The potential risks associated with air cargo on domestic and international flights, and the challenges involved in assessing and addressing them, are discussed in a new report from the Congressional Research Service. See Security of Air Cargo Shipments, Operations, and Facilities, January 24, 2018,

Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2018, updated January 25, 2018

Banking Law: An Overview of Federal Preemption in the Dual Banking System, January 23, 2018

Economic Impact of Infrastructure Investment, updated January 24, 2018

EPA’s Methane Regulations: Legal Overview, updated January 24, 2018

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS): An Overview, updated January 24, 2018

The United Arab Emirates (UAE): Issues for U.S. Policy, updated January 25, 2018

China-U.S. Trade Issues, updated January 23, 2018

The new budget law that keeps the government open for the next three weeks includes a provision that would permit the transfer and spending of intelligence funds during that period without congressional authorization or approval.

“This language is troublesome for the [Senate intelligence] committee because it would authorize the intelligence community to spend funds ‘notwithstanding’ the law that requires prior authorization by the Senate Intelligence Committee or by the House Intelligence Committee,” said intelligence committee chairman Sen. Richard Burr on Monday.

“Effectively, the intelligence community could expend funds as it sees fit without an authorization bill in place.”

“Let me just say to my colleagues, a situation like this is untenable,” Sen. Burr said. “If you neuter the committee, you neuter our oversight.”

But efforts by Senator Burr and committee vice chairman Senator Mark Warner to modify the provision were blocked by Appropriations Committee chairman Sen. Thad Cochran. He said the controversial language “is included exactly as requested by the administration” and with his support the budget measure was enacted into law.

The provision was first reported last week by Ryan Grim in The Intercept.

The override of normal oversight requirements was requested by the Office of Management and Budget at the urging of the Pentagon, the Washington Examinerreported. See “Provision in shutdown-ending bill stokes fear of oversight-free intelligence spending” by Steven Nelson, January 23, 2018,

An unnamed congressional staffer told the paper that the change mainly pertains to missile defense funds and “does not give the intelligence community a blank check at all.” The staffer also contended that it does not materially affect the role of the intelligence committees.

But the chairman and vice chairman disagree.

“For the next 3 weeks we will have an inability to exercise, in our estimation, the tools that we might need,” Senator Burr said.

The Marshall Plan, the program of U.S. financial assistance that helped spark the economic recovery of western Europe following World War II, is considered to be one of the most successful U.S. foreign policy initiatives ever and one that might have implications for today.

“Although the Marshall Plan has its critics and occurred during a unique point in history, many observers believe it offers lessons that may be applicable to contemporary foreign aid programs,” according to a new report from the Congressional Research Service that reviews its achievements. See The Marshall Plan: Design, Accomplishments, and Significance, January 18, 2018.

Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Temporary Protected Status: Overview and Current Issues, updated January 17, 2018

Government Contract Bid Protests In Brief: Analysis of Legal Processes and Recent Developments, January 19, 2018

Highway Bridge Conditions: Issues for Congress, updated January 17, 2018

Prevalence of Mental Illness in the United States: Data Sources and Estimates, updated January 19, 2018

Iran’s Foreign and Defense Policies, updated January 19, 2018

NLRB Rejects Former Standards Following Appointment of New Members, CRS Legal Sidebar, January 18, 2018

Director of National Intelligence Daniel R. Coats last month issued a newly revised directive that details intelligence community procedures for dealing with leaks of classified information. See Unauthorized Disclosures of Classified National Security Information, Intelligence Community Directive 701, December 22, 2017.

The directive formalizes several notable developments in intelligence policy regarding leaks:

*    It presents an expansive definition of an unauthorized disclosure that includes not simply disclosure but also the “confirmation” or “acknowledgement” of classified information to an unauthorized person.

*    It mandates the use of “audits and systems monitoring” in order “to detect and attribute attempts to bypass or defeat security safeguards.”

*    It specifies that polygraph examinations used by intelligence agencies shall “address the issue of unauthorized disclosures of classified information” as part of the security vetting process.

*    It notes that the DNI may prohibit the IC Inspector General from investigating a leak, pursuant to 50 USC 3033(f), “if the Director determines that such prohibition is necessary to protect vital national security interests of the United States.” The DNI is obliged to notify the congressional intelligence committees if he ever exercises this authority.

The new directive defines a hierarchy of unauthorized disclosures based on their severity and the feasibility of investigating and prosecuting them. “This process is designed to identify which incidents can be closed without further review, which call for an internal investigation, and which should be referred [to the Department of Justice] with a request for a criminal investigation.”

The directive updates and expands the provisions of a prior version that was issued in 2007 by then-DNI Mike McConnell.

Over the course of U.S. history, twenty Members of Congress have been expelled by their colleagues. Most of those cases were based on charges of disloyalty to the United States in the early Civil War period. Two of them followed convictions on charges of public corruption, most recently in 2002.

A new report from the Congressional Research Service surveys the history of congressional expulsions and the related case law. See Expulsion of Members of Congress: Legal Authority and Historical Practice by Cynthia Brown and Todd Garvey, January 11, 2018.

Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Trends in Bank Secrecy Act/Anti-Money Laundering Enforcement, January 12, 2018

The Logan Act: An Overview of a Sometimes Forgotten 18th Century Law, CRS Legal Sidebar, January 12, 2018

Marbury v. Madison Returns! The Supreme Court Considers the Scope of “Judicial” Power, CRS Legal Sidebar, January 16, 2018

House Judiciary to Mark Up H.R. 4170, the Disclosing Foreign Influence Act, CRS Legal Sidebar, January 16, 2018

Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Constitutional Challenge to SEC Administrative Law Judges, CRS Legal Sidebar, January 16, 2018

Recent Changes in the Estate and Gift Tax Provisions, updated January 11, 2018

Funding and Financing Highways and Public Transportation, updated January 11, 2018

Wilderness: Issues and Legislation, updated January 17, 2018

District Court Enjoins DACA Phase-Out: Explanation and Takeaways, CRS Legal Sidebar, January 11, 2018

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), updated January 16, 2018

China-U.S. Trade Issues, updated January 11, 2018

History, Evolution, and Practices of the President’s State of the Union Address: Frequently Asked Questions, updated January 12, 2018

The U.S. Army this week published an overview of future military cyberspace operations. See The U.S. Army Concept for Cyberspace and Electronic Warfare Operations 2025-2040, TRADOC Pamphlet 525-8-6, 9 January 2018.

The new Army publication is intended to promote development of cyber capabilities, to foster integration with other military functions, to shape recruitment, and to guide technology development and acquisition. It addresses defense against cyber threats as well as offensive cyber activities.

Proliferation of cyber threats is eroding the benefits of US superiority in conventional military power, the document said.

“The Army faces a complex and challenging environment where the expanding distribution of cyberspace and EMS [electromagnetic spectrum] technologies will continue to narrow the combat power advantage that the Army has had over potential adversaries.”

“Adversaries will conduct complex cyberspace attacks integrated with military operations or independent of traditional military operations.”

“Since every device presents a potential vulnerability, this trend represents an exponential growth of targets through which an adversary could access Army operational networks, systems, and information.”

“Conversely, it presents opportunities for the enhanced synchronization of Army technologies and information to exploit adversary dependencies on cyberspace.”

“If deterrence fails, Army forces isolate, overwhelm, and defeat adversaries in cyberspace and the EMS to meet the commander’s objectives.”

“These [Army] capabilities exploit adversary systems to facilitate intelligence collection, target adversary cyberspace and EMS functions, and create first order effects. Cyberspace and EW [electronic warfare] operations also create cascading effects across multiple domains to affect weapons systems, command and control processes, critical infrastructure, and key resources to outmaneuver adversaries physically and cognitively, applying combined arms in and across all domains.”

Military action in cyberspace is an evolving field that may have overtaken existing law or convention.

“Many effects of cyberspace operations require considerable legal and policy review,” the Army document said.

Mandatory minimum sentencing in drug-related criminal prosecutions has “contributed to an explosion in the federal prison population and attendant costs,” a new report from the Congressional Research Service on the laws of mandatory sentencing observes.

“Thus, the federal inmate population at the end of 1976 was 23,566, and at the end of 1986 it was 36,042. On January 4, 2018, the federal inmate population was 183,493.” The costs incurred by the federal prison system have increased accordingly. See Mandatory Minimum Sentencing of Federal Drug Offenses by CRS Senior Specialist Charles Doyle, January 11, 2018.

Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Attorney General’s Memorandum on Federal Marijuana Enforcement: Possible Impacts, CRS Legal Sidebar, January 10, 2018

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR): An Overview, updated January 9, 2018

Facing the FACT Act: Abortion and Free Speech (Part I), CRS Legal Sidebar, January 10, 2018

Update: Who’s the Boss at the CFPB?, CRS Legal Sidebar, updated January 11, 2018

Venezuela’s Economic Crisis: Issues for Congress, January 10, 2018

Transatlantic Relations in 2018, CRS Insight, January 10, 2018

Overview of “Travel Ban” Litigation and Recent Developments, CRS Legal Sidebar, updated January 10, 2018

Has the U.S. adopted a policy of regime change towards Iran? Government officials have sent different signals at different times.

In 2006, President George W. Bush called for a “free and democratic” Iran, which appeared to be an endorsement of regime change.

In 2013, President Obama explicitly disavowed a policy of regime change and referred to the country as the “Islamic Republic of Iran,” its post-revolutionary name, which was understood to convey recognition of the current Iranian leadership.

Most recently, the signals are mixed. “The Trump Administration has not adopted a policy of regime change, but there have been several Administration statements that indicate support for that outcome,” according to a newly updated report from the Congressional Research Service, which also takes note of the recent political protests in Iran. See Iran: Politics, Human Rights, and U.S. Policy, updated January 8, 2018.

Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Libya: Transition and U.S. Policy, updated January 8, 2018

The U.S. Export Control System and the Export Control Reform Initiative, updated January 8, 2018

A Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment: Background and Congressional Options, updated January 8, 2018

Monetary Policy and the Federal Reserve: Current Policy and Conditions, updated January 9, 2018

Budget Enforcement Procedures: The Senate Pay-As-You-Go (PAYGO) Rule, updated January 9, 2018

Smart Toys and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998, CRS Legal Sidebar, January 8, 2018

Protecting Consumers and Businesses from Fraudulent Robocalls, January 5, 2018

Drug Compounding: FDA Authority and Possible Issues for Congress, January 5, 2018

Defense Primer: Under Secretary of Defense (Intelligence), CRS In Focus, updated January 3, 2018

Several government officials who collectively represent much of the public face of the national security secrecy system have retired recently. They include:

*    Sheryl Shenberger, Director of the National Declassification Center

*    Stephen Randolph, Historian of the State Department

*    David J. Sherman, NSA Associate Director for Strategy, Plans, and Policy

*    Joseph Lambert, CIA Director of Information Management

In various ways they have all been significant collaborators — or at least partners in debate — with public advocates of greater openness, and they have all contributed to a gradual increase in public access to national security information.

Their diverse activities and achievements are not fully known to me and cannot be summarized here. But from my own limited vantage point, each one made a positive difference.

After I raised the question of declassifying US records regarding Indonesia in the 1960s (at a June 2016 meeting of the Public Interest Declassification Board), Sheryl Shenberger approached me to ask for more information, which I provided. It turned that this task was ideal for the National Declassification Center, especially since it involved a set of records that were both historically important and relatively limited in volume. She saw to it that the collection was declassified and released last year.

Stephen Randolph helped advocate for the release of the long-suppressed Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) volume on the 1953 coup in Iran, which was finally published last year. Under his leadership, the Historian’s Office was strengthened, productivity was increased, and FRUS began to be published within its mandated 30-year deadline for the first time in decades.

David Sherman helped foster internal and external discussion of changes to government secrecy policy. And when I pointed out that a “finding aid” to historical NSA records at the National Archives was unhelpfully classified, he conceded that was a mistake and expedited its declassification.

Joseph Lambert (who retired early last year) had the difficult task of defending CIA classification policies. But he was always willing to discuss the subject, to acknowledge errors and to correct them.

In fact, the accessibility of these officials — their willingness to engage with members of the public — was perhaps their single most admirable feature. For my part, I think each of them helped me to see problems of disclosure from a government perspective, to understand what might be feasible and what was not, and to formulate proposals for change that could be acted upon by their respective bureaucracies.

Over the last three years, Congress has sharply increased its legislative activity on defense acquisition reform, with an average of 82 new provisions in this area per year, compared to an average of 47 provisions in the previous decade. “Reform” here often means expanded authority to acquire military goods and services with increased flexibility.

A new report from the Congressional Research Service analyzes and summarizes that recent legislation, which affects contracting, auditing, major defense programs, and many other complicated but important topics. See Acquisition Reform in the FY2016-FY2018 National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAAs), January 4, 2018.

If the National Flood Insurance Program is not reauthorized by Congress prior to January 19, 2018, many of its key provisions will expire. See What Happens If the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Lapses?, CRS Insight, updated January 3, 2018

Other recent reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2018 Budget and Appropriations, updated January 3, 2018

Cyprus: Reunification Proving Elusive, updated January 2, 2018

Serbia: Background and U.S. Relations, updated January 4, 2018

Membership of the 115th Congress: A Profile, updated January 3, 2018

Clean Air Act Issues in the 115th Congress: In Brief, updated January 3, 2018

Military Service Records and Unit Histories: A Guide to Locating Sources, updated January 2, 2018