Climate change is a serious threat to global progress and stability. Actions to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and stabilize global temperatures can avoid impacts of climate change on human health, the economy, national security, and the environment. But without a strong federal-level climate policy response from the United States, chances of serious global climate action are slim.
The potential for utilizing a federal carbon tax to address the risks of climate change has been discussed in U.S. policy debates on both sides of the aisle. Under a carbon tax, consumers and producers would account for the costs of climate change in their decision making. The policy would reduce greenhouse gas emissions without sacrificing the efficiency of private markets.
Topic:
Energy Policy, International Affairs, and Domestic politics
Foreign policy rarely plays a decisive role in congressional elections in the US. However, President Trump’s tendency to mix foreign policy into the domestic debate might increase its salience. Electoral success for the Democrats could both constrain and embolden the president’s international conduct.
The 2020 US presidential election could be a close call with a narrow margin of victory. Many key factors underlying Donald Trump’s 2016 electoral success are still active and might suffice to win over a very polarized electorate in an extremely ugly election.
Empirical studies have shown that US politics is heavily tilted in favor of the better-off, as political decisions tend to reflect the preferences of the rich while largely ignoring those of the poor and the middle classes. These findings have prompted a lively debate about potential mechanisms that cause this pattern of unequal responsiveness. Existing studies suggest that specific characteristics of the political system are a major explanatory factor – in particular, private donations and campaign financing. We build on these studies but focus for the first time on an entirely different case. In this paper, we ask whether similar patterns of unequal responsiveness are discernible in Germany, which not only is a more egalitarian country, but also funds election campaigns entirely differently from the US. We analyze an original dataset of more than 800 survey questions posed between 1980 and 2013. The questions deal with specific political decisions debated at the time and cover a broad range of politically relevant topics. Our results show a notable association between political decisions and the opinions of the rich, but none or even a negative association for the poor. Representational inequality in Germany thus resembles the findings for the US case, despite its different institutional setting. Against this background, we conclude by discussing potential mechanisms of unequal responsiveness
For nearly 70 years, the United StatesRepublic of Korea (hereafter, Korea) alliance has remained strong, built mainly on shared strategic and national security interests. While the North Korean nuclear threat has long dominated political discussions and media headlines, today the economic pillar of the relationship is no less important. Economic engagement and cooperation have been strengthened since the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) went into effect in 2012, which in turn helped solidify the overall bilateral relationship.
America’s relationship with Russia was among the most controversial foreignpolicy issues of the 2016 presidential campaign, and has remained so in the Trump administration’s initial weeks. Much of the controversy has been strictly political, focused primarily on exploiting anger and suspicion toward Moscow as a weapon during the election campaign and, more recently, in confirmation hearings for President Donald Trump’s key foreign-policy and national-security nominees. That said, public discussion before and after the November election has also exposed sharp differences over U.S. policy toward Russia and the assessments of U.S. and Russian interests, objectives and values that shape Washington’s choices. This volume seeks to contribute to that debate by exploring U.S. options in pursuing President Trump’s stated intent to engage with Moscow
Trump’s decision leaves the Kurdish nationalists of the KDP defenceless and, with their patron gone, will likely cause splits among Arab forces allied with Kurdish militiamen. Regionally, it sends a message to US allies in the Gulf about the Trump’s commitment to the Iran-containment strategy.
The United States and India
relationship has changed from offense
to more extensive engagement since 2004. With
mutual interest and potential of both, the US and India relationship has matured into a strategic partnership through mutual atomic cooperation. This paper investigates the cost and advantage of the strategic partnership of India and the US and the effect on the South Asian balance of power in the backdrop of PakUS relationships. It additionally concentrates on the security structure of the neighborhood, and challenges for the US to keep up strategic partnerships with the opponents India and Pakistan
U.S. PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP has inherited large strategic and tactical nuclear arsenals from his predecessor, Barack Obama, and a strat- egy of “unconditional offensive nuclear deterrence,” which allows for the possibility of a preemptive nuclear strike against practically any country that is not an ally, friend or partner of the United States.