTA, particularly if we focus on the manufacturing sector. The jobs that we're creating in maquiladoras, the jobs that were created due to NAFTA, were not enough to achieve or to allow Mexico to grow at rates that were acceptable. During the time of NAFTA, Mexico has grown at the same—almost at the same level of demographic rates of population rates. So overall, a number of jobs were lost in the beginning, the first years of NAFTA. Many of these people needed to move to the United States. So the effects of NAFTA in Mexico have been very extremely, extremely unequal. But what you will read probably in the reports that have been produced by Mexican academics, Mexican analysts and think tanks and in the think tanks of the United States is that NAFTA has been overall very good for Mexico. It has not been bad for Mexico. It has allowed the country to have access to a number of products but, at the same time, has affected some other sectors that could be considered of national security. And I'm thinking about the production of grain in the agricultural sector in particular. But with regards to labor rights—and this is why the question is very important, and I'm not sure that I answered it correctly. The United States has different priorities and has had different priorities that were manifested in the growth of dissatisfaction among an important segment of the U.S. population that has not been able to—I mean, become part of the development in the United States. That gave place to the Make America Great Again movement where the intention or the importance that a number of people in the United States, both in the left or in the right—the idea of a Green New Deal that it's right now in the form of the Build Back Better framework has this idea in mind, to generate jobs inside the United States, because globalization or very aggressive globalization after the end of the Cold War really put a number of people in the United States in a complicated situation because the jobs were performed outside the borders of the United States. So today, this is why it is important to understand what USMCA is about with regards to labor. There is an important pressure from the United States, in particular, to Mexico to increase or—the conditions of the workers in the manufacturing sector overall because there is an important focus on wages. But if wages are—increase more than what the president already increased, you know, into this framework and labor unions make more complicated the entrance of foreign capital and the foreign capital goes back to the United States, will Mexico lose its competitiveness? And the losses will be for Mexico. So there is a tension there and definitely this tension has not been solved. The wages in Mexico have been low but that has to do with the labor supply and with the conditions of labor markets overall. And if there is a force to create the labor unions, this is probably not going to be in the—I mean it's not going to benefit Mexican workers because the businesses are probably not going to generate those jobs and will probably relocate. That's a conversation that has been going on and we have not solved. And we have not seen an improvement overall in the conditions or the wages of workers, more than the one that Andrés Manuel López Obrador by decree—has been given to the workers by increasing in double, particularly at the border wages in the manufacturing sector. But in the framework of USMCA, we haven't yet seen the results and we have not yet seen also the pressure if Mexico has not because the unions have not been created and there are many tensions in that sector. There was an attempt to start with the first labor union in the maquiladora sector by—I mean today a person who is right now in Congress, Susana Prieto Terrazas—she ended up in jail in the state of Tamaulipas, so this is a very complicated subject that we haven't been able to solve. CASA: I'm afraid we have to close now. We're not able to get to all the questions, but we will give you the contacts for the professor and you can reach out to her directly, if you would like to continue the conversation. Guadalupe, thank you very much for being with us today, and to all of you for your great questions and comments. You can follow Guadalupe on Twitter @GCorreaCabrera. Our next Academic Webinar will take place on Wednesday, November 17, at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Jason Bordoff, founding director of the Center of Global Energy Policy and professor of professional practice in international and public affairs at Columbia University, will lead a conversation on energy policy and efforts to combat climate change. In the meantime, I encourage you to follow @CFR_Academic on Twitter and visit CFR.org, ForeignAffairs.com, and ThinkGlobalHealth.org for new research and analysis on global issues. Thank you again for joining us today. We look forward to tuning in on November 17. (END)

Photo:  Tsai Ing-wen, President of the Republic of China Target Taiwan.  Gerrit van der Wees @GerritWees, and @GordonGChang, Gatestone, Newsweek https://thediplomat.com/2021/10/what-do-taiwanese-think-of-chinas-record-setting-incursions-into-taiwans-adiz/ Gerrit van der Wees, adjunct professor at George Washington University's Elliott School of Foreign Affairs and George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government 

In this episode of Intelligence Matters, CBS News Intelligence and National Security Reporter Olivia Gazis interviews three top former intelligence officials about the past, present and future of U.S. engagement in Afghanistan. Panelists Michael Morell, former CIA deputy director and Intelligence Matters host, Michael Vickers, former Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and CIA operations officer, and Philip Reilly, former Chief of Operations at CIA's Counterterrorism Center and Kabul station chief, each weigh in on the implications of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan and the future of the counterterrorism mission in the region. This episode was produced in partnership with the Michael V. Hayden Center for Intelligence, Policy, and International Security at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and GovernmentSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

JJ Green and guest host Dr. Guadalupe Correa-Cabrera, of George Mason University's Schar School, interview Dr. Zulia Orosco, professor at The Autonomous University of Baja, California about the many different forms of racism that Latinos face at home and here in the U.S.

Shea Garrison, Ph.D., is president of Counterpoint Institute for policy, research, and education and a policy fellow at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. Arizona Resident: ‘As Much as Biden Is Letting Us Down, He Is Letting Illegal Immigrants Down as Well'

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic raised questions about how the health crisis, government-imposed lockdowns, and economic recession would affect religious faith and behavior. While many social scientists expected it to strengthen religiosity as people turned to their faith for comfort in a time of need, others suspected a religious recession could result from the limitations on communal religious activity. In this episode, we speak with three political scientists, Tarek Masoud, A. Kadir Yildirim, and Peter Mandaville, about their new study of religious behavior following the pandemic in the Muslim-majority countries of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, and Indonesia in November and December of 2020.Tarek Masoud is Faculty Director of the Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Islamic Studies Program at Harvard University, Professor of Public Policy, and Sultan Qaboos bin Said of Oman Professor of International Relations at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government.A. Kadir Yildirim is Fellow at Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy. Twitter: @akyildirimPeter Mandaville is Professor of International Affairs at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. Twitter: @pmandavilleCredits and transcript: islamicstudies.harvard.edu/ep-8-pandemic-religious-behavior-muslim-world-tarek-masoud-kadir-yildirim-and-peter

On this week's episode is Justin Gest, author and Associate Professor of Policy and Government, George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government. Justin and a team of demographers and economists have released a study on GDP growth scenarios based on immigration policy. We also discuss one of the principle approaches to addressing immigration hesitancy of Americans and how advocates can better explain the opportunities to those who oppose immigration based on personal economic fears.

Last week for the Michael V. Hayden Center for Intelligence, Policy, and International Security at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government, David Priess moderated a virtual event called, "Spy Writing in the Real World." The event featured three authors of espionage fiction, two with previous experience working inside the U.S. intelligence community: Brad Thor, the #1 New York Times bestselling author of 21 thrillers; Karen Cleveland, a former CIA analyst and New York Times bestselling author of "Need to Know" and "Keep You Close"; and award-winning author and former NSA and CIA officer Alma Katsu, who had written five novels prior to her first new spy novel, "Red Widow." They talked about the spy thriller genre, their challenges within it, their research and their experience with prepublication classification review.

We interviewed Dr. Mike Hunzeker. Hunzeker currently serves as an assistant professor and associate director of the Center for Security Policy Studies at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government, where he conducts research on deterrence, war termination, military adaptation, and simulation design. In a fascinating interview, he shares his insights on the current balance of military power in the Taiwan Strait, Chinese military doctrine, and Taiwanese readiness for a potential attack. Producer: Marshall Reid, Jack Liu Hosts: Marshall Reid, Joseph Ross Edit: Jack Liu Music: Joseph Ross

Congress's enactment of the Clean Air Act fifty years ago was meant to change our environmental impacts — but did it change Congress, too? That is the question that Prof. Frank Manheim of George Mason University's Schar School of Public Policy asks in his new working paper, “ Transformation of Congressional Lawmaking by the Clean Air Act of 1970 and Its Effects.” In this episode, part of the Gray... Source