Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH), the most outspoken opponent of proposals to permit direct public access to Congressional Research Service reports, recently lost his chairmanship of the House Administration Committee in the initial fallout of the unfolding corruption scandals in Congress.
But it is unclear whether his sensible successor, Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-CA) (R-Mich.), will be any more amenable to online public access to CRS products. It may be that this inevitable step will have to await the election of a whole new Congress that actually values public access to government information.
In the meantime, members of the public can get their CRS fix from “unauthorized” sources.
In addition to the FAS archive of CRS reports, there are rich complementary collections at the State Department’s Foreign Press Center and at CDT’s OpenCRS.com, among others.
Here are some notable new or recently updated CRS reports from FAS that are not available from those other sites.
“Balancing Scientific Publication and National Security Concerns: Issues for Congress,” updated February 2, 2006.
“National Emergency Powers,” updated February 10, 2006.
“Jordan: U.S. Relations and Bilateral Issues,” updated March 14, 2006.
“Global Climate Change: Federal Research on Possible Human Health Effects,” updated February 10, 2006.
“‘Bunker Busters’: Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator Issues, FY2005-FY 2007,” updated February 21, 2006.
“The Exon-Florio National Security Test for Foreign Investment,” updated March 15, 2006.
“Military Retirement: Major Legislative Issues,” updated March 14, 2006.
“Navy Attack Submarine Force-Level Goal and Procurement Rate: Background and Issues for Congress,” updated January 18, 2006.
“Navy DD(X), CG(X) and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress,” updated March 7, 2006.
“Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) in Iraq: Effects and Countermeasures,” February 10, 2006.
This report serves as a landscape assessment and toolbox from which local governments can negotiate an informed position when it comes to the levers available to them and includes a first-of-its kind analysis of eight executed community benefits agreements.
When a hurricane hits, it’s all hands on deck – that goes for federal data, too. Pulling back from our investments in timely, accurate, and accessible public data will only make us less prepared and put us all at greater risk.
This is bigger than a singular elimination of race and ethnicity questions. It could accelerate the second wave of widespread reductions to demographic data, leaving public health officials with even less information to deliver better health outcomes for all Americans.
Soft law was never meant to be a permanent solution. Treating it as one, and letting the sandcastle stand in for the skyscraper indefinitely, is how we end up with a decade of voluntary commitments and no enforceable accountability to show for it.