“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
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.