Understanding Defense Acquisition, and More from CRS
Noteworthy new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service that Congress has not made publicly available include the following.
Defense Acquisitions: How DOD Acquires Weapon Systems and Recent Efforts to Reform the Process, January 2, 2013
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Current Conflicts, December 28, 2012
The Army’s Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) Program: Background and Issues for Congress, January 2, 2013
Marine Corps Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) and Marine Personnel Carrier (MPC): Background and Issues for Congress, January 2, 2013
Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV): Background and Issues for Congress, January 2, 2013
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments, January 2, 2013
Improper Payments and Recovery Audits: Legislation, Implementation, and Analysis, January 2, 2013
The Purple Heart: Background and Issues for Congress, December 31, 2012
Geoengineering: Governance and Technology Policy, January 2, 2013
Is Biopower Carbon Neutral?, January 2, 2013
Unemployment Insurance: Programs and Benefits, December 31, 2012
Federal Benefits and the Same-Sex Partners of Federal Employees, December 21, 2012
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act: An Overview of Limiting Tort Liability of Gun Manufacturers, December 20, 2012
The FHA Single-Family Mortgage Insurance Program: Financial Status and Related Current Issues, December 21, 2012
Permanent Legal Immigration to the United States: Policy Overview, December 17, 2012
Inauguration Security: Operations, Appropriations, and Issues for Congress, December 17, 2012
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.