With the formal ending of the U.S. war in Iraq on December 15, 2011, the Congressional Research Service has produced an updated report on U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Current Conflicts (pdf).
“Confusion can occur because beginning and ending dates for ‘periods of war’ in many nonofficial sources are often different from those given in treaties and other official sources of information, and armistice dates can be confused with termination dates,” the December 28, 2011 CRS report said.
A different kind of confusion can arise when misleading or mistaken information is presented as fact, as when President Bush declared in a May 1, 2003 address to the nation that “major military combat actions in Iraq have ended.”
The CRS report does not address covert action or other unacknowledged military operations.
Some other noteworthy new or newly updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following (all pdf).
Director of National Intelligence Statutory Authorities: Status and Proposals,” December 16, 2011
The National Security Council: An Organizational Assessment, December 28, 2011
Terrorism Information Sharing and the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Report Initiative: Background and Issues for Congress, December 28, 2011
The Army’s Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) and Early Infantry Brigade Combat Team (E-IBCT) Programs: Background and Issues for Congress, December 27, 2011
National Infrastructure Bank: Overview and Current Legislation, December 14, 2011
Drug Offenses: Maximum Fines and Terms of Imprisonment for Violation of the Federal Controlled Substances Act and Related Laws, December 12, 2011
Keystone XL Pipeline Project: Key Issues, December 12, 2011
Recess Appointments: Frequently Asked Questions, December 12, 2011
“Super PACs” in Federal Elections: Overview and Issues for Congress, December 2, 2011
This rule gives agencies significantly more authority over certain career policy roles. Whether that authority improves accountability or creates new risks depends almost entirely on how agencies interrupt and apply it.
Our environmental system was built for 1970s-era pollution control, but today it needs stable, integrated, multi-level governance that can make tradeoffs, share and use evidence, and deliver infrastructure while demonstrating that improved trust and participation are essential to future progress.
Durable and legitimate climate action requires a government capable of clearly weighting, explaining, and managing cost tradeoffs to the widest away of audiences, which in turn requires strong technocratic competency.
FAS is launching the Center for Regulatory Ingenuity (CRI) to build a new, transpartisan vision of government that works – that has the capacity to achieve ambitious goals while adeptly responding to people’s basic needs.