MAKING PREVENTION WORK IN HEALTHCARE

Photo:  Secretary of HHS Kathleen Sebelius
FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Moving Academic Medicine Forward
June 11, 2012
Baltimore, MD
Johns Hopkins is a terrific place to be talking about the future of medicine.
More than 100 years ago, when Abraham Flexner had to decide which institution to use as his model of medical education, there was little question which it would be. The influence of Johns Hopkins, he wrote, can hardly be overstated. And a century later his words seem truer than ever.

Hopkins has been a leader time and time again: the first major medical school to admit women; the first to use rubber gloves during surgery; the first to develop renal dialysis and CPR. Hopkins helped develop new specialties from neurosurgery and urology to endocrinology and pediatrics.

More recently Hopkins scientists have made discoveries at the foundation of genetic engineering, neurotransmitter pathways, and that most cutting-edge medical technology of all, the checklist.

The last 15 years have been shaped by Dean Miller who came to Johns Hopkins with one of the hardest jobs possible. He was asked to take one of the most renowned medical schools and hospital systems in the world, and make it even better. But that’s exactly what he did.

So Dean Miller, let me add my congratulations to those you’ve received today.
But even here at Johns Hopkins, we must also acknowledge how far we still have to go.
Over the last couple decades there has been a growing consensus about where we need to move our health care system: toward a focus on prevention and maintaining health, a greater emphasis on primary care, more coordination between providers, greater value for dollars spent, and better use of evidence, leading to continuous improvement.

We’re moving in that direction. But I think it’s clear that we’re not moving fast enough. Though we’ve been talking about these reforms for decades in some cases, our health care system is still marked by uneven quality, unequal access, and runaway costs that put care out of reach for far too many families.

And yet, as I speak to you today, I’m very optimistic.
Over the last few years, we’ve seen a number of powerful trends converge: The rapid adoption of electronic health records, a growing public awareness about the importance of prevention, a new eagerness and willingness among providers to embrace change, and the Affordable Care Act – the most important health legislation in over 40 years.

The combination of these trends has created a unique opportunity for progress in health care.  And no one is better positioned to take advantage of that opportunity than Johns Hopkins and America’s teaching hospitals.
Today I want to talk about a few key areas where I believe we have the greatest potential for progress.

The first area is making prevention a priority. There is a growing body of evidence that people’s behaviors outside the health care system – what we eat, how much we exercise, whether we smoke or not – affect our health even more than the treatments and medicines we get when we visit a doctor.
For doctors, this meant experiences like designing the perfect regimen for your patient with diabetes, only to see them go home to a neighborhood where the lack of healthy food options meant their chances of sticking to that diet were almost zero.

So over the last three years, this Administration launched what is probably the most ambitious effort in our country’s history to help people make healthy choices: funding innovative local programs for reducing chronic disease; new laws to make sure kids get healthy school lunches; and historic legislation to make it harder for tobacco companies to market their products to kids -- since we know that every day, 3,800 young people smoke their first cigarette.

We’re also making it easier for doctors to promote good health in their practices.
A key benefit of the health care law is that recommended preventive services like cancer screenings and wellness visits are now available for Medicare beneficiaries and many other Americans at no additional cost.  So doctors no longer have to worry about those patients skipping their mammograms and checkups because they can’t afford the co-pay or deductible.

But prevention only works if leading institutions like Johns Hopkins make it a priority.
That starts in your clinical work where you can give your patients the tools to live healthy lives. Getting a teenager the support he needs to quit smoking may be more important than any test or exam you might provide. And helping a young parent identify asthma triggers in her home may determine whether or not her child truly thrives.

You have a unique role in your patients’ lives, and a powerful opportunity to affect their health well after they leave your offices.

But we also need better research about which community-based prevention programs work and which don’t – especially in areas where we’ve only just gotten started, like childhood obesity. We’ve seen the positive impact of programs like building safe routes to school and smoke-free public housing. But now we need to measure and study their results -- because we know that by honing and improving these interventions, we can reach more people in more communities more effectively.

Another area we’re focusing on is primary care which is fundamental to helping people stay healthy. Yet we face a dire shortage of providers across the country today. As chronic diseases continue to rise and our population continues to age, the need for primary care providers will only grow.

In the Obama Administration, we’re doing our part by increasing reimbursement rates for primary care.  And we’ve added thousands of slots to the National Health Service Corps.  If you go and practice primary care in an underserved community, we’ll help you repay your loans – a win/win.

But we also need academic medicine to further explore the importance of primary care in your research and underscore it in your training. Far too often, especially at our leading teaching hospitals, primary care has been treated like it was less challenging, less important, and a less worthy use of a physician’s skills. We need to change these attitudes, and that starts with our medical schools.

But ultimately, the choice belongs to the next generation of doctors. So, to the medical students here today, I ask you, directly, to consider becoming a primary care physician. If you want to help lead the biggest transformation of medicine in decades, there’s no better place to be.
That brings me to a third area where academic medicine can continue to lead. That is in moving our system toward care coordination.

Thanks to the medical breakthroughs of the last 50 years, millions of Americans today are living with chronic conditions that would have killed them 50 years ago.  It’s good news that we’re living longer.  But it also means we have a new group of patients who often suffer from multiple, chronic conditions.

You may see a patient with congestive heart failure.  But she also has chronic asthma, uncontrolled diabetes, and is a smoker. As she sees more and more individual doctors, the chances that something may fall through the cracks increase. And then, so do the costs of her care.

But we know that doing something right often costs less than doing it wrong. And under the health care law we’re changing the way we pay for care -- to get high value for the dollars we spend.

We’re supporting models like Accountable Care Organizations that will get paid for keeping their patients healthy and not just how many tests and procedures they do. Many of them are led by teaching hospitals, and we need you there going forward on the frontlines of our work to deliver higher value care.

But if we are going to make coordinated care the rule and not the exception, we also need to make sure it’s at the heart of our medical school curricula. There was a time when it was good enough just to train the best specialist in every field. But today, no one person alone can keep their patient healthy. It requires primary care doctors and specialists, but also nurses, community health workers, and substance abuse counselors.

And this multidisciplinary, team-based care, must be part and parcel of training the next generation of physicians. It’s why the surgeon and author Atul Gawande likes to say: today, we need pit crews, not cowboys.

These are three areas where Johns Hopkins can lead the way.  But I also want you to think beyond your own patients, your own students, and your own research grants.    

One of the most important breakthroughs in medicine over the last 10 years was the surgical checklist developed right here at Hopkins. When ICU doctors and nurses implemented the checklist, you saw a real difference.

But what really made the checklist so powerful was when other leaders and other institutions took it up. Michigan hospitals gave it a try and ended up saving 1,500 lives and reduced health care costs by $200 million in just 18 months. Now, hospitals everywhere have embraced it.

So this is the final place I’d like to ask you to step forward. Beyond the three pillars of research, education, and patient care at the heart of academic medicine, we need you to take on another mission. We need you to serve as a model for the future of health care.

Change is hard. People often see the initial advantage of trying something new. But then there are costs and risks involved, and after a few bumps in the road, the temptation is to stick with what you know – even if it’s not working well.

But change becomes easier, if someone creates a path for you to follow. Institutions like Johns Hopkins have always been models for the rest of the nation. But that has been about more than just new facilities or the latest ranking in a particular publication.

It’s also means pushing this country forward, even from the front of the pack, to build a better health care system for all Americans.

I look ahead with great hope for the future of medicine. There will be more obstacles to overcome. But in the face of great challenges, the pioneers of American medicine have never been discouraged. We’re going forward together -- because today, a stronger, healthier America is on the horizon.

FLUID DYNAMICS AS A SCIENCE

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ARMED WITH SCIENCE
Written on JUNE 11, 2012 AT 7:48 AM by JTOZER
Through The Eyes Of A Scientist-Dr/ Elaine Oran
By Jessica L. Tozer
For a scientist, life is a series of questions just waiting to be answered.
How we’re connected, how things work, why they’re here… These are things that humans have been trying to figure out since the Neanderthals began to drool.  Elaine Oran seeks her understanding of the universe through the perspective of science.

Dr. Elaine Oran is the Senior Scientist for Reactive Flow Physics, affiliated with the  Laboratory for Computational Physics and Fluid Dynamics at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington DC.  Like many physicists, Dr. Oran uses equations and numbers to analyze questions of existence and bring the answers to life, so to speak.

So what does that mean, exactly?
“Basically, I study fluid motion, fluid dynamics.  I study the motions and the behavior of gases and liquids and plasmas.  More specifically, I solve rather complex sets of equations, usually on large computers, and these describe dynamics.”

Tell us a little bit about fluid motion and dynamics, and how it applies to you.
“My specialty that flow with some kind of reactions and turbulence.  There are really three different sorts of reactions that we look at.  One is chemical reactions.  That’s what drives engines — car engines and propulsion devices.  There are atomic reactions; the Earth’s upper atmosphere is an example.  Then there are thermonuclear reactions; the sort that we look at in exploding stars.”

So how does understanding the mechanics of an exploding star help the Department of Defense?
“In my research I try to understand how explosions occur, and this means I want to know how the chemical or other types of reactions interact with the fluids to release energy.”

“The Navy – and the DOD in general – is very interested in a number of issues related to the general properties of explosions, controlling them or avoiding them. They’re interested in both how to avoid unwanted explosions or intense chemical reactions and how to create them in a controlled way.  If we understand this, we can avoid dangerous situations.  We could also make more efficient and perhaps even cleaner engines.”

When it comes to your research, what question or questions are you most excited to answer?
“At the moment the most interesting question to me has to do with turbulent reacting flows and trying to define the controlling processes.  It seems very likely that many of the usual classical theories are not at all complete.  And so when you find something where there’s a gaping hole in knowledge, that’s kind of where I like to dive in.  Right now we have one in turbulent reacting flows.   So the most exciting questions are simply the things we do not understand.  In this case, how the turbulence, reactions, and background flow all interact to give surprising and unexpected results.”

What would you like to say to any young people just starting to blaze their own scientific trail?
“I would tell young men and young women not to be afraid.  That’s what I see too often, people being afraid, intellectually fearful.  They are not willing to just look in front of them and see where the problems are and face them head-on.  Don’t afraid to be wrong, don’t be afraid to be right.  That’s the death of science.”
Fear is the death of science.  You know, I think I like that.  Pithy.  Dramatic.  Possibly the next title of my new science fiction book series…

We’ll keep asking the questions, Dr. Oran, just as long as you keep working to answer them.
———-
Dr. Elaine Oran is the Senior Scientist for Reactive Flow Physics, affiliated with the Laboratory for Computational Physics and Fluid Dynamics at the Naval Research Laboratory.  Information for this article provided by the Naval Research Laboratory.

EXPLODING STAR 
FROM:  NASA
Infrared images from NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope and Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) are combined in this image of RCW 86, the dusty remains of the oldest documented example of an exploding star, or supernova. It shows light from both the remnant itself and unrelated background light from our Milky Way galaxy. The colours in the image allow astronomers to distinguish between the remnant and galactic background, and determine exactly which structures belong to the remnant. Dust associated with the blast wave of the supernova appears red in this image, while dust in the background appears yellow and green. Stars in the field of view appear blue. By determining the temperature of the dust in the red circularshell of the supernova remnant, which marks the extent to which the blast wave from the supernova has travelled since the explosion, astronomers were able to determine the density of the material there, and conclude that RCW 86 must have exploded into a large, wind-blown cavity. The infrared images, when combined with optical and X-ray data, clearly indicate that the source of the mysterious object seen in the sky over 1,800 years ago must have been a Type Ia supernova.

U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE CLINTON CONCERNED ABOUT ETHNIC/SECTARIAN VIOLENCE IN BURMA

Photo:  Recent Trip, Secretary Clinton with Burmese Ethnic Minority Representatives.  Credit:  U.S. State Department.

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT

Violence in Burma's Rakhine State

Press Statement

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Washington, DC

June 11, 2012

The United States continues to be deeply concerned about reports of ongoing ethnic and sectarian violence in western Burma’s Rakhine State and urges all parties to exercise restraint and immediately halt all attacks. The Burmese Government has announced a State of Emergency and curfews in Rakhine State, but reports of violence continue.

We join others in the international community and call on authorities to work with local leaders—together with Muslim, Buddhist, and ethnic representatives, including Rohingya—to halt the on-going violence, begin a dialogue toward a peaceful resolution, and ensure an expeditious and transparent investigation into these incidents that respects due process and the rule of law.

The United States has welcomed Burma’s recent reform efforts and the important steps President Thein Sein, Aung San Suu Kyi, and other leaders inside and outside of government have taken. The situation in Rakhine State underscores the critical need for mutual respect among all ethnic and religious groups and for serious efforts to achieve national reconciliation in Burma. We urge the people of Burma to work together toward a peaceful, prosperous, and democratic country that respects the rights of all its diverse peoples.

CV-22 OSPREY DESCENDS DURING AIR FORCE ACADEMY POLARIS WARRIOR EVENT

FROM:  U.S. AIR FORCE
Cadet Wing wraps up 1st Polaris Warrior
A CV-22 Osprey with the 20th Special Operations Squadron at Cannon Air Force Base, N.M., descends on the Air Force Academy Cadet Area during the Academy's Polaris Warrior event April 28, 2012. Polaris Warrior combined several military training challenges designed to reinforce skills that cadets may need in the field. (U.S. Air Force photo/Raymond McCoy)

THE NUSTAR JOURNEY BEGINS

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT ARMED WITH SCIENCE
This photo shows the Orbital Sciences Corporation Pegasus XL rocket with the NuSTAR spacecraft after attachment to the L-1011 carrier aircraft known as "Stargazer." Image credit: NASA/Randy Beaudoin, VAFB 

Written on JUNE 10, 2012 AT 7:54 AM by JTOZER
NuStar Headed To The Stars
 NASA‘s Nuclear Spectroscopic Teelscope Array, or NuSTAR, is now perched atop its Pegasus XL rocket, strapped to the plane that will carry the mission to an airborne launch. Launch is scheduled for June 13, no earlier than 8:30 a.m. PDT (11:30 a.m. EDT).
The plane — the L-1011 “Stargazer” aircraft — is now at Vandenberg Air Force Base  in central California. It is scheduled to fly to Kwajalein Atoll in the central Pacific Ocean from June 5 to 6. About an hour before launch, the plane will lift off from the island, and drop NuSTAR and its rocket over the ocean. The rocket will then ignite, carrying NuSTAR to its final orbit around Earth’s equator.

NuSTAR will be the first space telescope to create sharp images of X-rays with high energies, similar to those used by doctors and dentists. It will conduct a census for black holes, map radioactive material in young supernovae remnants, and study the origins of cosmic rays and extreme physics around collapsed stars.

NuSTAR is a Small Explorer mission led by the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena and managed by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, also in Pasadena, for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate in Washington. The spacecraft was built by Orbital Sciences Corporation, Dulles, Va.  Launch management and government oversight for the mission is the responsibility of NASA’s Launch Services Program at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL PEREZ ON ALL STUDENTS BEING WELCOMED IN OUR NATIONS SCHOOLS

Photo Credit:  Wikimedia.
FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Assistant Attorney General Thomas E. Perez Speaks at the American Civil Liberties Union’s Plyler v. Doe 30th Anniversary Event
Washington, D.C. ~ Monday, June 11, 2012
It’s an honor and a pleasure to be here with all of you today to mark the 30th anniversary of Plyler v. Doe, the U.S. Supreme Court’s historic decision making clear that all children, regardless of their immigration status, must be made welcome in our nation’s schools. I want to thank the ACLU for organizing this symposium, and Laura Murphy for the gracious welcome.

At the Civil Rights Division, we work to break down the barriers that keep so many from fully participating in American life - in the voting booth, the workplace, and of course, in the classroom.   For the past three decades, Plyler has kept the door to opportunity open for millions of children across America.   Plyler has stood for the proposition that public schools serve all children in this country, no matter where they were born.  Plyler has represented the promise that the American dream should be accessible to all.

Plyler reflects the deeply American notion that all young people deserve the chance to advance as far as their hard work and talent can carry them. Every day, we hear about and work with students who, thanks to Plyler, are able to complete elementary and high school; who, without the benefit of financial aid, find a way to get a college degree, and who push on to fulfill a dream of becoming an architect, teacher or even a lawyer.   These students are daily beneficiaries of Plyler, and their achievements are an inspiring example of why its holding is so critical.

Just over one year ago, together with our partners at the Department of Education, we issued guidance on the right of all students to enroll in school regardless of their or their parents’ immigration status.   The guidance reminded schools of their obligations under Plyler and federal civil rights laws more generally and made clear that:

A child who resides in a state cannot be denied access to its public schools, whether or not the child is legally in the United States.
Schools cannot have policies that bar or discourage students from attending school based on immigration status.

Schools cannot have enrollment requirements that have the purpose or result of denying children access based on race or national origin.

Schools cannot deny enrollment if students or their parents choose not to provide a social security number or, if a district requests a birth certificate, provide a foreign birth certificate.
   
We issued the Plyler guidance to help schools meet these obligations – because it’s the law, and because there’s so much at stake.   No one benefits when a child is kept out of the classroom.  The cost to that child, and to all of us, is just too great.

Three decades ago, the Plyler court noted the folly of depriving innocent children of the basic tools to contribute to society:

 “By denying these children a basic education,” the court said, “we deny them the ability to live within the structure of our civic institutions, and foreclose any realistic possibility that they will contribute in even the smallest way to the progress of our Nation.”

Thirty years later, countless children have benefited from the Plyler decision, receiving an education and with it, a chance at a better life.   Indeed, throughout this country, we see the promise of Plyler borne out.    We see young people graduating from high school and reaping many of the benefits that come with a high school diploma.   We see students pursuing their dreams of college and beyond, despite sometimes daunting obstacles.   Because of Plyler, these young people are getting the opportunity to advance based on their individual merit – the essence of the American dream.

The benefits of Plyler are felt by all of us, wherever we or our ancestors were born.   Three decades after Plyler, immigrant students have made and continue to make vast and deep contributions to America’s cultural, civic, and economic landscape.  Studies show that over time, the economic contributions of children of immigrants – who enter the labor force and pay far more in taxes than they receive in benefits – are on par with those of their classmates.    In the schools, these children and their classmates reap the documented benefits of a diverse school environment.   All over the country, we see immigrant children and their families contributing richly to their schools and the cultural, social, and economic fabric of this country.  Thirty years after Plyler, the wisdom and moral strength of its holding are clearer than ever.

Undocumented children and c hildren from immigrant families, however, continue to face barriers to enrolling in, and attending, school.  For example, in 2011, Alabama passed a law known as H.B. 56, and in doing so, placed a road block at the school house door.   H.B. 56 is Alabama’s immigration law – a law that, among other things, directly targets students by requiring schools to verify the immigration status of enrolling children and their parents.

Right after H.B. 56 went into effect, the Civil Rights Division had boots on the ground. I attended a town hall meeting at an Alabama elementary school.   There, I listened to parents, students and teachers share the deep and immediate impact H.B. 56 had on their lives.    In Birmingham, which occupies a central place in the history of the civil rights movement, I heard from a diverse group of civil rights, faith and education leaders who were unified in condemning the effect of H.B. 56 on Alabama’s schoolchildren.    
We sought data on enrollment and attendance from the Alabama State Department of Education to get a more systemic sense of the impact of H.B. 56. Just last month, we shared our review with the state.    While H.B. 56 was only in effect for a short time before being enjoined by the courts, the data revealed that the law had a major and lasting impact on Alabama’s schoolchildren, particularly Hispanic students and English Language Learners.   Absences among Alabama’s Hispanic students tripled after the immigration law went into effect, while staying flat for other groups of students.   Withdrawals of Hispanic children also spiked when compared with previous years, with more than 13 percent of the state’s Hispanic students withdrawing between the beginning of the school year and February 2012.

Our conversations with students and parents underscored the dramatic picture painted by the state’s data.  Students told us they stayed home or withdrew from school out of fear that they or their parents would be questioned about their immigration status. Others returned to school but told us they couldn’t concentrate in class and that they no longer felt safe and welcome in their classrooms.   Parents told us about watching their honors students’ grades drop in the aftermath of H.B. 56.

We also met with Alabama teachers and administrators -- educators who know just how much every school day counts in the life of a student.    They are deeply committed to keeping students engaged, to getting parents involved, and to promoting inclusive environments at school.   They felt that H.B. 56 has frustrated their efforts.   And they told us about the tremendous time spent and the emotional toll of comforting children whose schoolmates have disappeared from the classrooms.

We will continue to closely watch and respond to the developments in Alabama as well as in any other states where students’ access to education is curtailed.    Alabama presents a dramatic challenge to the goals and values of Plyler, but across the country we see the persistence of barriers that limit educational opportunities.   At the Civil Rights Division, these are challenges that we are working to address.

In the year since we issued the Plyler guidance, we have provided technical assistance to schools about their responsibility to enroll students regardless of their immigration status.  We have investigated complaints about schools that have requested social security numbers from students and/or parents, thereby discouraging - if not directly prohibiting - many undocumented students from coming to school.   We have also investigated complaints that schools have not made their registration procedures accessible to parents who have limited proficiency in English.   These are the day-to-day barriers that immigrant students face as they try to receive an education and start down the path of a better future.

Our efforts to remove these barriers continue in districts throughout this country.   For example, in states like North Carolina and Kentucky, we have worked with schools to revise enrollment policies and remove requirements that students produce social security numbers.  In the Palm Beach County, Fla. School District, we have worked to ensure that the district’s requirements for proving residency do not create barriers for immigrant students, and that policies and forms are translated for parents who are not proficient in English.   These districts are taking proactive steps to make sure that students and their families are welcomed in school, regardless of background.

To fully realize the goals and the promise of Plyler, we must do even more as a nation. We must come together in honor of the young men and women who were not yet citizens of the U.S. yet risked – and lost - their lives in the Iraq war.    They fought and died for their country before they were allowed to call it their own.

For those young people who hope to continue on to college, or to bravely serve our nation in the armed forces, we must continue to break down barriers.  The President has spoken about the simple justice and common sense of the DREAM Act.  The DREAM Act would provide a path to citizenship for immigrant students who aspire to higher education, or who serve with valor in the U.S. military.  These talented young people truly represent the best of what America has to offer.   More than anything, they want to pursue their dreams and contribute to this country, a country that they know and love as their own.  Passing the DREAM Act, and passing comprehensive immigration reform to fix our broken immigration system, will bring us closer to the ultimate value that underlies the Plyler decision -- that every child should have the chance to succeed to the very limits of his or her talent and ambition.

Plyler represents the best of our collective ideals as a nation.   Those ideals of equality, justice, and fairness are central to the mission of the Civil Rights Division.   Although countless children – and our country as a whole – have directly benefited from Plyler’s holding, the past year has shown us that we still have far to travel.    At the Civil Rights Division, we will continue to use all tools at our disposal to fulfill the promise of Plyler, and to keep the schoolhouse door open to all.

AFTER 50 YEARS THE U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE STILL LOOKING FOR ALCATRAZ ISLAND ESCAPEES

FROM:  U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE
After 50 Years, the U.S. Marshals Remain Diligent in Hunt for Renowned Alcatraz Escapees 
FRANK MORRIS (Left)
WASHINGTON – Fifty years after their escape from U.S. Penitentiary Alcatraz on June 11, 1962, the U.S. Marshals Service remains diligent in the manhunt for Frank Morris and brothers Clarence and John Anglin. They are the only men to escape from Alcatraz Island in San Francisco who remain unaccounted for.

The elaborate escape plan was the result of more than one year of planning and included the design of a life raft and life preservers fashioned from more than 50 raincoats, the fabrication of lifelike dummies to ruse guards on night bed checks and enlarged ventilation holes in their cell walls, which they used spoons to create and concealed with cardboard replicas of vent covers.
JOHN ANGLIN (Below)
On the night of June 11, 1962, the three escaped through the vents and made their way to the northeast part of the island, where they inflated the makeshift raft and three life preservers and slipped into the water. Varied reports stated that the inmates either drowned or made their escape via nearby Angel Island. A fourth inmate, Allen West, was involved in planning the escape, but he never made it out of his prison cell. The known details of the escape were provided by West during several interviews.

The Marshals Service adopted the case from the FBI in 1979. Since that time, countless deputy U.S. marshals have worked the case and investigated thousands of leads in almost every state in the country and a few foreign countries. They used media venues such as the TV show America’s Most Wanted to generate tips and additional investigative information. In a 1993 interview with that program, U.S. Marshals Service Acting Director John Twomey said, “We know they were young and vigorous, that they had the physical ability to survive and that they had a well-thought-out scheme.”

The possibility of survival steered investigators to unusual and detailed leads to suspected whereabouts of the escapees. One example occurred in 2010, when an unmarked grave, claimed to be that of an escapee, was exhumed but failed to offer positive identification. The 1962 escape remains one of the best known unsolved crimes in American history. “No matter where the leads take us, or how many man hours are spent on this historic case, the Marshals Service will continue to investigate to the fullest extent possible,” said David Harlow, assistant director, U.S. Marshals Investigative Operations Division.

The Marshals will continue to pursue the escapees until they are either arrested, positively determined to be deceased or reach the age of 99. “The ongoing U.S. Marshals investigation of the 1962 escape from Alcatraz federal prison serves as a warning to fugitives that regardless of time, we will continue to look for you and bring you to justice,” said U.S. Marshal Don O’Keefe of the Northern District of California. If the inmates survived the escape and are alive today, Frank Morris would be 85 years old, Clarence Anglin would be 81 and John Anglin would be 82.

The U.S. Marshals have a long history of successfully tracking, locating and apprehending prison escapees. In August 2011, Frederick Barrett, a convicted murderer wanted in Florida for escape, was apprehended after 32 years on the lam. He was found hiding in a remote cabin in the mountains of Colorado.

CLARENCE ANGLIN (Left)

U.S. STILL WORKING TO OPEN SUPPLY ROUTES IN PAKISTAN

Photo Credit:  U.S. Navy.
FROM:   AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Work Continues Toward Opening Pakistan Supply Routes
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.
WASHINGTON, June 11, 2012 - Though a team of U.S. negotiators is returning home after several weeks of discussing reopening ground supply routes in Pakistan, the talks are not mired, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said here today.

In November, Pakistan closed ground routes that had been used to resupply forces in Afghanistan after a NATO airstrike accidentally killed 24 Pakistani soldiers earlier in the month.

"The [ground lines of communication] remain an open issue," Little told reporters. "We've not reached a resolution yet with the Pakistanis on reopening the ground supply routes. We hope to resolve the issue soon. We haven't gotten to 'yes' yet, but this is something we're going to continue to work very hard [on] with our Pakistani counterparts."

Officials will continue to work through the office of the defense representative in Pakistan to try to resolve the matter, Little said. "We will continue to have dialogue," he added, "so while the issue is not resolved, the talking has not stalled."

The press secretary emphasized that the negotiating team's departure from Pakistan shouldn't be taken as a sign of unwillingness to continue the dialogue.

"The members of the team that are leaving, or have left, are prepared to return to Islamabad at any moment to continue discussions in person," he said. Little said he thinks there is agreement, in concept, that the supply routes can be reopened. "Both sides would like to be able to reopen the ground supply routes," he said. "There are some specific issues that need to [be] worked through."

Although it's possible to continue the mission in Afghanistan without the Pakistani ground supply routes, Little said, having them open would provide more options and would be less expensive.

"The more options you have available to you when you're mounting a major logistics effort like supplying the war effort in Afghanistan, and in bringing people and equipment out, the better," he said.

Little said the decision for the U.S. team to leave Pakistan was independent of Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta's comments reflecting frustration over Pakistan serving as a safe haven for terrorists.

"The comments ... were largely directed at the problem of the Haqqani network and the safe haven in Pakistan," he noted. "We've made our concerns known for a very long time about the safe havens in Pakistan, and the ability of the Haqqani network to cross the border and conduct attacks inside Afghanistan. The secretary's remarks on the trip were focused [on that]."

Little said the Haqqani network's ability to conduct operations inside Afghanistan remains a "very serious concern" for the United States.

"We believe that it's important, as [Panetta] indicated, that the Pakistanis do their part, on their side of the border, to stop the Haqqanis from mounting operations," he said.
"This is something we need to work through with the Pakistanis," he added. "We believe that we can establish a relationship that produces the kind of action we believe is required on their side of the border."

ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER SPEAKS OF THE FUTURE AT LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS CONVENTION

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks at the League of Women Voters Convention Washington, D.C. ~ Monday, June 11, 2012
Thank you, Elisabeth – for your kind words and for the outstanding leadership that you are providing – not only for the League of Women Voters, and its ever-expanding network of allies and supporters, but also in our nation’s ongoing struggle to protect the strength, the integrity, and the future of our democracy.

This is the cause that, more than 90 years ago, inspired the founding of this organization.   And it’s the cause that brings us together today.

I am honored to be part of this annual convention – and to be among so many friends.   And I especially am grateful for the opportunity to tell each of you, in person, how much I appreciate your partnership – as well as your dedicated, tireless contributions – in protecting the most fundamental, and most powerful, right of American citizenship: the right to vote.

Since its establishment in 1920, the League of Women Voters has been on the front lines of our nation’s fight to expand the franchise, to ensure that all eligible citizens have access to the ballot box, and to uphold this country’s founding and enduring promise of “government of, by, and for the people.”

Today, this work goes in your efforts to educate, mobilize, and register voters – in more than 800 state and local chapters in all 50 states and here in Washington D.C.   It goes on in the innovative programs and resources you’ve developed, including the High School Voter Registration Manual – which is now available to students nationwide – and, of course, Vote411.org – a cutting-edge website for voting information that, in the 2008 election season alone, received more than 20 million hits.

And this work continues in your ongoing calls for improvements and updates in our voting systems; your advocacy for commonsense, cost-effective modernization; your outreach to aspiring young leaders – from all political parties – who view LWV as a “training ground” for civil engagement and public service at the highest levels; and, of course, in your work – in statehouses and courthouses nationwide – to speak out, and even to take legal action against, legislative efforts that could threaten voting access – and undermine the central provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

Fifty years ago, this organization played a key role in advocating for the passage of this groundbreaking legislation.   Despite the decades that have passed, and the progress that’s been achieved, since then – and despite our nation’s long tradition of extending voting rights – to non-property owners and women, to people of color and Native Americans, and to younger Americans – your mission, in many ways, has never been more important.   We saw the important value in your work several days ago, in an important ruling in the case that LWV helped to bring against the state of Florida, in which you have successfully challenged the state’s new voter registration statute, and in so doing protected the rights of perhaps millions of eligible voters.

It’s clear that your actions in that case, and your similar efforts nationwide, have been fueled by both growing concerns that essential voting rights could be limited because of recent state-level legislative changes; and by a deep commitment – to upholding the values that have long distinguished our nation as a global leader and example, and that continue to define who we are as Americans.

Now, I realize that some have questioned your motives and mischaracterized your efforts.  Believe me, I know how you feel.   But the clear and simple fact is that this work never has been – and never should be – about politics or partisan maneuvering.   This work is about honoring our most basic principles – of inclusion and opportunity, of equal treatment and fair representation.  And it’s about fulfilling the most essential, and most sacred, obligations of American citizenship.   That’s true for the League of Women Voters.   And it’s also true for the United States Department of Justice.

As Attorney General, it is my obligation – and solemn duty – to ensure that the rights of all Americans are protected.   And I’m proud that, under this Administration, our Civil Rights Division – and its Voting Section – have taken meaningful steps to ensure integrity, independence, and transparency in our enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.

As you, we have reviewed – and, in some cases, denied administrative preclearance – to recent state-level voter identification laws.   We are actively litigating voter ID laws passed in Texas and South Carolina because – based on each state’s own data – we determined that those laws disproportionately and adversely affect the rights of minority voters.

It is an, “undeniable fact that voter ID laws can burden some citizens’ right to vote.”   Now, that’s not only my opinion – that’s a direct quote from one of my predecessors – former Attorney General Michael Mukasey – which he provided after the Supreme Court’s decision in the Indiana voter ID case.   He went on to observe, and I quote again, that, “It is important for states to implement and administer voter ID laws in a way that minimizes that possibility [of a burden].  And it is important for the Department to do its part to guard against that possibility.   We will not hesitate to use the tools available to us – including the Voting Rights Act – if these laws, important though they may be, are used improperly to deny the right to vote."

Today’s Justice Department is committed to these ideals – and to this work.   As you all know – and will be discussing in greater detail throughout this convention – our voting rights enforcement efforts have never been stronger, more important – or more effective.   We have worked successfully and comprehensively to protect the voting rights of citizens with disabilities, language minorities, and Americans living and serving abroad.   During the 2010 election cycle, the Civil Rights Division obtained court orders, court-approved consent decrees, or out-of-court agreements in 14 jurisdictions, which ensured that thousands of military and overseas voters had the opportunity to vote and to have that vote counted.   In fact, in just the past four months, we've filed three different lawsuits – in Alabama, Wisconsin, and California – to protect the voting rights of servicemembers and overseas citizens.

We’re also actively and aggressively enforcing the “Motor Voter” law – which this organization helped to advance – and working to make certain that voter registration opportunities be made available at a wider variety of government offices – beyond just the local department of motor vehicles.   Over the last year and a half, we filed two lawsuits to enforce Section 7 of the NVRA – the first lawsuits filed by the Department to enforce this critical provision in seven years.   We’ve also filed amicus briefs in five cases raising NVRA claims in the past year.   We recognize that LWV thinks we should do more in this area- and we will - but we can all be encouraged by the steps that have been taken – and by the their promising results.   For example, after filing a lawsuit in Rhode Island last year, we reached an agreement with state agencies that resulted in more voters being registered in the first full month after our lawsuit than in the entire previous two-year reporting period.

We’re also working to ensure that the protections for language minorities – another LWV priority – which are included in the Voting Rights Act, are aggressively enforced.   These protections now apply to more than 19 million voting-age citizens.   In the last year and a half, we’ve resolved eight different cases to protect the rights of Spanish-speaking, Chinese-speaking, and Native American voters in communities all around the country – from New York to Ohio to California to South Dakota to Nebraska.   And, today, we’re actively reviewing nationwide compliance.

But the Justice Department can’t do it all.   Ensuring that every veteran, every senior, every college student, and every eligible citizen has the right to vote must become our common cause.  And, for all Americans, protecting this right, ensuring meaningful access, and combating discrimination must be viewed, not only as a legal issue – but also as a moral imperative.

Today, I’d like to highlight three areas where public support will be crucial in driving progress – and advancing much-needed reforms.   The first involves deceptive election practices – and dishonest efforts to prevent certain voters from casting their ballots.

Throughout our history we’ve unfortunately seen all sorts of efforts to keep people away from the polls – from literacy tests and poll taxes, to misinformation campaigns telling people that Election Day has been moved, or that only one adult per household can cast a ballot.   Before the 2004 elections, fliers were distributed in minority neighborhoods in Milwaukee, falsely claiming that “[I]f anybody in your family has ever been found guilty [of a crime], you can’t vote in the presidential election” – and that you risk a 10-year prison sentence if you do.   Two years later, 14,000 Latino voters in Orange County, California received mailings, warning in Spanish that, “[If] you are an immigrant, voting in a federal election is a crime that can result in jail time.”  Both of these blatant falsehoods likely deterred some eligible citizens from going to the polls.

And, at the end of last year, the campaign manager of a Maryland gubernatorial candidate was convicted on election fraud charges for approving anonymous “robocalls” that went out on Election Day last year to more than 100,000 voters in the state’s two largest majority-black jurisdictions.   These calls encouraged voters to stay home – telling them to “relax” because their preferred candidate had already wrapped up a victory.

In an effort to deter and punish such harmful practices, during his first year in the U.S. Senate, President Obama introduced legislation that would establish tough criminal penalties for those who engage in fraudulent voting practices – and would help to ensure that citizens have complete and accurate information about where and when to vote.   Unfortunately, this proposal did not move forward.   But, last December, Senators Schumer and Cardin re-introduced this legislation, in an even stronger form.  As it continues to move toward committee consideration, it has sparked and helped to advance a critically important dialogue across – and beyond – Capitol Hill.

The second area for reform is the need for neutrality in redistricting efforts.   Districts should be drawn to promote fair and effective representation for all – not merely to undercut electoral competition and protect incumbents.   If we allow only those who hold elected office to select their constituents – instead of enabling voters to choose their representatives – the strength and legitimacy of our democracy will suffer.

One final area for reform that merits our strongest support is the growing effort – which is already underway in several states – to modernize voter registration.   Today, the single biggest barrier to voting in this country is our antiquated registration system.   According to the Census Bureau, of the 75 million adult citizens who failed to vote in the last presidential election, 60 million of them were not registered and, therefore, not eligible to cast a ballot.

All eligible citizens can and should be automatically registered to vote.   The ability to vote is not merely a privilege – it is an essential Constitutional right.   Under our current system, many voters must follow cumbersome and needlessly complex and varied voter registration rules.  And every election season, state and local officials have to manually process a crush of new applications – most of them handwritten – leaving the system riddled with errors, and, too often, creating chaos at the polls.

Fortunately, modern technology provides a straightforward fix for these problems – if we have the political will to bring our election systems into the 21st century.   We should automatically register citizens to vote, by compiling – from relevant databases that already exist – a list of all eligible residents in each jurisdiction.   Of course, these lists would be used solely to administer elections – and would protect essential privacy rights.

We must also address the fact that, although one in nine Americans move every year, their voter registration often does not move with them.   Many would-be voters don’t realize this until they’ve missed the deadline for registering, which can fall a full month before Election Day. Election officials should work together to establish a program of permanent, portable registration – so that voters who move can vote at their new polling place on Election Day.  Until that happens, we should implement fail-safe procedures to correct voter-roll errors and omissions, by allowing every voter to cast a regular, non-provisional ballot on Election Day.  Several states have already taken this step, and it’s been shown to increase turnout by at least three to five percentage points.

These modernization efforts would not only improve the integrity of our elections, they would also save precious taxpayer dollars.

Despite these benefits, there will always be those who say that easing registration hurdles will only lead to voter fraud.   Let me be clear: voter fraud is not acceptable – and will not be tolerated by this Justice Department.   But as I learned early in my career – as a prosecutor in the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, where I actually investigated and prosecuted voting-fraud cases – making voter registration easier is simply not likely, by itself, to make our elections more susceptible to fraud.   Indeed, those on all sides of this debate have acknowledged that in-person voting fraud is uncommon.   We must be honest about this.   And we must recognize that our ability to ensure the strength and integrity of our election systems – and to advance the reforms necessary to achieve this – depends on whether the American people are informed, engaged, and willing to demand commonsense solutions that make voting more accessible.   Politicians may not readily alter the very systems under which they were elected.   Only we, the people, can bring about meaningful change.   And, because of this, the League of Women Voters continues to be – not just relevant, but absolutely vital in strengthening our democracy.

Through a range of efforts, you are calling on the citizens of this country to consider what kind of a nation – and what kind of a people – we want to be; and to ask some important questions: Are we willing to allow this era – our era – to be remembered as the age when our nation’s proud tradition of expanding the franchise was cut short?   Are we willing to allow this time – our time – to be recorded in history as the age when the long-held belief that, in this country, every citizen has the chance – and the right – to help shape their government, became a relic of our past, instead of a guidepost for our future?

For me, for each of you – and for our nation’s Department of Justice and the National League of Women Voters – the answers are clear.   But, unfortunately, the road ahead is far from certain.

That’s why you must keep up – and expand – your critical work.   Continue to speak out; to raise awareness about what’s at stake; to call on all political parties and leaders to resist the temptation to suppress certain votes in the hope of attaining electoral success – and challenge and encourage them, instead, to work to achieve success by appealing to more voters.   Keep urging policymakers at every level to reevaluate our election systems – and to reform them in ways that encourage, not limit, participation.   And, above all, keep seeking out and seizing opportunities to build upon the remarkable, transformative progress that the League of Women Voters has helped to make possible.

In advancing these efforts, the people in this room are part of an extraordinary legacy.   The arc of American history has always bent toward the expansion of the franchise.   This organization has served as a key component for this most noble – and uniquely American – endeavor.   But never forget – your vital work is not just historically relevant.   You are also a vital, contemporary part of what makes our nation truly exceptional.   I urge you – regardless of the opposition you face – to stay true, and remain fiercely committed, to the principles that have always guided the League of Women Voters and that can ensure that the 21st will be another "American century."

Thank you.

PARTNERSHIPS TO COMBAT THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION THREAT

Photo:  ICBM Test.  Credit:  U.S. Air Force.
FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
New Partnerships for Combating the Threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction
Remarks Rose Gottemoeller
Acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security Joseph Rotblat Memorial Lecture, Hay Festival
Hay-on-Wye, Wales, United Kingdom
June 10, 2012

“Above all, remember your humanity.” Sir Joseph Rotblat recalled these words from the 1955 Manifesto of Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein when he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize in 1995, on behalf of the International Pugwash Movement. For Jo, they reflected very well the frame of mind we must have when we confront the problem of nuclear weapons.

I was honored to know Joseph Rotblat, and these words have stuck with me. When we talk about creating the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons, we are not talking about some remote utopia, we are talking about preventing the use of the most powerful weapon ever conceived by man. We are talking about protecting humanity.

The idea of a world free of nuclear weapons is nothing new. It was upon us almost as soon as scientists realized the feasibility of nuclear weapons. Sir Joseph was one of this community. As a leader of the Pugwash Movement, he was instrumental in making nuclear elimination a legitimate topic for policymakers around the world. When he was pushing for reductions at the height on the Cold War, Jo saw an opening for conversation – not one in English and Russian across the negotiating table, but one in the universal languages of math and science, a conversation among scientists. This open forum for scientific dialogue, which became the Pugwash Movement, led to some of the first arms control and nonproliferation treaties.

Through his work, Sir Joseph played a big role in making the goal of “zero” an acceptable goal of security policy. Two years after his death, four venerable Cold Warriors – former Secretaries of State George Shultz and Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of Defense William Perry and former Senator Sam Nunn – published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journalcalling for a world without nuclear weapons. The group, often called “the Four Horsemen” saw it as “a bold initiative consistent with America’s moral heritage.” Two years later, President Obama spoke to thousands of people in Prague, stating that the United States would seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. That speech was the foundation for what we in Washington call the Prague Agenda.

Even with the massive shift in accepting nuclear elimination as a policy worth pursuing, Sir Joseph warned us, “the Cold War is over, but Cold War thinking survives.” When it comes to the next steps in nuclear reductions, this is undoubtedly true. In order to dismantle this dangerous legacy, we have to change the way we think about these weapons. And we have to be ready to challenge our notions of how they might be eliminated.

We are entering unknown terrain. As we steadily reduce nuclear weapons toward zero, the more cheating matters. Consider, if you will: if a country can stash away just a few nuclear weapons while others continue to eliminate them, that country can spring a significant and dangerous surprise on the world community. To counter this possibility, we will need innovative approaches. Finally to achieve zero, we will need a truly global effort involving thousands and thousands of people. I am guessing you are asking yourself, “How on Earth can an ordinary person such as I help with a problem like this?”

Joseph Rotblat considered this challenge decades ago. He developed the concept called “societal verification,” which he defined as the involvement of whole communities in monitoring compliance with treaties, in contrast to using the highly specialized teams of experts such as we use to verify the New START Treaty. Sir Joseph argued that technological verification of the New START kind was sufficient for reducing arsenals to lower numbers. However, the prospect of a state clandestinely acquiring only a few nuclear weapons in a disarmed world requires greater confidence and verification. Sir Joseph believed societal verification would bring us this increased confidence. Such a societal regime, he said, would be essential in achieving the goal of zero.

Today, we have the information revolution to lend to this task, and Sir Joseph’s concept is closer to reality. Our enviornment today is a smaller, increasingly-networked world where the average citizen connects to others in cyberspace hundreds of times each day. We exchange and share ideas on a wide variety of topics. Citizens are armed with more information tools than ever before. Why should we not put this vast problem solving entity to good use?

Think about this: Any event, anywhere on the planet, has the potential now to be broadcast globally in mere seconds. The implications for arms control monitoring and verification are compelling. It is harder to hide things nowadays. When it is harder to hide things, it is easier to be caught. The neighborhood gaze is a powerful tool.

The Possibilities
Open source information technologies can improve arms control verification in at least two ways: either as a way of generating new information, or as analysis of information that already is out there.

Let me give you some examples, to give you an idea what I’m talking about.
In 2009, in recognition of the 40th anniversary of the Internet, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) held a competition where 10 red weather balloons were moored at visible fixed locations around the continental United States. The first team to identify the location of all 10 balloons won a sizable cash prize--$40,000. Over 4,300 teams composed of an estimated 2 million people from 25 countries took part in the challenge. A team from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology won the challenge, identifying all of the balloon locations in an astonishing time of 8 hours and 52 minutes. Of course, to win in such a short time or complete the challenge at all, the MIT team did not “find” the balloons themselves. They tapped into social networks using a unique incentive structure that not only incentivized people to identify a balloon location, but also incentivized people to recruit others to the team. Their win showed the enormous potential of social networking, and also demonstrated how incentives can motivate large populations to work toward a common goal.

Social networking is already being incorporated into local safety systems. RAVEN911—the Regional Asset Verification & Emergency Network—is a multilayer mapping tool that supports emergency first response in Cincinnati, Ohio. RAVEN911 uses live data feeds and intelligence gathered through Twitter to provide details that cannot be given on an everyday geographic map, such as the location of downed electric power lines and flooded roads. Authorities are cooperating with communities in Southwestern Ohio, Southeastern Indiana and Northern Kentucky to develop and implement this emergency management system, in order to help fire departments assess the risks and potential dangers before arriving on the scene of an accident. This open source system gives emergency responders a common operating picture, to better execute time critical activities, such as choosing evacuation routes out of flooded areas.

In addition to collecting useful data, the ability to identify patterns and trends in social networks could aid the arms control verification process. In the most basic sense, social media can draw attention to both routine and abnormal events. We may be able to mine Twitter data to understand where strange effluents are flowing, to recognize if a country has an illegal chemical weapons program; or to recognize unexpected patterns of industrial activity at a missile production plant. In this way, we may be able to ensure better compliance with existing arms control treaties and regimes such as the Chemical Weapons Convention.

The synergy is stunning: private citizens may contribute to monitoring for illicit weapons of mass destruction wherever they are found.

Now, how could approaches such as this work specifically in the arms control context? I’ve been thinking about the notion of verification challenges.

Let’s just imagine that a country, to establish its bona fides in a deep nuclear reduction environment, may wish to open itself to a verification challenge, recruiting its citizens and their i-Phones to help prove that it is not stashing extra missiles in the woods, for example, or a fissile material production reactor in the desert. Of course, some form of international supervision would likely be required, to ensure the legitimacy of the challenge and its procedures. And we would have to consider whether such a challenge could cope with especially covert environments, such as caves or deep underground facilities.


Sound far-fetched? Just consider that even today, tablets such as your iPad have tiny accelerometers installed – that’s what tells the tablet which way is up. But the accelerometers also have the capability of detecting small shakes, like an earth tremor.

Now, imagine a whole community of tablet users, all containing an “earth shake” app, dispersed randomly around the country, and connected into a centralized network node. An individual shake could be something as simple as bumping your iPad on a table. But a whole network of tablets, all shaking at virtually the same time? That tells you that something happened; knowing where all the tablets are and the exact time they started shaking can help you to geo-locate the event. It could be an earthquake, or it could be an illegal nuclear test. Of course, other sensors and analysis would have to be brought to bear to figure out the difference.

This is called “ubiquitous sensing,” that is, collecting data and basic analysis through sensors on smartphones and other mobile-computing devices. These sensors would allow citizens to contribute to detecting potential treaty violations, and could build a bridge to a stronger private-public partnership in the realm of treaty verification.

Would private citizens be willing to participate in such a community? We’ve never tried it in the arms control setting, but consider the SETI on-line community – the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence community – with somewhere between 300,000 and 3 million active users worldwide. It may not be an accident that the scientist who proposed the tablet seismography concept to me is an astrophysicist who worked with SETI. He knows the value of citizen participation.

The Challenges Ahead
Of course, for any of this to work, there are technical, legal and political barriers ahead that would need to be overcome—no easy feat to be sure.
On the technical front, it would be necessary to work together to make sure nations cannot spoof or manipulate the public verification challenges that they devise. We also have to bear in mind there could be limitations based on the freedoms available to the citizens of a given country.

On the legal front, there are many questions that must be confronted about active vs. passive participation. How can we prevent governments from extracting information from citizens without their knowledge, or manipulating results collected in databases? Further, in some circumstances, how can active participants be sheltered from reproach by authorities? It may be possible, through careful handling and management, to mask sources, even if locations are public.

On the political front, we cannot assume that information will always be so readily available. As nations and private entities continue to debate the line between privacy and security, it is possible to imagine that we are living in a golden age of open source information that will be harder to take advantage of in future. In the end, the goal of using open source information technology and social networks should be to add to our existing arms control monitoring and verification capabilities, not to supersede them.

It is also important to remember that while we spend a lot of time focusing on nuclear weapons, the other weapons of mass destruction—particularly biological weapons—pose even greater challenges for arms control policy, because they are inherently dual use assets and, thus, difficult to disentangle from normal industrial or commercial processes. Here, too, we need creative thinking about how to facilitate transparency in the biotech sector without compromising sensitive research and industrial practices, or proprietary information.

Joining Forces
Even with the great ideas and fool-proof planning, another issue that we have to consider is how do we create, organize and, when necessary, fund efforts such as these. Developing partnerships among government, civil society groups, philanthropic organizations and private businesses will be the key to moving ahead.

These alliances, sometimes surprising and uncommon, can produce some extraordinary results. The makers of the first artificial heart worked with National Air and Space Administration ( NASA) engineers to develop the technology. Surgeons created arthroscopic methods for heart surgery by talking to engineers who fix jet engines.

We are now just starting to brainstorm about ideas for our partnerships in the arms control arena. The idea of public verification challenges needs developing by considering a straightforward question: Can a government actively enlist its public to help prove it is in compliance with its arms control and nonproliferation obligations?

Closing
Since this is an ideas festival, I have come to the right place. We need your ideas. We need your ideas if we are to take the dream of Bertrand Russell, Albert Einstein, Sir Joseph Rotblat, and so many more, and turn it into reality. We need scientists, diplomats, teachers, religious leaders, soldiers and advocates working together, but most importantly, we need young people. Young adults finishing their undergraduate studies this year have lived their entire lives in the years since the Cold War ended, yet they have inherited thousands and thousands of nuclear weapons. We need to spur their interest–and creativity– in solving the problem of combating weapons of mass destruction. Approaching the rising generation on this issue through the lens of the information age may be one way to engage them. I do believe that our young will rise to the occasion and respond to President Obama’s words, spoken in Seoul earlier this year:

“I see the spirit we need in this endeavor -- an optimism that beats in the hearts of so many young people around the world. It’s that refusal to accept the world as it is, the imagination to see the world as it ought to be, and the courage to turn that vision into reality.”

I think he is right, and I intend to help them on their way.
Thank you for your attention, and I look forward to your questions.

SCIENTISTS BELIEVE LOSS OF BIO-DIVERSITY IS BAD FOR HUMAN WELL-BEING

Photo Credit:  lcb.
FROM:  NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Ecologists Call for Preservation of Planet's Remaining Biological Diversity
Two decades after Rio Earth Summit, scientists recommend international efforts to halt biodiversity losses

June 6, 2012
Twenty years after the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, 17 ecologists are calling for renewed international efforts to curb the loss of Earth's biological diversity.
The loss is compromising nature's ability to provide goods and services essential for human well-being, the scientists say.

Over the past two decades, strong scientific evidence has emerged showing that decline of the world's biological diversity reduces the productivity and sustainability of ecosystems, according to an international team led by the University of Michigan's Bradley Cardinale.

It also decreases ecosystems' ability to provide society with goods and services like food, wood, fodder, fertile soils and protection from pests and disease.

                                             Photo Credit:  lcb

"Water purity, food production and air quality are easy to take for granted, but all are largely provided by communities of organisms," said George Gilchrist, program director in the National Science Foundation's Division of Environmental Biology, which funded the research.

"This paper demonstrates that it is not simply the quantity of living things, but their species, genetic and trait biodiversity, that influences the delivery of many essential 'ecosystem services.'''

Human actions are dismantling ecosystems, resulting in species extinctions at rates several orders of magnitude faster than observed in the fossil record.

If the nations of the world make biodiversity an international priority, the scientists say, there's still time to conserve much of the remaining variety of life--and possibly to restore much of what's been lost.

The researchers present their findings in this week's issue of the journal Nature.
The paper is a scientific consensus statement that summarizes evidence from more than 1,000 ecological studies over the last two decades.

"Much as consensus statements by doctors led to public warnings that tobacco use is harmful to your health, this is a consensus statement that loss of Earth's wild species will be harmful to the world's ecosystems and may harm society by reducing ecosystem services that are essential to human health and prosperity," said Cardinale.
"We need to take biodiversity loss far more seriously--from individuals to international governing bodies--and take greater action to prevent further losses of species."
An estimated nine million species of plants, animals, protists and fungi inhabit the Earth, sharing it with some seven billion people.

The call to action comes as international leaders prepare to gather in Rio de Janeiro on June 20-22 for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, known as the Rio+20 Conference.

The upcoming conference marks the 20th anniversary of the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, which resulted in 193 nations supporting the Convention on Biological Diversity's goals of biodiversity conservation and the sustainable use of natural resources.

The 1992 Earth Summit caused an explosion of interest in understanding how biodiversity loss might affect the dynamics and functioning of ecosystems, as well as the supply of goods and services of value to society.

In the Nature paper, the scientists review published studies on the topic and list six consensus statements, four emerging trends, and four "balance of evidence" statements.

The balance of evidence shows, for example, that genetic diversity increases the yield of commercial crops, enhances the production of wood in tree plantations, improves the production of fodder in grasslands, and increases the stability of yields in fisheries.

Increased plant diversity results in greater resistance to invasion by exotic plants, inhibits plant pathogens such as fungal and viral infections, increases above-ground carbon sequestration through enhanced biomass, and increases nutrient remineralization and soil organic matter.

"No one can agree on what exactly will happen when an ecosystem loses a species, but most of us agree that it's not going to be good," said Shahid Naeem of Columbia University, a co-author of the paper. "And we agree that if ecosystems lose most of their species, it will be a disaster."

"Twenty years and a thousand studies later, what the world thought was true in Rio in 1992 has finally been proven: biodiversity underpins our ability to achieve sustainable development," Naeem said.

Despite far-reaching support for the Convention on Biological Diversity, biodiversity loss has continued over the last two decades, often at increasing rates.
In response, a new set of diversity-preservation goals for 2020, known as the Aichi targets, was recently formulated.

And a new international body called the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services was formed in April 2012 to guide a global response toward sustainable management of the world's biodiversity and ecosystems.

Significant gaps in the science behind biological diversity remain and must be addressed if the Aichi targets are to be met, the scientists write in their paper.

"This paper is important both because of what it shows we know, and what it shows we don't know," said David Hooper of Western Washington University, one of the co-authors.

"Several of the key questions we outline help point the way for the next generation of research on how changing biodiversity affects human well-being."

Without an understanding of the fundamental ecological processes that link biodiversity, ecosystem functions and services, attempts to forecast the societal consequences of diversity loss, and to meet policy objectives, are likely to fail, the ecologists write.

"But with that fundamental understanding in hand, we may yet bring the modern era of biodiversity loss to a safe end for humanity," they conclude.

In addition to Cardinale, Naeem and Hooper, co-authors of the Nature paper are: J. Emmett Duffy of The College of William and Mary; Andrew Gonzalez of McGill University; Charles Perrings and Ann P. Kinzig of Arizona State University; Patrick Venail and Anita Narwani of the University of Michigan; Georgina M. Mace of Imperial College London; David Tilman of the University of Minnesota; David A. Wardle of the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences; Gretchen C. Daily of Stanford University; Michel Loreau of the National Centre for Scientific Research in Moulis, France; James B. Grace of the U.S. Geological Survey; Anne Larigauderie of the National Museum of Natural History in Rue Cuvier, France; and Diane Srivastava of the University of British Columbia.

PRIORITY SETTING OF THE U.S. AFRICA COMMAND

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Members of the U.S. Africa Command headquarters staff at Kelley Barracks in Stuttgart, Germany, as Army Gen. Carter F. Ham, Africom commander, shares his priorities during his first all-hands meeting, March 28, 2011. DOD photo by Army 1st Class Claude Dixon  

Priorities Set U.S. Africa Command's Agenda
By Donna Miles
STUTTGART, Germany, June 11, 2012 - After a year of significant change sweeping the African continent – a wave of democratic movements, the emergence of South Sudan as the world's newest nation and an increase in violent extremism, among them – U.S. Africa Command is using the new defense strategic guidance to shape its engagement in the theater.

"In line with the new strategic guidance, we've prioritized our efforts, focusing on the greatest threats to America, Americans and American interests," Army Gen. Carter F. Ham, Africom commander, told the Senate Armed Services Committee in March.
Ham's strategy, encapsulated in an eight-page command strategy document published in September, is based on four top priorities:
-- Countering terrorism and violent extremist organizations;
-- Countering piracy and illicit trafficking;
-- Partnering to strengthen defense capabilities; and
-- Preparing for and responding to crises.
All support two guiding principles, Ham explained during an interview with American Forces Press Service at his headquarters here: that a safe, secure and stable Africa is in the United States' national interests, and that Africans are best suited to address African security challenges.

No Africom effort gets higher billing than its initiatives aimed at eliminating terrorist safe havens and support for terrorist organizations intent on attacking the United States and its citizens, allies and interests abroad.

"Countering the threats posed by al-Qaida affiliates in East and Northwest Africa remains my No. 1 priority," Ham said.

But for security to take hold in Africa for the long-term, Ham also recognizes the importance of strengthening African partners' defense capabilities so they can address their own security challenges. He noted ongoing efforts to increase capacity in peacekeeping, maritime security, disaster response and other key areas. The general noted the value of this investment, from "train-the-trainer" sessions conducted at the tactical level to leader development programs that will have positive long-term strategic implications.
"We are planting seeds, if you will, and allowing those to develop and grow," he said, noting that it's all being done with no permanently assigned forces and limited forces on the ground.

"I think we get a disproportionate positive effect for a relatively small investment," Ham said. "We don't use lots of troops. Generally, our exercises and engagements are pretty small-scale." They typically involve an individual ship, a small group of Marines, Seabees or veterinarians, or a maintenance detachment, he explained.

"But the effect is multiplied, because our focus is on training and enabling the Africans to do things for themselves," he said. "So there is a compounding effect that results from our engagement."

Army Maj. Gen. Charles Hooper, Africom's director of strategy, plans and programs, said Africom's small force structure, limited assets and relatively small budget makes it a Defense Department model as it puts into practice new strategic guidance that emphasizes leaner, more agile operations.

"If you look at the strategic guidance, it talks about a small footprint," he said. "And I would say that Africa Command is the quintessential small footprint, providing the maximum return and the maximum impact for our national policies with limited resources. We have become masters at providing the maximum return on investment."

BUILDING STRONGER RELATIONSHIPS

FROM:  U.S. NAVY
Hospitalman David Looney shows a local Indonesian child how to listen to the heart while conducting rounds for a surgery screening at Siloam Hospital during Pacific Partnership 2012. Now in its seventh year, pacific partnership is an annual U.S. Pacific Fleet humanitarian and civic assistance mission U.S. military personnel, host and partner nations, non-governmental organizations and international agencies designed to build stronger relationships and develop disaster response capabilities throughout the Asia-Pacific region. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Laurie Dexter (Released) 120606-N-GI544-141

FEMA RELEASES MONEY TO FIGHT HYDE PARK FIRE

Photo:  File, C-130 Fighting Fire.  Credit:  U.S. Air Force
FROM:  FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
FEMA Authorizes Funds to Help Fight Colorado's Hyde Park Fire
DENVER, Co. -- The U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has authorized the use of federal funds to help with firefighting costs for the Hyde Park Fire located in Larimer County.
FEMA Regional Administrator Robin Finegan approved the state’s request for a Federal Fire Management Assistance Grant (FMAG) at 7:19 p.m on June 9, 2012. The fire has burned in excess of 4,000 acres of federal and state/private lands.

At the time of the request the fire was threatening 150 homes in and around Fort Collins, population 299,630. The fire is also threatening campgrounds in the area, the Stove Canyon and Poudre Canyon watersheds and an unknown amount of other infrastructure.

The authorization makes FEMA funding available to pay 75 percent of the state’s eligible firefighting costs under an approved grant for managing, mitigating and controlling designated fires.

FMAGs are provided through the President's Disaster Relief Fund and made available by FEMA to assist in fighting fires that threaten to cause a major disaster. Eligible items can include expenses for field camps; equipment use, repair and replacement; mobilization and demobilization activities; and tools, materials and supplies.

These grants do not provide assistance to individual home or business owners and do not cover other infrastructure damage caused by the fire.

SEC. OF STATE CLINTON'S REMARKS ON CUTBACKS IN IRANIAN CRUDE OIL PURCHASES

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Regarding Significant Reductions of Iranian Crude Oil Purchases
Press Statement Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of StateWashington, DC
June 11, 2012
Today I have made the determination that seven economies—India, Malaysia, Republic of Korea, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Turkey and Taiwan--have all significantly reduced their volume of crude oil purchases from Iran. They join the 11 countries for which I made this determination in March. As a result, I will report to the Congress that sanctions pursuant to Section 1245(d)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 will not apply to their financial institutions for a potentially renewable period of 180 days.

We have implemented these sanctions to support our efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and to encourage Iran to comply with its international obligations. Today’s announcement underscores the success of our sanctions implementation. By reducing Iran’s oil sales, we are sending a decisive message to Iran’s leaders: until they take concrete actions to satisfy the concerns of the international community, they will continue to face increasing isolation and pressure.

The United States remains committed to a dual-track policy that offers Iran the chance to engage seriously with the international community to resolve our concerns over its nuclear program through negotiations with the P5+1. Iran has the ability to address these concerns by taking concrete steps during the next round of talks in Moscow. I urge its leaders to do so.