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
Americans are paying too much for almost everything, because the United States has long treated its trucking industry as an artifact to be preserved rather than as an opportunity for innovation.
These ideas aim to advance the detailed policy solutions needed to foster public trust and implement fairness in the adoption of AI across diverse domains, from healthcare and government benefits to rural access, education, and worker protections.
The evidence is clear: algorithmic pay-setting is established in app-based work, and payroll/timekeeping failures show how software can produce systemic wage harm at scale
While a few states have taken steps to implement decision-making mechanisms for certain AI systems, too many leaders are simply accepting narratives about AI’s purported public benefit at face value – jumping to the “how” of AI implementation before thoroughly vetting potential systems and deciding whether they are appropriate to use at all.