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.
If carbon markets are going to play a meaningful role — whether as engines of transition finance, as instruments of accurate pricing across heterogeneous climate interventions, or both — they need the infrastructure and standards that any serious market requires.
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.