The Meaning of Transparency, and More from CRS

President Obama’s declared goal of making his “the most transparent Administration in history” generated successive waves of enthusiasm, perplexity, frustration, and mockery as public expectations of increased openness and accountability were lifted sky high and then — often, not always — thwarted.

Every Administration including this one presides over the release of more government information than did its predecessors, if only because more information is created with the passage of time and there is more that can be released. But President Obama seemed to promise more than this. What was it?

Part of the problem is definitional.

“Although there are laws that affect access to government information, there is no single definition for what constitutes transparency– nor is there an agreed upon way to measure it,” observes a new report from the Congressional Research Service.

“Transparency may be defined as the disclosure of government information and its use by the public,” the report suggests. “Transparency, under this definition, requires a public that can access, understand, and use the information it receives from the federal government. This report first assesses the meaning of transparency and discusses its scholarly and practical definitions. It also provides an analysis of the concept of transparency, with a focus on federal government transparency in the executive branch.”

“This report subsequently examines the statutes, initiatives, requirements, and other actions that make information more available to the public or protect it from public release. It also examines transparency and secrecy from the standpoint of how the public accesses government information, and whether the release of government data and information may make operation of the federal government more or, counter-intuitively, less transparent. Finally, this report analyzes whether existing transparency initiatives are effective in reaching their stated goals.”

The CRS report makes only passing mention of national security secrecy and does not address efforts to reduce the scope and application of secrecy in the national security realm. It also does not consider in any depth how technological changes are affecting government information policy, perturbing or mooting longstanding official positions on disclosure and non-disclosure. Nor does it explore political obstacles to greater transparency (such as the congressional policy that bars CRS publication of this very report on transparency).

A copy of the report was obtained by Secrecy News. See Government Transparency and Secrecy: An Examination of Its Meaning and Use in the Executive Branch,” November 8, 2012.

Some other new and newly updated CRS reports that Congress has not made publicly available include the following.

U.S. Renewable Electricity: How Does Wind Generation Impact Competitive Power Markets?, November 7, 2012

Energy Policy: 112th Congress Issues and Legislative Proposals, November 8, 2012

China and Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and Missiles: Policy Issues, November 7, 2012

The U.S.-Panama Free Trade Agreement (which entered into force on October 31), November 8, 2012

The United States as a Net Debtor Nation: Overview of the International Investment Position, November 8, 2012

Social Security: Cost-of-Living Adjustments, November 8, 2012

Israel: Background and U.S. Relations, November 7, 2012

Lebanon: Background and U.S. Policy, November 6, 2012

Who Is a Veteran?, and More from CRS

Selected reports from the Congressional Research Service on veterans’ affairs which Congress has not made readily available to the public include the following.

“Who is a Veteran?” — Basic Eligibility for Veterans’ Benefits, January 23, 2012

Employment for Veterans: Trends and Programs, October 23, 2012

GI Bills Enacted Prior to 2008 and Related Veterans’ Educational Assistance Programs: A Primer, October 22, 2012

The Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008 (Post-9/11 GI Bill): Primer and Issues, September 21, 2012

Disability Benefits Available Under the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Veterans Disability Compensation (VDC) Programs, September 12, 2012

SBA Veterans Assistance Programs: An Analysis of Contemporary Issues, September 4, 2012

Overview of the Appeal Process for Veterans’ Claims, July 16, 2012

Veterans Affairs: Historical Budget Authority, FY1940-FY2012, June 13, 2012

Veterans’ Medical Care: FY2013 Appropriations, May 8, 2012

Suicide Prevention Efforts of the Veterans Health Administration, February 3, 2012

Veterans and Homelessness, February 2, 2012

Natural Gas in the US Economy, and More from CRS

New and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service that Congress has not made available to the public include the following.

Natural Gas in the U.S. Economy: Opportunities for Growth, November 6, 2012

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act: Title VII, Derivatives, November 6, 2012

Same-Sex Marriages: Legal Issues, November 5, 2012

Mayo v. Prometheus: Implications for Patents, Biotechnology, and Personalized Medicine, November 6, 2012

U.S. Direct Investment Abroad: Trends and Current Issues, October 26, 2012

Foreign Direct Investment in the United States: An Economic Analysis, October 26, 2012

Employment for Veterans: Trends and Programs, October 23, 2012

Yemen: Background and U.S. Relations, November 1, 2012

Bahrain: Reform, Security, and U.S. Policy, November 6, 2012

Faithless Electors, and More from CRS

The members of the Electoral College who formally enact the election of the President are expected or even required to represent the wishes of the voters who elected them, but sometimes they don’t!

“Notwithstanding the tradition that electors are bound to vote for the candidates of the party that nominated them, individual electors have sometimes broken their commitment, voting for a different candidate or candidates other than those to whom they were pledged,” a report from the Congressional Research Service explains. “They are known as ‘faithless’ or ‘unfaithful’ electors.”

“Although 24 states seek to prohibit faithless electors by a variety of methods, including pledges and the threat of fines or criminal action, most constitutional scholars believe that once electors have been chosen, they remain constitutionally free agents, able to vote for any candidate who meets the requirements for President and Vice President. Faithless electors have been few in number (since the 20th century, one each in 1948, 1956, 1960, 1968, 1972, 1976, and 1988, one blank ballot cast in 2000, and one in 2004), and have never influenced the outcome of a presidential election.”

See The Electoral College: How It Works in Contemporary Presidential Elections, October 22, 2012.

Other new and newly updated reports from the Congressional Research Service that Congress has not made available to the public include the following.

Maritime Territorial and Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) Disputes Involving China: Issues for Congress, October 25, 2012

Federal Involvement in Flood Response and Flood Infrastructure Repair: Storm Sandy Recovery, October 31, 2012

Emergency Relief Program: Federal-Aid Highway Assistance for Disaster-Damaged Roads and Bridges, November 1, 2012

Constitutionality of Retroactive Tax Legislation, October 25, 2012

The Impact of the Federal Estate Tax on State Estate Taxes, October 24, 2012

Air Force F-22 Fighter Program, updated October 25, 2012

Some Comments on the “Withdrawal” of a CRS Report

Updated below

The New York Times reported last week that the Congressional Research Service had withdrawn a report that found no correlation between reduced tax rates and increased economic growth after some Republican Senators took exception to it. (“Nonpartisan Tax Report Withdrawn After G.O.P. Protest” by Jonathan Weisman, November 1.)

But “withdrawn” here means withdrawn from the internal congressional website. CRS could not withdraw the report from public circulation because it never made the report publicly available. In fact, as things stand, the “withdrawn” CRS report is now more widely accessible than the large majority of other CRS products. Not only did the New York Times post it online, it is available on the congressional website of the Senate Democratic Policy Committee, as well as through FAS and elsewhere.

But neither congressional Republicans who were angered by the report nor Democrats who were offended by its withdrawal have seen fit to provide public access online to thousands of other CRS reports, which are effectively suppressed without being withdrawn. (A House resolution earlier this year to alter that anachronistic policy has not gone anywhere.)

One possible argument against public disclosure is that the CRS report on tax rates and growth would almost certainly have escaped criticism if it had not been introduced into broad public discourse by a previous New York Times article in September. Once people began talking about it, it could not be ignored by interested members of Congress. But that is an argument for CRS irrelevance, not for non-disclosure.

CRS often does fine work, but it is not above error or beyond criticism. Republicans, Democrats and anyone else are all well within their rights to dispute CRS reports on factual, methodological or even ideological grounds. Why wouldn’t they be?

Ideally, the proper response from CRS would not have been to withdraw the report, but to engage the critics. If those critics have valid points, CRS should revise the report accordingly. If the objections are not valid, let CRS explain why. This shouldn’t be complicated. And yet somehow it is. Once a congressional agency becomes the target of partisan attacks, it can be crippled and then destroyed, as was the case with the still-lamented Office of Technology Assessment, which was terminated by the new Republican majority in 1995. (“Congress surely doesn’t need [a research organization such as CRS] that acts like an arm of the Democratic Party,” the Wall Street Journal editorialized ominously and unfairly on Friday in response to the latest controversy.)

According to the Times story last week, “Congressional aides and outside economists said they were not aware of previous efforts to discredit a study from the research service.” But actually there have been a number of such efforts in which the motives or competence of CRS analysts were impugned by Members who disagreed with their conclusions.

“CRS completely ignored the most basic principles of statutory interpretation,” complained Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) in an angry 2006 letter to the CRS director criticizing certain CRS intelligence studies. He said CRS had produced “a flawed and obviously incomplete analysis…. ” The CRS perspective was defended at that time by Rep. Jane Harman, and the studies in question were not rescinded. (See “Mau-Mauing the Congressional Research Service,” Secrecy News, February 4, 2006.) A 1993 CRS report on Iraq’s Nuclear Achievements was one of a number of reports that have been withdrawn from official circulation for various reasons.

Update: The “withdrawn” CRS report was reissued in a somewhat revised form on December 12, 2012 and may be found here.

Vulnerability of Electric Power System Assessed by CRS

The U.S. electric power system is vulnerable to a variety of threats, from natural disasters to operational errors to sabotage or terrorist attack, a newly disclosed report from the Congressional Research Service says.

Over the years there have actually been tens of thousands of recorded attacks on electric power targets, CRS notes, but usually due to “mischief” and with limited or no consequences.

“Most commonly, electric outages are caused by use of a weapon to shoot out transformers or use of simple tools to take down transmission towers.”

“As part of regular operating procedure, utilities make contingency plans for outages of one or two large components on their system. However, few systems make contingency plans for outages on as many as seven critical components. Under extreme scenarios, large portions the United States could be without power for several months.”

The CRS report is dated April 9, 2004. But for reasons that could not be immediately ascertained, the report was only issued last week with a new report number.

“This report identifies physical and cyber vulnerabilities in the electric transmission and distribution system. The role of government and industry in protecting infrastructure as well as in the restoration of damaged systems is analyzed and policy implications are discussed.”

A copy of the report was obtained by Secrecy News. See Electric Utility Infrastructure Vulnerabilities: Transformers, Towers, and Terrorism, April 9, 2004.

Federal Support for Academic Research, and More from CRS

Newly updated reports from the Congressional Research Service that Congress has not made publicly available include the following.

Federal Support for Academic Research, October 18, 2012

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act: History, Impact, and Issues, October 22, 2012

Terrorism and Transnational Crime: Foreign Policy Issues for Congress, October 19, 2012

Managing the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Policy Implications of Expanding Global Access to Nuclear Power, October 19, 2012

U.S. Sanctions on Burma, October 19, 2012

Burma’s Political Prisoners and U.S. Sanctions, October 19, 2012

Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress, October 18, 2012

Navy Ohio Replacement (SSBN[X]) Ballistic Missile Submarine Program: Background and Issues for Congress, October 18, 2012

Navy Shipboard Lasers for Surface, Air, and Missile Defense: Background and Issues for Congress, October 19, 2012

Navy Irregular Warfare and Counterterrorism Operations: Background and Issues for Congress, October 18, 2012

Congressional Oversight, and More from CRS

Newly updated reports from the Congressional Research Service which Congress has not made publicly available include the following.

Congressional Oversight, October 17, 2012

Contemporary Developments in Presidential Elections, October 18, 2012

U.S. International Trade: Trends and Forecasts, October 19, 2012

President of the United States: Compensation, October 17, 2012

Peru in Brief: Political and Economic Conditions and Relations with the United States, October 18, 2012

Libya: Transition and U.S. Policy, October 18, 2012

China Naval Modernization: Implications for U.S. Navy Capabilities — Background and Issues for Congress, October 17, 2012

Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress, October 18, 2012

Job Growth During the Recovery, and More from CRS

New and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service that Congress has not made available to the public include the following.

Job Growth During the Recovery, updated October 16, 2012

The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR): Funding Issues After a Decade of Implementation, FY2004-FY2013, October 10, 2012

Statutes of Limitation in Federal Criminal Cases: An Overview, updated October 1, 2012

Venezuela: Issues for Congress, updated October 16, 2012

Georgia’s October 2012 Legislative Election: Outcome and Implications, October 15, 2012

Iran Sanctions, updated October 15, 2012

U.S. Foreign Assistance to Pakistan, and More from CRS

Last month, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton informed Congress that U.S. national security interests required a waiver of statutory limitations on security aid to Pakistan. “The Secretary’s accompanying justification for the waiver was delivered in classified form,” a newly updated report from the Congressional Research Service noted, adding that the waiver “appeared extremely difficult to justify” in view of Pakistan’s uneven cooperation with U.S. and NATO forces. See Pakistan: U.S. Foreign Assistance, updated October 4, 2012

Some other Congressional Research Service products that have not been made readily available to the public include the following.

Jordan: Background and U.S. Relations, updated October 3, 2012

Federal Grants-in-Aid Administration: A Primer, October 3, 2012

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF): Welfare-to-Work Revisited, October 2, 2012

Sequestration: A Review of Estimates of Potential Job Losses, October 2, 2012