Advanced search Help
Resource Type or Special Collection is CRS Reports
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).
-
Veterans and Homelessness [November 6, 2015]
From the Summary: "The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan brought renewed attention to the needs of veterans, including the needs of homeless veterans. Researchers have found both male and female veterans to be overrepresented in the homeless population, and, as the number of veterans increased due to these conflicts, there was concern that the number of homeless veterans could rise commensurately. The 2007-2009 recession and the subsequent slow economic recovery also raised concerns that homelessness could increase among all groups, including veterans. […] Several issues regarding veterans and homelessness have become prominent, in part because of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. One issue is ending homelessness among veterans. In November 2009, the VA announced a plan to end homelessness within five years. Both the VA [Department of Veterans Affairs] and HUD [Department of Housing and Urban Development] have taken steps to increase housing and services for homeless veterans. Funding for VA programs has increased in recent years (see Table 4), Congress has appropriated funds to increase available units of permanent supportive housing through the HUD-VASH [HUD-VA Supported Housing] program (see Table 5), and the number of veterans served in many programs has increased (see Table 6). Congress has appropriated a total of $575 million to support initial funding of HUD-VASH vouchers in each year from FY2008 through FY2015, enough to fund approximately 79,000 vouchers. Since the VA announced its plan, the HUD and VA point-in-time estimates of the number of veterans experiencing homelessness has fallen from 74,050 in 2009 to 49,933 in 2014 (see Table 1)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Perl, Libby
2015-11-06
-
Veterans' Medical Care: FY2016 Appropriations [December 7, 2015]
"The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provides benefits to veterans who meet certain eligibility criteria. Benefits to veterans range from disability compensation and pensions to hospital and medical care. The VA provides these benefits through three major operating units: the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), and the National Cemetery Administration (NCA). This report focuses on funding for the VHA. The President submitted his FY2016 budget request to Congress on February 2, 2015. The President's request for the VHA is approximately $60.6 billion (without collections), an additional $1.3 billion (for the three medical care accounts) above the enacted 2016 advance appropriations for VHA, which was $58.7 billion. When the $622 million request for the medical and prosthetic research account is taken into consideration, the total amount requested for VHA is a $1.9 billion increase over the FY2015 amount. The House Appropriations Committee approved the FY2016 Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill (MILCON-VA appropriations bill) on April 22, 2015. The House passed the measure (H.R. 2029, H.Rept. 114-92) on April 30. The House-passed bill provides approximately $60.3 billion for the VHA (without collections). […] The appendixes of this report provide funding levels for all VA accounts from FY1995 to FY2015 (including rescissions, and supplements)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Panangala, Sidath Viranga
2015-12-07
-
Veterans' Benefits: Burial Benefits and National Cemeteries [March 11, 2016]
"Burial benefits are nonmonetary and monetary benefits that eligible veterans receive for their military service. Servicemembers and veterans have been provided nonmonetary burial benefits since the Civil War and monetary burial benefits since World War I.
Eligible veterans and active duty members of the Armed Forces can be interred in national cemeteries and can receive government-furnished headstones or markers, and in their honor, next of kin can receive presidential memorial certificates and burial flags. Their spouses or surviving spouses, minor children, and, under certain conditions, unmarried adult children may also be buried in national cemeteries. [...] This report provides a descriptive analysis of both nonmonetary and monetary burial benefits and national cemeteries."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Szymendera, Scott
2016-03-11
-
Unique Identification Codes for Federal Contractors: DUNS Numbers and CAGE Codes [May 5, 2016]
"An essential element of the federal government's acquisition system is the capability to identify the businesses, and other types of entities, that do work for the government. Accurate identification of potential contractors and incumbent contractors facilitates a host of procurement processes while contributing to the transparency of federal government procurement. The federal government uses a proprietary system, Dun & Bradstreet's (D&B's) Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS), to uniquely identify the entities with which it does business. At no cost to the applicant, D&B assigns a DUNS number-a nine-digit unique identification code-to prospective government contractors. (Businesses that are not would-be government contractors also may apply for a DUNS number.) The federal government's use of DUNS, however, is not limited to the identification numbers. D&B provides, pursuant to its contract with the General Services of Administration (GSA), 7 types of software products and 14 data products that enable the government to use DUNS for a variety of acquisition-related functions, such as paying contractors. Furthermore, approximately 80 data systems within the federal government contain DUNS information. Congress may have concerns regarding the continued use of DUNS numbers and has expressed interest in exploring other options. At the request of a Senate subcommittee, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) examined the costs and data restrictions involved with using a proprietary identification system and studied alternatives for identification numbers for government contractors. The implementation of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act (DATA Act; P.L. 113-101) is accompanied by similar, significant interest within Congress-and within the agencies charged with implementing the act-for exploring options for a nonproprietary contractor identification system."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Halchin, L. Elaine
2016-05-05
-
Unique Identification Codes for Federal Contractors: DUNS Numbers and CAGE Codes [November 21, 2016]
"An essential element of the federal government's acquisition system is the capability to identify the businesses, and other types of entities, that do work for the government. Accurate identification of potential contractors and incumbent contractors facilitates a host of procurement processes while contributing to the transparency of federal government procurement.
The federal government uses a proprietary system, Dun & Bradstreet's (D&B's) Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS), to uniquely identify the entities with which it does business. At no cost to the applicant, D&B assigns a DUNS number-a nine-digit unique identification code-to prospective government contractors. [...] Congress may have concerns regarding the continued use of DUNS numbers and has expressed interest in exploring other options. At the request of a Senate subcommittee, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) examined the costs and data restrictions involved with using a proprietary identification system and studied alternatives for identification numbers for government contractors."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Halchin, L. Elaine
2016-11-21
-
Use of the Annual Appropriations Process to Block Implementation of the Affordable Care Act (FY2011-FY2017) [January 13, 2017]
"Congress remains deeply divided over implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), the health reform law enacted in March 2010. Since the ACA's enactment, lawmakers opposed to specific provisions in the ACA or the entire law have repeatedly debated its implementation and considered bills to repeal, defund, delay, or otherwise amend the law. In addition to considering ACA repeal or amendment in authorizing legislation, some lawmakers have used the annual appropriations process in an effort to eliminate funding for the ACA's implementation and address other aspects of the law. ACA-related provisions have been included in enacted appropriations acts each year since the ACA became law. In October 2013, disagreement between the Republican-led House and Democratic-controlled Senate over the inclusion of ACA language in a temporary spending bill for the new fiscal year (i.e., FY2014) resulted in a partial shutdown of government operations that lasted 16 days."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Redhead, C. Stephen; Cornell, Ada S.
2017-01-13
-
Use of the Annual Appropriations Process to Block Implementation of the Affordable Care Act (FY2011-FY2017) [October 7, 2016]
"Congress remains deeply divided over implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), the health reform law enacted in March 2010. Since the ACA's enactment, lawmakers opposed to specific provisions in the ACA or the entire law have repeatedly debated its implementation and considered bills to repeal, defund, delay, or otherwise amend the law. In addition to considering ACA repeal or amendment in authorizing legislation, some lawmakers have used the annual appropriations process in an effort to eliminate funding for the ACA's implementation and address other aspects of the law. ACA-related provisions have been included in enacted appropriations acts each year since the ACA became law. [...] Congressional appropriators have used a number of legislative options available to them through the appropriations process in an effort to defund, delay, or otherwise address implementation of the ACA. First, they have denied CMS and the IRS any new funding to cover the administrative costs of ACA implementation. Second, House appropriators repeatedly have added limitations (often referred to as riders) to the Labor-HHS-ED and Financial Services appropriations bills to prohibit CMS and the IRS from using discretionary funds provided in the bills for ACA implementation activities. [...] Third, House appropriators have incorporated ACA-related legislative language in the Labor-HHS-ED appropriations bills. [...] Finally, congressional appropriators have added to recent Labor-HHS-ED appropriations acts several reporting and other administrative requirements regarding implementation of the ACA."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Redhead, C. Stephen; Cornell, Ada S.
2016-10-07
-
Use of the Annual Appropriations Process to Block Implementation of the Affordable Care Act (FY2011-FY2016) [August 4, 2016]
"Congress remains deeply divided over implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which President Obama signed into law in March 2010. Since the ACA's enactment, lawmakers opposed to specific provisions in the ACA or the entire law have repeatedly debated its implementation and considered bills to repeal, defund, delay, or otherwise amend the law. To date, most of this legislative activity has taken place in the House, which reverted to Republican control in 2011. Over the past five years, the Republican-led House has passed numerous ACA-related bills, including legislation that would repeal the entire law. There has been less debate in the Senate, which remained under Democratic control through 2014. Most of the ACA legislation passed by the House during that period was not taken up by the Senate. However, a few bills to amend specific elements of the ACA that attracted sufficiently broad and bipartisan support were approved by both the House and the Senate and signed into law. Now that Republicans control both chambers of Congress, opponents of the ACA see new opportunities to pass and send to the President legislation that would change the law. In addition to these attempts to repeal or amend the ACA through authorizing legislation, some lawmakers have used the annual appropriations process in an effort to eliminate funding for the ACA's implementation and address other concerns they have with the law. […] This report summarizes the ACA-related language added to annual appropriations legislation by congressional appropriators since the ACA was signed into law."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Redhead, C. Stephen; Cornell, Ada S.
2016-08-04
-
Wartime Detention Provisions in Recent Defense Authorization Legislation [May 28, 2015]
"In recent years, Congress has included provisions in annual defense authorization bills addressing issues related to detainees at the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and, more broadly, the disposition of persons captured in the course of hostilities against Al Qaeda and associated forces. The National Defense Authorization Act for FY2012 (2012 NDAA; P.L. 112-81) arguably constituted the most significant legislation informing wartime detention policy since the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF; P.L. 107-40), which serves as the primary legal authority for U.S. operations against Al Qaeda and associated forces. Much of the debate surrounding passage of the 2012 NDAA centered on what appeared to be an effort to confirm or, as some observers view it, expand the detention authority that Congress implicitly granted the President via the AUMF in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. But the 2012 NDAA addressed other issues as well, including the continued detention of persons at Guantanamo. Both the 2013 NDAA (P.L. 112-239) and the 2014 NDAA (P.L. 113-66) also contain subtitles addressing U.S. detention policy, though neither act addresses detention matters as comprehensively as did the 2012 NDAA. The 2015 NDAA (P.L. 113-291) and the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (2015 Cromnibus; P.L. 113-235), essentially maintain the status quo."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Elsea, Jennifer; Garcia, Michael John
2015-05-28
-
United Nations Reform: Background and Issues for Congress [May 15, 2015]
"Since its establishment in 1945, the United Nations (U.N.) has undergone numerous reforms as international stakeholders seek ways to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the U.N. system. During the past two decades, controversies such as corruption in the Iraq Oil-For-Food Program, allegations of sexual abuse by U.N. peacekeepers, and instances of waste, fraud, and abuse by U.N. staff have focused attention on the need for change and improvement of the United Nations. Many in the international community, including the United States, continue to promote substantive reforms. The 114th Congress may focus on U.N. reform as it considers appropriate levels of U.S. funding to the United Nations and monitors the progress and implementation of ongoing and previously approved reform measures. Generally, Congress has maintained a significant interest in the overall effectiveness of the United Nations. Some Members are particularly interested in U.N. Secretariat and management reform, with a focus on improving transparency and strengthening accountability and internal oversight. In the past, Congress has enacted legislation that links U.S. funding of the United Nations to specific U.N. reform benchmarks. Supporters of this strategy contend that the United Nations has been slow to implement reforms and that linking payment of U.S. assessments to progress on U.N. reform is the most effective way to motivate member states to efficiently pursue comprehensive reform. Opponents argue that tying U.S. funding to U.N. reform may negatively impact diplomatic relations and could hinder the United States' ability to conduct foreign policy."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Blanchfield, Luisa
2015-05-15
-
United States Fire Administration: An Overview [January 3, 2011]
"The U.S. Fire Administration (USFA)--which includes the National Fire Academy (NFA)--is currently housed within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The objective of the USFA is to significantly reduce the nation's loss of life from fire, while also achieving a reduction in property loss and non-fatal injury due to fire. The United States Fire Administration Reauthorization Act of 2008 (H.R. 4847/S. 2606) was signed into law on October 8, 2008 (P.L. 110-376). P.L. 111-83, the FY2010 Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, provided $45.588 million for USFA, the same level as the Administration's proposal. The Administration's FY2011 budget proposal requested $45.930 million for USFA, an increase of 0.7% from the FY2010 level. The House Appropriations Subcommittee and the Senate Appropriations Committee both matched the Administration request for the USFA. The Continuing Appropriations and Surface Transportation Extension Act, 2011 (P.L. 111-322) funds USFA at FY2010 levels through March 4, 2011. As is the case with many federal programs, concerns in the 112th Congress over the federal budget deficit could impact budget levels for the USFA. Debate over the USFA budget has focused on whether the USFA is receiving an appropriate level of funding to accomplish its mission, given that appropriations for USFA have consistently been well below the agency's authorized level. An ongoing issue is the viability and status of the USFA and National Fire Academy within the Department of Homeland Security."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Kruger, Lennard G.
2011-01-03
-
United States Fire Administration: An Overview [August 6, 2010]
"The U.S. Fire Administration (USFA)-which includes the National Fire Academy (NFA)-is currently housed within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The objective of the USFA is to significantly reduce the nation's loss of life from fire, while also achieving a reduction in property loss and non-fatal injury due to fire. The United States Fire Administration Reauthorization Act of 2008 (H.R. 4847/S. 2606) was signed into law on October 8, 2008 (P.L. 110-376). P.L. 111-83, the FY2010 Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, provided $45.588 million for USFA, the same level as the Administration's proposal. The Administration's FY2011 budget proposal requested $45.930 million for USFA, an increase of 0.7% from the FY2010 level. The House Appropriations Subcommittee and the Senate Appropriations Committee both matched the Administration request for the USFA. In the 111th Congress, debate over the USFA budget focuses on whether the USFA is receiving sufficient funding to accomplish its mission, given that appropriations for USFA have consistently been well below the agency's authorized level. An ongoing issue is the viability and status of the USFA and National Fire Academy within the Department of Homeland Security."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Kruger, Lennard G.
2010-08-06
-
Urban Search and Rescue Task Forces: Facts and Issues [April 24, 2006]
"Since the early 1990s, Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) Task Forces have been certified, trained, and funded by the federal government. Twenty-eight task forces are located in 19 states. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials may call out the task force (or forces) in closest proximity to the disaster to help locate and extricate victims from collapsed buildings and structures. The task forces represent a partnership involving federal, local government, and private sector experts. Most recently, USAR teams received considerable publicity, and reportedly achieved life-saving results, in their mission to Haiti after the earthquakes of early 2010. Legislation pending before Congress would affect the USAR system in two ways. First, H.R. 119 would designate a New Jersey task force to be part of the system. Other legislation (H.R. 706 and H.R. 3377) would establish statutory authority and federal funding for a USAR response system. Members of Congress will consider FY2011 funding for the task forces during the second session of the 111th Congress, and may elect to debate issues associated with the deployment of USAR task forces to foreign countries."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Bea, Keith
2006-04-24
-
What are the Department of Defense (DOD) Policies on Transgender Service? [July 15, 2015]
"On July 13, 2015, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter announced that DOD will review its policies on transgender service. As part of this announcement he issued two directives: [1] DOD will create a working group composed of military and civilian personnel to study the policy and readiness implications of allowing transgender persons to serve openly. [2] The decision authority for administrative discharges for those diagnosed with gender dysphoria or who identify themselves as transgender will be the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. Secretary Carter also emphasized that the working group will 'start with the presumption that transgender persons can serve openly without adverse impact on military effectiveness and readiness, unless and except where objective, practical impediments are identified.' The word 'transgender' does not appear in the United States Code, the Code of Federal Regulations, or in any DOD issuances. However, the term 'transgender' is typically applied to individuals who do not identify or conform to their physical gender at birth and may include, but is not limited to, those who self-identify as transgender, transsexual, gender-queer, gender nonconforming, or cross-gender. For the purpose of diagnosis, the American Psychiatric Association classifies this condition as 'gender dysphoria.' DOD currently treats the physical and psychological aspects of transgender conditions as disqualifying conditions for new personnel accessions and for the discharge of existing servicemembers."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Kamarck, Kristy N.
2015-07-15
-
Use of the Annual Appropriations Process to Block Implementation of the Affordable Care Act (FY2011-FY2016) [October 13, 2015]
"Congress remains deeply divided over implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), the health reform law enacted in March 2010. Since the ACA's enactment, lawmakers opposed to specific provisions in the ACA or the entire law have repeatedly debated its implementation and considered bills to repeal, defund, delay, or otherwise amend the law. In addition to considering ACA repeal or amendment in authorizing legislation, some lawmakers have used the annual appropriations process in an effort to eliminate funding for the ACA's implementation and address other aspects of the law. ACA-related provisions have been included in enacted appropriations acts each year since the ACA became law. In October 2013, disagreement between the Republican-led House and Democratic-controlled Senate over the inclusion of ACA language in a temporary spending bill for the new fiscal year (i.e., FY2014) resulted in a partial shutdown of government operations that lasted 16 days. […] Finally, congressional appropriators have added to recent Labor-HHS-ED appropriations acts several reporting and other administrative requirements regarding implementation of the ACA. These include instructing the HHS Secretary to establish a website with information on the allocation of funding from the Prevention and Public Health Fund and to provide an accounting of administrative spending on ACA implementation."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Redhead, C. Stephen; Cornell, Ada S.
2015-10-13
-
Use of the Annual Appropriations Process to Block Implementation of the Affordable Care Act (FY2011-FY2016) [July 10, 2015]
"Congress remains deeply divided over implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), the health reform law enacted in March 2010. Since the ACA's enactment, lawmakers opposed to specific provisions in the ACA or the entire law have repeatedly debated its implementation and considered bills to repeal, defund, delay, or otherwise amend the law. In addition to considering ACA repeal or amendment in authorizing legislation, some lawmakers have used the annual appropriations process in an effort to eliminate funding for the ACA's implementation and address other aspects of the law. ACA-related provisions have been included in enacted appropriations acts each year since the ACA became law. In October 2013, disagreement between the Republican-led House and Democratic-controlled Senate over the inclusion of ACA language in a temporary spending bill for the new fiscal year (i.e., FY2014) resulted in a partial shutdown of government operations that lasted 16 days. The House Appropriations Committee has added numerous ACA-related provisions to annual appropriations acts since the Republicans regained control of the House in 2011. Most of these provisions were included in the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies ('Labor-HHS-ED') Appropriations Act, which funds the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). A few were incorporated in the Financial Services and General Government ('Financial Services') Appropriations Act, which funds the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). By comparison, the Labor-HHS-ED and Financial Services appropriations bills drafted by the Senate Appropriations Committee were largely free of any ACA-related provisions while the committee remained under Democratic control through 2014."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Redhead, C. Stephen; Cornell, Ada S.
2015-07-10
-
Use of the Annual Appropriations Process to Block Implementation of the Affordable Care Act (FY2011-FY2016) [September 21, 2015]
From the Summary: "Congress remains deeply divided over implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), the health reform law enacted in March 2010. Since the ACA's enactment, lawmakers opposed to specific provisions in the ACA or the entire law have repeatedly debated its implementation and considered bills to repeal, defund, delay, or otherwise amend the law. In addition to considering ACA repeal or amendment in authorizing legislation, some lawmakers have used the annual appropriations process in an effort to eliminate funding for the ACA's implementation and address other aspects of the law. ACA-related provisions have been included in enacted appropriations acts each year since the ACA became law. In October 2013, disagreement between the Republican-led House and Democratic-controlled Senate over the inclusion of ACA language in a temporary spending bill for the new fiscal year (i.e., FY2014) resulted in a partial shutdown of government operations that lasted 16 days."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Redhead, C. Stephen; Cornell, Ada S.
2015-09-21
-
United States Fire Administration: An Overview [June 26, 2015]
From the summary: "The United States Fire Administration (USFA)--which includes the National Fire Academy (NFA)--is currently housed within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The objective of the USFA is to significantly reduce the nation's loss of life from fire, while also achieving a reduction in property loss and non-fatal injury due to fire. […] The Administration's FY2016 budget proposed $41.582 million for USFA, a 5.6% decrease from the FY2015 level. Of the total, the budget proposal recommended $12.268 million for the National Fire Academy. S. 1619, the Department of Homeland Security Act, 2016, was reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee on June 18, 2015, and would provide $44 million for USFA. […] Concerns in the 114th Congress over the federal budget deficit could impact future funding levels for the USFA. Debate over the USFA budget has focused on whether the USFA is receiving an appropriate level of funding to accomplish its mission, given that appropriations for USFA have consistently been well below the agency's authorized level. An ongoing issue is the viability and status of the USFA and National Fire Academy within the Department of Homeland Security."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Kruger, Lennard G.
2015-06-26
-
Veterans and Homelessness [November 29, 2013]
"The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have brought renewed attention to the needs of veterans, including the needs of homeless veterans. Researchers have found both male and female veterans to be overrepresented in the homeless population, and as the number of veterans increases due to these conflicts, there is concern that the number of homeless veterans could rise commensurately. The 2007-2009 recession and the subsequent slow economic recovery also raised concerns that homelessness could increase among all groups, including veterans. Congress has created numerous programs that serve homeless veterans specifically, almost all of which are funded through the Veterans Health Administration of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). These programs provide health care and rehabilitation services for homeless veterans (the Health Care for Homeless Veterans and Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans programs), employment assistance (Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program and Compensated Work Therapy program), and transitional housing (Grant and Per Diem program) as well as supportive services (the Supportive Services for Veteran Families program). The VA also works with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to provide permanent supportive housing to homeless veterans through the HUD-VA Supported Housing Program (HUD-VASH). In the HUD-VASH program, HUD funds rental assistance through Section 8 vouchers while the VA provides supportive services. In addition, the VA and HUD have collaborated on a homelessness prevention demonstration program."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Perl, Libby
2013-11-29
-
Unauthorized Alien Students: Issues and 'DREAM Act' Legislation [December 3, 2013]
"Multiple DREAM Act [Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act] bills have been introduced in recent Congresses to address the unauthorized student population. Most have proposed a two-prong approach of repealing the 1996 provision and enabling some unauthorized alien students to become U.S. legal permanent residents (LPRs) through an immigration procedure known as 'cancellation of removal'. While there are other options for dealing with this population, this report deals exclusively with the DREAM Act approach in light of the considerable congressional interest in it. In the 111th Congress, the House approved DREAM Act language as part of an unrelated bill, the Removal Clarification Act of 2010 (H.R. 5281). The Senate, however, failed to invoke cloture on a motion to agree to the House-passed DREAM Act amendment, and the bill died at the end of the Congress. The House-approved language differed in key respects from earlier versions of the DREAM Act. Bills to legalize the status of unauthorized alien students were again introduced in the 112th Congress. In 2012, in the absence of congressional action on DREAM Act legislation, the Obama Administration announced that certain individuals who entered the United States as children and meet other criteria would be considered for relief from removal."
Bruno, Andorra
2013-12-03
-
United Nations Reform: Background and Issues for Congress [January 13, 2014]
"Since its establishment in 1945, the United Nations (U.N.) has undergone numerous reforms as international stakeholders seek ways to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the U.N. system. During the past two decades, controversies such as corruption in the Iraq Oil-For-Food Program, allegations of sexual abuse by U.N. peacekeepers, and instances of waste, fraud, and abuse by U.N. staff have focused attention on the need for change and improvement of the United Nations. Many in the international community, including the United States, continue to promote substantive reforms. The second session of the 113th Congress may focus on U.N. reform as it considers appropriate levels of U.S. funding to the United Nations and monitors the progress and implementation of ongoing and previously approved reform measures. […] Developed countries, for example, support delegating more power to the U.N. Secretary-General to implement management reforms, whereas developing countries fear that giving the Secretary- General more authority may undermine the power of the U.N. General Assembly and therefore the influence of individual countries. Generally, U.N. reform is achieved by amending the U.N. Charter or through various non-Charter reforms. Charter amendment, which requires approval by two-thirds of the General Assembly and ratification 'according to the constitutional processes' of two-thirds of U.N. member states (including the five permanent Security Council members), is rarely used and has been practiced on only a few occasions. Non-Charter reforms--which include General Assembly action or initiatives by the U.N. Secretary-General--are more common and comparatively easier to achieve. This report will be updated as policy changes or congressional actions warrant."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Blanchfield, Luisa
2014-01-13
-
Unemployment Insurance: Consequences of Changes in State Unemployment Compensation Laws [October 30, 2013]
"This report analyzes several types of recent changes to state Unemployment Compensation (UC) programs. Three categories of UC state law issues are considered: (1) changes in the duration of state UC unemployment benefits; (2) changes in the UC weekly benefit amount; and (3) the enactment into state law of two trigger options for the Extended Benefit (EB) program. Over the last several years, some states have enacted legislation to decrease the maximum number of weeks of regular state UC benefits. Until recently, all states paid at least up to 26 weeks of UC benefits to eligible, unemployed individuals. In 2011, however, six states passed legislation to decrease their maximum UC benefit durations: Arkansas, Florida, Illinois (only if certain program criteria are met across different calendar years), Michigan, Missouri, and South Carolina. In 2012, Georgia also passed legislation to decrease the maximum UC benefit duration. In 2013, North Carolina enacted similar legislation."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Isaacs, Katelin P., 1980-
2013-10-30
-
United States as a Net Debtor Nation: Overview of the International Investment Position [December 17, 2013]
"The international investment position of the United States is an annual measure of the assets Americans own abroad and the assets foreigners own in the United States. The net position, or the difference between the two, sometimes is referred to as a measure of U.S. international indebtedness. This designation is not strictly correct, because the net international investment position reveals the difference between the total assets Americans own abroad and the total amount of assets foreigners own in the United States. These assets generate flows of capital into and out of the economy that have important implications for the value of the dollar in international exchange markets. Some Members of Congress and some in the public have expressed concerns about the U.S. net international investment position because of the role foreign investors are playing in U.S. capital markets and the potential for large outflows of income and services payments. Some observers also argue that the U.S. reliance on foreign capital inflows places the economy in a vulnerable position."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Jackson, James K., 1949-
2013-12-17
-
Video Relay Service: Program Funding and Reform [October 22, 2013]
"The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates a number of disability-related telecommunications services, including video relay service (VRS). VRS allows persons with hearing disabilities, using American Sign Language (ASL), to communicate with voice telephone users through video equipment, rather than through typed text. VRS has quickly become a very popular service, as it offers several features not available with the text-based telecommunications relay service (TRS). In June 2010, the FCC began a comprehensive review of the rates, structure, and practices of the VRS program. The goal of the review is to reform the VRS program, which had long been burdened by waste, fraud, and abuse, and by compensation rates that had become inflated above actual cost. The FCC issued its updated VRS Program rules in June 2013. The new rules initiate fundamental restructuring of the program to support innovation and competition, drive down ratepayer and provider costs, eliminate incentives for waste, and further protect consumers. […] Congressional interest in the VRS Program is two-fold: eliminating fraud and abuse in the program and maintaining the usefulness of the program for users. Controversy has arisen over the latest proposals for change to the program being considered by the FCC. The FCC believes that rate structure changes are needed to reduce fraud and better manage the VRS program, but the deaf and hard-of-hearing community is concerned that funding cuts will result in fewer and less-qualified ASL interpreters."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Figliola, Patricia Moloney
2013-10-22
-
Veterans and Homelessness [March 12, 2014]
"The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan brought renewed attention to the needs of veterans, including the needs of homeless veterans. Researchers have found both male and female veterans to be over-represented in the homeless population, and, as the number of veterans increased due to these conflicts, there was concern that the number of homeless veterans could rise commensurately. The 2007-2009 recession and the subsequent slow economic recovery also raised concerns that homelessness could increase among all groups, including veterans. […] Another issue is the concern that veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan who are at risk of homelessness may not receive the services they need. In addition, concerns have arisen about the needs of female veterans, whose numbers are increasing. Women veterans face challenges that could contribute to their risks of homelessness. They are more likely to have experienced sexual trauma than women in the general population and are more likely than male veterans to be single parents. Historically, few homeless programs for veterans have had the facilities to provide separate accommodations for women and women with children. In recent years, Congress and the VA have made changes to some programs in an attempt to address the needs of female veterans, including funding set asides and efforts to expand services."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Perl, Libby
2014-03-12
-
Veterans' Medical Care: FY2014 Appropriations [April 1, 2014]
"The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provides benefits to veterans who meet certain eligibility criteria. Benefits to veterans range from disability compensation and pensions to hospital and medical care. The VA provides these benefits through three major operating units: the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), and the National Cemetery Administration (NCA). This report focuses on funding for the VHA. The VHA is primarily a direct service provider of primary care, specialized care, and related medical and social support services to veterans through the nation's largest integrated health care system. Eligibility for VA health care is based primarily on previous military service, disability, and income. The President's FY2014 budget request was submitted to Congress on April 10, 2013. The President's budget requested $147.9 billion in budget authority for the VA as a whole. For FY2014, the Administration requested $55.2 billion for VHA. This included $43.7 billion for the medical services account, $6.0 billion for the medical support and compliance account, $4.9 billion for the medical facilities account, and nearly $586 million for the medical and prosthetic research account. Furthermore, as required by the Veterans Health Care Budget Reform and Transparency Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-81), the President's budget requested $55.6 billion in advance appropriations for the three medical care accounts (medical services, medical support and compliance, and medical facilities) for FY2015."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Panangala, Sidath Viranga
2014-04-01
-
Veterans' Medical Care: FY2015 Appropriations [May 15, 2014]
"The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provides benefits to veterans who meet certain eligibility criteria. Benefits to veterans range from disability compensation and pensions to hospital and medical care. The VA provides these benefits through three major operating units: the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), and the National Cemetery Administration (NCA). This report focuses on funding for the VHA. The VHA is primarily a direct service provider of primary care, specialized care, and related medical and social support services to veterans through the nation's largest integrated health care system. Eligibility for VA health care is based primarily on previous military service, disability, and income. The President's FY2015 budget request was submitted to Congress on March 4, 2014. The President's budget is requesting $158.6 billion in budget authority for the VA as a whole. This includes $93.5 billion in mandatory funding and $65.1 billion in discretionary funding. For FY2015, the Administration is requesting $56.6 billion for VHA. This includes $45.4 billion for the medical services account, $5.9 billion for the medical support and compliance account, $4.7 billion for the medical facilities account, and nearly $589 million for the medical and prosthetic research account. Furthermore, as required by the Veterans Health Care Budget Reform and Transparency Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-81), the President's budget is requesting $58.6 billion in advance appropriations for the three medical care accounts (medical services, medical support and compliance, and medical facilities) for FY2016."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Panangala, Sidath Viranga
2014-05-15
-
What Is the Farm Bill? [April 7, 2014]
"The farm bill is an omnibus, multi-year piece of authorizing legislation that governs an array of agricultural and food programs. Titles in the most recent farm bill encompassed farm commodity price and income supports, farm credit, trade, agricultural conservation, research, rural development, bioenergy, foreign food aid, and domestic nutrition assistance. Although agricultural policies sometimes are created and changed by freestanding legislation or as part of other major laws, the farm bill provides a predictable opportunity for policy makers to comprehensively and periodically address agricultural and food issues. The farm bill is renewed about every five years. […] The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the total cost of mandatory programs at $489 billion over the next five years (FY2014-FY2018). This estimated cost does not include the cost of discretionary programs that are subject to appropriations. Of the total estimated mandatory outlays, $391 billion is for nutrition assistance and $98 billion is mostly geared toward agriculture production. Within the agriculture portion, crop insurance outlays are projected to be $41 billion over the next five years, $28 billion for conservation, and $24 billion for farm commodity programs."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Johnson, Renée; Monke, James
2014-04-07
-
What Is the Farm Bill? [March 12, 2014]
"The farm bill is an omnibus, multi-year piece of authorizing legislation that governs an array of agricultural and food programs. Titles in the most recent farm bill encompassed farm commodity price and income supports, farm credit, trade, agricultural conservation, research, rural development, bioenergy, foreign food aid, and domestic nutrition assistance. Although agricultural policies sometimes are created and changed by freestanding legislation or as part of other major laws, the farm bill provides a predictable opportunity for policy makers to comprehensively and periodically address agricultural and food issues. The farm bill is renewed about every five years. The Agricultural Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-79) is the most recent omnibus farm bill, and was enacted into law in February 2014. It succeeded the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-246). The 2014 farm bill contains 12 titles encompassing commodity price and income supports, farm credit, trade, agricultural conservation, research, rural development, energy, and foreign and domestic food programs, among other programs. Provisions in the 2014 farm bill reshape the structure of farm commodity support, expand crop insurance coverage, consolidate conservation programs, reauthorize and revise nutrition assistance, and extend authority to appropriate funds for many U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) discretionary programs through FY2018."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Johnson, Renée
2014-03-12
-
United States Fire Administration: An Overview [May 29, 2014]
"The United States Fire Administration (USFA)--which includes the National Fire Academy (NFA)--is currently housed within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The objective of the USFA is to significantly reduce the nation's loss of life from fire, while also achieving a reduction in property loss and non-fatal injury due to fire. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (P.L. 113-76), signed into law on January 17, 2014, funds USFA at $44 million. The FY2015 budget proposal requested $41.407 million for USFA, a $2.593 million reduction (a 6% cut) from the FY2014 level. Of the requested total appropriation, $12.422 million would be allocated to the National Fire Academy, $11.264 million to National Fire Programs, and $14.666 million to National Emergency Training Center (NETC) Management, Operations and Support. On January 2, 2013, the President signed P.L. 112-239, the FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act. Title XVIII, Subtitle B is the United States Fire Administration Reauthorization Act of 2012, which authorizes USFA at an annual level of $76,490,890 for FY2013 through FY2017. Concerns in the 113th Congress over the federal budget deficit could impact future funding levels for the USFA. Debate over the USFA budget has focused on whether the USFA is receiving an appropriate level of funding to accomplish its mission, given that appropriations for USFA have consistently been well below the agency's authorized level. An ongoing issue is the viability and status of the USFA and National Fire Academy within the Department of Homeland Security."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Kruger, Lennard G.
2014-05-29
