Numerous new reports of the Congressional Research Service on subjects of public interest and concern have been issued lately. Yet by design, they are not made readily available to the public. They include the following.
“The Department of Defense Rules for Military Commissions: Analysis of Procedural Rules and Comparison with Proposed Legislation and the Uniform Code of Military Justice” (pdf), updated July 25, 2006.
“Hamdan v. Rumsfeld: Military Commissions in the ‘Global War on Terrorism'” (pdf), July 6, 2006.
“Military Tribunals: Historical Patterns and Lessons” (pdf), July 9, 2004.
“Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses” (pdf), updated July 31, 2006.
“Israeli-Arab Negotiations: Background, Conflicts, and U.S. Policy” (pdf), updated July 25, 2006.
“Lebanon” (pdf), updated July 24, 2006.
“European Approaches to Homeland Security and Counterterrorism” (pdf), July 24, 2006.
“China and Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and Missiles: Policy Issues” (pdf), updated July 17, 2006.
“Banning Fissile Material Production for Nuclear Weapons: Prospects for a Treaty (FMCT)” (pdf), July 14, 2006.
“North Korean Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States” (pdf), updated July 6, 2006.
“International Small Arms and Light Weapons Transfers: U.S. Policy” (pdf), updated June 27, 2006.
Good information sources, like collections, must be available and maintained if companies are going to successfully implement the vision of AI for science expressed by their marketing and executives.
Let’s see what rules we can rewrite and beliefs we can reset: a few digital service sacred cows are long overdue to be put out to pasture.
Nestled in the cuts and investments of interest to the S&T community is a more complex story of how the administration is approaching the practice of science diplomacy.
Surprise! It’s a double album drop with the release of both the President’s Budget Request (PBR to us, not Pabst Blue Ribbon) and the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Budget Justification for Fiscal Year 2027 (FY27) last Friday.