One “canary in the coal mine” for the U.S. health care system is the fate of early retirees’ health benefits. Once a win-win for workers and employers, the skyrocketing cost of health insurance has reversed this trend. The pressure on employers and anxiety of retirees have risen. This has led to new types of arrangements between firms and unions to preserve funding and insurance for pre-Medicare retirees. But will it work? Should other firms and unions follow suit? And what role should policy play in protecting the health coverage of early retirees? 

Please join us for a discussion of these questions with a distinguished panel.  Jeanne Lambrew of the Center for American Progress will present an overview of the challenges and policy issues.  Larry Cohen of Communications Workers of America, Annette Guarisco of General Motors, Karen Ignagni of America’s Health Insurance Plans, and Barbara Kennelly of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, will shed light on the opportunities, challenges, and possible actions that public and private actors can take.

Today’s dialogue in medical journals and the mainstream press on health disparities in American society increasingly focuses on individuals' genetic predispositions to disease. More and more, race is interjected into this dialogue as scientists link genes of certain racial groups to medical conditions while pharmaceutical companies increasingly seek to medicate those conditions. Unfortunately, during this process the focus on reducing and preventing racial health disparities – which in large part can be attributed to social determinants – becomes obscured.

The Center for American Progress will explore these trends and their implications for addressing racial health disparities by hosting a public dialogue.  Jamie Brooks, co-author of  "Geneticizing Disease: Implications for Racial Health Disparities," which will be released at the event, will provide an overview of the issue and the paper's findings. Law professor Lisa Crooms will follow with a legal and racial perspective on the implications of “geneticizing” disease. And in closing, Dr. Nicole Lurie will discuss the known non-medical determinants of health, such as environment, insurance status, and other socio-economic factors. Meredith King, co-author of the paper, will moderate the discussion to follow.

Come celebrate the publication of Military Reform: A Reference Handbook.  Join authors Lawrence J. Korb, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress and a senior advisor to the Center for Defense Information and Winslow T. Wheeler, director of the Straus Military Reform Project at CDI for a discussion and Q&A on the book moderated by Bruce G. Blair, President of World Security Institute.

Just published, Military Reform: A Reference Handbook, examines the successes and failures of the recent military reform movement in Congress and the Pentagon. The book presents the reader with a history of the various attempts to reform the American armed forces - from both internal and external sources - from the American Revolution to the present day. The authors identify the serious yet poorly addressed challenges facing America's defenses today, and focus on both the genuine and cosmetic efforts taken to remedy the many remaining critical problems. They conclude with lessons for how to reform our armed forces more effectively than the ineffectual - and sometimes counterproductive - efforts that have been attempted in recent years.

The rise of other global powers is most often posed as a sorry tale, full of threats to America's primacy, prosperity, and way of life. The potential loss of our #1 status implies a blow to our safety, economy, and prestige.

But this is a rare moment in history: none of the world's big powers are our adversaries. In their new book, The Next American Century, Nina Hachigian and Mona Sutphen show that the "pivotal powers" - China, Europe, India, Japan, and Russia - seek greater influence, but each has an enormous stake in the world economy and a keen desire to thwart common threats. India is a key ally in the struggle against terrorism. China's help is essential to containing pandemic disease. Russia is leading an effort to keep nuclear devices out of terrorists' hands. Japan and Europe are critical partners in tackling climate change. None of these countries is a direct military or ideological challenger. In fact, their gains largely help, rather than hurt, America's continuing prosperity, growth, and to some extent, even its values. Will we have conflicts with these powers? Definitely. Some will be serious. But, by and large, they want what we want: a stable world and better lives for their citizens. We live in an era of opportunity, not of loss.

To take advantage of this moment, the United States must get its own house in order, making sure that American children can compete, American workers can adjust, America's military remains cutting-edge, and American diplomacy entices rather than alienates. While America must be prepared for the possibility that a hostile superpower may one day emerge, it has to be careful not to turn a distant, uncertain threat into an immediate one. Washington should welcome the pivotal powers into a vigorous international order to share the burden of solving pressing global problems of peace, climate, health, and growth. The avenue to a truly safer and more prosperous world runs through the pivotal powers. With them, we can build a world where Americans will thrive, today and tomorrow.

U.S. reliance on oil – primarily for transportation – has many negative impacts. To pay for this oil, American consumers send billions of dollars to other countries including some that are incongruent with U.S. interests. And we are dependent on this fuel from countries rife with political instability. Conflicts there can cause the oil price to spike. In short, oil dependence threatens our economy and national security.

In addition, the combustion of oil and petroleum products – particularly gasoline – threatens our environment. Emissions of greenhouse gases from motor vehicles are the second largest source of U.S. global warming pollution.

Congress began to address these problems with the enactment of the Energy Independence and Security Act. President Bush signed it into law on December 19, 2007. It includes the first increase in fuel economy standards since 1975. It would require cars and light trucks to meet an average fuel economy standard of 35 miles per gallon by 2020, with interim steps in the early years.

Now that the new law sets a fuel economy destination, auto companies can travel there via various routes. Some companies, such as General Motors, plan to develop "plug in hybrids" that rely on batteries recharged via AC outlets, combined with gasoline. Other companies plan to develop cars that rely on different fuels. Each system has its advantages and drawbacks.

This event will bring together leaders from General Motors and Honda to discuss their various approaches to achievement of the new fuel economy standards. An impartial automotive engineer from the Union of Concerned Scientists will provide his perspective as well. The ultimate technology "winner" could affect our transportation system for years to come.