Advanced search    Help

Clear all search criteria

Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

• Renditions: Constraints Imposed by Laws on Torture [Updated July 5, 2005]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This report discusses relevant international and domestic law restricting the transfer of persons to foreign states for the purpose of torture. The U.N. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), and its domestic implementing legislation (the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998) impose the primary legal restrictions on the transfer of persons to countries where they would face torture. CAT and U.S. implementing legislation generally prohibit the rendition of persons to countries in most cases where they would more likely than not be tortured, though there are arguably limited exceptions to this prohibition. Under U.S. regulations implementing CAT, a person may be transferred to a country that provides credible assurances that the rendered person will not be tortured. Neither CAT nor implementing legislation prohibits the rendition of persons to countries where they would be subject to harsh interrogation techniques not rising to the level of torture. Besides CAT, additional obligations may be imposed upon U.S. rendition practice via the Geneva Conventions, the War Crimes Act, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  2005-07-05
• Regulation of Broadcast Indecency: Background and Legal Analysis [Updated March 5, 2004]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  Two recent events have placed increased attention on the FCC and its indecency regulations . The airing of the 2003 Golden Globe Awards and the subsequent ruling by the FCC's Enforcement Bureau, coupled with the controversy surrounding the 2004 Super Bowl half-time show, have brought broadcast indecency to the forefront of the congressional agenda. Bills have been introduced to increase the penalties imposed for broadcast indecency (H.R. 3717, S. 2056, S . 2147) and to prohibit the broadcast of certain words and phrases in any grammatical form (H.R. 3687). Resolutions have been introduced to express disapproval of the FCC Enforcement Bureau's decision regarding the Golden Globe Awards broadcast : H.Res. 482, H.Res. 500, and S . Res. 283, which the Senate passed on December 9, 2003 . In addition, both the House and Senate have held or scheduled hearings on broadcast indecency. This report provides background on the two events in question, discusses the legal evolution of the FCC's indecency regulations, and provides an overview of how the current regulations have been applied . The final section of the report considers whether prohibiting the broadcast of "indecent" words regardless of context would violate the First Amendment.

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Cohen, Henry, 1949-; Welborn, Angie A.

  2004-03-05
• Rising Energy Competition and Energy Security in Northeast Asia: Issues for U.S. Policy [Updated February 9, 2005]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Asia has become a principal driver in world energy markets, largely due to China's remarkable growth in demand. As the gap between consumption and production levels in Asia expands, the region's economic powers appear to be increasingly anxious about their energy security, concerned that tight supplies and consequent high prices may constrain economic growth. Rising energy competition in East Asia promises to impact U.S. policy in many ways, from contributing to price spikes because of China's rapidly increasing demand to altering the geo-strategic landscape in the years to come as regional powers struggle to secure access to energy supplies. This report analyzes the short-term and long-term impact on U.S. interests of alternatives being pursued by China, Japan, and South Korea to bolster their energy security. It also examines decisions being made by Asian states now that will significantly shape global affairs in the future, how these decisions might play out, and how Congress and the executive branch might play a role in those decisions."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Chanlett-Avery, Emma

  2005-02-09
• Safeguarding the Nation's Drinking Water: EPA and Congressional Actions [Updated March 7, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The events of September 11 raised concerns about the security of the nation's drinking water supplies and their vulnerability to attack. Issues include the readiness of water utilities to prevent and respond to attacks on water systems, steps that can be taken to improve preparedness and response capabilities, and the availability of resources to help utilities enhance drinking water security. After a presidential commission on critical infrastructure protection identified vulnerabilities in the water sector in 1997, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with other federal agencies, water utilities, and state and local governments, began taking steps to improve the security of water systems, although these efforts generally were not targeted to current concerns over terrorism...Since September 11, 2001, EPA has increased efforts to help utilities safeguard facilities and supplies from terrorist or other threats in numerous ways...The 107th Congress took significant steps to improve drinking water security...In February 2003, the White House issued the National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructure and Key Assets, which designates EPA as the lead agency for protecting critical water infrastructure. The 108th Congress may be interested in overseeing implementation of the water security provisions of the Bioterrorism Act and other efforts to improve drinking water security. Regarding funding, the Consolidated Appropriations Resolution for FY2003, P.L. 108-7 (H.J.Res. 2) provides more than $22 million for EPA for water security activities." - Excerpts from Summary

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Tiemann, Mary

  2003-03-07
• Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA): Selected Regulatory and Legislative Issues [July 27, 2010]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Much progress has been made in assuring the quality of public water supplies since the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was first enacted in 1974. Public water systems must meet extensive regulations, and water utility management has become a much more complex and professional endeavor. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has regulated some 91 drinking water contaminants, and more regulations are pending. In 2007, the number of community water systems reporting no violations of drinking water standards was 89.5%. Despite nationwide progress in providing safe drinking water, an array of issues and challenges remain. Recent issues have involved infrastructure funding needs, regulatory compliance issues, and concerns caused by detections of unregulated contaminants in drinking water, such as perchlorate and pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs). Another issue involves the adequacy of existing regulations (such as trichloroethylene (TCE)) and EPA's pace in reviewing and potentially revising older standards. Congress last reauthorized SDWA in 1996. Although funding authority for most SDWA programs expired in FY2003, Congress continues to appropriate funds annually for these programs. No broad reauthorization bills have been proposed, as EPA, states, and water systems continue efforts to implement current statutory programs and regulatory requirements. A long-standing and overarching SDWA issue concerns the cumulative cost and complexity of drinking water standards and the ability of water systems, especially small systems, to comply with standards."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Tiemann, Mary

  2010-07-27
• Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA): Selected Regulatory and Legislative Issues [April 22, 2010]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Water infrastructure financing legislation has been offered repeatedly in recent Congresses to authorize higher funding levels for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) program, and also to provide grants and other compliance assistance to small communities. […]. The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee has reported S. 1005, a drinking water and wastewater infrastructure financing bill, and a bill to establish a water infrastructure trust fund, H.R. 3202, was introduced in the House. A newer SDWA issue concerns proposals and research regarding the underground injection of carbon dioxide (CO2) for long-term storage as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] has proposed regulations under SDWA [Safe Drinking Water Act] to provide a national permitting framework for managing the underground injection of CO2 for commercial-scale sequestration projects. In August 2009, EPA published a notice of data availability and requested additional comment on the proposed rule. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA; P.L. 110-140) included carbon sequestration research and development provisions, and specified that geologic sequestration activities shall be subject to SDWA provisions related to protecting underground drinking water sources. Another underground injection issue concerns the increasing use of hydraulic fracturing to produce natural gas from unconventional geologic formations. Bills have been introduced to authorize regulation of this practice under the SDWA underground injection control program."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Tiemann, Mary

  2010-04-22
• Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS): Overview and Issues [October 14, 2010]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Federal policy has played a key role in the emergence of the U.S. biofuels industry. Policy measures include minimum renewable fuel usage requirements, blending and production tax credits, an import tariff, loans and loan guarantees, and research grants. This report focuses on the mandated minimum usage requirements--referred to as the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS)-- whereby a minimum volume of biofuels is to be used in the national transportation fuel supply each year. It describes the general nature of the RFS mandate and its implementation, and outlines some emerging issues related to the sustainability of the continued growth in U.S. biofuels production needed to fulfill the expanding RFS mandate, as well as the emergence of potential unintended consequences of this rapid expansion. Congress first established an RFS with the enactment of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct, P.L. 109-58). This initial RFS (referred to as RFS1) mandated that a minimum of 4 billion gallons be used in 2006, and that this minimum usage volume rise to 7.5 billion gallons by 2012. Two years later, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA, P.L. 110-140) superseded and greatly expanded the biofuels blending mandate. The expanded RFS (referred to as RFS2) required the annual use of 9 billion gallons of biofuels in 2008 and expanded the mandate to 36 billion gallons annually in 2022, of which no more than 15 billion gallons can be ethanol from corn starch, and no less than 16 billion must be from cellulosic biofuels. In addition, EISA carved out specific requirements for 'other advanced biofuels' and biomass-based biodiesel."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Schnepf, Randall Dean, 1954-; Yacobucci, Brent D.

  2010-10-14
• Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA): Selected Regulatory and Legislative Issues [Updated January 13, 2010]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Water infrastructure financing legislation has been offered repeatedly in recent Congresses to authorize higher funding levels for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) program, and also to provide grants and other compliance assistance to small communities. [...] In July, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee reported S. 1005, a drinking water and wastewater infrastructure financing bill, and a bill to establish a water infrastructure trust fund, H.R. 3202, was introduced in the House. A newer SDWA issue concerns proposals and research regarding the underground injection of carbon dioxide (CO2) for long-term storage as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] has proposed regulations under SDWA to provide a national permitting framework for managing the underground injection of CO2 for commercial-scale sequestration projects. In August 2009, EPA published a notice of data availability and requested additional comment on the proposed rule. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA; P.L. 110-140) included carbon sequestration research and development provisions, and specified that geologic sequestration activities shall be subject to SDWA provisions related to protecting underground drinking water sources. Another underground injection issue concerns the increasing use of hydraulic fracturing to produce natural gas from unconventional geologic formations. Bills have been introduced to authorize regulation of this practice under the SDWA underground injection control program."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Tiemann, Mary

  2010-01-13
• Safeguarding the Nation's Drinking Water: EPA and Congressional Actions [September 30, 2010]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The events of September 11, 2001, focused heightened attention on the security status of the nation's drinking water supplies and the vulnerability of this critical infrastructure sector to attack. Congress since has enacted security requirements for public water systems and has provided funding for vulnerability assessments, emergency planning, and drinking water research. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the lead federal agency for the water sector, has worked with water utilities, state and local governments, and federal agencies to improve the drinking water security. The Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 (P.L. 107- 188) amended the Safe Drinking Water Act to require some 8,400 community water systems to assess vulnerabilities and prepare emergency response plans. It authorized funding for these activities and for emergency grants to states and utilities, and it directed EPA to review methods to prevent, detect, and respond to threats to water safety and infrastructure security. The act did not require water systems to make security upgrades to address potential vulnerabilities. In most years since FY2002, Congress appropriated roughly $5 million annually for EPA to work with states and the water sector to improve the security of drinking water supplies."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Tiemann, Mary

  2010-09-30
• Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA): A Summary of the Act and Its Major Requirements [December 10, 2010]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This report summarizes the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and its major programs and regulatory requirements. It excerpts, with several additions, the SDWA chapter of CRS Report RL30798, Environmental Laws: Summaries of Major Statutes Administered by the Environmental Protection Agency, which provides summaries of the principal environmental statutes administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This report includes the drinking water security provisions added to the SDWA by the Public Heath Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-188). The SDWA, Title XIV of the Public Health Service Act, is the key federal law for protecting public water supplies from harmful contaminants. First enacted in 1974 and substantially amended in 1986 and 1996, the act is administered through programs that establish standards and treatment requirements for public water supplies, control underground injection of wastes, finance infrastructure projects, and protect sources of drinking water. The 1974 law established the current federal-state arrangement in which states may be delegated primary implementation and enforcement authority for the drinking water program. The state-administered Public Water Supply Supervision (PWSS) Program remains the basic program for regulating the nation's public water systems, and 49 states have assumed this authority. The last major reauthorization of the act was done through the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 (P.L. 104-182), which generally authorized appropriations for SDWA programs through FY2003. As with other EPA-administered statutes having expired funding authority, Congress has continued to appropriate funds for the ongoing SDWA programs. In addition to reviewing key programs and requirements of the SDWA, this report includes statistics on the number and types of regulated public water systems. It also provides tables that list all major amendments, with the year of enactment and public law number, and that cross-reference sections of the act with the major U.S. Code sections of the codified statute."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Tiemann, Mary

  2010-12-10
• Safeguarding the Nation's Drinking Water: EPA and Congressional Actions [Updated August 22, 2002]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The events of September 11 raised concerns about the security of the nation's drinking water supplies and their vulnerability to attack. Issues include the readiness of water utilities to prevent and respond to attacks on water systems, steps that can be taken to improve preparedness and response capabilities, and the availability of resources to help utilities enhance drinking water security. After a presidential commission on critical infrastructure protection identified vulnerabilities in the drinking water sector in 1997, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), along with other federal agencies, water utilities, and state and local governments, began taking steps to improve the security of water systems, although these efforts generally were not targeted to current concerns over terrorism. For several years, EPA has provided some research, information, and technical and financial assistance to improve preparedness and increase the security of drinking water systems and supplies. Some of these activities began pursuant to the 1998 Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 63 on protecting the nation's critical infrastructure, but PDD-63 efforts were focused almost entirely on computer security issues. Since September 11; however, EPA has substantially broadened and expedited its efforts to help drinking water utilities safeguard facilities and supplies from terrorist or other threats. Congress has taken significant steps to improve security in the water sector since September 11. In the emergency supplemental appropriations for FY2002 (P.L. 107- 117, H.R.3338), Congress provided EPA with $175.6 million for several counterterrorism activities, including enhancing drinking water security."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Tiemann, Mary

  2002-08-22
• Renditions: Constraints Imposed by Laws on Torture [September 8, 2009]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This report discusses relevant international and domestic law restricting the transfer of persons to foreign states for the purpose of torture. The U.N. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), and its domestic implementing legislation (the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998) impose the primary legal restrictions on the transfer of persons to countries where they would face torture. Both CAT and U.S. implementing legislation generally prohibit the rendition of persons to countries in most cases where they would more likely than not be tortured, though there are arguably limited exceptions to this prohibition. Historically, the State Department has taken the position that CAT's provisions concerning the transfer of persons do not apply extraterritorially, though as a matter of policy the United States does not transfer persons in its custody to countries where they would face torture (U.S. regulations and statutes implementing CAT, however, arguably limit the extraterritorial transfer of individuals nonetheless). Under U.S. regulations implementing CAT, a person may be transferred to a country that provides credible assurances that the rendered person will not be tortured. Neither CAT nor its implementing legislation prohibit the rendition of persons to countries where they would be subject to harsh treatment not rising to the level of torture. Besides CAT, additional obligations may be imposed upon U.S. rendition practice via the Geneva Conventions, the War Crimes Act (as amended by the Military Commissions Act (P.L. 109-366), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  2009-09-08
• Renditions: Constraints Imposed by Laws on Torture [Updated October 12, 2007]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Persons suspected of criminal or terrorist activity may be transferred from one State (i.e., country) to another for arrest, detention, and/or interrogation. Commonly, this is done through extradition[…][.] Far less often, such transfers are effectuated through a process known as 'extraordinary rendition' or 'irregular rendition.' These terms have often been used to refer to the extrajudicial transfer of a person from one State to another. In this report, 'rendition' refers to extraordinary or irregular renditions unless otherwise specified. Although the particularities regarding the usage of extraordinary renditions and the legal authority behind such renditions are not publicly available, various U.S. officials have acknowledged the practice's existence. Recently, there has been some controversy as to the usage of renditions by the United States, particularly with regard to the alleged transfer of suspected terrorists to countries known to employ harsh interrogation techniques that may rise to the level of torture, purportedly with the knowledge or acquiescence of the United States. This report discusses relevant international and domestic law restricting the transfer of persons to foreign states for the purpose of torture. The U.N. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), and its domestic implementing legislation (the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998) impose the primary legal restrictions on the transfer of persons to countries where they would face torture. Both CAT and U.S. implementing legislation generally prohibit the rendition of persons to countries in most cases where they would more likely than not be tortured, though there are arguably limited exceptions to this prohibition."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Garcia, Michael John

  2007-10-12
• Renditions: Constraints Imposed by Laws on Torture [Updated January 25, 2008]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This report discusses relevant international and domestic law restricting the transfer of persons to foreign states for the purpose of torture. The U.N. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), and its domestic implementing legislation (the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998) impose the primary legal restrictions on the transfer of persons to countries where they would face torture. Both CAT and U.S. implementing legislation generally prohibit the rendition of persons to countries in most cases where they would more likely than not be tortured, though there are arguably limited exceptions to this prohibition. The State Department has taken the position that CAT's provisions concerning the transfer of persons do not apply extraterritorially, though as a matter of policy the United States does not transfer persons in its custody to countries where they would face torture […]. Under U.S. regulations implementing CAT, a person may be transferred to a country that provides credible assurances that the rendered person will not be tortured. Neither CAT nor implementing legislation prohibits the rendition of persons to countries where they would be subject to harsh interrogation techniques not rising to the level of torture. […]. This report also discusses legislation introduced in the first session of the 110th Congress to limit or bar U.S. participation in renditions […]."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Garcia, Michael John

  2008-01-25
• Renditions: Constraints Imposed by Laws on Torture [Updated January 17, 2007]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This report discusses relevant international and domestic law restricting the transfer of persons to foreign states for the purpose of torture. The U.N. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), and its domestic implementing legislation (the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998) impose the primary legal restrictions on the transfer of persons to countries where they would face torture. Both CAT and U.S. implementing legislation generally prohibit the rendition of persons to countries in most cases where they would more likely than not be tortured, though there are arguably limited exceptions to this prohibition. The State Department has taken the position that CAT's provisions concerning the transfer of persons do not apply extra-territorially, though as a matter of policy the United States does not transfer anyone in its custody to a country where they would face torture (U.S. regulations and statutes implementing CAT, however, arguably limit the extraterritorial transfer of individuals nonetheless). Under U.S. regulations implementing CAT, a person may be transferred to a country that provides credible assurances that the rendered person will not be tortured. Neither CAT nor implementing legislation prohibits the rendition of persons to countries where they would be subject to harsh interrogation techniques not rising to the level of torture. Besides CAT, additional obligations may be imposed upon U.S. rendition practice via the Geneva Conventions, the War Crimes Act (as amended by the Military Commissions Act (P.L. 109-366)), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Garcia, Michael John

  2007-01-17
• Renditions: Constraints Imposed by Laws on Torture [Updated November 6, 2006]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This report discusses relevant international and domestic law restricting the transfer of persons to foreign states for the purpose of torture. The U.N. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), and its domestic implementing legislation (the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998) impose the primary legal restrictions on the transfer of persons to countries where they would face torture. CAT and U.S. implementing legislation generally prohibit the rendition of persons to countries in most cases where they would more likely than not be tortured, though there are arguably limited exceptions to this prohibition. Under U.S. regulations implementing CAT, a person may be transferred to a country that provides credible assurances that the rendered person will not be tortured. Neither CAT nor implementing legislation prohibits the rendition of persons to countries where they would be subject to harsh interrogation techniques not rising to the level of torture. Besides CAT, additional obligations may be imposed upon U.S. rendition practice via the Geneva Conventions, the War Crimes Act, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Garcia, Michael John

  2006-11-06
• Renditions: Constraints Imposed by Laws on Torture [April 28, 2005]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Persons suspected of terrorist activity may be transferred from one State (i.e., country) for arrest, detention, and/or interrogation. Commonly, this is done through extradition, by which one State surrenders a person within its jurisdiction to a requesting State via a formal legal process, typically established by treaty. Far less often, such transfers are effectuated through a process known as 'extraordinary rendition' or 'irregular rendition.' These terms have often been used to refer to the extrajudicial transfer of a person from one State to another (for purposes of this report, 'rendition' refers to extraordinary or irregular renditions unless otherwise specified). Although the particularities regarding the usage of extraordinary renditions and the legal authority behind such renditions is not publicly available, various U.S. officials have acknowledged the practices existence. Recently, there has been some controversy as to the usage of renditions by the United States, particularly with regard to the alleged transfer of suspected terrorists to countries known to employ harsh interrogation techniques that may rise to the level of torture, purportedly with the knowledge or acquiescence of the United States."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Garcia, Michael John

  2005-04-28
• Russian Oil and Gas Challenges [February 22, 2006]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Russia is a major player in world energy markets. It has more proven natural gas reserves than any other country, is among the top ten in proven oil reserves, is the largest exporter of natural gas, the second largest oil exporter, and the third largest energy consumer. Energy exports have been a major driver of Russia's economic growth over the last five years, as Russian oil production has risen strongly and world oil prices have been very high. This type of growth has made the Russian economy dependent on oil and natural gas exports and vulnerable to fluctuations in oil prices. Russia's ability to maintain and expand its capacity to produce and to export energy faces difficulties. Russia's oil and gas fields are aging. Modern western energy technology has not been fully implemented. There is insufficient export capacity in the crude oil pipeline system controlled by Russia's state-owned pipeline monopoly, Transneft. And, there is insufficient investment capital for improving and expanding Russian oil and gas production and pipeline systems."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Gelb, Bernard A.

  2006-02-22
• Safeguarding the Nation's Drinking Water: EPA and Congressional Actions [Updated December 15, 2004]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The events of September 11, 2001, raised new concerns about the security of the nations drinking water supplies and their vulnerability to attack. Issues have included the readiness of water utilities to prevent and respond to attacks on water systems, the efforts utilities have made to assess vulnerabilities and improve preparedness and response capabilities, and the availability of resources to help utilities enhance drinking water security. After a presidential commission on critical infrastructure protection identified vulnerabilities in the water sector in 1997, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with other federal agencies, water utilities, and state and local governments, began taking steps to improve the security of water systems. The 1998 Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 63 on protecting critical infrastructure designated EPA as the lead federal agency for the water sector; however, efforts focused almost entirely on computer security. Since September 2001, EPA and its water sector partners have undertaken many actions to enhance the security of water supplies and infrastructure."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Tiemann, Mary

  2004-12-15
• Russian Oil and Gas Challenges [January 3, 2006]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Russia is a major player in world energy markets. It has more proven natural gas reserves than any other country, is among the top ten in proven oil reserves, is the largest exporter of natural gas, the second largest oil exporter, and the third largest energy consumer. Energy exports have been a major driver of Russia's economic growth over the last five years, as Russian oil production has risen strongly and world oil prices have been very high. This type of growth has made the Russian economy dependent on oil and natural gas exports and vulnerable to fluctuations in oil prices. Russia's ability to maintain and expand its capacity to produce and to export energy faces difficulties. Russia's oil and gas fields are aging. Modern western energy technology has not been fully implemented. There is insufficient export capacity in the crude oil pipeline system controlled by Russia's state-owned pipeline monopoly, Transneft. And, there is insufficient investment capital for improving and expanding Russian oil and gas production and pipeline systems."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Gelb, Bernard A.

  2006-01-03
• Safeguarding the Nation's Drinking Water: EPA and Congressional Actions [Updated December 18, 2002]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The events of September 11 raised concerns about the security of the nations drinking water supplies and their vulnerability to attack. Issues include the readiness of water utilities to prevent and respond to attacks on water systems, steps that can be taken to improve preparedness and response capabilities, and the availability of resources to help utilities enhance drinking water security. After a presidential commission on critical infrastructure protection identified vulnerabilities in the water sector in 1997, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with other federal agencies, water utilities, and state and local governments, began taking steps to improve the security of water systems, although these efforts generally were not targeted to current concerns over terrorism. Pursuant to the 1998 Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 63 on protecting the nations critical infrastructure, EPA had provided some research, information, and technical and financial assistance to improve preparedness and increase the security of drinking water systems. However, PDD-63 efforts were focused almost entirely on computer security issues. Following September 11, EPA significantly increased and expedited efforts to help utilities safeguard facilities and supplies from terrorist or other threats. The 107th Congress took significant steps to improve security in the water sector."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Tiemann, Mary

  2002-12-18
• Renewable Energy R&D Funding History: A Comparison with Funding for Nuclear Energy, Fossil Energy, and Energy Efficiency R&D [January 26, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Energy research and development (R&D) intended to advance technology played an important role in the successful outcome of World War II. In the post-war era, the federal government conducted R&D on fossil fuel and nuclear energy sources to support peacetime economic growth. The energy crises of the 1970s spurred the government to broaden the focus to include renewable energy and energy efficiency. Over the 33-year period from the Department of Energy's inception at the beginning of fiscal Year (FY) 1978 through FY2010, federal spending for renewable energy R&D amounted to about 16% of the energy R&D total, compared with 14% for energy efficiency, 26% for fossil, and 37% for nuclear. For the 63-year period from 1948 through 2010, nearly 12% went to renewables, compared with 9% for efficiency, 25% for fossil, and 50% for nuclear."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Sissine, Fred J.

  2011-01-26
• Russian Political, Economic, and Security Issues and U.S. Interests [September 13, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Russia made uneven progress in democratization during the 1990s, but this limited progress was reversed after Vladimir Putin rose to power in 1999-2000, according to many observers. During this period, the State Duma (lower legislative chamber) became dominated by government-approved parties, gubernatorial elections were abolished, and the government consolidated ownership or control over major media and industries, including the energy sector. The Putin government showed low regard for the rule of law and human rights in suppressing insurgency in the North Caucasus, according to critics. Dmitriy Medvedev, Putin's longtime protégé, was elected president in 2008; President Medvedev immediately designated Putin as prime minister and continued Putin's policies. In August 2008, the Medvedev-Putin 'tandem' directed military operations against Georgia and recognized the independence of Georgia's separatist South Ossetia and Abkhazia, actions condemned by most of the international community. In late 2011, Putin announced that he would return to the presidency and that Medvedev would become prime minister. This announcement, and flawed Duma elections at the end of the year, spurred popular protests, which the government addressed by launching a few reforms and holding pro-Putin rallies. In March 2012, Putin was (re)elected president by a wide margin. The day after Putin's inauguration in May 2012, the legislature confirmed Medvedev as prime minister. Since then, Putin has tightened restrictions on freedom of assembly and other human rights."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Nichol, James P.

  2013-09-13
• Russian Political, Economic, and Security Issues and U.S. Interests [August 8, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Russia made uneven progress in democratization during the 1990s, but this limited progress was reversed after Vladimir Putin rose to power in 1999-2000, according to many observers. During this period, the State Duma (lower legislative chamber) became dominated by government-approved parties, gubernatorial elections were abolished, and the government consolidated ownership or control over major media and industries, including the energy sector. The Putin government showed low regard for the rule of law and human rights in suppressing insurgency in the North Caucasus, according to critics. Dmitriy Medvedev, Putin's longtime protégé, was elected president in 2008; President Medvedev immediately designated Putin as prime minister and continued Putin's policies. In August 2008, the Medvedev-Putin 'tandem' directed military operations against Georgia and recognized the independence of Georgia's separatist South Ossetia and Abkhazia, actions condemned by most of the international community. In late 2011, Putin announced that he would return to the presidency and that Medvedev would become prime minister. This announcement, and flawed Duma elections at the end of the year, spurred popular protests, which the government addressed by launching a few reforms and holding pro-Putin rallies. In March 2012, Putin was (re)elected president by a wide margin. The day after Putin's inauguration in May 2012, the legislature confirmed Medvedev as prime minister. Since then, Putin has tightened restrictions on freedom of assembly and other human rights."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Nichol, James P.

  2013-08-08
• Salaries of Members of Congress: Congressional Votes, 1990-2013 [February 3, 2014]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The U.S. Constitution, in Article I, Section 6, authorizes compensation for Members of Congress 'ascertained by law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States.' Throughout American history, Congress has relied on three different methods in adjusting salaries for Members. Specific legislation was last used to provide increases in 1990 and 1991. It was the only method used by Congress for many years. The second method, under which annual adjustments took effect automatically unless disapproved by Congress, was established in 1975. From 1975 to 1989, these annual adjustments were based on the rate of annual comparability increases given to the General Schedule federal employees. This method was changed by the 1989 Ethics Act to require that the annual adjustment be determined by a formula based on certain elements of the Employment Cost Index (ECI). Under this revised process, annual adjustments were accepted 13 times (scheduled for January 1991, 1992, 1993, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, and 2009) and denied eleven times (scheduled for January 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1999, 2007, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014). In the 113th Congress, bills have been introduced to alter the adjustment procedure, reduce the pay of Members of Congress, extend the current pay freeze, prohibit pay during a government shutdown, and apply any sequester to Member pay. Since January, 2009, the salary for Members of Congress has been $174,000. Subsequent adjustments were denied by P.L. 111-8 (enacted March 11, 2009), P.L. 111-165 (May 14, 2010), P.L. 111-322 (December 22, 2010), P.L. 112-175 (September 28, 2012), P.L. 112-240 (January 2, 2013), and P.L. 113-46 (October 17, 2013)."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brudnick, Ida A.

  2014-02-03
• Qatar: Background and U.S. Relations [January 30, 2014]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Qatar, a small peninsular country in the Persian Gulf, emerged as a partner of the United States in the mid-1990s and currently serves as host to major U.S. military facilities. Qatar holds the third largest proven natural gas reserves in the world, and is the largest exporter of liquefied natural gas. Its small citizenry enjoys the world's highest per capita income. Since the mid-1990s, Qatari leaders have overseen a course of major economic growth, increased diplomatic engagement, and very limited political liberalization. The Qatari monarchy founded 'Al Jazeera', the first all-news Arabic language satellite television network, in 1995. Over time, the network has proven to be as influential and, at times, as controversial as the policies of its founders, including during recent unrest in the Arab world. In June 2013, Emir Hamad bin Khalifa al Thani abdicated in favor of his son Tamim bin Hamad, marking the first voluntary and planned transition of power in Qatar since it became an independent country in 1971. In an April 2003 referendum, Qatari voters approved a new constitution that officially granted women the right to vote and run for national office. The constitution envisions elections for two-thirds of the seats in a national Advisory Council. However, such elections have not been scheduled, and the term of the current Advisory Council has been extended to 2016. Central Municipal Council elections were last held in May 2011."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Blanchard, Christopher M.

  2014-01-30
• Retirement Benefits for Members of Congress [March 19, 2014]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Prior to 1984, neither federal civil service employees nor Members of Congress paid Social Security taxes, nor were they eligible for Social Security benefits. Members of Congress and other federal employees were instead covered by a separate pension plan called the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS). The 1983 amendments to the Social Security Act (P.L. 98-21) required federal employees first hired after 1983 to participate in Social Security. These amendments also required all Members of Congress to participate in Social Security as of January 1, 1984, regardless of when they first entered Congress. Because CSRS was not designed to coordinate with Social Security, Congress directed the development of a new retirement plan for federal workers. The result was the Federal Employees' Retirement System Act of 1986 (P.L. 99- 335). Members of Congress first elected in 1984 or later are covered automatically under the Federal Employees' Retirement System (FERS). All Senators and those Representatives serving as Members prior to September 30, 2003, may decline this coverage. Representatives entering office on or after September 30, 2003, cannot elect to be excluded from such coverage. Members who were already in Congress when Social Security coverage went into effect could either remain in CSRS or change their coverage to FERS."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Isaacs, Katelin P., 1980-

  2014-03-19
• Refugee Admissions and Resettlement Policy [March 6, 2014]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "A refugee is a person fleeing his or her country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. Typically, the annual number of refugees that can be admitted into the United States, known as the refugee ceiling, and the allocation of these numbers by region are set by the President after consultation with Congress at the start of each fiscal year. For FY2014, the worldwide refugee ceiling is 70,000, with 68,000 admissions numbers allocated among the regions of the world and 2,000 numbers comprising an unallocated reserve. An unallocated reserve is to be used if, and where, a need develops for refugee slots in excess of the allocated numbers. The FY2014 regional allocations are, as follows: Africa (15,000), East Asia (14,000), Europe and Central Asia (1,000), Latin America/Caribbean (5,000), and Near East/South Asia (33,000). Overseas processing of refugees is conducted through a system of three priorities for admission. 'Priority 1' comprises cases involving persons facing compelling security concerns. 'Priority 2' comprises cases involving persons from specific groups of special humanitarian concern to the United States (e.g., Iranian religious minorities). 'Priority 3' comprises family reunification cases involving close relatives of persons admitted as refugees or granted asylum."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Bruno, Andorra

  2014-03-06
• Russian Compliance with the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty: Background and Issues for Congress [June 2, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the summary: "The United States and Soviet Union signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in December 1987. Negotiations on this treaty were the result of a 'dual-track' decision taken by NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] in 1979. At that time, in response to concerns about the Soviet Union's deployment of new intermediate-range nuclear missiles, NATO agreed both to accept deployment of new U.S. intermediate-range ballistic and cruise missiles and to support U.S. efforts to negotiate with the Soviet Union to limit these missiles. In the INF Treaty, the United States and Soviet Union agreed that they would ban all land-based ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers. The ban would apply to missiles with nuclear or conventional warheads, but would not apply to sea-based or air-delivered missiles. […] The United States could also consider a number of options for how it might respond if Russia withdraws from the INF Treaty and deploys new INF-range missiles. It could develop and deploy new military capabilities--including, possibly, new land-based INF-range missiles or new missile defense capabilities--to offset the threat posed by new Russian INF-range missiles. The United States could also take other steps with its allies to assure them of the U.S. commitment to their defense. Congress is likely to continue to conduct oversight hearings on this issue, and to receive briefings on the status of Russia's cruise missile program. It may also consider legislation authorizing U.S. military responses and supporting alternative diplomatic approaches."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Woolf, Amy F.

  2015-06-02
• Reform of U.S. International Taxation: Alternatives [June 3, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The current U.S. system is a hybrid construct, embodying a mix of opposing jurisdictional principles. Not surprisingly, the mixed system--in conjunction with foreign host-country taxes-- poses a patchwork of incentive effects for U.S. firms and their global operations, in some cases taxing foreign operations favorably and creating an incentive to invest abroad, and in other cases imposing high tax burdens and posing a disincentive to overseas investment. In still other cases, the system presents a rough tax neutrality toward overseas investment. It is perhaps the hybrid nature of the system that has led to calls for reform. Prescriptions for a 'good' tax system vary, and the hybrid system satisfies none of them fully. This report describes and assesses the principal prescriptions that have been offered for broad reform of the international system. It begins with an overview of current law and possible revisions. It then sets the framework for considering economic efficiency as well as tax shelter activities. Finally, it reviews alternative approaches to revision in light of those issues."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Gravelle, Jane

  2015-06-03