Bioterrorism, Changes in the Arctic, and More from CRS
New Congressional Research Service reports obtained by Secrecy News that have not been made readily available to the public include the following (all pdf):
“Federal Efforts to Address the Threat of Bioterrorism: Selected Issues for Congress,” March 18, 2010.
“Changes in the Arctic: Background and Issues for Congress,” March 30, 2010.
“Deforestation and Climate Change,” March 24, 2010.
“The Impact of Major Legislation on Budget Deficits: 2001 to 2009,” March 23, 2010.
“GAO Bid Protests: An Overview of Timeframes and Procedures,” March 15, 2010.
“GAO Bid Protests: Trends, Analysis, and Options for Congress,” February 11, 2009.
“The Future of U.S. Trade Policy: An Analysis of Issues and Options for the 111th Congress,” March 24, 2010.
“Europe’s Preferential Trade Agreements: Status, Content, and Implications,” March 22, 2010.
“F-35 Alternate Engine Program: Background and Issues for Congress,” March 22, 2010.
“Cyprus: Reunification Proving Elusive,” April 1, 2010.
A bill on government transparency that was introduced by Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL) last week would finally make all non-confidential CRS reports publicly available online. There must have been a dozen such proposals that have been introduced in Congress over the last 15 years without effect, and it is not clear whether the latest iteration will fare any better.
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.