Could imported steel pose a threat to U.S. national security? The Trump Administration thinks so. Last week, President Trump directed the Secretary of Commerce to conduct an investigation under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 “to determine the effects on national security of steel imports.”
Yesterday the Congressional Research Service reviewed the issue skeptically, noting that such investigations almost never produce a meaningful outcome. “Perhaps one reason these investigations are infrequently conducted may be that such investigations rarely result in a finding that certain imports threaten to impair national security,” CRS wrote. See A Steely Look at Steel: Commerce Directed to Prioritize Investigation of the Effects of Steel Imports on National Security, CRS Legal Sidebar, April 24, 2017.
Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.
New Executive Order Directs Agencies to Revise or Rescind Climate Change Rules and Policies, CRS Legal Sidebar, April 20, 2017
U.S. Strategy for Engagement in Central America: Policy Issues for Congress, April 12, 2017
Cuba: U.S. Policy in the 115th Congress, April 21, 2017
China-U.S. Trade Issues, updated April 24, 2017
Turkey: Erdogan’s Referendum Victory Delivers “Presidential System”, CRS Insight, April 20, 2017
U.S. Circuit and District Court Nominations: Comparative Statistics of Two-Term Presidencies Since 1945, CRS Insight, April 24, 2017
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act: Background and Summary, updated April 21, 2017
Cost-Benefit Analysis and Financial Regulator Rulemaking, April 12, 2017
Cybersecurity: Critical Infrastructure Authoritative Reports and Resources, updated April 21, 2017
FDA Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS): Description and Effect on Generic Drug Development, April 11, 2017
New Canadian Dairy Pricing Regime Proves Disruptive for U.S. Milk Producers, CRS Insight, April 20, 2017
Iran Nuclear Agreement, updated April 21, 2017
The Budget Control Act and the Defense Budget: Frequently Asked Questions, updated April 21, 2017
At a period where the federal government is undergoing significant changes in how it hires, buys, collects and organizes data, and delivers, deeper exploration of trust in these facets as worthwhile.
Moving postsecondary education data collection to the states is the best way to ensure that the U.S. Department of Education can meet its legislative mandates in an era of constrained federal resources.
Supporting children’s development through health, nutrition, education, and protection programs helps the U.S. achieve its national security and economic interests, including the Administration’s priorities to make America “safer, stronger, and more prosperous.”
To strengthen federal–state alignment, upcoming AI initiatives should include three practical measures: readiness assessments before fund distribution, outcomes-based contracting tied to student progress, and tiered implementation support reflecting district capacity.