“What is Manufacturing?” is not the title of a lost work of Heidegger, but of a new report from the Congressional Research Service. The CRS report delves into the shifting meaning of “manufacturing” and the implications for economic analysis.
“Changes in the structure of manufacturing make it difficult to design government policies that support manufacturing-related value added and employment in the United States. Many federal laws adopted with the goal of supporting manufacturing do not take into account the increasingly blurred lines between manufacturing and other types of economic activity,” the report said.
See What Is Manufacturing? Why Does the Definition Matter?, February 6, 2017.
Other noteworthy new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.
Gun Control, Mental Incompetency, and Social Security Administration Final Rule, February 2, 2017
Army Corps Easement Process and Dakota Access Pipeline Easement Status, CRS Insight, February 2, 2017
EPA’s and BLM’s Methane Rules, CRS Insight, February 3, 2017
Supreme Court Appointment Process: President’s Selection of a Nominee, updated February 6, 2017
The Islamic State and U.S. Policy, updated February 2, 2017
Conventional Prompt Global Strike and Long-Range Ballistic Missiles: Background and Issues, updated February 3, 2017
Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress, updated February 2, 2017
The United States Withdraws from the TPP, CRS Insight, February 3, 2017
“El Chapo” Guzmán’s Extradition: What’s Next for U.S.-Mexican Security Cooperation?, CRS Insight, updated February 3, 2017
Cabo Verde: Background and U.S. Relations, February 6, 2017
Cuba Sanctions: Legislative Restrictions Limiting the Normalization of Relations, updated February 3, 2017
The Pacific Islands: Policy Issues, February 2, 2017
Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), February 3, 2017
Why Did March 2016 U.N. Sanctions Not Curb China’s Imports of Coal from North Korea?, CRS Insight, February 3, 2017
To secure the U.S. bio-infrastructure, maintain global leadership in biotechnology, and safeguard American citizens from emerging threats to their privacy, the federal government must modernize its approach to human genetic and biological data.
To ensure an energy transition that brings broad based economic development, participation, and direct benefits to communities, we need federal policy that helps shape markets. Unfortunately, there is a large gap in understanding of how to leverage federal policy making to support access to capital and credit.
From use to testing to deployment, the scaffolding for responsible integration of AI into high-risk use cases is just not there.
OPM’s new HR 2.0 initiative is entering hostile terrain. Those who have followed federal HR modernization for years desperately want this effort to succeed.