Article V Conventions to Amend the Constitution, and More from CRS
The Congressional Research Service has just produced a second report concerning “Article V Conventions” by which state legislatures can try to initiate amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
“The Article V Convention for proposing amendments was the subject of considerable debate and forethought at the Constitutional Convention [in 1787],” the new report says. “The founders clearly intended it as a balance to proposal of amendments by Congress, providing the people, through their state legislatures, with an alternative means to consider amendments, particularly if Congress was unable or unwilling to act on its own. Since it is one of the few provisions of the Constitution that has never been implemented, however, the Article V Convention presents many questions for Congress.”
See The Article V Convention for Proposing Constitutional Amendments: Historical Perspectives for Congress, July 10, 2012. The earlier Article V report on Contemporary Issues for Congress, noted yesterday, is here.
Other new and updated CRS reports that have not been made readily available to the public include the following.
Abortion: Judicial History and Legislative Response, July 9, 2012
Higher Education Tax Benefits: Brief Overview and Budgetary Effects, July 10, 2012
Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs, July 10, 2012
Yesterday, Rep. Leonard Lance (R-NJ) and Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL) introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives that make non-confidential CRS reports publicly available on a congressional website. If the resolution is approved, the public would have authorized access to most CRS reports and would no longer have to rely on unauthorized access. See “New Bill Would Open CRS Reports to Public” by Daniel Schuman of the Sunlight Foundation.
January saw us watching whether the government would fund science. February has been about how that funding will be distributed, regulated, and contested.
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.