April 15, 2015 // 10:00am — 11:30am
Global Europe Program
Why has fact-checking become such an important part of journalism?The discussion will provide insight into how fact-checking is done in practice and why fact-checking politicians, pundits, and policymakers, has recently become a global trend in online journalism.
February 23, 2015 // 2:00pm — 3:00pm
For the first time in his Administration, President Barack Obama has submitted to Congress a formal request for additional authority to use military force. Is his draft Authorization for Use of Military Force against ISIL “alarmingly broad,” as The New York Times worries, or a narrow set of handcuffs? Does it empower the Presidency or create—as Senator John McCain put it—“535 Commanders-in-Chief”? From different angles, many ask: Does the proposed AUMF reflect sound law and sound strategy?
October 07, 2014 // 1:00pm — 3:00pm
As the mid-term elections approach, one of the biggest questions this November will be about the future of the Keystone XL pipeline. On October 7, the Canada Institute convened a panel of experts to discuss the reasons for the KXL pipeline becoming the political football it is today, as well as what the proposed project means for the upcoming elections, the legal underpinnings of the approval process, and where the pipeline will go from here, both in Nebraska and in Washington, D.C.
July 30, 2014 // 10:00am — 12:00pm
Science and Technology Innovation Program
What is data journalism? Why does it matter? How has the maturing field of data science changed the direction of journalism and global investigative reporting?
April 09, 2014 // 4:00pm — 5:30pm
With today's Congress sharply divided along partisan lines, are U.S. lawmakers still capable of reaching across the aisle on foreign policy? This public program will examine the congressional politics of U.S. foreign policy making and the prospects for foreign policy bipartisanship.
August 01, 2013 // 9:00am — 10:30am
Congress has long been criticized for abdicating its war powers' responsibilities to the president. Is this still the case, and if so, why? Does Congress tend to push back more after a war has drug on for a long time and does this reflect the war weariness of the public? These just are some of the questions this panel will explore.
July 11, 2013 // 12:00pm — 1:00pm
The law that authorized U.S. forces to act against terrorists after 9/11 is once again up for debate. The Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) is seen by many as no longer applicable to a conflict that has moved beyond those responsible for 9/11. The enemy and the nature of the conflict have changed: is it time for the U.S. to revise or repeal the AUMF? This National Conversation includes expert commentators who have worked in many of the organizations most closely involved with the issue – Congress, the U.S. military and the CIA.
June 20, 2013 // 1:00pm — 2:30pm
How can we protect our infrastructure, and make it more resilient against the many hazards that are part of the 21st Century? This National Conversation is part of a dialogue between government and the private sector, to help make policy more effective.
May 17, 2013 // 12:00pm — 1:30pm
The founding fathers expected Congress to be the most important branch of government and gave it the most power. When Congress is broken—as its justifiably dismal approval ratings suggest—so is our democracy. Here, Robert G. Kaiser, whose long and distinguished career at The Washington Post has made him as keen and knowledgeable an observer of Congress as we have, takes us behind the sound bites to expose the protocols, players, and politics of the House and Senate—revealing both the triumphs of the system and (more often) its fundamental flaws.
April 25, 2013 // 5:00pm — 6:00pm
The much venerated Senate of the mid-twentieth century is now a distant memory. Today senators routinely electioneer on the Senate floor, play games with the legislative process, and question each other’s motives. Sean M. Theriault documents how one group of senators has been at the forefront of the transformation—the “Gingrich Senators,” which he defines as those Republicans who previously served in the House after New Gingrich was first elected. He shows how the Gingrich Senators are more conservative and more likely to engage in partisan warfare than the other Republicans.