Even in this banner season for military academy football — complete with winning streaks, national rankings and a conference championship — the biggest goal remains the same. For Army: Beat Navy. For Navy: Beat Army. With the college football landscape changing at a furious rate, the significance of this matchup adds a dose of tradition to mid-December, amid all that talk about the transfer portal and the new expanded playoff. "We've had a good year. You make it a great year by winning this game coming up on Saturday. Frankly, that's just the way it goes around here," Army coach Jeff Monken said. "It's a game and a season really all of its own. We don't apologize for talking about it all the time. We talk about it all the time, and it's 365 days a year." Saturday in Landover, Maryland, is the 125th matchup between Army and Navy, and although these two programs are long removed from their days winning national titles and Heisman Trophies, this is a historic moment in the rivalry. The Black Knights and Midshipmen have combined for 19 wins this season, their highest total ever entering this game. Army (11-1) is ranked 19th in the AP poll after beating Tulane last week to win the American Athletic Conference — the first league title of any kind in the team's 134-year history. Navy (8-3) was ranked as well earlier this season after starting with six straight victories. "I knew we were going to be an improved football team," Navy coach Brian Newberry said. "Didn't know exactly what that was going to look like. I think certainly we've improved in a lot of different areas. I'm excited about the season we've had." This was Army's first season in the AAC, putting the Black Knights and Midshipmen in the same league, although their annual matchup is considered a nonconference game. For a while, there was a chance the teams could meet twice, with a conference championship clash coming before the regularly scheduled Army-Navy game, but that didn't happen. Their most prominent common opponent came from outside the league. Notre Dame handed both Navy and Army its first loss, beating the Midshipmen 51-14 and the Black Knights 49-14. Within the AAC, both teams beat Temple, UAB and East Carolina. Army beat Tulane and Rice and Navy lost to those two teams. Army and Navy also each won its nonconference game against Air Force. Those victories over Air Force mean this season's Commander-In-Chief's Trophy comes down to the Army-Navy game. It's the first time since 2017 that both teams enter this game with a shot at the trophy. It's also the first time since 2017 that both teams enter the game with bowl bids secured. Navy faces Oklahoma in the Armed Forces Bowl and Army takes on Marshall in the Independence Bowl. This year's Army-Navy game is at the Washington Commanders' home stadium in Landover. It was also held there in 2011. This is the first time the game has been in Maryland since Baltimore hosted it in 2016. Baltimore is also up next in 2025. Army quarterback Bryson Daily has 29 rushing touchdowns this season, which is tied for the FBS lead with running back Ashton Jeanty, Boise State's Heisman finalist. Only one QB in FBS history has run for more TDs in a season than Daily. That was Navy's Keenan Reynolds, with 31 in 2013. "You come here to play in this game. The biggest stage possible, millions of people watching and a sold-out NFL stadium. It's awesome," Daily said. "None of the games that happened before this matter. We're going into this game like we're 0-0, they're 0-0 because that's just how you have to come into this game." Navy's closest game this season — win or lose — was a 56-44 win over Memphis. The Midshipmen are the only FBS team that hasn't had a game this season decided by eight points or fewer. AP Sports Writer Stephen Whyno contributed to this report. Subscribe to stay connected to Tucson. A subscription helps you access more of the local stories that keep you connected to the community. Be the first to know Get local news delivered to your inbox!
The downfall of America's 'most hated mayor' as he sparks fresh outrage among despairing residents Just 18 months into office and Johnson is already seen as Chicago's worst mayor By JAMES REINL, SOCIAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT, FOR DAILYMAIL.COM Published: 19:02, 23 November 2024 | Updated: 19:02, 23 November 2024 e-mail View comments Brandon Johnson struck an uplifting note in his inaugural speech as Chicago 's mayor in May 2023, saying a 'better day is ahead' for a city gripped by 'violence and despair.' Eighteen months later, and residents of the third-biggest US city are waiting on the Democrat to deliver, as his popularity collapses amid a series of political missteps . Just 14 percent of Chicagoans approve of the mayor, and 70 percent view him unfavorably, according to a recent survey by San-Francisco based Change Research. Critics say the dad-of-three has been too hostile to police while abandoning his teachers' union pals and the cash-strapped Chicagoans who voted him into office. Stephen Maynard Caliendo, a political science professor, says Johnson, 48, gets bad advice and makes too many 'rookie mistakes.' 'The honeymoon is well over. There has to be some wins coming,' Caliendo told CBS News. Johnson's office did not answer our request for comment. His supporters say it's hard to reverse Chicago's long-standing problems of poverty, crime , and racial tensions overnight when the city faces a $1 billion budget deficit crisis. Against this backdrop, DailyMail.com takes a look at what's gone wrong for Chicago's mayor... THE THIN BLUE LINE Mayor Brandon Johnson's approval rating is 56 points underwater after just 18 months on the job The mayor was not welcome at the funeral this month of slain Chicago Police Officer Enrique Martine Read More Chicago mayor Brandon Johnson tries to blame Richard Nixon for July 4 weekend of gun violence Voters in Chicago, like anywhere else, want to feel safe when they walk down the street. But Johnson fell into the progressive politician's trap of going softer on lawbreakers than the public can stomach. As America grappled with the police killing of George Floyd, Johnson, then Cook County Commissioner, joined others in calls to 'defund the police.' He backtracked on this during a mayoral election campaign that pitted him against centrist Democrat Paul Vallas, who vowed to hire more officers amid widespread public safety concerns. Even so, his mayorship has suffered by a lack of commitment to law and order. The number of aggravated assaults in Chicago jumped 4 percent to 14,029 between 2023 and 2024, according to the Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA). The numbers of homicides, rapes, and robberies fell slightly, but remains alarmingly high. In his draft budget for the hard up city, Johnson last month proposed swingeing cuts to police training and reform efforts. Maggie Hickey, an independent monitor of the Chicago Police Department, said it 'risks undoing' progress in the force. Johnson's lack of support among street cops was plain to see this week. He planned to attend his funeral of Officer Enrique Martinez, who was killed during a traffic stop on the South Side. But the officer's family and the police union raised objections. Johnson eventually backtracked, saying he was 'honoring' the family's request to stay away. When it comes to cops, crime and public safety, Johnson just can't get it right. THE UNION'S MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE Johnson was supposed to be the mayor who could handle contract negotiations with a powerful teaching union Instead, a public school system for some 323,000 students has been thrown into chaos Read More America's 'most hated mayor' is blasted by fuming residents over radical new policy The Chicago Teachers Union bankrolled Johnson's mayoral campaign - pouring cash into the candidacy of one of its ex-organizers and former social studies teacher. As mayor, Johnson was expected to repay the largesse when teachers contracts were re-negotiated in 2024. But cash-strapped Chicago can't afford to meet educators' demand for a 9 percent annual pay bump. Johnson tied himself in knots trying to keep the union happy while balancing the books. His plan to fill a looming deficit in the schools budget with a $300m short-term, high-interest loan was rejected by the public school district's CEO, Pedro Martinez. When Johnson tried to get school board members to oust Martinez, they refused and resigned instead. Last month, the mayor hastily appointed new board members, but the damage was already done. The public spat threw a system for some 323,000 students into chaos, and Johnson had alienated many of his former backers. WINDY CITY WELCOME Mayor Johnson visits a police headquarters that was housing asylum-seekers and migrant new arrivals in May 2023 Johnson was in August ranked as America's 'worst sanctuary mayor' by the Immigration Reform Law Institute, a watchdog Read More School board is set to RESIGN after hated city mayor 'forced' bosses to remove public schools CEO Chicago is not the only liberal US city struggling to cope with the influx of immigrants and asylum seekers across the southern border. But Johnson has struggled especially hard to accommodate the tens of thousands of newcomers who arrived looking for work and schools and without a roof over their heads. When his administration turned public schools into shelters and doled out apartments to foreigners, residents in the mostly-black affected neighborhoods vented their ire on social media. In one viral clip, an African-American woman slammed the mayor's support for asylum seekers, with shelters and $9,000 payouts, saying it was at the expense of the blacks who helped elect him. 'I don't understand how they can give these immigrants thousands of dollars in the state of Illinois, but look what they're doing to our own f******g people,' said the Chicago woman. She described seeing 'Latinos' arriving in her neighborhood in a '12-foot box truck,' using government welfare checks to 'buy up everything' and effectively price black residents out. 'The fact they are here, and our government is giving more to them than to the people who were born here, is really starting to p**s us off,' she added. 'Mayor Brandon, we are coming for your a**.' Johnson was in August ranked as America's 'worst sanctuary mayor' by the Immigration Reform Law Institute, a watchdog. The group said he'd lavished hundreds of millions of dollars on immigrants while his own voters languished in poverty. DEARTH OF TAXES Downing a pint at a Chicago boozer will get more expensive under Mayor Johnson's tax hike plans Johnson has failed miserably at what 17th Century French statesmen Jean-Baptiste Colbert called the 'art of taxation.' For Colbert, it involved 'so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest amount of feathers with the least amount of hissing.' Yet the hissing after Johnson's hikes on property and liquor taxes has been hard to ignore. When he proposed $300 million rise in property taxes in the 2025 budget, City Council members had a rare moment of unanimity. They voted 50-0 against the proposal. The mayor's revised plan, a $150 million hike, is only slightly less unpopular. Chicagoans already pay among the highest property taxes in the country. Poor and minority groups have long said the taxes make homeownership a pipe dream. One Chicago resident, a woman known only as Mrs Lawrence, slammed the mayor at a recent city meeting. 'We paid for these properties for a purpose and not for you to go touchin' it with $300 million that you want to siphon out of the citizens' pockets,' she said. Seemingly not content with taxing Chicagoans into homelessness, the mayor also took aim at their Friday nights. He seeks to raise taxes in liquor in bars and restaurants to 35 percent, the first such bump since 2008. Hospitality groups are fighting against the plan, saying it will upend their industry. THE TRUMP SLUMP Donald Trump made gains with voters across Illinois in this month's election, but did not win the state Johnson's predecessor Lori Lightfoot didn't leave office with a smile on her face The writing has been on the wall for Johnson for some time. Voices calling for his recall are growing louder. This month's presidential election was another wake-up call about the changing face of blue US cities. President-elect Donald Trump's vote share rose from 15.8 percent across Cook County, which includes Chicago, in 2020, to 21.4 percent this year. MAGA Chicagoans blasted Johnson's tax hikes at a heated city council meeting this month in a sign of the city's shifting political sands. Among the most vocal critics was Tyjuan Sims, who confronted Johnson directly, accusing him of neglecting Chicagoans while helping undocumented immigrants. 'The feds need to address you! The DOJ needs to address you! And hopefully Donald Trump will address you,' Sims yelled in the chamber. 'You're gonna protect the undocumented, while you're gonna allow for the citizens in Chicago to suffer under your, what? Three percent?' Johnson has been on the back foot for weeks. Reporters quizzed him about his doomed taxation plans and dismal approval ratings this week. He said it was 'too early' to grade his performance, and talked up recent gains — investment flows to Chicago and a falling homicide rate. Johnson is having a hard time, but he can perhaps take some solace in the fact that he's not the only unpopular mayor Chicagoans have complained about. His predecessor, Lori Lightfoot, was so unpopular that she failed to make the mayoral run-off vote in 2023. Before her, Rahm Emanuel dropped his 2019 reelection bid amid controversies over rising crime, school closures and an infamous police shooting. Share or comment on this article: The downfall of America's 'most hated mayor' as he sparks fresh outrage among despairing residents e-mail Add comment
Coconino boys basketball cruises in opener, trouncing Tempe at home
Congress to focus on organisation in 2025, says Mallikarjuna Kharge
Terry McLaurin has enjoyed a career year in 2024 for the Washington Commanders , but his season has now encountered an unexpected hurdle. McLaurin has been limited in practice this week due to an ankle issue. It doesn't sound like McLaurin is in too much danger of missing Sunday night's contest against the Atlanta Falcons , but Washington had better hope he's at 100 percent. McLaurin in recent weeks has enjoyed arguably the best stretch of play in his NFL career, with six touchdowns in his past four games. McLaurin, who ranks second in the NFL in receiving touchdowns with 12 (behind only Ja'Marr Chase), is very likely to be selected for his second career Pro Bowl and even has a good case to make an All-Pro team. Last Sunday , he set the Commanders' franchise record for receiving TDs in a season. It's unclear as to exactly when or how McLaurin suffered his ankle injury, but it's estimated that he would have missed practice on Wednesday (the team was off for the holiday) and was limited on Thursday. Washington is hurting at the WR position, with Dyami Brown (hamstring) and Noah Brown (kidney) also banged up. The Commanders signed Chris Moore to their practice squad on Thursday in lieu of the injuries, though hopefully that's not a sign that McLaurin's is more severe than anticipated. He seemed to be in good spirits during his media availability , sounding like someone who has every intention of playing on Sunday. Washington will need him to do so, and will need him to be at his best. The Commanders can clinch a playoff bid against Atlanta, and it wouldn't feel right if their offense's biggest star can't be on the field for it.None
No. 4 Penn State tries to keep playoff picture out of focus in prep for tough trip to MinnesotaDarius Myers Announces Assassins & Conspirators, Book Six, In The Black Camelot Fiction Series and Podcast Availability 12-26-2024 08:32 PM CET | Leisure, Entertainment, Miscellaneous Press release from: Getnews / PR Agency: Internet Marketing Company Image: https://www.globalnewslines.com/uploads/2024/12/1735028829.jpg Darius Myers Photo The Black Camelots Face New Threats as Kill Squads Target Their Reign; Series Now Available on Amazon with Author Open for Podcast Interviews Author Darius Myers continues to captivate readers with his Black Camelot series [ http://dariusmyers.com ]. Book six of the thrillers follows the hunt by kill squads for a trio dubbed Gotham's Black Camelots. Their status as the city's royals has marked them for death by white supremacist who have vowed to bring the era of Black Camelot to an end. In Assassins & Conspirators, the war to kill the Black Camelot's has paused momentarily. Corrupt politician and now presidential candidate Digby Yates has ordered a manhunt for Tyrone Wheeler. Hit squads are hunting Wheeler because Yates' estranged wife, Flower, has passionately and publicly displayed her love and devotion for the former field hand. In the first attempt, Flower's sister, the beautiful Blaine Andrews is shot and killed by the Yates hired killers. Skylar Andrews, Blaine's husband, has vowed revenge, but failed in his first attempt. Political old lion and family patriarch, Hardwick Bivens Sr also wants Yates dead. Against the expressed wishes of his granddaughter, Democratic presidential candidate Janet Bivens, he hired assassin Billy One-Shot to kill Yates. That plan is abandoned until another is conceived. This one targets the head of the country's most powerful religious powers after it makes a pact with Yates. In Black Camelot's Assassins and Conspirators the dark worlds convene. The conspirators use their considerable power and the assassins reassess. It leaves one of the world's most revered powers shattered. Why Does The Black Camelot's Matter? They Embody Black Excellence "In my childhood home and in Black households everywhere, we celebrated Black excellence whenever we saw it," Myers shares. "Whether it was a Black actor, athlete, or politician, their success felt like a victory for all of us. The Black Camelots are my tribute to that tradition-a modern-day celebration of Black people winning." The Black Camelot series is available on Amazon in paperback and digital formats The six-book series is available on Amazon [ https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08Z1PTF5H?binding=paperback&searchxofy=true&ref_=dbs_s_aps_series_rwt_tpbk&qid=1733426548&sr=8-1 ] in paperback and digital formats. Myers is open to discussing his work on podcasts, sharing insights into Assassins & Conspirators and the Black Camelot series. These discussions will explore the inspiration behind the stories, themes of Black empowerment, and his transition from media executive to author. About Darius Myers Darius Myers is a New York City-based author and former media executive with a passion for storytelling that uplifts and inspires. His career includes leadership roles at Time Warner, Gannett, and CBS Magazines. Myers holds a degree in journalism from Long Island University and an MBA from Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management. To schedule a podcast interview or learn more about the series, visit http://dariusmyers.com . Media Contact Company Name: Fero Scitus Books Contact Person: Darius Myers Email: Send Email [ http://www.universalpressrelease.com/?pr=darius-myers-announces-assassins-conspirators-book-six-in-the-black-camelot-fiction-series-and-podcast-availability ] Country: United States Website: https://dariusmyers.com/ This release was published on openPR.
Julia Wick | (TNS) Los Angeles Times As California politicos look ahead to 2025, the biggest question looming is whether Vice President Kamala Harris — a native daughter, battered just weeks ago by presidential election defeat — will enter the 2026 California governor’s race. Related Articles National Politics | Senate begins final push to expand Social Security benefits for millions of people National Politics | Trump taps immigration hard-liner Kari Lake as head of Voice of America National Politics | Trump invites China’s Xi to his inauguration even as he threatens massive tariffs on Beijing National Politics | Pressure on a veteran and senator shows what’s next for those who oppose Trump National Politics | What Americans think about Hegseth, Gabbard and key Trump Cabinet picks AP-NORC poll Harris has yet to give any public indication on her thoughts and those close to her suggest the governorship is not immediately top of mind. But if Harris does ultimately run — and that’s a massive if — her entrée would seismically reshape the already crowded race for California’s highest office. Recent polling suggests Harris would have a major advantage, with 46% of likely voters saying they were somewhat or very likely to support her for governor in 2026, according to a UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies survey co-sponsored by The Times. “If Vice President Harris were to choose to run, I am certain that that would have a near field-clearing effect on the Democratic side,” Rep. Katie Porter, D-Irvine, said during a recent UC Irvine panel interview . Porter, a high-profile Democrat who has been eyeing the wide-open governor’s race, has yet to say whether she plans to run. Porter’s point was broadly echoed in conversations with nearly a dozen California political operatives and strategists, several of whom requested anonymity to speak candidly. Most speculated that a Harris entry would cause some other candidates in the race to scatter, creating further upheaval in down-ballot races as a roster of ambitious politicians scramble for other opportunities. “In politics, you always let the big dogs eat first,” quipped Democratic political consultant Peter Ragone. The current gubernatorial field is a who’s who of California politicians, but lacks a clear favorite or star with widespread name recognition. The vast majority of California’s 22 million voters have yet to pay attention to the race and have little familiarity with the candidates. The list of Democratic candidates includes Los Angeles’ first Latino mayor in more than a century ( Antonio Villaraigosa ); the first female and first out LGBTQ leader of the state Senate ( Toni Atkins ); the sitting lieutenant governor and first woman to hold that post ( Eleni Kounalakis ); the state superintendent of public instruction ( Tony Thurmond ) and the former state controller ( Betty Yee ). Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom is serving his second term as California governor, meaning he is ineligible to run again. Several other Democrats, including Porter, outgoing Health and Human Services Director Xavier Becerra and state Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta have also publicly toyed with the idea of a run. They could be less likely to enter the fray should Harris decide to run. What the billionaire mall mogul Rick Caruso — who has also been exploring a run — would choose to do is an open question, as Caruso might contrast himself with Harris as a more centrist candidate. The real estate developer was a registered Republican until November 2019. It’s unlikely that Harris will proffer a public decision in the immediate term, leaving plenty of time for political insiders to game out hypotheticals in the weeks and months to come. Harris’ office did not respond to a request for comment. “I think every candidate for governor is trying to get some kind of intel,” Mike Trujillo, a Los Angeles-based Democratic political consultant and former Villaraigosa staffer, said of a potential Harris run. Trujillo speculated that Harris’ current state was probably similar to Hillary Clinton’s hiking sojourns in the Chappaqua woods after losing to Donald Trump in 2016, or Al Gore growing a beard in the bruising aftermath of his 2000 defeat. “The first thing she’s probably thinking about is, ‘Well, can I run again for president in four years?’ Not, ‘Do I run for governor in two years?’” said one political operative who’s worked with Harris in the past. Harris maintains a home in Brentwood and previously served as California’s senator and attorney general. A successful run for governor in 2026 would almost certainly impede a grab for the presidency in 2028. (Though if history is any guide, an unsuccessful run for California governor does not definitively preclude a bid for the Oval Office: Two years after losing the White House to John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon lost the 1962 contest for governor to Pat Brown . The Yorba Linda native became the nation’s 37th president in 1969.) As the chief executive of a state that doubles as the world’s fifth-largest economy, Harris would have more power to steer policy and make changes as a California governor than she did as vice president, where her job required deference to President Biden. But leading a state, even the nation’s most populous, could feel like small potatoes after being a heartbeat (and a few dozen electoral votes) from the presidency. The protracted slog to November 2026 would also be a stark contrast to her ill-fated 107-day sprint toward the White House, particularly for a candidate whose 2020 presidential primary campaign was dogged by allegations of infighting and mismanagement. “I don’t think Kamala Harris has a deep psychological need to be governor of California, or to be in elective office in order to feel like she can contribute to society,” said the operative who’s worked with Harris in the past. “I think some of these people do, but she’s somebody who has enough prominence that she could do a lot of big, wonderful things without having to worry about balancing California’s budget or negotiating with Assemblyman Jesse Gabriel,” the Encino Democrat who chairs the Assembly’s budget committee. Technically, Harris has until March 2026 to decide whether she enters a race. But political strategists who spoke to The Times theorized that she probably would make a move by late spring, if she chooses to do so. “People will be more annoyed if she drops in in June,” a Democratic strategist involved with one of the gubernatorial campaigns said. Sending a clear signal by February would be more “courteous,” the strategist continued, explaining that such a move would give candidates more time to potentially enter other races. Kounalakis is a longtime friend and ally of Harris’ , and the vice president also has long-term relationships with some of the other candidates and potential candidates. California has eight statewide elected offices and campaign finance laws allow candidates to fundraise interchangeably for them, meaning money already raised for a candidate’s gubernatorial campaign could easily be redirected should they decide to run for, say, lieutenant governor instead. There are already a number of candidates running for lieutenant governor, including former Stockton Mayor Michael Tubbs, former state Sen. Steven Bradford and former state Treasurer Fiona Ma. But that office probably would see even more interest should Harris enter the gubernatorial race. It’s a largely ceremonial position, but one that has served as a launching pad for the governorship. Still, even if Harris does enter the race, Republican political strategist Mike Murphy threw cold water on the idea that she would have an automatic glide path to the governor’s office. “It’s like Hollywood. Nobody knows anything. She’s famous enough to look credible in early polling. That’s all we know for sure,” Murphy said. “Does that predict the future? No. Are there a lot of downsides (to a potential Harris candidacy)? Totally, yes.” ©2024 Los Angeles Times. Visit latimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.Army-Navy game has added buzzBraves-White Sox blockbuster would replace Max Fried with $2.9M star | Sporting News
Army-Navy game has added buzz
James Politi , Felicia Schwartz , Stefania Palma and Aime Williams in Washington Your guide to what the 2024 US election means for Washington and the world Joe Biden is staging a final push to deliver more aid to Ukraine, lock in manufacturing subsidies and confirm federal judges as he tries to secure his legacy before Donald Trump starts his second term in January. Following vice-president Kamala Harris’s defeat to Trump this month, and the failure of his own re-election bid in July, Biden has been urging his cabinet and senior officials to ramp up, rather than wind down, their activities. For many administration officials, the push to double down on domestic and foreign policy initiatives is an attempt to preserve some of their biggest accomplishments and head off Trump’s attempts to reverse them. “The president has been very clear that we need to get as much done as possible, and he wants it to be as productive a period as other periods in his presidency,” a White House official said on Friday. On the global stage, Biden is still grappling with the Russia-Ukraine conflict and Israel’s wars with Hamas in Gaza and Hizbollah in Lebanon, both of which have weighed heavily on his presidency. In a flurry of last-minute decisions, Biden and his team have taken steps to help Kyiv strengthen its position on the battlefield, ultimately improving its leverage in negotiations with Russia over a settlement that might now come sooner rather then later. Trump, a sceptic of Ukraine aid, has pledged to end the war between Russia and Ukraine quickly, and vice president-elect JD Vance outlined a plan on the campaign trail in which Russia would hold on to the territory it has taken. But the Biden administration is still trying to give one last jolt of help to Ukraine, including a surge of $7bn in lethal aid and significant policy shifts regarding the use of US-provided weapons. Notably, the US has approved Kyiv’s use of long-range weapons for deep strikes into Russian territory and will transfer anti-personnel mines to Ukraine. In the Middle East, Biden has failed to achieve his goal of securing a ceasefire deal between Israel and Gaza that could lead to the release of the remaining hostages held by Hamas — and there is scant hope that could be reached within the next two months. But Biden has set his sights on halting the fighting between Israel and Hizbollah, dispatching Amos Hochstein , a senior aide, to the region, though it is also a long-shot. The aim is to allow tens of thousands of displaced Israelis to return to their homes on the Israel-Lebanon border and for Hizbollah to move its forces away from the contested area. At home, the strong jobs growth under Biden’s watch fell flat with voters, who punished Harris over his administration’s record on inflation even though price gains have eased since their peak in 2022. Biden’s main goal now is to make sure that the hundreds of billions of dollars in investments he enacted to spur domestic manufacturing and infrastructure upgrades — from chip production to clean energy plants — can live on in the second Trump era. “We’re really mobilising on . . . getting projects online, getting funding out the door, making sure that we execute as much as we can on the different legislation that the president passed,” the White House official said. Gina Raimondo, Biden’s commerce secretary, has said she aims to spend “almost all” of the $50bn earmarked to supercharge US chip manufacturing under Biden’s Chips Act, of which $39bn is directed to incentives and $11bn is for research and development. In a recent interview with Politico, Raimondo said she directed her staff to work through the weekend and made personal calls to tech company executives to try and speed up deals. “The chips team has announced preliminary agreements with two dozen companies for chips awards, and over the next two months, plans to announce preliminary agreements for all $39bn of that funding, and is well on its way towards securing final agreements for many of those entities [where] preliminary awards were announced,” another White House official said. Meanwhile, Biden’s top climate officials have sought to reassure allies that Donald Trump will not be able to halt the progress of Biden’s flagship Inflation Reduction Act, which contains $369bn in subsidies for clean technologies. John Podesta, Biden’s top climate adviser, told delegates at this month’s UN climate summit that he believed Republicans would not try to reverse the IRA because the subsidies helped companies set up factories in red states. “Many Republicans, especially governors, know all this activity is a good thing for their districts, states and for their economies,” said Podesta. But the other big domestic priority for Biden is to press the Senate — which will be controlled by Democrats until early January — to confirm as many of his judicial appointments as possible before Trump is able to usher in a new wave of conservative nominees to federal courts. During his first presidency, Trump installed more than 200 federal judges, including staffing nearly as many influential appellate court judges in one term as former president Barack Obama did in two, according to Pew Research . Trump appointed 54 appellate judges, one shy of Obama’s total. Trump also cemented the highest court’s conservative supermajority by appointing three justices in his first term. Biden has already appointed more than 200 federal judges but only one justice to the Supreme Court — the liberal Ketanji Brown Jackson. That did not affect the court’s ideological leaning. Now, the president wants to see Chuck Schumer, the Democratic senate majority leader, quickly approve as many Biden appointees as possible. “We’ve been working with them very, very closely to get as many of the president’s nominees confirmed because he believes that he wants to leave a lasting impact on the judiciary,” the White House official said.Fox News Flash top sports headlines are here. Check out what's clicking on Foxnews.com. Former NBA coach and longtime broadcaster Hubie Brown is in his final season calling NBA games, ESPN’s Content President Burke Magnus announced. "We are going to give Hubie one last shot on a game," Magnus said of the 91-year-old Brown on the "SI Media with Jimmy Traina" podcast. "He deserves that. We think the world of him. I think it’s absolutely remarkable the level he still calls games at age 90-plus." Magnus added that ESPN intends on honoring Brown at some point during the regular season to "send him off in style." CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM ESPN broadcaster Hubie Brown (left) and Ryan Ruocco during an NBA game between the San Antonio Spurs and the Los Angeles Lakers at Staples Center. (Kirby Lee/USA Today Sports) While Brown played in the league for a bit, he went into coaching high school basketball in 1955, where he would spend a decade before eventually taking assistant jobs at William & Mary and Duke. Brown returned to the NBA in 1972, joining the Milwaukee Bucks ’ staff to help coach a team that included Oscar Robertson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and others. JA MORANT'S TEAMMATE APPEARS TO SHOOT IMAGINARY GUN AS THREE-POINT CELEBRATION; SOCIAL MEDIA REACTS Brown spent two years with Milwaukee before making the move to the ABA in 1974 to lead the Kentucky Colonels. He spent another two years there before the ABA merged with the NBA before the 1976-77 campaign. Back in the league, Brown spent five years coaching the Atlanta Hawks, five seasons with the New York Knicks and ended his coaching career with the Memphis Grizzlies for three seasons. ESPN broadcaster Hubie Brown during an NBA game between the Indiana Pacers and Phoenix Suns at U.S. Airways Center. (Mark J. Rebilas/USA Today Sports) While Brown was jumping from coaching gig to coaching gig, he would take broadcasting jobs in between his stints. After being dismissed by the Knicks, for instance, he was a regular television broadcaster. Brown was a part of NBA on CBS before Turner Sports bought the league’s media rights in the early 1990s. He joined the Grizzlies in 2002, 16 years after his previous coaching job with the Knicks, though he left the job 12 games into the 2004-05 season for medical reasons. From there, Brown returned to broadcasting again, joining ABC for its coverage of the league, which included calling the 2005 and 2006 NBA Finals. He hasn’t left ABC/ESPN since. Basketball has been a true passion for Brown, who continues to provide expert analysis during broadcasts. However, his personal life has been tumultuous of late. His wife, Claire, died at age 87 in June. Heart complications also took his son, Brendan, earlier this month at the age of 54. ESPN broadcaster Hubie Brown during an NBA game between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Los Angeles Clippers at Staples Center. (Kirby Lee/USA Today Sports) CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Brown is a member of the National Sports Media Association Hall of Fame and the College Basketball Hall of Fame for his contributions to the game. He was inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame in 2005. Scott Thompson is a sports writer for Fox News Digital.
Tax Reform Bill will be passed through normal legislative process- DicksonThis transcript is from a CSIS event hosted on December 10, 2024. Watch the full video here. Stephen Morrison: Today we have the great pleasure of being joined by Loyce Pace, assistant secretary at Health and Human Services department for global affairs. (Music plays.) This is the CommonHealth from the CSIS Bipartisan Alliance for Global Health Security, engaging senior leaders on questions of how to address our common health security challenges in this post-COVID moment. (Music ends.) Hello and welcome. I’m J. Stephen Morrison, senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies – CSIS – based in Washington, D.C. CommonHealth Live! is a series of the CSIS Bipartisan Alliance for Global Health Security. Today we have the great pleasure of being joined by a close friend and much-admired colleague and leader in global health, Assistant Secretary at HHS for – in the Office of Global Affairs Loyce Pace. Welcome, Loyce. Thanks so much for joining us today. Loyce Pace: Thank you, Steve. Dr. Morrison: We’re here to talk about the newly released strategy, the Global Strategy of the Department of Health and Human Services, which is fresh out. Just came out a few days ago. We’re going to talk about that strategy and we’re going to talk about some of the bigger dimensions in which it sits. Loyce has been in this position since March of 2021 so she’s been in this leadership role continuously for almost the entire duration of this Biden administration, which brings enormous perspective, I think, across the span of work. This has been an exceedingly busy era in terms of both bilateral and multilateral diplomacy. Loyce has been at the center of all of those affairs. That’s her job – (laughter) – at HHS. That was her job was to lead in many, many different fora. We’ll hear more about that. Now, the global strategy, which I encourage all of you to read – the global strategy is new. It’s new and it’s meant to mark this moment. It comes on the heels of many other strategies that we’ve had issued in the course of this administration in which you participated. We had the National Health Security Strategy for 2023 to 2026. We had the Global Health Security Strategy of 2024. We had the National Biodefense Strategy and Implementation Plan in 2022. We had the Biodefense Posture Review at the DOD that was concluded last year. So there’s been a lot of thinking, a lot of policy formulation. I mean, in this administration it’s remarkable how much of this has happened and been instituted, and all of these efforts require a prodigious amount of work across a span of different actors. You at the top of the frame are trying to fuse these opinions into this consolidated strategy. Congratulations on that. Ms. Pace: Thank you. Dr. Morrison: It’s a remarkable amount of work and it comes on the backdrop of a lot of other remarkable work. So let’s start with as you look at this – this is going to be one of your legacies. You can point to this as a culmination of a lot of work. What are the two to three most significant elements or changes within this which are going to distinguish it as people look at this and they go, OK, well, that marked a certain passage in our thinking? So tell us about that. Ms. Pace: Well, thanks very much, first of all, for the introduction, Steve, and just acknowledging all of the work – the painstaking but rewarding work that we’ve been about this administration. With this global strategy coming out of the Department of Health and Human Services I think, first and foremost, people are going to see equity front and center and that’s something that’s different. It’s not that we haven’t been focused on equity or health equity, broadly speaking, for decades but now we’re finally talking about it, from this president to Secretary Becerra to others across the administration and, certainly, throughout the department. We’re saying, look, we can’t get this work done to protect Americans or to protect Americans by protecting the world unless we have an equity lens. So that’s number one. I think number two in the strategy people might see an increased focus on innovation. When we looked back at the last strategy that we published as a department – the last global strategy back in 2016 – I think we even did a word search to understand how many times innovation, technology, and other such terms were used or referenced and it wasn’t that much, surprisingly. So we wanted to bring this particular version of the document current to reflect all the innovations that we’ve been able to realize, right, and benefit from in the past decade or so and that includes very current information technologies like artificial intelligence and how that can be leveraged to advance global health, let alone the sort of bread and butter manufactured technologies and other very basic, tangible innovations that we lived through with COVID-19. So that’s another important focus. And then I think, finally, we really wanted to pull together themes and kind of connect dots across various priorities. What do I mean by that? We have done a good job, I think, in the global health community talking about the spectrum of diseases, right, from infectious diseases to, say, noncommunicable diseases, from maternal child health to other matters along the spectrum. But we haven’t always leaned into the intersection of, say, health and migration or health and climate. And so we’re able to lift up the work that the department is doing, understanding that the world is multifaceted and complex, and there are agencies within the department that are able to focus at the intersection of health and these other development issues. Dr. Morrison: Thank you. Let me take each of those and dive a little more deeply. On the equity norm it comes through loud and clear, right? Ms. Pace: Good. Dr. Morrison: I mean, it’s right at the front end but it runs through all of the argumentation, and when I ask myself, OK, what in practical terms are we talking about here on equity there were a couple things that I took away as what you mean by equity in actual action – concrete action. One is sexual and reproductive rights. A second is LGBTQ+ rights and protections. A third is low income countries and a right to universal health coverage. Maybe right is not the correct term, but provision. In other words, inequity in terms of the absence of something that should be there as a fundamental basis of our strategy of engagement with our partner countries. And the last is something that you’ve referenced which is manufacturing capabilities in low income countries. Those are the things that I think are the manifestations in concrete terms of this equity norm. And the other thing I wanted to mention is it seems to me the aftermath of COVID equity became a driving preoccupation across the diplomatic domain, right – I mean, in the pandemic treaty negotiations, in the IHR, you know, modifications. In many, many fora that you were in, that you serve in on the boards of the different organizations, of SEFI, Global Fund – that all of the different bilateral regional bodies that you find yourself in there was a surge. This marched forward to become a dominant concern normatively, it seems to me, and that has settled. It has become a process of consolidation of this into things like this, just strategy. Ms. Pace: Sure. Yeah. Dr. Morrison: But say a few words more about that. Ms. Pace: Well, I’m really glad to know that’s come through because that’s exactly what we wanted to do was to take equity from headline to implementation and execution because there’s a real need for equity as strategy, right, and not just this principle that we tout. Of course, there is a moral imperative to a lot of the work that we do but there’s a very strategic imperative, as you well know. So let’s take HIV and the decades of work that we’ve done in that space. One of the reasons we did what we did to try and respond to the crisis in the way that we have and continue to do is because we know that unless we truly reach those who have traditionally or historically been left behind we’re not going to be able to finish this fight and that’s going to have ramifications for these communities, for countries, and for the world. We saw it with COVID, right? One of the reasons that we were also seized with ensuring that we had vaccines at home and abroad is because we wanted to stop this virus in its tracks. And, of course, vaccines weren’t the only answer but they were an important part of the equation once they became available and I often would talk about in the absence of vaccines there’s this risk or opportunity for variants to emerge, right, and we saw that happening as the longer we took to ensure that there was equitable access. So to your point, we are very much focused on how we can improve or drive access to health – health care, health services, public health – through these strategic objectives because that’s the only way we’re going to be able to make progress overall. Dr. Morrison: Thank you. On the innovation and the special focus on AI that, of course, has entered the mainstream discussion of almost everything, right, and it also is – there’s an equity concern in terms of affordable access on new technologies, right? So equity carries into that but it’s also something that is celebratory in the sense that there’s – a certain pessimism has settled into our thinking. Resources have become very tight, the cycle of crisis followed by neglect, the, you know, global health security, global health – what we think of as global health traditionally has entered a period of peril, in a sense, in terms of trying to preserve its prioritization. It’s a slipping priority and the like. Putting innovation forward, it seems to me, is a very good strategy for preserving an optimism and a forward look. It’s also a faith in our capacity as a nation to bring forward new solutions that have not just benefits for Americans but to others. Say more about that because, you know, this strategy is not a pessimistic strategy but it’s occurring in a very pessimistic time. Ms. Pace: Yeah, that’s an important point. I mean, look, America has always led the world in very important ways and I think what we’re trying to do is bring that forward, especially when you think about the history of many of our agencies within the Department of Health, right? You think about the NIH and how historic their innovations have come to be including as recently as with COVID-19 but stretching back, again, decades. But then you have newer agencies like ARPA-H, right, this new research agency and authority that is looking at these sort of Moonshot Initiatives and carrying forward things like the president’s Moonshot Initiative or agenda but also looking at other interesting investments in antimicrobial resistance and Alzheimer’s and the like. And that is exciting, right, because there’s an opportunity for us to translate these innovations in the world and also, let’s not forget, learn from the exchanges we have internationally to benefit what we do here at home. And so coming back to ARPA-H, let alone with our National Institutes of Health, they have these broad-based research communities that they’ve been able to foster over time and they’re purposely and intentionally multinational because we know that genius has no borders, right? We know that the next innovation can truly come from anywhere. But it’s always been the spirit of America, I think, to harness that in thoughtful, meaningful, and really impactful ways. And so I do think that’s the promise – one of the great promises of this strategy and of the innovation that we have. But one more thing about that, too, that I think is important we have to tie it to the equity lens that we were just talking about before. You know, innovation without equity really has no impact, right? It’s really just a good idea that is for the few and not the many, and so it’s important that we have this ethical, equitable approach to anything that we do to understand who benefits. You know, even in the planning phase, right, how we develop these innovations is critically important, who is engaged in that process, so that it does reach the right folks. But regulation and other important components also need to be key as part of this enabling environment for the innovation. It’s not just sort of the products or ideas themselves. Dr. Morrison: Yeah. I’m glad you brought up ARPA-H if only because, you know, we’re entering a period now of a reconsideration of how fast should science be and how big and bold versus slow and incremental, the discovery phase, and how do we invest to bring innovation forward at a faster rate, safer rate, but also have it be of use in low and middle – within partnerships with low and middle income countries. And I wanted to ask you, do you have in your mind a few of the most choice technological challenges, whether we’re talking vaccines, countermeasures, diagnostics. There’s any number of types of innovations. But if you look, like, at the Mpox outbreak, right, which has now become embedded in the Kivus – it’s become embedded in Burundi, in Uganda – it’s a long-term problem. When you talk to folks in the – who are managing that response one question that comes up is, OK, over the long term we need a vaccine that can be used continental wide that’s cheap and affordable and usable. We don’t have that today. We do have a very good JYNNEOS – Ms. Pace: Stand in, yeah. Dr. Morrison: – vaccine, but it doesn’t fit that requirement. We need a level of innovation that’s going to bring that forward. So is it that sort of thing that you – when you’re thinking about accelerating the innovation for the purposes of our global strategy of engagement with our partners in low and middle income countries is that the sort of thing you have in mind is let’s prioritize two or three things that – where we really do want to push hard? Ms. Pace: I think innovation can run the gamut. So you can be referring to products like new vaccines and, of course, there have been endless conversations about what actually deserves or requires investment. I talked about antimicrobial resistance earlier. Speaking of outdated products and the need to innovate in this space, you know, AMR being potentially the next big thing is something that requires that investment and attention, which is why we’ve been making it. But there have been conversations – global conversations – whether they be at WHO or at the G-20 that have asked this very question, right, where do we really make these investments. But what’s exciting about the focus on innovation as well is the ability and even obligation to crowd in other actors to answer this question. This is not just a public sector problem and solution. We have to draw from universities and academia. We need to be drawing from the private sector and industry, and they’re coming forth with these ideas around where we can make these investments and, importantly, making it possible for us to make multiple investments across the board. In other words, we don’t just have to make one bet in one space like in Mpox, which is a good example. But there are other needs, right? Think about the investments we’ve been able to make in the newer dengue vaccine, right, and actually given the outbreaks and increasing outbreaks globally really provide hope and promise in that space. And so it’s – there’s a bit of both/and in this when it comes to kind of where we place those bets. But I want to be sure we’re also talking about, I guess, small I innovation as well, how the workforce – the global health workforce – operates in an environment where you have more climate disasters and conflicts. You know, that in itself is another innovation, right, understanding how we sustain the capacity and also stamina, frankly, of our frontline workers. What are the innovations that can be deployed when it comes to surveillance and testing, for example? How can we even leverage artificial intelligence or some of these larger data models or capacities to innovate in that way, right? So it’s, you know, there are people much smarter than me who are thinking about this every day and that’s one of the reasons why you will see that as a focus in what we’ve put together. Dr. Morrison: Thank you. You mentioned – in your third area around connecting dots and integrating you mentioned health and climate and so I wanted to just touch on that briefly. This is an issue that’s of great concern for us. We’ve created within our Bipartisan Alliance a very ambitious working group around health and climate. We’ve spoken with one of your colleagues, John Balbus, who came on camera earlier. So you’re – this is a nice broadcast companion to hearing from him, who was very impressive and visionary running that new office of climate health and equity at HHS. You mentioned in the report the need for greater support to prepare to the President’s Emergency Plan on Resilience and Equity. Ms. Pace: Adaptation and Resilience. (Laughs.) Dr. Morrison: Adaptation. The President’s Emergency Plan for Adaptation and Resilience. Ms. Pace: Yes. Dr. Morrison: Say a bit more about what has been possible so far. I mean, John was very candid about the limitations but he was very energetic and committed, as you have been. What has been possible in this period up to now and what would you hope for, looking ahead? Ms. Pace: Well, I’m glad you had Dr. Balbus on. He is the best and brightest in this space and has been working tirelessly on this effort. As you mentioned, we have had the – been able to stand up, excuse me, the office of climate change and health equity in the department and, again, recognizing the important intersection of those two pieces. But I would say that we go about this work globally in a couple of different ways. There’s the mitigation track, which John probably talked extensively about, in terms of our decarbonization efforts, let alone the ways that we are trying to work with global partners to forecast what’s coming, right. Unfortunately, we are getting used to some of these weather patterns globally and how they affect quality of life. There are pollution patterns that we can track. There are, obviously, wildfires and huge – Dr. Morrison: Huge migration and demographic changes. Ms. Pace: Exactly. So there’s so much that we can start to get ahead of knowing what’s coming, and our CDC really can do a lot to borrow from partners around the world to inform our work here, right, in this country and vice versa, kind of have that exchange with partners globally based on what we’re doing and learning it inside of the U.S. But then there is an important adaptation component, too, and I talked about workforce a little bit. But I think even when we consider people’s health records what happens when people are fleeing a fire or a flood? What happens to their health information? How can they track their treatment courses and ensure that they are – those are sustained? There are other important components to adaptation as well when we think about the ways we need to just really understand how people are affected by climate disasters and ensure that there is a ready workforce and health infrastructure that can support them in the event of an emergency. So those are the types of ways we’re trying to ensure those pieces are in place. We’ve been able to work with the World Health Organization in there and how this has emerged as well because some of the things that we’re able to do out of the office of global affairs is partner with multilateral institutions in this space. We’ve engaged in the COP conferences the past several years. Obviously, Brazil’s G-20 focused on climate and, you know, you have WHO’s special envoy on climate and health with Dr. Vanessa Kerry. So all of these issues have emerged as priorities across our partners and so it has behooved us as the department of health to meet the moment ourselves and liaise accordingly. Dr. Morrison: Do you – you know, there’s climate as a – climate change as a topic is a polarized, politicized term and so we do run headlong into a very partisan set of divisions within our own society. Language becomes very important in trying to not trigger a negative and immediate negative reaction to get a focus on these issues of what the health impacts are of extreme weather and of rising infectious diseases – dengue and malaria and other things – and what the global demographic changes are looking like, and how do you – what’s your advice on finding the right language to bring a consensus together? Because we’re not going to be able to be effective, I don’t think, in devising a foreign policy around climate and health if we can’t figure out a language that draws both division – both sides of our deeply divided society into support. What are your thoughts on that? I know there’s no easy answer so I’m not pretending that but I would like your thoughts because you’ve had to engage, and we’ve gone through a period where extreme weather has had profoundly destabilizing impacts on populations in red, blue, and purple states in our country. Ms. Pace: Right. (Laughs.) That’s right. Dr. Morrison: Massive numbers of people impacted – Ms. Pace: Right. Dr. Morrison: – in places that they never expected. Asheville, North Carolina never expected they would be at the forefront of this. Ms. Pace: Exactly. And think about the fallout there when it comes to adaptation, right? We needed to be mindful of the supply chain in that very scenario and we’ve seen that play out all over the world. You know, it’s an important question without an easy answer but I think one way we could go about getting past the language and the debate around that language is by focusing more on One Health. I mean, this – you know, honestly, the intersection of climate and health isn’t necessarily a new idea and there are plenty of folks both in the human health and environmental health space that have recognized this intersection for years. Just think about zoonotic spillover, right? (Laughs.) Dr. Morrison: Right. Right. Ms. Pace: We are seeing diseases move between animals and humans. That is a climate and health priority or agenda. That is a One Health agenda, and the more, I think, we can really point to where it’s playing out and, importantly, what that risk entails to either side of that equation the better off we are in trying to at least have a conversation – a constructive conversation about what can be done, and I’ve seen that work, right, when you can really break down for people what the priorities should be given that intersection, given that interplay. It’s worked. You know, we have field epidemiologists now, excuse me, who don’t just focus on kind of the disease detection amongst humans but we are now training our CDC is working with partners to train people in the ag sector to do the same thing amongst animals and to really work together in a meaningful intentional way to stop this spillover where it starts. So that alone is a version of this that we’re talking about. But I think we can take that further to some of these other examples when it comes to extreme weather events and other issues, like you said, that, you know, affect all of us no matter where we’re coming at this issue. Dr. Morrison: Yes. Let’s shift to your diplomatic role. I mean, you’re the lead diplomat from HHS. Many different fora. I want to mention also you have these six attachés around the world. We’ve worked very closely with Erika Elvander in Beijing who has done a spectacular job in the last three and a half, four years in that role. She came in, I think, pretty close in time to that role as your arrival. We hosted the – I think there was – we had the – five of the regional attachés plus Dr. Lim from Geneva here for a forum end of last week and it was quite extraordinary. They were so impactful. They were so strategic in their orientation. They were able to tell these stories around the role they played in these big embassies, really important places, right – South Africa, Kenya, New Delhi, Beijing, Mexico City. Ms. Pace: Mmm hmm. Brasilia. Dr. Morrison: Geneva, Brasilia. I mean, it was very impressive in terms of having a capability that really could recount in specific detail their contribution to advancing our agenda. So kudos to them. I know they fall under your office. They’re an enormous asset, sometimes not very well appreciated either, I think. (Laughter.) So kudos to you. Ms. Pace: Thank you. Dr. Morrison: I just wanted to mention that because it was very – it was really quite inspiring to hear that, to understand the power of this capability, which we did not always have. Ms. Pace: That’s true, and they’re incredible. I mean, it’s – and where they are placed is quite strategic, right? I mean, these are not – these are people who truly partner with the countries where they’re serving. This is not a development sort of top down operation but, rather, when you think about the Mexicos and Brazils or the Indias and the Chinas and other countries you mentioned we are able to have this real partnership because of their advancement in health as well, and whether we’re talking about innovation or immunizations and surveillance and other important components of health these countries are leading the way in their own right and so it behooves us to have this strong tie, and it’s played out in really important ways even in recent years including during COVID. I like to say these attachés were holding up the sky in some cases as Delta was hitting India, right, and these waves were hitting some of these other countries as Omicron was hitting South Africa. So it’s really important to – that we do acknowledge the boots on the ground, the people who are serving as the node for U.S. health initiatives and working, of course, with other U.S. agencies accordingly but are just a critical touch point for us. Dr. Morrison: For us this year, I mean, one of the highlights of our year, 2024, was the ability to host on September 27th the Chinese vice minister of the National Health Commission. Now, there had not been in Washington, D.C., a ministerial level Chinese health official in Washington since 2017. There had been a seven-year gap of that level of contact. Now, we all know what happened, right? We had COVID. We had geopolitical confrontations. We had President Biden and President Xi meet twice and pledge to renew and elevate cooperation on health. But politics kept getting in the way. But we were able to do that. We were able to host the vice minister here at CSIS who then went on to meet with Deputy Secretary Andrea Palm at HHS as well as leadership from four of the National Institutes of Health, also very significant, and to go to the – meet with Victor Dzau at the National Academy of Medicine. Now, I raise all of this because we could never have done this without the help of Erika Elvander, the health attaché in Beijing, and with the support of Ambassador Nick Burns and his whole team. But it took two trips out there. It took endless amounts of consultation. But we are very indebted, very grateful, to the fact that you have these remarkable people in place and that they actually are very responsive and creative in that way. Ms. Pace: That’s good. Dr. Morrison: Tell us about WHO. You know, WHO, you – you’re at the front face of the relationship. It’s a difficult relationship. It may be that when incoming President Trump is inaugurated on January 20th there’s an expectation he may snap back to end the membership, which may start a process of negotiation around reform, a 12-month string in which there could be negotiation. We don’t know. But it’s important for us to be talking now about how healthy is WHO, how important is WHO to U.S. global interests and if there is a quest to strengthen WHO through reform. In your view, what should be the – is it the prequalification process? Is it – what is it that – concretely because these terms get thrown around and WHO is terribly important to U.S. interests. If we walk away we’re handing – we’re ceding a space to our rivals, right – to our adversaries. We’re opening space for heightened influence by both China and Russia. Say a few words about WHO and how you see it today and what would a reform agenda look like. Ms. Pace: Well, I have to say I’ve been really proud of the way we’ve been able to reengage with WHO. It’s critically important and it demonstrates the power of health diplomacy. But health diplomacy or diplomacy overall is not about always going easy on your partners and friends or agreeing, right? Sometimes you have to have tough conversations, and while we’ve applauded a lot of the work that WHO has done we’ve had to have some constructive, productive conversations about how they can improve that work and we’ve done that alongside other member states, importantly, because we’ve remained at the table, and WHO, to their great credit, has been incredibly receptive to it. These are conversations that even stretch back to the previous administration, and so we were happy to continue those discussions, to continue driving that reform agenda and that reform agenda really encompasses quite a bit, right? You think about all of the internal workings of the organization – staffing, budgeting, and the like. You think about the governing practices or the model with the executive board on which I’ve been sitting the past several years and then, obviously, you think about their programmatic agenda and priorities. And so across all of these different areas WHO has been pushing forward to continue to either streamline their work, to look more closely at how those resources are allocated and leveraged, and really look at how – the impact that they have and how that’s communicated. You know, sometimes it’s a matter of us not fully appreciating or understanding why the organization is pursuing what it’s doing, what sort of challenges they’re facing. Sometimes it’s a matter of them just really leaning on the board that much more and the member states more broadly to make tough decisions. You know, they are a member-led organization – Dr. Morrison: Right. Ms. Pace: – and there are 190-plus member states all with different perspectives and priorities. Sometimes it takes a lot of wrangling to ensure that we are doing right by the institution and it doesn’t mean they don’t have a role in making these changes as well but we all have to be a part of that reform effort. So that’s been our approach to our work with WHO and it’s our hope that that is what can continue. Dr. Morrison: So what would you say – what would you identify as the areas where if we want to salvage this relationship and preserve membership what would be the things that, in your view, should be a priority for negotiation? Ms. Pace: Well, I think what we’ve worked with WHO on and what we’ve seen them do, for example, is really – I mean, look, they’ve launched a new global program of work that sets out some clear priorities according to where the needs are globally when it comes to health and well-being. Importantly, they are looking more closely at these social determinants of health, kind of the root causes of issues around health. That way I think while they might have specific programs in a number of disease areas they’re not just playing this game of whack-a-mole trying to save all of these lives from these different conditions or risk, but they can step back and say, well, what is actually driving poor health and well-being globally? What is at the root of this? So that, I think, is going to be important for them to sort of demonstrate that greater return on investment, frankly. You know, the inner workings – the operational pieces – are also quite important. It’s, perhaps, boring to talk about but that is going to be where they can do a lot of convincing to show, hey, we have used this one dollar to do – to save this many lives, to do this many things, and that can be sustained over time. A lot of the work at this point in global health by WHO and a range of other actors is going to need to be structural, right? It’s great when we can provide products and supplies, let alone, you know, providers and other sort of tangible pieces to people all over the world. But it’s more important that WHO, working with partners, can really invest in the capacity of these countries and ensure that countries can take on this work for themselves, which is exactly what they want to do. So the more WHO and its regional offices can demonstrate that evolution and that even independence of partners globally I think that is a winning case that they can make in Washington. Dr. Morrison: Let’s turn to your reflections on the last few years. Let’s start with, like, what are your proudest achievements? Like, what are the two or three proudest – when you’re talking to your grandchildren or your nephews and nieces, you know, and they say, well, what did you actually do on those – in those almost four years? What are going to – what are you going to say? Ms. Pace: You know, I’m proud of the IHRs – the international health regulations – and the way that our team worked so hard with their counterparts around the world to update those, and I will explain to the nieces and nephews and others around me that once upon a time we had a pandemic hit us and we had a plan to fight that pandemic, and we did OK in some ways – we meaning the world, right. There were countries that could use these rules that were in place to tell us what was going on, to protect their people, to protect others. But there were ways that we didn’t quite get it right, and some of that was because we weren’t taking into account the speed of information and the way that moved around the world. We weren’t taking into account the ways that WHO and other actors needed to understand that information, to have access to that information so that they could take actions, right? We weren’t taking into account some of the other core pieces around resources or capacity for countries not only to report what’s happening but then to be supported in that reporting. So those are all the things we were able to do through the amendments to the IHRs was bring them to the present to ensure that if we are affected by something like COVID again we get that much closer to perfect in a way that we – you know, we didn’t quite do this time. But I think it’s important to know that we had a strong base and thank goodness we didn’t have to start from scratch when it came to those amendments. Dr. Morrison: OK. So the IHR reform process. Ms. Pace: Yeah. Dr. Morrison: What are the other items that you’re going to brag about? Ms. Pace: I would say, you know – (laughs) – I’m not good at bragging but I’m thinking about this being Human Rights Day, and something we have done in this administration is really make that connection between health and rights in a way that, again, we’ve seen and heard from our leadership, and in a way that felt surprising, honestly. It was – it seemed that it was a given that we were all here trying to save lives and acknowledging that we would save lives whoever they were, wherever they were. But it started to creep into some of these discussions at WHO and in other forums that, well, wait a minute. You know, do we really want to focus on, for example, LGBTQI+ populations and communities? How much do we need to even sort of gear our work towards these special populations? You and I know that that’s been critical to the health response and health agenda over time but I think there are people who have come into this space who don’t remember that history, who don’t necessarily appreciate the data and evidence around the importance of focusing on these groups. And there was a moment even in the World Health Assembly. I remember speaking up because there was a debate not just over whether we should focus on these communities but whether or not they even existed, and that was heartbreaking to hear because my values and faith tell me that if I can’t see someone I can’t serve them. And so one of my proudest moments is reminding my colleagues that we have to see everyone we are trying to serve. Dr. Morrison: Mmm hmm. Thank you. We’ve done a lot of work on Gaza. We have a series, “Gaza: The Human Toll.” Ms. Pace: Mmm hmm. Yeah. Dr. Morrison: We’ve done 21 one-hour broadcasts. The principal focus is pulling people in from Gaza who are operationally struggling under the worst imaginable circumstances to deal with this humanitarian and health catastrophe that is – you know, that is going to be with us for a very long time. The U.S. policy on this has been very controversial, and will remain very controversial as people sift through what happened and why did this happen in the level of devastation and harm to innocent civilians in this period. One bright spot, it seems to me, in a what otherwise very, very disappointing diplomatic record around in responding to these crises – one bright spot was some work that you did and I want you to talk about that. Ms. Pace: Well, thank you for raising that. Back in ’23 – in the fall of ’23 as things were unfolding in the region the executive board of WHO had a debate and ultimately made a decision to host a special session to discuss what was happening in Gaza in particular and, you know, what happens in these special sessions, I think as you know, is it allows us to shine a light on issues of importance to the health community and it was determined and agreed as part of those discussions leading up to that session that we needed to take a hard look at what the health impact really was as a result of the conflict and this is, you know, citizens or civilians everywhere and anywhere in the region who were being affected. What came of it was the U.S. joined consensus around the need for WHO to continue monitoring that situation, the impact that the conflict was having on health providers and health facilities and, more broadly, on civilians, whether we look at access to food and nutrition, water sanitation, or other very critical aspects that, you know, as you mentioned, have unfolded over, you know, the months – now, you know, more than a year. And so it was important, I think, for us in the health community to set that tone to make it clear that regardless of the very tough geopolitical and diplomatic issues we were going to stand strong and hold the line when it came to health and the importance of focusing on health in whatever space however difficult it is. Dr. Morrison: Well, thank you. You know, the issue of U.S. policy towards Gaza has been, obviously, very divisive across America. It’s been very divisive internally within the U.S. government and we’re going to see a lot of postmortems on this in the coming months and years around all of this and you taking that stand is terribly important. Ms. Pace: Thank you. Dr. Morrison: I just want to say that WHO in this period has been courageous and sustained in its work, from Rik Peeperkorn who’s come on – who’s the head of the operations for WHO in Gaza, to Richard Brennan in Cairo, the head of our emergency operations, to Hanan Balkhy, the head of the EMRO, the regional office in Cairo – we hosted her here, she was very powerful and eloquent. To Dr. Tedros, the secretary general of WHO – the director general of WHO has been consistently on point about what this all means and vocal about all of this, to the polio team, to Hamid Jafari out of Jordan. This has been a terrible and tragic and terribly dangerous and frustrating situation but WHO has just really distinguished itself in this period, and with your support – and I’m grateful that you did what you did – is quite important. Ms. Pace: Thank you. Dr. Morrison: So we’re at the closing moments now and – of this interview and we’re approaching the conclusion of the Biden administration. Tell us what gives you hope and optimism now, looking ahead – what parting advice you have to anyone who is thinking about the future around U.S. leadership in global health. You have laid out a very nice strategy here. You’ve made the case that we’ve covered here around equity, around innovation, around paying attention to the things that now are very much connecting like climate and health. Give us your parting thoughts. Ms. Pace: Well, look, I never imagined that I would be sitting in this chair doing this work, and it’s funny because I, as an advocate, liaise with the office of global affairs all the time and I love that I came to know each of the directors of the office, going back decades, and I’m grateful to them for the – you know, what I was able to step into, I guess. And so my hope even in publishing this strategy now is leaving something for the next person, right, so that they can build on this legacy that we have left over multiple administrations. I think anyone coming into this role or the U.S. government overall I trust that they will focus on the mission and on the people who drive that mission, right. I mean, that’s really what we have, particularly when we talk about health diplomacy. Our currency is our people. You talked about our attachés. We have a whole team of people here in Washington, D.C. We, obviously, have a range of partners abroad, especially when you think about our Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But that’s the work, you know, and the work has been underway in a way that has been making progress over time and I hope that we can all sort of look back and celebrate that progress but, importantly, look forward to know that that progress can be sustained and even elevated in the months and years to come. Thanks a lot for having me. Dr. Morrison: Thank you. Thank you. I want to offer a special thanks to a number of colleagues who pulled all of this together: Sophia Hirshfield and Maclane Speer; my colleagues in the Bipartisan Alliance; our terrific production team – Dhanesh Mahtani, Alex Brunner, Theo Chavez; to your colleagues at OGA who worked very closely with us to make all of this happen. This has been a wonderful conversation. Congratulations on the strategy. Congratulations on your tenure and achievements in this period and thank you for coming and spending time with us today. Ms. Pace: I appreciate it, Steve. Good to see you. Dr. Morrison: Thank you. (END.)Will Democrats Finally Learn A Lesson?
QF’s QSTP engages int’l tech startups in 2nd GIL programmeNPFL queries Akwa United over threat to broadcast partner