Trans-Pacific Partnership: Strategic Implications, and More from CRS
A new report from the Congressional Research Service examines claims that the 12-nation free trade agreement known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will (or will not) advance the strategic interests of the United States by enabling it to exert influence in economic as well as security domains. See The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Strategic Implications, February 3, 2016.
Other new and newly updated Congressional Research Service products that Congress has withheld from public distribution include the following.
The Obama Administration’s Feed the Future Initiative, January 29, 2016
Immigration Legislation and Issues in the 114th Congress, February 3, 2016
Unaccompanied Alien Children–Legal Issues: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions, updated January 27, 2016
State Challenges to Federal Enforcement of Immigration Law: Historical Precedents and Pending Litigation in Texas v. United States, updated January 27, 2016
Apprenticeship in the United States: Frequently Asked Questions, January 29, 2016
The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC): An Economic Analysis, February 1, 2016
Airport Privatization: Issues and Options for Congress, updated February 3, 2016
The Good Cause Exception to Notice and Comment Rulemaking: Judicial Review of Agency Action, January 29, 2016
Oil Sands and the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund: The Definition of “Oil” and Related Issues for Congress, February 3, 2016
Dietary Guidelines for Americans: Frequently Asked Questions, February 2, 2016
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF): Size and Characteristics of the Cash Assistance Caseload, updated January 29, 2016
Federal Securities Law: Insider Trading, updated February 2, 2016
Iran’s Foreign Policy, updated January 29, 2016
Jordan: Background and U.S. Relations, updated January 27, 2016
Legislative Branch: FY2016 Appropriations, updated February 1, 2016
Body Armor for Law Enforcement Officers: In Brief, updated January 28, 2016
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.
FAS has partnered with ICLEI USA to launch the CRI Local Advisory Council.