Between 1973 and 2016, Members of Congress introduced resolutions of censure directed against federal officials on 59 occasions, according to the Congressional Research Service. Of those, 14 were filed against the Obama Administration.
Such resolutions have little or no practical significance, though they may serve a limited political purpose.
“The adoption of a simple or concurrent resolution expressing the House’s or Senate’s ‘censure,’ ‘condemnation,’ or ‘no confidence’ in a particular officer of the federal government does not have any immediate or binding legal import, but does express a particular moral judgment and may have both symbolic as well as political implications,” the CRS report said. See Congressional Censure and “No Confidence” Votes Regarding Public Officials, June 23, 2016.
Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.
The European Union: Current Challenges and Future Prospects, updated June 21, 2016 (pre-Brexit)
Does Foreign Aid Work? Efforts to Evaluate U.S. Foreign Assistance, updated June 23, 2016
Salaries of Members of Congress: Recent Actions and Historical Tables, udpated June 21, 2016
Salaries of Members of Congress: Congressional Votes, 1990-2016, updated June 21, 2016
The State of Campaign Finance Policy: Recent Developments and Issues for Congress, updated June 23, 2016
U.S. Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production in Federal and Non-Federal Areas, updated June 23, 2016
Trade-Based Money Laundering: Overview and Policy Issues, June 22, 2016
Mileage-Based Road User Charges, June 22, 2016
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): History and Overview, updated June 22, 2016
Statements of Administration Policy, June 21, 2016
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.
FAS is launching the Center for Regulatory Ingenuity (CRI) to build a new, transpartisan vision of government that works – that has the capacity to achieve ambitious goals while adeptly responding to people’s basic needs.