A new report from the Congressional Research Service summarizes for Congress what is publicly known about the two National Security Agency surveillance programs that were disclosed by Edward Snowden and reported last month by The Guardian and The Washington Post.
“Since these programs were publicly disclosed over the course of two days in June, there has been confusion about what information is being collected and what authorities the NSA is acting under. This report clarifies the differences between the two programs and identifies potential issues that may help Members of Congress assess legislative proposals pertaining to NSA surveillance authorities.”
The CRS report does not present any new factual material concerning the surveillance programs. But it identifies some outstanding questions about them — the word “unclear” is used several times — and it formulates topics for congressional consideration. See NSA Surveillance Leaks: Background and Issues for Congress, July 2, 2013.
Other new or newly updated CRS reports that Congress has not made publicly available include the following.
Ecuador: Political and Economic Conditions and U.S. Relations, July 3, 2013
China Naval Modernization: Implications for U.S. Navy Capabilities — Background and Issues for Congress, updated July 5, 2013
China-U.S. Trade Issues, updated July 3, 2012
China’s Economic Rise: History, Trends, Challenges, and Implications for the United States, updated July 3, 2013
U.S.-Taiwan Relationship: Overview of Policy Issues, updated July 2, 2013
Taiwan: Major U.S. Arms Sales Since 1990, updated July 3, 2013
Datasets and variables that do not align with Administration priorities, or might reflect poorly on Administration policy impacts, seem to be especially in the cross-hairs.
One month of a government shutdown is in the books, but how many more months will (or can) it go? Congress is paralyzed, but there are a few spasms of activity around healthcare and the prospects of a continuing resolution to punt this fight out until January or later.
At a period where the federal government is undergoing significant changes in how it hires, buys, collects and organizes data, and delivers, deeper exploration of trust in these facets as worthwhile.
Moving postsecondary education data collection to the states is the best way to ensure that the U.S. Department of Education can meet its legislative mandates in an era of constrained federal resources.