New and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service that were issued last week include the following.
Federal Conspiracy Law: A Brief Overview, updated January 20, 2016
Methods of Estimating the Total Cost of Federal Regulations, January 21, 2016
Judicial Redress Act 101 — What to Know as Senate Contemplates Passing New Privacy Law, CRS Legal Sidebar, January 21, 2016
TransCanada to Seek $15 Billion in NAFTA Lawsuit over Denial of Keystone XL Permit Request, CRS Legal Sidebar, January 19, 2016
EPA and the Army Corps’ Proposed “Waters of the United States” Rule: Congressional Response and Options, updated January 20, 2016
The Glass-Steagall Act: A Legal and Policy Analysis, January 19, 2016
Congress and the Budget: 2016 Actions and Events, January 19, 2016
GAO Bid Protests: An Overview of Timeframes and Procedures, updated January 19, 2016
“Regulatory Relief” for Banking: Selected Legislation in the 114th Congress, updated January 19, 2016
Money for Something: Music Licensing in the 21st Century, updated January 19, 2016
Comparing DHS Appropriations by Component, FY2016: Fact Sheet, updated January 20, 2016
Iran: U.S. Economic Sanctions and the Authority to Lift Restrictions, updated January 22, 2016
The Fight Against Al Shabaab in Somalia in 2016, CRS Insight, January 19, 2016
Latin America and the Caribbean: Key Issues for the 114th Congress, updated January 20, 2016
The U.S. Military Presence in Okinawa and the Futenma Base Controversy, updated January 20, 2016
The European Union: Questions and Answers, updated January 19, 2016
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.