Recent moves by Russia to reform its military were assessed by the Congressional Research Service in a new report (pdf).

“This report… provides basic information about the [Russian] military’s leadership and structure, the arms industry and efforts to modernize weaponry (including through foreign arms technology transfers), power projection efforts, and the military budget.”

The CRS report on “Russian Military Reform and Defense Policy” is dated August 24, 2011, though it was actually published September 20.

Under congressional secrecy policy, CRS is not permitted to make its reports directly available to the public.

Led by the United States, arms-exporting nations are competing ever more intensely to win lucrative sales contracts in a shrinking global marketplace, according to a new report (pdf) from the Congressional Research Service.

“Worldwide weapons sales declined generally in 2010 in response to the constraints created by the tenuous state of the global economy,” the report said.  The value of all arms transfer agreements with developing nations declined from $49.8 billion in 2009 to over $30.7 billion in 2010.  At the same time, however, the value of all arms deliveries to developing nations was nearly $21.9 billion, which is “the highest total in these deliveries values since 2006.”  See “Conventional Arms Transfers to Developing Nations, 2003-2010” by Richard F. Grimmett, Congressional Research Service, September 22, 2011.

Yet “as new arms sales have become more difficult to conclude since the global recession began, competition among sellers has become increasingly intense,” the report said.

“A number of weapons-exporting nations are focusing not only on the clients with whom they have held historic competitive advantages, due to well-established military-support relationships, but also on potential new clients in countries and regions where they have not been traditional arms suppliers.”

Meanwhile, “[D]eveloping nations have been leveraging their attractiveness as clients by demanding greater cost offsetting elements in their arms contracts, as well as transfer of more advanced technology and provisions for domestic production options,” the report said.

The United States dominates the global arms market both in sales agreements and in deliveries, according to the CRS report, which was first reported in the New York Times on September 24.

The annual CRS reports prepared by Mr. Grimmett are authoritative compilations of official data on arms transfers, based on privileged access by CRS to government records.  As such, they may have enduring reference value for researchers in the field (despite the fact that the reports do not include clandestine or covert transfers).   A collection of all CRS annual reports on conventional arms transfers dating back to 1982 is available on the Federation of American Scientists website here.  Additional background is available from the FAS Arms Sales Monitoring Project.

Reports on secrecy-related topics from the Congressional Research Service that are newly updated (but otherwise not new) include these (all pdf).

Criminal Prohibitions on the Publication of Classified Defense Information, September 8, 2011

Protection of Classified Information by Congress: Practices and Proposals, August 31, 2011

The State Secrets Privilege: Preventing the Disclosure of Sensitive National Security Information During Civil Litigation, August 16, 2011

Newly updated CRS reports on other topics include these.

Intelligence Issues for Congress, September 14, 2011

The Palestinians: Background and U.S. Relations, August 30, 2011

U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians, August 29, 2011

 

For those who may not have been paying attention, “A small group of developing countries are transforming the global economic landscape,” the Congressional Research Service observed in a report last month.  “Led by China, India, and Brazil, these rising economic powers pose varied challenges and opportunities for U.S. economic interests and leadership of the global economy.”  See “Rising Economic Powers and the Global Economy: Trends and Issues for Congress” (pdf), August 22, 2011.

Other new reports from CRS that have not been made readily available to the public include the following (all pdf).

“Cost-Benefit and Other Analysis Requirements in the Rulemaking Process,” August 30, 2011

“Climate Change: Conceptual Approaches and Policy Tools,” August 29, 2011

“Financing Recovery After a Catastrophic Earthquake or Nuclear Power Incident,” August 25, 2011

“Addressing the Long-Run Budget Deficit: A Comparison of Approaches,” August 25, 2011

“Homeland Security Department: FY2012 Appropriations,” September 2, 2011

“Congressional Primer on Major Disasters and Emergencies,” August 31, 2011

The authority of the President to use military force without congressional authorization and the ability of Congress to limit or regulate such use are discussed in a new report (pdf) from the Congressional Research Service.

At issue are the scope and priority of basic constitutional terms, including the definition of the President’s role as commander in chief, the authority of Congress to declare war, and its ability to appropriate or to withhold funds for military operations.

No final answers can be provided.  However, “it is generally agreed that Congress cannot ‘direct campaigns,’ but that Congress can regulate the conduct of hostilities, at least to some degree, and that Congress can limit military operations without the risk of a presidential veto by refusing to appropriate funds,” the CRS report said.

“To date,… no court has invalidated a statute passed by Congress on the basis that it impinges the constitutional authority of the Commander in Chief, whether directly or indirectly through appropriations,” the report noted. “In contrast, presidential assertions of authority based on the Commander-in-Chief Clause, in excess of or contrary to congressional authority, have been struck down by the courts.”

The political, ideological or institutional obstacles to the independent exercise of constitutional authority by Congress, which may run even deeper than any legal constraints, are not addressed here.

A copy of the new report was obtained by Secrecy News. See “Congressional Authority to Limit Military Operations,” September 8, 2011.

The growing use of social media — such as Twitter and Facebook — in responding to emergency situations is examined in a new report (pdf) from the Congressional Research Service.

“In the last five years social media have played an increasing role in emergencies and disasters,” the report notes. “Social media sites rank as the fourth most popular source to access emergency information. They have been used by individuals and communities to warn others of unsafe areas or situations, inform friends and family that someone is safe, and raise funds for disaster relief.”

While they have still untapped potential for improving emergency communications, social media can also be used — inadvertently or maliciously — to disseminate false or misleading information, the report observes. See “Social Media and Disasters: Current Uses, Future Options, and Policy Considerations,” September 6, 2011.

With few exceptions, congressional leaders of both parties are opposed to allowing direct public access to Congressional Research Service reports like this one.  Perhaps they wish to foster a healthy public skepticism about the validity of official restrictions on government information, or a heightened appreciation for unauthorized disclosures.

At any rate, some recent CRS reports that are not publicly available from CRS include the following (all pdf).

“India: Domestic Issues, Strategic Dynamics, and U.S. Relations,” September 1, 2011. (This report notes in passing the curious statistic that “some 40% of American hotel rooms are owned by Indian-Americans.”)

“Desalination: Technologies, Use, and Congressional Issues,” August 15, 2011.

“U.S. Energy: Overview and Key Statistics,” July 29, 2011.

“U.S. Renewable Electricity Generation: Resources and Challenges,” August 5, 2011.

New and updated reports on China and Taiwan from the Congressional Research Service include the following (all pdf).

China-U.S. Trade Issues, August 10, 2011

U.S.-Taiwan Relationship: Overview of Policy Issues, August 4, 2011

China’s Currency: A Summary of the Economic Issues, August 3, 2011

Taiwan: Major U.S. Arms Sales Since 1990, August 2, 2011

U.S.-China Military Contacts: Issues for Congress, July 26, 2011

China Naval Modernization: Implications for U.S. Navy Capabilities — Background and Issues for Congress, July 22, 2011

Human Rights in China and U.S. Policy, July 18, 2011

Recent reports from the Congressional Research Service that have not been made readily available to the public include the following (all pdf).

“The European Union: Foreign and Security Policy,” August 15, 2011

“Standard & Poor’s Downgrade of U.S. Government Long-Term Debt,” August 9, 2011

“The Obama Administration’s Cybersecurity Proposal: Criminal Provisions,” July 29, 2011

New reports from the Congressional Research Service on topics of economic policy include the following (all pdf).

“Boosting U.S. Exports: Selected Issues for Congress,” July 21, 2011

“Economic Recovery: Sustaining U.S. Economic Growth in a Post-Crisis Economy,” July 18, 2011

“Inflation: Causes, Costs, and Current Status,” July 26, 2011

“Treasury Securities and the U.S. Sovereign Credit Default Swap Market,” July 25, 2011

“The Unemployment Trust Fund (UTF): State Insolvency and Federal Loans to States,” July 8, 2011

“Can Contractionary Fiscal Policy Be Expansionary?,” June 6, 2011

Four months after the retirement of the previous director of the Congressional Research Service (CRS), Daniel Mulhollan, no successor has been named.  Today, the Library of Congress posted a solicitation on USA Jobs seeking applicants for the position of CRS Director.

“A successful candidate for this position should have thorough, substantive knowledge of the Congress as an institution and its operations.  The candidate should have experience interacting with Members of Congress and their staffs, and should possess first-hand knowledge of congressional decision-making, processes, and procedures,” the job announcement said.

Anyone with ideas of opening up CRS to interactions with the larger world would not be welcome.

Applicants “should have a strong desire to work exclusively for Congress,” the announcement said, reflecting the legacy view that CRS should not be responsive to anyone but Congress, and should not even make non-confidential CRS publications available to the public.

Recent CRS reports that are not publicly available from CRS include the following (all pdf).

“Suicide, PTSD, and Substance Use Among OEF/OIF Veterans Using VA Health Care: Facts and Figures,” July 18, 2011

“The State of Campaign Finance Policy: Recent Developments and Issues for Congress,” July 18, 2011

“Fairness Doctrine: History and Constitutional Issues,” July 13, 2011

“Chinese Tire Imports: Section 421 Safeguards and the World Trade Organization (WTO),” July 12, 2011

“State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2012 Budget and Appropriations,” July 22, 2011

“The Republic of South Sudan: Opportunities and Challenges for Africa’s Newest Country,” July 25, 2011

“Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy and Implementation,” July 11, 2011

“National Security Letters: Proposals in the 112th Congress,” June 30, 2011

Recent reports from the Congressional Research Service that have not been made readily available to the public include the following (all pdf).

“Federal Support for Academic Research,” June 17, 2011

“Financial Aid for Students: Print and Web Guides,” June 24, 2011

“Patent Reform in the 112th Congress: Innovation Issues,” June 30, 2011

“Congressional Nominations to U.S. Service Academies: An Overview and Resources for Outreach and Management,” July 5, 2011

“Real Earnings, Health Insurance and Pension Coverage, and the Distribution of Earnings, 1979-2009,” July 6, 2011

“Challenge to the Boeing-Airbus Duopoly in Civil Aircraft: Issues for Competitiveness,” July 25, 2011

“Statutory Limits on Total Spending as a Method of Budget Control,” July 26, 2011

One of the peculiar features of the prosecution of suspected leaker Jeffrey Sterling is that he is charged with a seemingly unlikely count of “mail fraud.”

The government’s contention (in Count Eight of the indictment) is that by leaking information to author James Risen, whose books containing that information were later sent by mail to bookstores, Mr. Sterling engaged in mail fraud.

Mail fraud is no doubt a bad thing to do.  But to a surprising extent the opposite is also true. The law is so broadly written that many bad things that a person may do could turn out to be mail fraud.

“The mail and wire fraud statutes essentially outlaw dishonesty,” according to a new survey of the subject prepared by the Congressional Research Service which describes the statutes’ astonishing breadth.  (The CRS report does not address the Sterling case.)

“A defendant need not personally have mailed or wired a communication,” the CRS report said; “it is enough that he ’caused’ a mailing or transmission of a wire communication in the sense that the mailing or transmission was the reasonable foreseeable consequence of his intended scheme.”

See “Mail and Wire Fraud: A Brief Overview of Federal Criminal Law,” July 21, 2011.  An abridged version of the same report is here (both pdf).

“The mail fraud statute was first enacted in the late nineteenth century in order to prevent city slickers from using the mail to cheat guileless country folks,” the CRS report really says.