SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " policy " 2,575 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Merchants of Doubt and the attacks on Extreme Event Attribution science
Last week, I attended a meeting at Columbia University on attribution science and climate law, hosted by the Sabin Center. It was a fantastic event, bringing together scientists and legal experts working at the intersection of extreme event attribution and climate law. Subscribe For those unfamiliar with it, extreme event attribution attempts to quantify the contribution of climate change to an extreme event. For example, several groups analyzed the impact of climate change on Hurricane Harvey’s enormous rainfall totals over Houston, Texas and they found that climate change increased rainfall by 15 to 38%. One thing that came up again and again was how terrified fossil-fuel interests are of extreme event attribution science. They are acutely aware that this research could land them in court. And losing those cases would leave them legally liable for billions of dollars in climate damages. Because the legal stakes are so high, the blowback has turned ugly. I spoke with several scientists at the meeting who are facing ongoing harassment over their work. This blowback is a coordinated campaign to make the entire field look suspect. The goal is to create the impression that attribution science is too uncertain, too political, or too conflicted to be useful in court or in public policy. The strategy is not based on actual science or evidence of misconduct, but on the generation of doubt. The new Merchants of Doubt We’ve seen this before. In fact, not that long ago: We only have to go back a year to the Department of Energy (DOE) Climate Working Group (CWG) report to see an example of using doubt as the tool to push back against well-established science. This strategy is laid out in an email from a member of the CWG, Dr. Roy Spencer, that was released during litigation over the Climate Working Group process. The key quote is: About all I can hope is that what we write will provide sufficient “reasonable scientific doubt” regarding the science claims in the 2009 TSD [technical support document], based upon almost 2 decades of new science, to call into question the original reasoning for the EPA Administrator’s decision that CO2 presents a threat to human health and welfare. This statement is strong evidence that at least some members of the committee were working to support a particular policy outcome: revoking the Endangerment Finding. The email also explains how they planned to do it: by attempting to generate “reasonable doubt”. This is going to be hard, Spencer implies. Despite falsely claiming that “2 decades of new science” weakens the case, Spencer explicitly acknowledges that the actual peer-reviewed science of climate change overwhelmingly rejects his position: But if the science argument is decided upon by a vote, or by the number of published citations, we lose the science argument. We can go back even further: This CWG email shares unmistakable DNA with the infamous 1969 tobacco memo that declared: “Doubt is our product, since it is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’ that exists in the mind of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy.” The tobacco memo also acknowledges the limit of this strategy: Like the CWG, they knew the science was not on their side. Share The new new Merchants of Doubt The people attacking the IPCC chapter on extreme event attribution are the newest iteration of the Merchants of Doubt. Their goal, like all Merchants before them, is to introduce doubt into the process. Because the report is not even out yet, they cannot attack its conclusions. So they are attacking the authors instead. Here is a press release from the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee: In the letter, the Chairmen express concerns about potential conflicts of interest involving members of the Attribution Committee, stating that “publicly available information suggests a troubling pattern” in which committee members are affiliated with nonprofits that support climate accountability lawsuits, “raising the appearance of impropriety and member bias.” To be clear, this is just innuendo. There is no actual evidence of bias. And given the robust process that these reports go through, including multiple lines of peer review, it seems very unlikely that significant bias can survive into the report. When the report comes out, critics will have the opportunity to make legitimate criticisms of the report — if any exist. If none do, however, they’ll still make criticisms, but they’ll be bogus, simply designed to generate doubt. We’ll see. A note to the press: Fix your frame To any journalists reading this: The public debate over extreme event attribution science is not going away. The science is simply too dangerous to fossil-fuel interests for them to stop fighting it. You very well might be assigned to write an article about this area of research in the future. When you do, do not automatically adopt the framing that climate misinformers want you to use. They want you to frame the story around questions like: Are climate scientists trying to put their thumb on the scale to achieve a predetermined, politically motivated result? Are climate scientists improperly letting their politics invade the science of the IPCC? That frame is a trap. Instead, you need to view this through the historical lens of the Merchants of Doubt. How does the ecosystem of doubt operate? Who funds it? What methods do they use to misrepresent science and slime researchers? What scientific results are they trying to keep people from understanding are legitimate? Ultimately, you instead need to focus your article on the generation of doubt as a way to maintain the fossil fuel industry’s social and legal license to keep burning oil, gas, and coal. If you treat the misinformers’ frame as a legitimate, good-faith scientific critique, you are helping them produce doubt. Don’t do it. Don’t be a Merchant of Doubt. Thanks for reading The Climate Brink! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work. Subscribe other stuff The Staying Curious Substack has an interesting post about the different flavors of climate sensitivity. This is crucial information if you want to understand how scientists think about how much warming the Earth will experience. I’d be grateful if you could hit the like button ❤️ below! It helps more people discover these ideas and lets me know what’s connecting with readers.
FSU researcher receives NASA grant to map extreme heat and protect public health
A collaborative, interdisciplinary team with researchers from Florida State University’s College of Social Sciences and Public Policy has received an
FSU researcher receives NASA grant to map extreme heat and protect public health
A collaborative, interdisciplinary team with researchers from Florida State University’s College of Social Sciences and Public Policy has received an
2026 Governors’ Health and Human Services Policy Advisors Institute
Health and human services policy advisors from states and territories across the country gathered in New Orleans for NGA’s annual HHS Policy Advisors Institute. Over one and a half days, advisors shared priorities, surfaced common challenges, and learned from peers on topics ranging from healthcare affordability to child welfare, SNAP administration, and the use of […]
How States with Health Care Cost Growth Targets Are Using Their Data to Develop Bold New Policy Approaches to Constrain Spending
News article: In a new Health Affairs Forefront article, Michael Bailit, January Angeles, and Rachel Block show how states with health care cost growth targets have
Takeaways From JD Vance’s New Book ‘Communion,’ on Faith and His Political Ambitions
In a new memoir, Mr. Vance recalls an “unsettling” meeting with Vatican officials on immigration policy and disavows his infamous disparagement of some Democrats as “childless cat ladies.”
RFK Jr. stops in Charlotte to talk health policy
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is in Charlotte to discuss health policies.
Gross Medicaid Prescription Drug Spending
State level data on Gross Medicaid Prescription Drug Spending from KFF, the leading health policy organization in the U.S.
Toward a uniform business tax system: Examining proposals to tax large pass-through entities as corporations
In a new paper for the Hamilton Project, we examine an approach that many policymakers have offered to reform pass-through taxation: requiring large or complex pass-through entities to pay federal income tax at the entity level, as corporations do.
Coral reefs are not doomed – but policy must catch up with the science
A new study shows some reefs still have a meaningful chance to survive and recover from climate impacts – provided they are protected
Making Sure Open Science Stays Open
Digital research infrastructure is essential to open science, but it is often overlooked and vulnerable to policy changes and funding cuts.
Long-Awaited Rule Aims To Boost ACA Choices While Embracing Higher Deductibles
By Julie Appleby and KFF Health News HealthDay ReportersTUESDAY, June 16, 2026 (HealthDay News) — The Affordable Care Act (ACA) seems to always be in a policy tug-of-war as its backers and critics spar over how it should work and who can qualify for coverage. This year is no different, with the ...
Michael M. Crow explains why scientists need to learn how to talk about their research
Michael M. Crow is an American academic leader and science and technology policy scholar who has served as president of Arizona State University (ASU) since 2002. How would you describe the current s...
CSUMB launches public health degree
What has been a concentration in the collaborative health and human services program is now its own major.
MLB issues warning to Giants pitchers for writing Bible verses on Pride caps
Major League Baseball issued a warning to three Giants pitchers who wrote Bible verses on the team's "Pride Night" caps, citing policy violations.
OPCW and UNODA partner to bridge gap between scientists and policymakers
Scientists learn how to apply policy and diplomacy at OPCW-UNODA workshop on chemical and biological disarmament
Social media platforms spread hate music in India despite policy violations, new report says
The report, “Profiting From Hate Music,” documents what researchers describe as the first comprehensive mapping of hate music across India's digital landscape.
PENN Entertainment Turns to Lobbying Firm for Sports Gambling
PENN Entertainment files lobbying registration with Ballard Partners to influence federal gaming policy. Learn how the casino operator is protecting its...
Health Insurance Coverage of Adults Ages 19 or Older, Multiple Sources of Coverage
State level data on Health Insurance Coverage of Adults Ages 19 or Older, Multiple Sources of Coverage from KFF, the leading health policy organization in the U.S.
Health Insurance Coverage of Adults Ages 19 or Older
State level data on Health Insurance Coverage of Adults Ages 19 or Older from KFF, the leading health policy organization in the U.S.
NFL says no discipline for Stefon Diggs under its personal conduct policy
Diggs, who was found not guilty last month of assaulting his personal chef, is unsigned after being released from the Patriots.
Political scientist Daniel Smith recognized for scholarly contributions
Dan Smith, UF faculty member since 2003, has received the 2026 Career Achievement Award from the State Politics and Policy Section o the American Political Science Association.
Yankees news: Paul Goldschmidt has been worth every dime
An insurance policy worth weight in gold; how Jasson managed a chaotic return; Boone amped about Knicks
One California politician’s unexpected crusade against ultra-processed food
Jesse Gabriel "has passed more food policy in three years than most legislators enact in their entire careers," says one supporter.
From PCOS to PMOS: New name reflects women’s metabolic health
Global multidisciplinary health professionals and organizations have updated the name polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) to polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome (PMOS), arguing that the former is “inaccurate.” They critique that the old name implied greater focus on pathological ovarian cysts, contributing to slower diagnosis, stigma, and limited research and policy framing for the 170 million women living with the condition.
The End of Climate Politics
As the West debated a green energy future, Beijing was building it.
HealthCare CEO named to new position with CT’s top health care advocacy group
As chairman, he will lead the association’s principal policy-making body, which is responsible for guiding advocacy, policy priorities and strategy.
Why businesses are concerned about Allegheny County's proposed paid leave policy
Meredith Boyle is one of hundreds of small business owners concerned about how to cover the costs of paid parental leave if Allegheny County eventually...
Donald Trump's legacy rests in the hands of federal courts
From immigration policy to elections and more, courts are poised to decide what President Donald Trump can accomplish in office.
Mizuho Raises CVS Health (CVS) Price Target on More Stable Policy Environment
With an annual dividend yield of 2.65%, CVS Health Corporation (NYSE:CVS) is included among the 12 High Yield Fortune 500 Stocks to Buy Now. America’s leading health solutions company, CVS Health Corporation (NYSE:CVS), provides advanced health care from pharmacy services and health plans to health and wellness. On June 8, Mizuho upped its price target on […]
Angst at the Supreme Court before a rush of decisions
Late spring means the Supreme Court is preparing to unleash decisions. Justices have already had a remarkable term. They invalidated much of President Donald Trump’s tariff policy, but also gutted the Voting Rights Act and gave Republicans an advantage in the redistricting war Trump started.
Colorado Politics Calendar June 15-21
CoPo’s weekly political calendar helps you find political and public policy events throughout Colorado. It includes candidate and issue campaign events, public policy meetings, court hearings, state and local party conventions, assemblies, debates, rallies, parades, speaking engagements, traveling dignitary appearances, water meetings, book signings, county commission hearings, city council meetings and more. As a subscriber, […]
How Sergio Gor Is Transforming the Role of U.S. Ambassador in the Trump Era
From his post in New Delhi, Mr. Gor has become a force in U.S. foreign policy, chasing business deals and stunning diplomats by reversing a long-planned embassy building project.
Prolific food and business reporter Katie Taranto leaving ARLnow after two years
After two years of connecting with local businesses, exploring Arlington's wide-ranging food scene and satisfying residents' questions and curiosity, reporter Katie Taranto is leaving ARLnow. Taranto, who is departing to cover federal climate policy at the trade publication Inside EPA, wrote prolifically about the arrival and departure of countless restaurants and retailers in Arlington, while
Does Jeff Bezos benefit from a NH Business Enterprise Tax cut? - THE JOSIAH BARTLETT CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY
New Hampshire’s unique state tax structure is hard to understand, especially for people who don’t own a business. More than a third (36%) of the state General Fund and Education Trust Fund revenue comes from business taxes. The vast majority of that comes from the Business Profits Tax (BPT), but the lesser-known Business Enterprise Tax […]
Political scientist Daniel Smith recognized for scholarly contributions
The award recognizes a political scientist who has made “a significant lifetime contribution to the study of politics and policy in the American states.”
Bipartisan Policy Center to Host Webinar on Rural Health Transformation Program
The Bipartisan Policy Center will host a webinar June 30 from 11 a.m. to noon EDT on how states are leveraging funding through the Rural Health Transformation Program (RHTP) to strengthen rural healthcare delivery through technology and workforce investments.
Behavioral Health Screening Legislation Advances
The House Health Policy Committee advanced legislation addressing preadmission screening assessments for behavioral health patients, as other healthcare bills advanced in the legislature during the week of June 8.
Pro-economic growth policy back in business following primaries, some say
Some in the Republican party are feeling positive about returns from the June 2 primary when it comes to legislative races. Results could indicate a shift in policy and legislative leadership.
Combining the general and the specific for urban science and policy
As the world's population becomes more and more urban, cities are emerging as key components of the Anthropocene—both as major contributors to climate change and as potential trendsetters for innovation ...
Combing the general and the specific for urban science and policy
New study highlights the need to connect research into the uniqueness of cities with research on their similarities
From Soil Health to Business Resilience: Key Takeaways from the World Living Soils Forum 2026
The World Living Soils Forum 2026, held in Arles on 3–4 June, brought together business leaders, financial institutions, policymakers, scientists and agricul...
NFIB Members Bring Small Business Agenda Directly to Washington Policymakers
Small business owners met with Administration and Congressional leaders during 2026 NFIB Fly-In
'Flip flop': Democrat firefighter in tight House race blasts popular Trump policy his national union supports
Democrat Bob Brooks criticized Trump's overtime tax break on a podcast despite his national firefighters union's support, prompting GOP flip flop accusations.
Lovelace Health System cuts 43 employees amid 'challenging policy environment'
Lovelace Health System confirmed they cut around 43 people from its workforce, citing rising costs and a "challenging policy environment."
‘Bad policy and even worse politics’: DeSantis spurns potential White House AI preemption
The Trump administration’s longstanding opposition to state AI laws ultimately killed legislation in Florida, and now Gov. Ron DeSantis fears policies in other states could fall by the wayside.
To fight child hunger, coordinate food, health and climate policy
A new Cornell-led report shows protecting nutrition now depends on integrating food and health systems as climate shocks strain both at once.
Today on ARC PDX | June 11, 2026 | Diving into how politics and policy shape the World Cup
ARC PDX AM digs into World Cup politics and global tensions, from Iran conflict to US immigration policy. Plus, Portland council debates turning the River District Navigation Center from 24-hour to overnight-only.
Survey shows growing challenge of running a business in Maine
Nearly half of Maine businesses surveyed by the Maine State Chamber of Commerce cite workforce challenges and policy uncertainty as barriers to growth .
When policy impedes healthcare, what are the solutions?
Yes, there’s money on the way from the federal government. But communities and healthcare systems are also taking things into their own hands.
From Illinois politics to entrepreneur museum: A founder’s $400 million bet
John Tillman, who founded the libertarian think tank Illinois Policy Institute in 2002, is trying to raise $400 million to build a national museum for entrepreneurs called Hall of Giants
Social Security is Facing a Political Crisis
On Tuesday the Social Security Trustees released their latest report on the system’s finances. The numbers didn’t change much: Unless something is done, the Old Age Survivors and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program, Social Security’s official name, will be unable to pay full benefits starting in either 2032 or 2034, depending on some technical issues. That’s not far away: If the Trustees are right, the prospect of a Social Security crisis will loom over the next presidential administration. It’s important to understand, however, the nature of the looming crisis. It won’t be an economic crisis. It won’t even be a serious fiscal crisis. Whatever you may have heard, Social Security isn’t in danger of going bankrupt. What we’re facing, instead, is potential political crisis. Congress and the White House could easily take action to sustain America’s retirement system. But given the current state of our politics, there’s no guarantee that they will. There is a widespread misunderstanding of how Social Security works. While Social Security was designed to look like a pension fund, it isn’t. A pension fund pays benefits out of a stock of assets it has accumulated over time. In contrast, Social Security operates as a government transfer program, like food stamps or Medicaid. Now, unlike food stamps — but like the highway trust fund — Social Security is on paper supported by a dedicated tax, the payroll tax, that is assigned to that program. But I say “on paper” because from an economic point of view assigning the payroll tax to Social Security is just an accounting convention. What matters for the U.S. economy is the overall balance between government spending and government revenue, not the difference between one type of spending and one source of revenue. So there’s no inherent economic significance to the fact that by 2034 payroll tax receipts will be insufficient to cover promised benefits. There is, however, a legislative issue. As long as the Social Security Administration can pay benefits out of payroll taxes and its cash reserve, there’s no need for Congress to vote each year to authorize benefits — they just keep going out until further notice. However, once those resources become insufficient, benefits will fall —by 17 percent according to the Trustees — unless Congress passes new legislation that “tops up” Social Security’s finances. Yet the current administration and Republican party are such extremists that there is a real risk that Social Security will be held hostage on behalf of their goals. If this should come to pass, the hostage-takers will claim that shoring up Social Security is unaffordable. Right on cue, Mike Johnson, the Trump-sycophant Speaker of the House, declared on Monday that “entitlement programs” like Social Security “have to be adjusted and fixed,” and that Republicans will introduce a plan to that effect next year. But this is a ploy, because while the cost of maintaining Social Security benefits at their promised level isn’t trivial, it is in fact affordable. According to the Trustees’ report, the actuarial balance of OASDI up through 2050 — the amount of additional funds it would need to keep paying full benefits for the next 25 years — is 1.06 percent of GDP. To put that number in perspective, the Trump administration proposes increasing military spending next year by $420 billion, equivalent to about 1.4 percent of GDP – without any discussion of whether that’s affordable Yet how did we get to the point where Social Security will need to be topped up? The main answer is that we have an aging population, with a growing ratio of retirees collecting benefits to workers paying into the system: Trump’s anti-immigration policies are making this problem worse. According to the Trustees’ report, lower immigration will deepen Social Security’s financial hole because many immigrants are working-age adults who will pay into the system for decades before they collect benefits. In fact, this problem may be much bigger than the report acknowledges: The report’s baseline assumption is that we’ll have net immigration of almost 1.2 million people a year, and even the pessimistic case assumes 750,000 a year. Meanwhile actual net immigration has already been cut far below that — and may now be negative. Moreover, Social Security is being financially damaged by growing income inequality in America. Payroll taxes are levied only on wages up to $184,500, and they don’t touch capital income. With the distribution of income increasingly shifting from labor to capital, as well as becoming more unequal among wage-earners, revenue from the Social Security payroll tax has been falling as a share of national income. From 1990 to 2024, it fell from 5.02 percent of gross domestic income to 4.46 percent. Which brings me to the question that, these days, we ask about everything: How might Social Security be affected by the advent of AI? A short answer: If, as many of us fear, AI accelerates rising income inequality, it will further reduce the payroll tax receipts that currently pay for Social Security and further endanger its finances. On the other hand, if AI, as its advocates promise, leads to faster economic growth, it will increase the potential tax base that could and should be used to support Social Security and other social insurance programs. But to take advantage of that larger base, we’ll have to get serious about taxing wealth and capital income. Is Social Security in trouble? Yes, but only because of the way its financing is currently structured — a structure that no longer works well because our society and economy have become so unequal. Moreover, Trump’s immigration policies are further endangering its already deteriorating financial condition. So don’t believe Republicans’ gaslighting that it will be necessary to cut Social Security benefits. All that is necessary to preserve Social Security is political will to raise taxes on the wealthy and a sensible immigration policy. MUSICAL CODA Actually 67 under current law.
Op-ed: City Council small business hearing was political theater
Instead of addressing the city’s well-documented small business challenges, the Council chose to stage a spectacle about federal lending policy it cannot change.
Mental health providers warn BCBSM billing changes could disrupt care for hundreds
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan is making changes to it’s “incident-to” billing policy, leading to growing concern among mental health care workers about acc
The Health and Wellbeing of Formerly Incarcerated People in Connecticut: Insights from the DataHaven Community Wellbeing Survey
By Carter Shannon, Nat Markey, Nora Hodgson, Samantha Lydell, Andrew Carr, and Mark Abraham, DataHaven About this Report Approximately 1 in 5 men aged 18–64 in Connecticut have experienced incarceration at some point in their lives. This population includes people who have been held in a local jail for a single night and those who have served lengthy prison sentences, and it cuts across race, age, geography, and socioeconomic background in ways that reflect broader structural inequities in the criminal legal system. Yet across nearly every indicator of wellbeing, formerly incarcerated people in Connecticut face significant disparities compared to those without an incarceration history. This report explores data on the experiences of formerly incarcerated men in Connecticut from the DataHaven Community Wellbeing Survey (DCWS). The DCWS illuminates significant gaps in economic wellbeing, physical health, mental health, and social support between men with and without incarceration histories in Connecticut. The survey also reveals worse self-reported outcomes for formerly incarcerated people across a range of quality-of-life indicators, with disparities that are often most severe among those who have been incarcerated more than once. These disparities do not arise by chance. They are shaped by a policy landscape that erects lasting barriers to housing, employment, and healthcare for people leaving incarceration, as well as by the physical and psychological toll of incarceration itself. This report is being written in the political context of federal funding cuts to social programs and proposed rollbacks to Medicaid eligibility, changes that will disproportionately impact people with incarceration histories, who are more likely to rely on public health coverage and other safety net supports.
The UN’s AI Panel Could Shape Global Governance. Can It Balance Science and Politics?
The United Nations’ new Scientific Panel on AI could give governments a shared evidentiary basis for policymaking—but only if it can balance independence, expertise, and political legitimacy.
The UN’s AI Panel Could Shape Global Governance. Can It Balance Science and Politics?
The United Nations’ new Scientific Panel on AI could give governments a shared evidentiary basis for policymaking—but only if it can balance independence, expertise, and political legitimacy.
Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo proposing mental health leave policy for all county employees
In 2023, Hidalgo took a two-month leave of absence from her role as the county's top elected official to receive treatment for clinical depression at an inpatient care facility outside of Texas.
How foreign policy values and issues cut across the political typology groups
The 2026 Pew Research Center political typology reveals a rich portrait of how Americans view the nation’s place in the world, the strength and use of its power, its relationships with other nations and many current foreign policy hotspots. While some foreign policy dynamics in the typology track traditional ideological and partisan divides, that is […]
From The Daily: For a different kind of politics, vote El-Sayed on August 4
From a policy standpoint, El-Sayed’s broad, sweeping vision is best for all Michiganders. He is the only candidate who is running to pass Medicare for All, and his public health background equips him with the necessary experience and vision to improve the U.S. healthcare system.
Business Restructuring Review Vol. 25 No. 3 May-June 2026
In This Issue Texas Bankruptcy Court Adopts Barnet Rule Requiring Foreign Debtor to Have U.S. Assets to Be Eligible for Chapter 15 Relief In In re Siu-Fung Ceramics Holdings Limited, No. 24-33299, 2026 WL 382424 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Feb. 10, 2026), the court denied petitions for chapter 15 recognition of Hong Kong bankruptcy and liquidation proceedings commenced on behalf of an individual debtor and a group of companies that he owned or controlled. According to the court: (i) the corporate debtors' Hong Kong liquidation proceeding was not eligible for chapter 15 recognition because the attorney retainer upon which such relief was based was not funded until nine months after the chapter 15 petition date; and (ii) the individual debtor's Hong Kong bankruptcy case could not be recognized because the debtor's "center of main interests" on the chapter 15 petition date was not in Hong Kong, and he did not even maintain an "establishment" there. [read more …] Southern District of Texas Clarifies Post-Purdue Course for Consensual Third-Party Releases and Gatekeeping Provisions In In re Container Store Group, Inc., 676 B.R. 356 (S.D. Tex. 2026), appeal filed, No. 26-20166 (5th Cir. Apr. 14, 2026), cross appeal filed, No. 26-20166 (5th Cir. Apr. 24, 2026), the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas addressed consensual third-party releases and gatekeeping provisions in the aftermath of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P., 603 U.S. 204 (2024). Consistent with existing Fifth Circuit precedent, the court confirmed that, in appropriate circumstances, consent for third-party releases may be obtained through a creditor's failure to opt out of granting that consent. But, the court ruled, consent through an opt-out mechanism essentially can never be inferred for creditor classes that stand to receive no recovery under a chapter 11 plan and that are deemed to reject the plan by operation of applicable bankruptcy law. Instead, those classes must affirmatively opt in to any release. The court also narrowed and remanded the bankruptcy court's acceptance of a broad gatekeeping provision, ruling that such provisions must correspond to the restrictions established by Fifth Circuit precedent. [read more …] Delaware Bankruptcy Court: Initial Transferee Need Not Be Defendant in Fraudulent Transfer Avoidance and Recovery Litigation The Bankruptcy Code gives a bankruptcy trustee the power to avoid asset transfers that are either made with the intent to defraud creditors or that are "constructively" fraudulent because an insolvent debtor did not receive adequate value in exchange. The Bankruptcy Code also permits recovery of an avoided transfer from not only the initial recipient, but also from subsequent transferees. Courts disagree over whether a transfer must actually be avoided before the trustee can seek recovery from a subsequent transferee and whether the initial transferee must also be a defendant in the recovery litigation against a subsequent transferee. The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware weighed in on this debate in Phillips v. SS Associates LLC (In re ONH AFC CS Investors, LLC), No. 23-10931 (CTG), 2026 WL 312892 (Bankr. D. Del. Feb. 4, 2026). The court adopted the majority view, ruling that the initial transferee need not be a defendant in avoidance and recovery litigation against a subsequent transferee, but that the trustee must establish the elements necessary to avoid the initial transfer as part of the recovery litigation. [read more …] New York Bankruptcy Court Weighs In on Adequate Assurance of Future Performance under Assigned Leases and Chapter 11 Plan Exculpation Provisions In order to assume and assign an executory contract or unexpired lease, a bankruptcy trustee must cure most defaults under the agreement and provide "adequate assurance" of the assignee's future performance. However, the Bankruptcy Code provides no guidance as to the meaning of "adequate assurance" other than with respect to shopping center leases. In In re Broadway Realty I Co. LLC, No. 25-11050, 2026 WL 147505 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 2026), the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York examined this issue in connection with a proposed assignment of thousands of residential leases as part of a free-and-clear sale of debtors' properties. The court held that "adequate assurance" does not mean a guarantee of the assignee's future performance, but merely demonstration that the assignee has the ability to satisfy the underlying obligations. The bankruptcy court also ruled that an exculpation provision in the debtors' chapter 11 plan exonerating non-estate fiduciaries from liability for actions taken in connection with the chapter 11 case was unobjectionable, provided it was limited in scope to postpetition conduct and actions taken in connection with implementation of the plan after its effective date. [read more …] Newsworthy Corinne Ball (New York) (Hall of Fame), Bruce Bennett (Los Angeles), Carl E. Black (Cleveland), Jeffrey B. Ellman (Atlanta), Brad B. Erens (Chicago), Gregory M. Gordon (Dallas), Heather Lennox (Cleveland/New York), Joshua M. Mester (Los Angeles), and Kevyn D. Orr (Washington) were included in the 2026 edition of Lawdragon 500 Leading Bankruptcy and Restructuring Lawyers. The Daily Business Review selected Isel M. Perez (Miami) as an "On the Rise" winner for the Florida Legal Awards. The Florida Legal Awards annually recognize those who have made significant contributions to the legal industry in Florida. Dan T. Moss (Washington/New York) was inducted as a Fellow in the 37th Class of the American College of Bankruptcy at its Annual Meeting in March 2026 in San Antonio, Texas. Christine Borries (Munich) was ranked in the practice area Restructuring/Insolvency in the 2026 edition of Chambers Germany. The 2027 edition of The Best Lawyers in Singapore™ recognized Sushma Jobanputra (Singapore) in the practice area Insolvency & Reorganization. The restructuring transaction involving Eissmann Automotive North America, Inc. received the "2025 Turnaround of the Year (Large Company)" at the Turnaround Management Association (Detroit) Annual Awards Reception. T. Daniel Reynolds (Cleveland) and Nick Buchta (Cleveland) represented subsidiaries of Eissmann Group Automotive in connection with the parent company's German insolvency proceedings. Roger Dobson (Sydney) is among 40 Jones Day lawyers recognized by The Best Lawyers in Australia 2027 for his contributions in Banking and Finance Law; Distressed Investing & Debt Trading; Insolvency and Reorganization Law; Litigation. An article written by Corinne Ball (New York) titled "Ard Finance—A Global Enterprise Combining an LME With a Foreign Insolvency Proceeding and Chapter 15" was published in the April 21, 2026, edition of the New York Law Journal. An article written by Alex Sapp (New York) titled "Recent Developments in Section 510—Subordination" was published in the 2025 edition of the Norton Annual Survey on Bankruptcy Law. An article written by Brad B. Erens (Chicago) titled "New York Bankruptcy Court Approves Insider DIP Litigation Financing" was published on April 6, 2026, by Lexis Practical Guidance. An article written by Corinne Ball (New York), Dan T. Moss (Washington/New York), David S. Torborg (Washington), and Isel M. Perez (Miami) titled "New York District Court Affirms Narrow Scope of 'Public Policy Exception' in Chapter 15 Cases" was published on April 6, 2026, by Lexis Practical Guidance. An article written by Jeffrey B. Ellman (Atlanta) titled "Statutory Cap on Lease Rejection Damage Claims in Bankruptcy Applies to Solvent Debtors" was published on April 6, 2026, by Lexis Practical Guidance. An article written by Trisha L. Mowbray (Real Estate; Chicago) and Ryan Sims (Washington) titled "Chapter 11 Plan that Abridged Non-Debtor Lessee's Rights to Remain in Possession After Rejection Unconfirmable as Having Been Proposed in Bad Faith" was published on April 6, 2026, by Lexis Practical Guidance. Lawyer Spotlight: Ben Rosenblum Ben Rosenblum, a partner in the New York Office, represents debtors, creditors, and other parties in out-of-court restructurings and court-supervised proceedings, including chapter 11 cases, municipal bankruptcies, international insolvency matters, and stockbroker liquidations. His experience spans industries such as manufacturing, shipping, mining, aviation, energy, real estate, and telecommunications. Ben's notable debtor representations include Peabody Energy, the City of Detroit, Chrysler LLC, Spansion Japan, and Dana Corporation. Significant creditor representations include General Maritime Corporation, Calpine Corporation, American Home Mortgage, and Murray Energy. He currently represents creditors in Puerto Rico's restructuring. He also has extensive experience advising financial institutions on bankruptcy law as applied to derivatives.
The Ebola story: how risk becomes politics
Ebola coverage shows how outbreak narratives shape fear, public health policy and trust, often faster than the virus spreads.
New OMB rule could break science in the United States
The drug that saved your mother. The treatment your doctor recommended. The clinical trial that bought someone you love more time. None of it was inevitable. It required a system built to operate outside politics and sustained over decades, because science doesn’t operate on the timeline of a politician. That system is now under direct threat. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has proposed a new rule to regulate all federal grants, not just science, but housing, education, defense, NASA and everything in between, that would fundamentally change how research is conducted in the United States. There have been a lot of fires in the past 16 months, and if everything is an emergency, nothing is an emergency. But this is a very big deal. These rules would strip away the independence that has kept science from becoming a political tool. The good news is there’s still something we can all do. How the grant system was designed to work When I was a new faculty member, I was full of millions of ideas, so I sat down and wrote an NIH proposal. I worked on it for months and thought it was so good. Then I sent it to my mentor. It came back covered in comments. Places where my reasoning wasn’t as airtight as I’d thought, methods that could be stronger, gaps in my thinking that I had been too close to the work to see. It stung, as honest feedback always does, but peer review almost always makes the work better. In fact, it’s the backbone of how American science has functioned for generations. At NIH, submitted proposals go to a panel of scientists who have experience in the field. These are the people who can read research methods and spot their weaknesses, who understand when an experiment is designed well and when it isn’t. Applications are scored rigorously, and often only the top 3-20% of proposals receive funding. The people making funding decisions are required to justify them based on these reviews. To be clear: this is not a perfect system, and good science still goes unfunded more often than any of us would like due to limited resources. There is also criticism that peer review may undervalue bold ideas that are risky but could have high payoffs. But the peer review system is nonetheless a meaningful part of the grant selection process. While thoughtful and careful changes could improve the system, the changes being proposed by OMB will not make things better. The rule that could change everything Through this OMB proposal, the system that helps decide what gets funded is being dismantled. There are many troubling elements buried in this proposal, but three provisions stand out in particular. Each would be damaging alone. Together, they would change what kind of science gets done in America, and who it serves. 1. Political appointees would decide which science gets funded, and peer review would be explicitly sidelined or ignored. The guidelines your doctor follows, the standards that determine what’s in your air and water, the drugs that get approved for your family: all of it starts with a funding decision. Right now, that decision is made by scientists who can evaluate whether the work is actually sound and whether it could move the needle forward. Under this proposal, funding decisions could be made by political appointees. The careful, expertise-driven review process that shapes grant funding would be effectively sidelined. That means that a poorly designed study could get funded simply because someone in a political office liked the sound of it, while rigorous, important work doesn’t get funded because it no longer aligns with the administration’s priorities. In other words, critical work that benefits all of us could now be missed just because it has become politically inconvenient. 2. Grants could be canceled at any point, without warning, in the middle of ongoing work. Say your tax dollars have been paying for a cancer study for two years. The grant was awarded for five years, so the team is mid-experiment. There are three additional years’ worth of answers that could change how the disease is treated for hundreds of thousands of people. With this new rule, the federal government could cancel the remaining funding tomorrow, walk away from the commitment it made with your money, and have no legal obligation to finish what it started. This is a huge waste of money. There are rarely other sources of funding for this work, which means the team, the graduate students, postdocs, and research staff who have dedicated years of their careers to this project could lose their jobs. Patients who have contributed their time to studies may not see it turn into useful learnings for others. Every hour of work already completed could result in nothing useful. Science can take decades to get to tangible outcomes. It needs a stable funding system to flourish. 3. Researchers would have a harder time communicating their findings without pre-approval from the federal government. There is a saying from Sir Mark Walport: “Science isn’t finished until it’s communicated.” Science is no use to anyone if it is kept locked away in the labs that produced the data. The proposed rule could make communicating research findings harder in a number of ways: Make it harder for scientists to widely share their findings in scientific journals. Publication costs, including journal fees that allow for broad public access, could not be paid for by federal funds which is often how scientists pay these costs. Restrict researchers from engaging publicly about how their findings should inform policy or public health guidelines. This would restrict scientists from doing the work that transforms years of lab work into decisions that actually affect people’s lives. Make it harder for scientists to attend conferences. Conferences would now need to be approved by the federal agency at the time of grant award. This disadvantages conferences or publications that are not politically aligned. Conferences are a key way in which scientists learn about work happening in their field so they can collaborate and build on each other’s findings. What good is science with a muzzle? The long-term impact These changes could (and hopefully would) be reversed under the next administration. But by then, damage has been done. Once projects are halted or denied funding by political appointees, people leave their science careers for other paths or even leave the country to do their amazing science elsewhere. You cannot pause a scientific study the way you pause a subscription you decided isn’t useful anymore. You cannot freeze a research team that depends on salaries to feed their families, causing a scramble for replacement funding that, in most cases, simply does not exist. When the money stops, everything stops, and all the work in progress and its potential are lost. Despite all of the language about reducing waste, fraud, and abuse, this new proposed rule increases the administrative burden tremendously. Every researcher watching this unfold will make a rational decision: don’t start anything that will take a decade to finish. This includes not building a team around funding that could vanish, or asking the big questions that need patience and stability to answer. The most consequential science, the kind that produces the treatments and the breakthroughs that reach your doctor’s office twenty years from now, is exactly the science that would be abandoned first. This is still a proposal, so we can all do something Some worry this rule is already a done deal. But by law, OMB is required to open a public comment period. Those comments matter because they inform members of Congress, they can be used in litigation, and they create a public record. So here’s what you can do: Submit a public comment. The public comment period on this proposed change is open until July 13. Anyone can submit a comment, and OMB is required to respond to substantial ones. Each comment must be different to count as distinct; identical comments will be counted only once. Comment as an individual, not on behalf of your organization. Here’s a full resource to help you, with useful examples, but in general: Share a story about how science or federal funding has benefitted you or is involved in your work. Are you or someone you loved a cancer survivor? Do you know someone with Alzheimer’s? Have you received NIH/NSF or other federal funding? All of these can be stories you use to highlight why you care. Explain why you’re worried about these proposed changes. You can use the wording found here or in other resources to help you. Ask them to withdraw this proposed rule. Contact your elected representatives. Congress allocates money to federal agencies to spend, and it has oversight of how that process works. You can let your representatives know this proposed change concerns you and ask them to intervene. There are levers they can push that can help at this moment. Let others know why federal funding matters. This isn’t just about science, but ALL federal grants, including for education systems, defense projects, and more. The process, including the importance of federal funding, is invisible to many. We can all make it more visible by sharing how science benefits us and why we value it. You can also share this article, or any of the resources linked here, to help spread awareness! Bottom line We are quickly losing ground in scientific research in the U.S. More changes, like the proposed rule by OMB, would decimate our ability to conduct research here, leaving us all worse off: fewer treatments for pancreatic cancer, less research on pollution impacts, fewer answers for patients with rare disease, and more unaddressed health needs. The impact will be very real for all of us, regardless of where we stand politically. Using our voices for science is more important than ever. Love, LM Big thanks to Dr. Megan Ranney for reading this over and providing brilliant insights, as always. Dr. Liz Marnik, PhD, is Executive Director of The Evidence Collective at YLE and a science communicator and immunologist working at the intersection of public trust, science, and public health. You can find her on Substack, LinkedIn, Instagram and Threads. Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE) comprises a team of experts, ranging from physicians to immunologists to epidemiologists to nutritionists, working together with one goal: to “Translate” ever-evolving public health science so that people are well-equipped to make evidence-based decisions. The YLE suite of newsletters reaches over 475,000 people across more than 132 countries. This newsletter is free to everyone, thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE community members. To support the effort, subscribe or upgrade below: Subscribe
Policy and politics are hitting CT families with rising summer costs
If you wanna get away this summer, the economic cost of a far-away war in Iran might affect your ability to spend here at home.
NUTRITION 2026: The leading source for the latest science
When it comes to nutrition, strong science is essential to navigating the myriad of choices that confront consumers, clinicians and policy
How 'undone science' shaped Chile's glacier protection battle
What is "undone science," and how does it affect environmental policy and regulation around the world? In a recent study published in Tapuya: Latin American Science, Technology and Society, Javiera Barandiarán, ...
Mejia Appointed to U.S. House of Representative Committee on Small Business
Today, upon the recommendation of the U.S. House Democratic Sterling and Policy Committee, Congresswoman Analilia Mejia (NJ-11) was appointed to the U.S. House of Representative Committee on Small Business. This is her second committee assignment in addition to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security. Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said, “Throughout her entire[...]
Police Removed Prominent Scientists from the ADA Meeting. Researchers Respond
The organizers of the American Diabetes Association meeting had a group of researchers removed from the event for sharing an editorial about negative impacts of policy changes to research funding.
The Code As Witness: A Book About Science, Politics & Pandemic Inquiry
The Code as Witness written by Steven C. Quay is part scientific investigation, part policy strategy, and part warning about the future of biological research.
The Code As Witness: A Book About Science, Politics & Pandemic Inquiry
The Code as Witness written by Steven C. Quay is part scientific investigation, part policy strategy, and part warning about the future of biological research.
Britain's New Political Stars Just Don’t Do Regret
According to her housekeeper’s testimony, the New York hotel magnate Leona Helmsley’s policy on tax in the 1980s was “only the little people pay.” The courts found the so-called “Queen of Mean” guilty of federal tax evasion and the authorities ordered her sentence to begin on April 15 — for filing purposes, US Tax Day.
We can create the future of science right now
Paul Litvak is the founder and Executive Director of the Robyn Dawes Institute and a Visiting Scholar at UC Berkeley. He has a PhD in Behavioral Decision Research from Carnegie Mellon where he studied emotions and the sunk cost bias. Over 15 years in industry, he solved a wide range of challenging technical problems. At Meta he created models optimizing the ad review process. At Google he ran experiments to measure social influence. At Airbnb, he was a product manager leading machine learning teams optimizing search ranking and price suggestions. He also co-founded and led product at Rhythmic Health, a venture-backed biosensing startup, creating an accurate low cost system using a color changing strip and a smart phone to measure salivary lactate. The bottleneck At this point, it is uncontroversial to say that science needs to stop using the PDF article as the unit of knowledge and currency. The unbearable slowness of scientific publishing, the profit motive and margins: I’m not saying anything new. The PDF also sucks because it’s hard to extract structured information, which makes it hard to do evidence synthesis. As a result, we do much less evidence synthesis than is needed. And evidence synthesis ultimately undergirds most policy and medical decision-making. I can see second-by-second real-time odds for any sporting or newsworthy event, but a school board can’t see the best evidence on whether their 8th graders should be taught algebra. As a society, we don’t treat this as an important problem. Again, not controversial. Not only is the problem well understood, but the solution has already been laid out. What we need is AI-assisted living evidence synthesis - (1) an open knowledge graph of atomic claims, (2) claims linked to evidence, (3) assessment and synthesis of each piece of evidence, and (4) continuous updating with new data. What few realize (yet) is that the technical capacity to build this vision for a significant portion of science already exists. Not only that, scientists and startup teams are already building many of these components. I know this because I’ve been surveying the space and talking to many of the builders. There are some missing pieces: for example, evaluations of how well some of the components work. But at this point, most of what’s missing is a fully end-to-end working integration of all of these parts. In the rest of this essay, I’m going to lay out all the parts of a working living evidence layer for science and who is working on them, and propose concrete next steps for building this system. What’s now possible The diagram above outlines the components of a living evidence synthesis platform, including some of the teams working on each component1. Scientific PDFs are processed into claims with associated evidence. The evidence is subjected to a forensic audit, methodological evaluation and robustness and reproducibility checks. Finally it’s given a weight in a continuously updating synthesis. What follows is a description and status of each component and a few of the teams working on them. Document understanding The first thing you need to be able to do is turn an article into structured data. Mostly that means parsing PDFs. There are often multicolumn layouts that confuse non-specialized PDF to text processing libraries. For scientific papers, there is the added complexity of parsing formulas and tables and figures. This is a really hot area - there are startups offering APIs, and it seems like a new open source package gets posted to Github every few weeks. What follows isn’t exhaustive. A package called GROBID was the state of the art for a while, they didn’t update their package for nearly two years until very recently. In the meantime reducto.ai released an AI powered PDF extraction API, PaddleOCR became popular, IBM released a model called Docling, and both Mistral and Gemini created models and libraries. I also know of at least one other well-funded psychology research group working on a paper parser. By contrast, there are few open evals in this space, with no extensive evals for complex table comprehension in particular. Nonetheless, I’m confident this will be a solved problem soon, given the combination of LLM advances and developer interest. Hypothesis level extraction There has been increasing interest in comprehending the extracted text of papers and linking information to evidence for each hypothesis. A lot of work has already been done. Trialstreamer (Marshall et al. 2020) and RobotReviewer LIVE (Marshall et al. 2023) demonstrated automated extraction of trial population, intervention, and outcome at scale on clinical RCTs. PaperQA2 (Skarlinski et al. 2024) and Ai2 ScholarQA (2024) extended this to retrieval-augmented question answering with citation grounding. Elicit, Consensus, and SciSpace operationalized claim-level extraction for end users. OpenEval (Booeshaghi et al. 2026) is the most recent and most ambitious: 1.96 million atomic claims extracted from 16,087 eLife manuscripts using Claude Sonnet 4.5, grouped into ~299,000 results, with LLM evaluations showing 81% agreement with human peer review on a 2,487-paper subset. None of these solutions link claims to test-statistics, as you would need to evaluate randomized controlled trials. This is why I built the evidence.guide API - to extract hypotheses and associated test statistics from behavioral science papers. The best public eval of this kind of extraction I’m aware of comes from the recent SCORE project - they had humans code thousands of psychology papers to extract their claims by hand. It would be extremely helpful to the world if all scientific PDFs were available as structured open data. I’ve been working to make this happen, both directly at Berkeley and through coordination with large entities I can’t yet speak of; as hard as it is to do, I think it’s possible2. Forensic audit A lot of work has been done on forensic audit, but some gaps remain. Of course, for biology papers that rely on images for evidence, there are a variety of tools (notably Proofig and ImageTwin) to spot anomalies. These are still well short of what sleuths like Elizabeth Bik can do on her own, but these tools are constant companions among fraud analysts. There’s someone working on auditing Excel files for anomalies, and a number of teams are automating numerical checks like GRIM and SPRITE, including Scrutiny project, the INSPECT-SR team as well as statcheck. The regcheck team is building a way to use AI to compare preregistrations to analyses in papers, to ensure there aren’t significant deviations. Nonetheless, there are many other kinds of anomalies to screen for, both public and less publicly known. And there are no formal evals for anomaly detection that I’m aware of. Still, there’s a lot to draw from in this space and I’m pretty certain we will be able to scan papers for most kinds of obvious anomalies in the near future. Methodological review This area has been white hot, though I fear for many of the startups in this space, because this capability may become commoditized. There are at least six different AI peer review companies, including Refine.ink, Reviewer3, ReviewerZero.ai, Q.E.D. Science, Paper Wizard, and Isitcredible. Coarse (a pun on refine) was also recently created as an open source alternative. These systems provide qualitative feedback on the content of papers, spotting methodological weaknesses and mathematical errors. They seem to work pretty well, and many academics report bitterly that they exceed the average quality of typical peer reviewers. But there are few evals here either. What evals exist so far involve using LLM-as-judge (circularity problems abound) or comparing against human reviews of questionable quality. What you’d ideally want is an eval that measures capturing known errors in papers3. Reproducibility and robustness Another active area has been using AI agents to automate computational reproducibility4 and robustness5 checks in papers that report numerical results. For more recent papers where data and code are available, AI agents can see whether they can re-run the analyses and produce the numbers reported in the published paper. In addition to a handful of individual academics who have been experimenting using Claude Code for this, the Institute for Replication is a leading group working on building an end to end system. The evals related to this problem are the most mature, with CORE-Bench (Siegel, Kapoor, Narayanan 2024) and PaperBench (OpenAI 2025) available to benchmark agents on this task. There is also work on getting AI agents to test alternative ways of analyzing the data to ensure the results are robust to small analytic design choices. Synthesis This is the most underdeveloped area where significant investment is required. Although some automated evidence synthesis systems exist — for example, otto-sr is building an AI agent to write systematic reviews — none of these incorporate the full range of paper level signals to weight evidence appropriately. Nor is there anything like an eval or a gold standard for a good systematic review. Arguably Cochrane reviews are the closest we have to gold standard human systematic reviews, though I’ve heard academics in the know complain about their uneven quality. A key question for a synthesis platform is how to weight anomalies and methodological issues in assessing the quality of a piece of evidence. This is an unsolved problem and one I’m very keen to work on. Continuous updating There are many pieces of basic infrastructure available for monitoring for new research and initiating updates. OpenAlex is the current open citation graph. Retraction Watch integrated into Crossref in October 2023. Scite tracks how citations support, contrast, or mention prior claims. The Living Evidence Network demonstrated continuous-update workflows in clinical guidelines. Engineering this is a relatively straightforward task. When you look over this technical architecture and all the progress being made, it’s hard not to be optimistic that a living guide to scientific evidence will be built. The stakeholders are ready The social infrastructure for this is starting to coalesce — it’s not just a pie in the sky academic exercise to imagine this coming into existence. Institutions like the Center for Open Science, the Institute for Replication, the INSPECT-SR, the Living Evidence Network and more are all working on scaling work to improve research quality. Funders are also aligned. The Sloan Foundation has funded living evidence work through COS. Coefficient Giving supports the Institute for Replication and COS. The Astera Institute and the Institute for Progress have shown interest in this space. NIH has established an Office for Replication and Reproducibility. Although there are (very unfortunately) serious headwinds in science funding generally, there is an active group of funders interested in metascience. A brief word about what I’ve been doing at RDI. First, as a Visiting Scholar at Berkeley I’ve been actively figuring out how a non-profit and a public university can conduct and make public the results of large-scale academic article data mining. With some of the money I raised from donors, I commissioned a legal analysis of recent case law and publisher text data mining (TDM) agreements in order to understand whether a massive open data mining of academic articles is possible (with caveats, it is). I’ve also been working to bring together stakeholders in this space, and identify gaps. I’ve also been doing some software development in this space, with more to come. A pilot proposal The assumption undergirding all of this is that an AI, given all this information, would make the right judgment about a scientific claim with lots of conflicting evidence, weighing all the factors appropriately. That’s the hypothesis we need to test. Randomized control trial research is the best place to focus on first. RCTs are used to make many of the important decisions in society - from medical trials to public policy changes. And they use a relatively uniform set of inferential statistics with lots of known and available diagnostics. Behavioral science experiments, within the broader realm of RCTs, should be first used as a testbed whose results can be generalized. Because behavioral science is at the vanguard of open science practices, replications abound (there are thousands of them) to serve as ground truth training data. Key Hypothesis Therefore the pilot would test, in behavioral RCTs that have been replicated, whether the quality of evidence for a claim can be used to accurately predict whether that claim will replicate. Secondary Hypotheses Compared to claims that replicated, non-replicated claims demonstrate a greater share of forensic anomalies in their source literatures. Hypothesis level claim and statistic extraction is accurate enough to scale living evidence without onerous human review costs. Replication prediction is more accurate than prediction markets6 or journal prestige. If all the different quality signals we gather do accurately predict which studies will replicate, then we can use that model to score evidence to power the living evidence layer. Why this is informative regardless of outcome If the pilot succeeds, the architecture extends to medical RCTs (where Living Evidence already operates and integration is mostly about claim representation), then to slices of basic biology with stable replication structure. If it fails, the field learns which quality signals are load-bearing and which ones metascience has oversold. Either result is a contribution to knowing what the literature supports. Implications for funders Because this burgeoning ecosystem of builders already exists, a well-informed philanthropic or government funder could play a crucial catalyzing role in bringing this future about. They could play at least three roles: creating open structured datasets, publishing open benchmarks and incentivizing the solving of key technical challenges. First, open archives of papers that the government maintains, like PubMed, could be turned into structured data amenable to large scale metascience and claim aggregation. I know the US government already has an interest in doing this, though some key open questions remain unanswered. How do you determine the best models and systems for accurately extracting information from papers? How can you establish a robust way to allow researchers to flag errors and correct them? And finally, how do you create a legal regime in working with publishers to maximize the scope of available papers? For the latter, a university or a private philanthropy may be better positioned to make structured data publicly available under journal subscription terms or fair use. Philanthropists or government funders could also coordinate to create or commission benchmarks that evaluate whether important problems have been solved. For example, an open benchmark for claim extraction from a range of different scientific article types would be extremely helpful. Ensuring the underlying data are accurate is vital for creating these evaluations. I’ve discussed opportunistically using various human-created datasets for this purpose, but a consistent problem is that errors in human data make it difficult for them to serve as a gold standard. Finally, with structured data and benchmarks available, the government or private philanthropy could use them to incentivize groups to develop machine learning systems that meet these benchmarks. Prizes are one potentially valuable tool for this. For example, you could establish a prize for a system that accurately updates a living meta-analysis for a small set of claims. Prizes are particularly useful as signals of problem importance, and can help create vibrant ecosystems of public and private research—see, for example the role the government played in kickstarting the current work on nuclear fusion. Conclusion The drawbacks of the current scientific publishing system are known. Scientists agree, metascientists agree, philanthropists agree: the published PDF plus citation graph isn’t the right substrate for maintaining a representation of the evidence base in science. The pieces needed to build the alternative either already exist or are rapidly taking shape. The community is forming around exactly this problem, with concrete partnerships and shared infrastructure. A pilot should start on behavioral science RCTs because that’s the slice of empirical science most amenable to legibility, where replication ground truth is richest, and where the failure modes are best documented. What’s been missing is the galvanizing mission to assemble these pieces into something that works. That’s what I’m proposing to build. *** 1 I have a broader field map that I’ll release publicly soon. This is me, building in public! 2 If this is something that you are excited about, please reach out and talk to me. 3 More on this very soon too! 4 This tests whether, given the code and the data, you can get the same statistics as reported in the published paper. 5 This tests whether the results are the same as a paper’s given alternative analytical decisions in conducting the analysis (like outlier omission). Closely related is the idea of a “multiverse” where you come up with many different ways of answering the same underlying research question with the same data, and test whether the results hold in all those alternative methods. There’s been work on the latter as well. 6 Some of the replications, e.g. those from the SCORE project, had paired the experiments with forecasts from prediction markets. So we get to look at this for free.
Xbox explains new exclusives policy: players "can expect a reliable pipeline" of exclusive titles in service of "turning around the business"
Matthew Ball says "we know how we're going to make those decisions," with internal and external communication to follow
Federal judge voids Trump’s $100,000 fee requirement for H-1B visas
A federal judge on Monday voided President Donald Trump’s requirement of a $100,000 application fee for H-1B visas, ruling that he lacked authority to impose the new policy for a program used by companies to hire highly skilled foreign workers in specialized fields.
Two NAU environmental science and policy master’s students receive national conservation scholarships
Northern Arizona University’s School of Earth and Sustainability and the Wyss Foundation have named environmental science and policy graduate students Taylor Hartness and Tia Hatton as 2026-2027 Wyss Conservation Scholars. The prestigious program supports innovative graduate-level education to advance a new generation of leaders in U.S. land conservation. Scholars are chosen for their commitment to conservation and their leadership qualities. They are pursuing interdisciplinary graduate studies to develop effective new approaches to today’s most…
Jimmy Patronis joins Tobacco Harm Reduction Caucus
The caucus pushes for policy that emphasizes harm reduction, such as vapor, nicotine pouches or heat-not-burn products.
Science Day 2026 at the HLPF: The science-policy imperative in the final stretch to 2030 and beyond
A Special Event convened alongside the UN High Level Political Forum (HLPF) on Thursday 09 July 2026, 10:00 AM - 1:00 PM (EDT)
Island Areas Pursue Policies That Advance Health Outcomes
Learn about legislation in island areas from the past year to strengthen infrastructure, prevention strategies, health care oversight, and more.
Commentary: Eliminating contracting preferences hampers long-term growth
Two converging forces are reshaping American small business, and federal procurement policy just turned its back on both.
We Need to Know More About How AI is Affecting Mental Health
The public, mental health practitioners, and policymakers don’t know enough about the impacts of AI use on the human psyche, writes Chris Mills Rodrigo.
Healthcare Highlights in the New State Budget - Empire Center for Public Policy
Governor Hochul's focus on affordability seems to have skipped over the healthcare portions of the new state budget.
Rapid changes in federal health policy result in uninsured Americans, Baker Institute report shows
A new health policy research brief from the Baker Institute for Public Policy at Rice is drawing attention to the sweeping pace of health care policy changes implemented during the first year of President Donald Trump’s second administration.
Keir Starmer to say ‘tech revolution must work for everyone’ in speech on AI
Prime minister to give speech on the government’s technology policy this morning
Can Marco Rubio convince Trump that a free Cuba is America First?
As Secretary of State, Marco Rubio has been a primary driver of President Trump’s foreign policy. But Cuba is his most personal challenge yet. And as he plots another potential run for the presidency in 2028, it’s the one whose success or failure could most closely define him.
Times columnists on what's ahead in California governor's race
Democrat Xavier Becerra starts out with a huge advantage over Republican Steve Hilton. How will they use the next five months? To discuss their policy differences? Or just talk about Trump?
Do New Leadership Hires Clarify WELL Health Technologies' (TSX:WELL) Public-Sector Digital Health Strategy?
WELL Health Technologies has appointed Dr. Andrew Bond as Chief Health Officer and Head of Public Sector, and Derek Clark as Chief Operating Officer, adding experienced leadership to clinical governance, government engagement, and platform-wide operations. These hires deepen WELL’s bench in both health system policy and complex multi-entity execution, reinforcing its push to work more closely with public health systems while scaling its national digital and clinic network. Next, we’ll...
Colorado Politics Calendar June 8-14
CoPo’s weekly political calendar helps you find political and public policy events throughout Colorado. It includes candidate and issue campaign events, public policy meetings, court hearings, state and local party conventions, assemblies, debates, rallies, parades, speaking engagements, traveling dignitary appearances, water meetings, book signings, county commission hearings, city council meetings and more. As a subscriber, […]
Multiple sources, joint analysis: pooling public health data for stronger public health intelligence across the Western Pacific
WHO Western Pacific countries and areas endorse a new policy brief on multi-source surveillance. A new World Health Organization (WHO) policy brief outlines a transformative approach to public health intelligence that connects data across a range of systems, sectors and disciplines. By creating a single, actionable picture of health threats based on multiple sources, such an approach aims to fill critical data gaps and aid countries in decision-making. WHO Member States across the Western Pacific endorsed the policy brief, Multi-source Surveillance to Support Public Health Action and Decision-making, at the WHO-led Asia Pacific Health Security Action Framework (APSHAF) Stakeholders Meeting held on 11 June 2026 in Malaysia.
Michigan Matters: Influential voices emanating from Mackinac Island
Oceans week 2026
This week is National Oceans week. One of the main events in Washington DC is Capitol Hill Ocean Week (or CHOW). This two-day event, sponsored by the U.S. Government, brought policymakers, scientis…
Policy Considerations for Defining Essential Health Systems
This policy brief outlines how an essential health system designation relates to existing designations and discusses policy considerations for developing measures to identify essential health systems.
Port Laredo trade summit to draw global business leaders
Hundreds of trade professionals, executives and policymakers are expected to attend Laredo's inaugural Global Trade Summit in July.
US rate futures raise rate hike odds in December after jobs data
U.S. interest rate futures on Friday increased the chances that the Federal Reserves will raise interest rates by the December policy meeting after a blockbuster payrolls number for May, which sharply exceeded market expectations.
This no-phones theater chain now asks visitors to order food by phone. The reviews aren’t good.
Alamo Drafthouse, which built its brand on a strict ‘no phones’ policy, is now asking patrons to use their devices to order from the menu.
Inside Trump’s suddenly softened new green card policy
Big business, including tech and AI companies, launched a quiet but extensive lobbying effort against the green card policy requiring applicants to apply from overseas.
Hospitals Are Leading Efforts to Make Health Care More Affordable
Affordability is front and center in conversations across the country, as Americans feel pressure from the rising cost of living and policymakers search for solutions. Hospitals and health systems share their concerns because we see the impact of high costs every day on the patients and families we serve. Hospitals are not waiting to do their part. Across the nation, they are already implementing efforts to make healthcare more affordable and accessible, as well as providing solutions that could lower costs across the entire health care system.
House passes Ukraine aid, Russia sanctions as GOP bucks Trump on foreign policy
Eighteen Republicans sided with Democrats to authorize billions in aid to Ukraine.
House passes bill to provide more Ukraine aid and impose new sanctions on Russia
The 226-195 vote is a sign of impatience with President Donald Trump's approach to the war and represents the House's second major foreign policy break with Trump this week.
Last Call for 6.4.26 – A prime-time read of what’s going down in Florida
A digest of the day's politics and policy while the bartender refreshes your drink.
Update: What We’re Watching, June 4, 2026
This update covers the latest federal health policy news and its potential impact on Kansas.