Critical Releases in Homeland Security: August 20, 2014
Every two weeks, the HSDL identifies a brief, targeted collection of recently released documents of particular interest or potential importance. We post the collection on the site and email it to subscribers. Click here to subscribe. (You must have an individual account in order to subscribe.)
5 featured resources updated Aug 20, 2014
-
Asylum Policies for Unaccompanied Children Compared with Expedited Removal Policies for Unauthorized Adults: In Brief [July 30, 2014]
"The sheer number of Central American children coming to the United States who are not accompanied by a parent or legal guardian and who lack proper immigration documents is raising complex and competing sets of humanitarian concerns and immigration control issues. Adults and families from the same three countries--El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras--have also been coming in increasing numbers over the same period. Current law provides that unaccompanied alien children (also referred to as unaccompanied children) are treated differently than adults or children with their parents who come to the United States without proper immigration documents. This report focuses on how unaccompanied alien children are treated in comparison to unauthorized adults and families with children in the specific contexts of asylum and expedited removal. Foreign nationals apprehended along the border or arriving at a U.S. port who lack proper immigration documents or who engage in fraud or misrepresentation are placed in expedited removal; however, if they express a fear of persecution, they receive a 'credible fear' hearing with a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Bureau (USCIS) asylum officer and--if found credible--are referred to an Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) immigration judge for a hearing. To ultimately receive asylum in the United States, foreign nationals must demonstrate a well-founded fear that if returned home, they will be persecuted based upon one of five characteristics: race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Wasem, Ruth Ellen
2014-07-30
-
Cost of Delaying Action to Stem Climate Change
"The signs of climate change are all around us. The average temperature in the United States during the past decade was 0.8° Celsius (1.5° Fahrenheit) warmer than the 1901-1960 average, and the last decade was the warmest on record both in the United States and globally. Global sea levels are currently rising at approximately 1.25 inches per decade, and the rate of increase appears to be accelerating. Climate change is having different impacts across regions within the United States. In the West, heat waves have become more frequent and more intense, while heavy downpours are increasing throughout the lower 48 States and Alaska, especially in the Midwest and Northeast. The scientific consensus is that these changes, and many others, are largely consequences of anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases. The emission of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2) harms others in a way that is not reflected in the price of carbon-based energy, that is, CO2 emissions create a negative externality. Because the price of carbon-based energy does not reflect the full costs, or economic damages, of CO2 emissions, market forces result in a level of CO2 emissions that is too high. Because of this market failure, public policies are needed to reduce CO2 emissions and thereby to limit the damage to economies and the natural world from further climate change. There is a vigorous public debate over whether to act now to stem climate change or instead to delay implementing mitigation policies until a future date. This report examines the economic consequences of delaying implementing such policies and reaches two main conclusions, both of which point to the benefits of implementing mitigation policies now and to the net costs of delaying taking such actions."
United States. Executive Office of the President
2014-07
-
Defense Surplus Equipment Disposal: Background Information [July 22, 2014]
"The Department of Defense (DOD) through a Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) component called DLA Disposition Services [formerly the Defense Utilization and Marketing Service (DRMS)] has a policy for disposing of government equipment and supplies considered surplus or deemed unnecessary, or excess to the agency's currently designated mission. DLA Disposition Services is responsible for property reuse (including resale), precious metal recovery, recycling, hazardous property disposal, and the demilitarization of military equipment. The effort to dispose of surplus military equipment dates back to the end of World War II when the federal government sought to reduce a massive inventory of surplus military equipment by making such equipment available to civilians. (The disposal of surplus real property, including land, buildings, commercial facilities, and equipment situated thereon, is assigned to the General Services Administration, Office of Property Disposal.)"
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Grasso, Valerie Bailey
2014-07-22
-
National Preparedness Report [2014]
"This report marks the third National Preparedness Report. Required annually by 'Presidential Policy Directive 8: National Preparedness,' the 'National Preparedness Report' summarizes progress in building, sustaining, and delivering the 31 core capabilities described in the 'National Preparedness Goal' (the Goal). Each year, the 'National Preparedness Report' presents an opportunity to evaluate gains that whole community partners--including all levels of government, private and nonprofit sectors, faith-based organizations, communities, and individuals-- have made in preparedness and to identify where challenges remain. This year's report focuses primarily on preparedness activities undertaken or reported during 2013. The intent of the 'National Preparedness Report' is to provide the Nation--not just the Federal Government--with practical insights on core capabilities that can inform decisions about program priorities, resource allocation, and community actions. Based on stakeholder feedback, the 2014 report places a renewed emphasis on approachable language, clear visuals, and concise findings that are interesting and useful to preparedness professionals and non- experts alike. While the 'National Preparedness Report' focuses on domestic efforts, the Federal Government also engages with international partners and organizations to understand and collaborate on issues such as cybersecurity, supply chain integrity and security, and infrastructure security and resilience."
United States. Department of Homeland Security
2014-03-30
Previous releases: January 13, 2021 | December 30, 2020 | December 16, 2020 | December 2, 2020 | November 18, 2020 | November 4, 2020 | October 21, 2020 | October 7, 2020 | September 23, 2020 | September 9, 2020 | August 26, 2020 | August 12, 2020 | July 29, 2020 | July 15, 2020 | July 1, 2020 | older ...