Undisclosed U.S. Detention Sites Overseas and More from CRS
The use of secret U.S. prison facilities abroad, first reported by Dana Priest in the Washington Post in November 2005, has since been confirmed by President Bush and has become the focus of controversy in the U.S. and elsewhere.
A new report (pdf) from the Congressional Research Service synthesizes what is now publicly known about the secret prisons and discusses some of the relevant legal concerns they raise. (“It is based on available open-source documentation, as cited, and not on any independent CRS investigation.”)
A copy of the new report was obtained by Secrecy News.
See “Undisclosed U.S. Detention Sites Overseas: Background and Legal Issues,” September 12, 2006.
Some miscellaneous other new products from CRS include the following (all pdf).
“Israeli-Arab Negotiations: Background, Conflicts, and U.S. Policy,” updated September 1, 2006.
“Israel: Background and Relations with the United States,” updated August 31, 2006.
“Saudi Arabia: Current Issues and U.S. Relations,” August 2, 2006.
“Sri Lanka: Background and U.S. Relations,” updated August 1, 2006.
“Navy Ship Procurement: Alternative Funding Approaches — Background and Options for Congress,” updated July 26, 2006.
“Navy Attack Submarine Force-Level Goal and Procurement Rate: Background and Issues for Congress,” updated July 26, 2006.
“Navy Ship Propulsion Technologies: Options for Reducing Oil Use — Background for Congress,” updated July 26, 2006.
“Navy DDG-1000 (DD(X)), CG(X), and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress,” updated July 26, 2006.
“Navy-Marine Corps Amphibious and Maritime Prepositioning Ship Programs: Background and Oversight Issues for Congress,” updated July 26, 2006.
“Unmanned Vehicles for U.S. Naval Forces: Background and Issues for Congress,” updated July 26, 2006.
This rule gives agencies significantly more authority over certain career policy roles. Whether that authority improves accountability or creates new risks depends almost entirely on how agencies interrupt and apply it.
Our environmental system was built for 1970s-era pollution control, but today it needs stable, integrated, multi-level governance that can make tradeoffs, share and use evidence, and deliver infrastructure while demonstrating that improved trust and participation are essential to future progress.
Durable and legitimate climate action requires a government capable of clearly weighting, explaining, and managing cost tradeoffs to the widest away of audiences, which in turn requires strong technocratic competency.
FAS is launching the Center for Regulatory Ingenuity (CRI) to build a new, transpartisan vision of government that works – that has the capacity to achieve ambitious goals while adeptly responding to people’s basic needs.