Skip to main content

CRS Reports

Congressional Research Service reports providing nonpartisan analysis of major federal policy issues.

4,930 reports indexed · sourced from EveryCRSReport.com

R42995Domestic Social Policy

An Overview of the Housing Finance System in the United States

This report provides an overview of how the housing finance system works and provides context for housing finance-related policy issues that Congress might choose to consider.

Mar 13, 2013

R42992

Guns, Excise Taxes, and Wildlife Restoration

As a result of the recent debate over guns, gun rights, and gun-related violence, there has been a marked increase in sales of many weapons as well as ammunition. Through an excise tax on firearms and ammunition, such sales have a marked beneficial effect on funding for state wildlife programs through the Wildlife Restoration Program (also known as Pittman-Robertson or P-R). This report examines these taxes, their allocation, and their use. It also examines the effects of sequestration of this account, pursuant to the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA, P.L. 112-25).

Mar 12, 2013

R41622Agricultural Policy

Environmental Regulation and Agriculture

This report discusses the impact of environmental regulation on agriculture. Most environmental regulations, in terms of permitting, inspection, and enforcement, are implemented by state and local governments, often based on federal EPA regulatory guidance. In some cases, agriculture is the direct or primary focus of the regulatory actions. In other cases, agriculture is one of many affected sectors. Traditionally, farm and ranch operations have been exempt or excluded from many environmental regulations.

Mar 12, 2013

R42991Appropriations

Analysis of the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013

Hurricane Sandy caused extensive human suffering and damage to public and private property. In response to this catastrophic event, Congress considered legislation to provide supplemental appropriations to federal disaster assistance programs. In addition, Congress considered revisions to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (the Stafford Act, P.L. 93-288 as amended), which is the primary source of authorities for disaster assistance programs for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). As a result, Congress passed the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013, which was included as Division B of the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-2). Division A of P.L. 113-2 provided a $50.7 billion package of disaster assistance largely focused on responding to Hurricane Sandy. Additionally, Congress increased the National Flood Insurance Programs borrowing authority by $9.7 billion (from $20.725 billion to $30.425 billion) (P.L. 113-1). Both of these supplemental relief law are discussed separately in CRS Report R42869, FY2013 Supplemental Funding for Disaster Relief. This report analyzes the provisions of the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013 (SRIA). In general, these provisions amend the Stafford Act with a stated goal of improving the efficiency and quality of disaster assistance provided by FEMA. Briefly, the amendments to the Stafford Act include: Establishing a new set of alternative procedures for administering the Public Assistance Program, which provides assistance for debris removal and the repair and restoration of eligible facilities (Section 1102 of the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013); Authorizing FEMA to enter into agreements with private owners of multi-family rental properties to expand post-disaster housing resources (Section 1103); Revising the administration of the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, to include a possible advancement of 25% of grant funds (Section 1104); Directing the establishment of alternative dispute resolution procedures (including binding arbitration), building on FEMAs current appeals process, to resolve federal and state disagreements on costs and eligibility questions (Section 1105); Directing the creation of a joint process for environmental and historical review for disaster recovery projects with the goal of increasing the speed of the process (Section 1106); Directing FEMA to study, and report to Congress, whether it is appropriate to increase the dollar size of small projects eligible for simplified procedures (Section 1107); Including child care as an eligible expense under the other needs assistance provided in certain disasters (Section 1108(a)); Specifically authorizing the reimbursement of the base wages of government employees providing emergency work under certain circumstances (Section 1108(b)); Directing FEMA to update the factors considered when assessing the need for Individual Assistance in the declaration process (Section 1109); Authorizing the chief executive of a tribal government to directly request disaster or emergency declarations from the President, much as a governor can for a state (Section 1110); and Directing FEMA to create a comprehensive national strategy for reducing the cost of future disasters (Section 1111). Prospectively, the changes in law apply to disasters declared on or after the date of enactment, January 29, 2013. Further, support can be found in the text and legislative history of the bill for applying at least some of these amendments retrospectively to Hurricane Sandy-related disaster declarations. However, it is less clear whether, and to what extent, some of these revisions will apply to disasters declared before Hurricane Sandy. This report will be updated as events warrant.

Mar 11, 2013

R42484Agricultural Policy

Budget Issues Shaping a Farm Bill in 2013

Mar 11, 2013

R40760

House Office of Congressional Ethics: History, Authority, and Procedures

This report describes the history and rationale behind the creation of the House Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE), its operations, and its relationship with the House Committee on Ethics, and options potentially available for Congress if further amendments to the House ethics process are desired.

Mar 8, 2013

R42988Immigration Policy

U.S. Immigration Policy: Chart Book of Key Trends

Mar 7, 2013

R42984Constitutional Questions

The 2013 Cybersecurity Executive Order: Overview and Considerations for Congress

This report provides background information regarding the threats and consequences of cybersecurity. The federal legislative framework for cybersecurity is complex, with more than 50 statutes addressing various aspects of it either directly or indirectly.

Mar 1, 2013

R42982American Law

Peace Talks in Colombia

This report provides background on Colombia's armed conflict and describes its key players. It briefly analyzes prior negotiations with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the lessons learned from those efforts that apply to the current talks. It examines what has transpired in the talks that have now lasted for more than a year and a half, considers some of the constraints that could limit the success of the peace talks, and looks at the prospects for the current negotiations.

Mar 1, 2013

R42987Appropriations

Gun Control Proposals in the 113th Congress: Universal Background Checks, Gun Trafficking, and Military Style Firearms

This report provides background information on federal regulation of firearms. The report discusses the legislative and executive developments in the 113th Congress, as well as universal background checks, gun trafficking, and possession of military style firearms.

Mar 1, 2013

R42964

Membership of the 113th Congress: A Profile

This report presents a profile of the membership of the 113th Congress (2013-2014). Statistical information is included on selected characteristics of Members, including data on party affiliation, average age, occupation, education, length of congressional service, religious affiliation, gender, ethnicity, foreign births, and military service.

Feb 28, 2013

R42979American Law

The Proposed Equal Rights Amendment: Contemporary Ratification Issues

This report examines the legislative history of the various proposals that ultimately emerged as the proposed Equal Rights Amendment and both identifies and provides an analysis of contemporary factors that may bear on its present and future viability.

Feb 28, 2013

R42980Immigration Policy

Brief History of Comprehensive Immigration Reform Efforts in the 109th and 110th Congresses to Inform Policy Discussions in the 113th Congress

Leaders in both chambers of Congress have listed immigration reform as a legislative priority in the 113th Congress. Most policymakers agree that the main issues in “comprehensive immigration reform” (CIR) include increased border security and immigration enforcement, improved employment eligibility verification, revision of legal immigration, and options to address the millions of unauthorized aliens residing in the country. These elements were among the features that President Barack Obama emphasized when he called for the 113th Congress to take up CIR legislation. Similar to President Obama’s recent statements on CIR, former President George W. Bush stated that comprehensive immigration reform was a top priority of his second term. President Bush’s principles of immigration reform included increased border security and enforcement of immigration laws within the interior of the United States, as well as a major overhaul of temporary worker visas, expansion of permanent legal immigration, and revisions to the process of determining whether foreign workers were needed. Then—as well as now—the thorniest of these issues centered on unauthorized alien residents of the United States. During the 109th Congress, both chambers passed major overhauls of immigration law but did not reach agreement on a comprehensive reform package. In the 110th Congress, Senate action on comprehensive immigration reform legislation stalled at the end of June 2007 after several weeks of intensive floor debate. The House did not act on comprehensive legislation in the 110th Congress. The three major CIR bills in the 109th and 110th Congresses were the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005 (H.R. 4437 as passed by the House in 109th Congress), the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (S. 2611 as passed by the Senate in 109th Congress), and the Comprehensive Immigration Reform (S. 1639 as considered by the Senate in 110th Congress). All three of the major CIR bills had provisions that would have increased resources for border security, expanded employment eligibility verification, increased the worksite enforcement penalties, broadened inadmissibility grounds pertaining to national security and illegal entry and added a ground for gang membership, expedited the implementation of the automated entry-exit system known as US-VISIT (United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology), broadened the categories of aliens subject to expedited removal, increased the criminal penalties for immigration and document fraud, and expanded the categories of aliens subject to mandatory detention. Despite these similarities, there were substantial differences between the chambers regarding the treatment of unauthorized aliens as well as allocations of visas across family and employment categories for future flows of legal immigrants. The House-passed bill in the 109th Congress would have criminalized unauthorized presence. In contrast, the Senate bills in the 109th and 110th Congresses would have created avenues for unauthorized aliens who met a set of criteria and paid prescribed penalties to acquire “earned legalization.” The Senate bills also had provisions that would have made substantial revisions to legal permanent admissions, notably revising and expanding the employment-based permanent and temporary visa categories. The failure of these substantial efforts to enact CIR in the 109th and 110th Congresses has prompted some to characterize CIR as a “third rail” issue that is too highly charged to touch.

Feb 27, 2013

R42975American Law

Federal Financial Reporting: An Overview

This report discusses the federal financial reporting -- defined here as the process of recording retrospective executive department-level financial and performance information -- may provide both a snapshot of the government's financial health at a given moment in time, as well as an accounting of its financial performance over a given time frame.

Feb 27, 2013

R42972

Sequestration as a Budget Enforcement Process: Frequently Asked Questions

Feb 27, 2013

R42977American Law

Sessions, Adjournments, and Recesses of Congress

This report first describes how pertinent rules and practices regulate the daily sessions of Congress and their adjournments and recesses, including discussion of the "legislative day." It then develops a corresponding discussion for the annual sessions of Congress, which addresses, among other things, the use of "pro forma sessions." The report clarifies certain situations in which terms may simultaneously apply in different ways in relation to the daily session and to the annual session. Finally, the report notes some of the most important implications of the occurrence of sessions, adjournments, and recesses in relation to such matters as presidential action on legislation, recess appointments by the President, the operation of statutory expedited procedures ("fast track" procedures), and "lame duck" (post-election) sessions.

Feb 27, 2013

R42967African Affairs

Kenya: Current Issues and U.S. Policy

This report provides background information regarding on political and security situation in Kenya. The report discusses U.S.-Kenya relations, as U.S. government views Kenya as a strategic partner and anchor state in East Africa, and as critical to counterterrorism efforts in the region.

Feb 26, 2013

R41303Energy Policy

Reauthorizing the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000

Feb 26, 2013

R42007Energy Policy

Everglades Restoration: Federal Funding and Implementation Progress

Feb 26, 2013

R42366

Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA): 2012 Reauthorization as PDUFA V

Title I of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA, P.L. 112-144) reauthorized the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) through September 30, 2017. Known as PDUFA V, this was the program’s fourth five-year reauthorization. The Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA), in 1992, gave the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the authority to collect fees from the pharmaceutical industry and to use the revenue to support “the process for the review of human drug applications.” PDUFA fees provided 52% of the Human Drugs Program funding for FY2012, accounting for more than 2,000 full-time equivalent employees. Therefore, as each reauthorization deadline approaches, FDA, industry groups, and most Members of Congress see PDUFA as must-pass legislation. Congress originally intended PDUFA to diminish the backlog of new drug applications at FDA and shorten the time from submission to decision. The general view is that PDUFA has succeeded. FDA has added review staff and reduced its review times. At each reauthorization, however, discussion returns to certain issues in the context of PDUFA that also reflect broader FDA concerns. The issues—and results—differ. PDUFA II expanded the user fee program’s scope to include activities related to the investigational phases of a new drug’s development, and to increase FDA communications with industry and consumer groups. PDUFA III again expanded the scope of activities that user fees could support to include both preclinical development and a three-year postapproval period. PDUFA IV concentrated on new measures concerning postmarket drug safety. The PDUFA V statutory language does not differ much from PDUFA IV. The accompanying FDA-industry agreement on performance and goals and procedures for FY2013 through FY2017 includes revised communication procedures and timing goals during the application review process and addresses expanded FDA efforts in regulatory science, drug development, drug safety, and information technology. In addition to PDUFA reauthorization, FDASIA included 10 other titles that reauthorized medical device user fees, established generic drug and biosimilar biological product user fees, and addressed pediatric drug research, medical device regulation, pharmaceutical supply chain security, antibiotic development incentives, expedited drug approval, drug shortages, and a set of miscellaneous provisions.

Feb 22, 2013

R42969Economic Policy

Border Security: Understanding Threats at U.S. Borders

The United States confronts a wide array of threats at U.S. borders, ranging from terrorists who may have weapons of mass destruction, to transnational criminals smuggling drugs or counterfeit goods, to unauthorized migrants intending to live and work in the United States. Given this diversity of threats, how may Congress and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) set border security priorities and allocate scarce enforcement resources? In general, DHS’s answer to this question is organized around risk management, a process that involves risk assessment and the allocation of resources based on a cost-benefit analysis. This report focuses on the first part of this process by identifying border threats and describing a framework for understanding risks at U.S. borders. DHS employs models to classify threats as relatively high- or low-risk for certain planning and budgeting exercises and to implement certain border security programs. Members of Congress may wish to use similar models to evaluate the costs and benefits of potential border security policies and to allocate border enforcement resources. This report discusses some of the issues involved in modeling border-related threats. Understanding border risks begins with identifying key threats. At their roots, border-related threats are closely linked to the flow of people (travelers) and goods (cargo) from one country to another. Any smuggled item or individual hidden among the legitimate flows potentially constitutes a threat to U.S. security or interests. The intentions and actions of unauthorized travelers separate them into different threat categories, including terrorists, transnational criminals, and other illegal migrants. Illegal goods are distinguished by their inherent legitimacy or illegitimacy. Certain weapons, illegal drugs, and counterfeit goods are always illegal and categorically prohibited, while other goods are legal under most circumstances, but become illegitimate if they are smuggled to avoid enforcement of specific laws, taxes, or regulations. The risks associated with these diverse types of threats may be modeled as a function of (1) the likelihood that the threat will be realized, and (2) the potential consequences of a given threat. In practice, however, estimating likelihood and evaluating potential consequences are challenging tasks, particularly when it comes to the diversity and complexity of border threats. Assessing border threats is also difficult because terrorists, criminals, and migrants are strategic actors who may adapt to border defenses. This report describes some of these challenges, and suggests questions policymakers may ask to develop their own “maps” of border risks. Several potential border threats are described, and the report summarizes what is known about their likelihood and consequences. The report concludes by discussing how risk assessment may interact with border security policymaking. Given the uncertainty and the subjective judgments involved in modeling risk, policymakers may struggle to reach a consensus on border priorities. Nonetheless, a systematic approach to studying border threats may help clarify the types of policy tradeoffs lawmakers confront at the border.

Feb 21, 2013

R42965Economic Policy

NAFTA at 20: Overview and Trade Effects

This report provides an overview of North American trade liberalization before the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), an overview of NAFTA provisions, the economic effects of NAFTA, and policy considerations.

Feb 21, 2013

R41816Economic Policy

National Park System: What Do the Different Park Titles Signify?

This report addresses questions that legislators have asked about park unit titles, when considering proposals to establish new park units, to redesignate existing units, or to change the provisions governing a unit It also discusses potential advantages and disadvantages of systemwide recommendations to simplify park nomenclature.

Feb 20, 2013

R42961

Comparing G-20 Reform of the Over-the-Counter Derivatives Markets

Derivatives, or financial instruments whose value is based on an underlying asset, played a key role in the financial crisis of 2008-2009. Congress directly addressed the governance of the derivatives markets through the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank; P.L. 111-203; July 21, 2010). This act, in Title VII, sought to bring the largely unregulated over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives markets under greater regulatory control and scrutiny. Pillars of this approach included mandating that certain OTC derivatives be subject to central clearing, such as through a clearinghouse, which involves posting margin to cover potential losses; greater transparency through trading on exchanges or exchange-like facilities; and reporting trades to a repository, among other reforms. In the debates over Dodd-Frank and in subsequent years, many in Congress have raised the following important questions: If the United States takes stronger regulatory action than other countries, will business in these OTC derivatives markets shift overseas? Since OTC derivatives markets are global in nature, could derivatives trading across borders, or business for U.S. financial firms that engage in these trades, be disrupted if other countries do not adopt similar regulatory frameworks? The first step in addressing these congressional concerns is to examine the degree to which other major countries have adopted similar legislation and regulation as the United States, particularly in light of commitments from the Group of Twenty nations (G-20) to adopt certain derivatives reforms. Following the financial crisis, G-20 leaders (generally political heads of state) established a reform agenda and priorities within that agenda for regulating and overseeing OTC derivatives. The G-20 as an organization has no enforcement capabilities, but relies on the members themselves to implement reforms. According to recent surveys, most members are making progress in meeting the self-imposed goal of implementing major reforms in derivatives markets. Only the United States appears to have met all the reforms endorsed by the G-20 members within the desired timeframe of year-end 2012. The European Union (EU), Japan, Hong Kong, and the United States have each taken significant steps towards implementing legislation requiring central clearing. However, in most of these jurisdictions legislation has not yet been followed up with technical implementing regulations for the requirements to become effective, according to the Financial Stability Board (FSB), which conducts the surveys. Most authorities surveyed estimated that a significant proportion of interest rate derivatives would be centrally cleared by year-end 2012, but they were less confident of progress for other asset classes. The EU appeared to be making progress in its G-20 derivatives regulatory commitments, particularly in central clearing and trade repository-reporting requirements, but at a slower pace than the United States, according to the FSB. This may be due in part to the need for legislation to be passed by individual national legislatures even when agreed broadly by the EU. As of October 2012, however, only the United States had adopted legislation requiring standardized derivatives to be traded on exchanges and electronic platforms. This report examines the G-20 recommendations for reforming OTC derivatives markets and presents the result of self-assessment surveys measuring the performance of G-20 members and some FSB members to date in meeting their commitments. The Appendix to the report presents more detailed information on the status of individual jurisdictions in implementing the G-20-endorsed reforms. The Glossary defines key international bodies and related financial terms and concepts.

Feb 19, 2013

R42962Economic Policy

Federal Reserve: Unconventional Monetary Policy Options

Feb 19, 2013

R42959Economic Policy

The Estate and Gift Tax Provisions of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012

Feb 15, 2013

R42957

Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Legal Issues

In the 113th Congress, there has been renewed congressional interest in gun control legislation. On January 16, 2013, President Obama announced his support for legislation on gun control, including a ban on certain semiautomatic assault firearms and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. Senator Dianne Feinstein introduced S. 150, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013, which would prohibit, subject to certain exceptions, the sale, transfer, possession, manufacturing, and importation of specifically named firearms and other firearms that have certain features, as well as the transfer and possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices. Representative Carolyn McCarthy introduced a companion measure, H.R. 437, in the House of Representatives. S. 150 is similar to the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 (P.L. 103-322) that was in effect through September 13, 2004. The Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 was challenged in the courts for violating, among other things, the Equal Protection Clause and the Commerce Clause. This report reviews the disposition of these challenges. It also discusses Second Amendment jurisprudence in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller and how lower courts have evaluated state and local assault weapons bans post-Heller.

Feb 14, 2013

R42958Immigration Policy

Unauthorized Aliens: Policy Options for Providing Targeted Immigration Relief

The 113th Congress is expected to consider comprehensive immigration reform legislation. If and when it does, a key challenge will be how to address the unauthorized alien population, estimated to number some 11 million. The unauthorized alien population is often treated as if it were monolithic, but it is, in fact, quite diverse. It includes individuals who entered the United States in different ways, for different reasons, and who have different types of connections to the United States. The circumstances of individuals who compose the unauthorized alien population affect their treatment under immigration law, especially with respect to prospects for obtaining legal status in the United States. Relevant immigration status-related factors include mode of entry into the United States, length of unlawful presence in the country, and the existence of family or employment connections. The differences in circumstances among unauthorized aliens are particularly relevant in the context of current discussions about how to address this population. In past years, immigration proposals on unauthorized aliens often called for the establishment of broad legalization programs to enable large numbers of unauthorized aliens to become U.S. legal permanent residents (LPRs) or, conversely, included provisions aimed at promoting the departure of large numbers of unauthorized aliens from the country over time. More recently, there has been discussion of developing policies to provide targeted immigration relief to unauthorized aliens. Immigration relief is a broad term that encompasses relief from removal from the United States without the granting of a legal immigration status as well as relief in the form of a legal immigration status. A main focus of recent discussions has been making eligibility for legal status available to certain segments of the unauthorized population. Aliens with approved immigrant visa petitions, especially those with U.S. citizen or LPR family members, seem to be of particular interest. Selected segments of the unauthorized alien population without an affirmative pathway to legal status, such as students who entered the United States as children and beneficiaries of long-term humanitarian relief, have also been the subject of policy proposals. Policies to provide targeted relief to unauthorized aliens could be legislative or administrative. Legislative options could include amending existing statutory provisions to make it easier for certain unauthorized aliens to obtain LPR status. They also could include establishing statutory mechanisms to enable certain subgroups of unauthorized aliens to become LPRs who may not have pathways to do so under current law, as in the case of the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act. Unauthorized aliens also could receive temporary relief from removal through administrative action. The Department of Homeland Security’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which was established in the absence of congressional action on DREAM Act legislation and includes similar eligibility criteria, provides a recent example. Such administrative actions can provide temporary relief, but, unlike legislative enactments, cannot provide beneficiaries with a legal immigration status.

Feb 13, 2013

R42741Health Policy

Laws Affecting the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP)

This report provides historical and background information that helps explain how Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) has evolved. It focuses solely on changes made to FEHBP through legislative action.

Feb 13, 2013

R42953Economic Policy

Government Assistance for AIG: Summary and Cost

This report discusses the American International Group (AIG), which was the largest direct recipient of government financial assistance during the recent financial crisis.

Feb 7, 2013

R42950Economic Policy

Prospects for Coal in Electric Power and Industry

For most of the twentieth century, the primary use of coal in the United States was for electric power generation, and for most of the history of power generation in the United States, coal has been the dominant fuel used to produce electricity. Even as recently as 2011, coal was the fuel used for almost 42% of power generation in the United States accounting for 93% of coal use. Industrial uses represented the remaining 7%. However, in April 2012, coal’s share of the power generation market dropped to about 32% (according to Energy Information Administration statistics), equal to that of natural gas. Coal was the fuel of choice because of its availability and the relatively low cost of producing electricity in large, coal-burning power plants which took advantage of coal’s low-priced, high energy content to employ economies of scale in steam-electric production. However, coal use for power generation seems to be on the decline, and the magnitude of coal’s role for power generation is in question. Two major reasons are generally seen as being responsible: the expectation of a dramatic rise in natural gas supplies, and the impact of environmental regulations on an aging base of coal-fired power plants. A recent drop in natural gas prices has been enabled by increasing supplies of natural gas largely due to horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (i.e., fracking) of shale gas formations. If the production can be sustained in an environmentally acceptable manner, then a long-term, relatively inexpensive supply of natural gas could result. Decreased natural gas prices are lowering wholesale electricity prices, stimulating a major switch from coal to gas-burning facilities. The electric utility industry values diversity in fuel choice options since reliance on one fuel or technology can leave electricity producers vulnerable to price and supply volatility. However, an “inverse relationship” may be developing for coal vs. natural gas as a power generation choice based on market economics alone, and policies which allow one fuel source to dominate may come at the detriment of the other. Coal-fired power plants are among the largest sources of air pollution in the United States. More than half a dozen separate Clean Air Act programs could possibly be used to control emissions, which makes compliance strategy potentially complicated for utilities and difficult for regulators. Because the cost of the most stringent available controls, for the entire industry, could range into the tens of billions of dollars, some power companies have fought hard and rather successfully to limit or delay regulations affecting them, particularly with respect to plants constructed before the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970 were passed. The expected retirement of approximately 27 GW of coal-fired capacity by 2016 has been reported to the Energy Information Administration (EIA) by coal plant owners and operators, accounting for approximately 8.5% of U.S. coal-fired capacity. While the costs of compliance with new Environmental Protection Agency regulations are a factor, several other issues are cited by coal plant owners and operators as contributing to these retirement decisions including the age of coal-fired power plants, flat to modest electricity demand growth, the availability of previously underutilized natural gas combined-cycle power plants, and the lower price of natural gas due to shale gas development. Even coal plants which have made significant modifications to meet existing EPA regulations are being closed or mothballed due to a combination of low natural gas prices, and the inability to sell power into other markets. EIA expects coal to be a significant part of the U.S. power generation industry’s future to well past 2030. But given price competition from natural gas, and emerging environmental regulations, that role will likely be smaller than in recent decades. Coal-fired generation is likely to face a challenging future.

Feb 4, 2013

R42949Legislative Process

The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012: Modifications to the Budget Enforcement Procedures in the Budget Control Act

Feb 4, 2013

R42482American Law

Congressional Redistricting and the Voting Rights Act: A Legal Overview

Jan 31, 2013

R42944Aging Policy

Medicare, Medicaid, and Other Health Provisions in the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012

Several policies that would have reduced spending and increased revenues were poised to take effect at the end of 2012; collectively, these were referred to by some as the “fiscal cliff.” Had these policies taken effect, CBO projected that the ensuing fiscal contraction would have resulted in a recession in 2013. On January 2, 2013, the President signed H.R. 8, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA, P.L. 112-240), which prevented most—but not all—of the fiscal cliff policies from going into effect. This Act was passed by the Senate on January 1, 2013 by a vote of 89-8, and by the House later that day, 257-167. Title VI of the Act extends several expiring provisions in the Medicare and Medicaid programs and makes other changes in federally funded health programs. Provisions in Title VI of ATRA that will result in higher physician fee schedule payments include the override of the sustainable growth rate (SGR) update mechanism of the Medicare physician fee schedule that would have reduced payments had it taken effect, and the extensions of the physician work geographic adjustment. Other provisions preserved some Medicare hospital payments by extending adjustments for low-volume hospitals and the Medicare-dependent hospital program. Sections that addressed Medicare managed care include the extension of the Medicare Advantage special needs plans and reasonable cost contracts. Medicare beneficiaries will continue to have access to the exceptions process for outpatient therapy limits and outreach and assistance programs for low-income beneficiaries. Other health programs extended by the ATRA include the qualifying individual program, the transitional medical assistance program, the Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) express lane option, family-to-family health information centers, and special diabetes programs for Type I diabetes and for American Indians and Alaska Natives. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the health provisions in H.R. 8 will result in a net increase in direct spending of $800 million over the ten-year period from FY2013 through FY2022. The physician payment override (“doc fix”) and the various health-related extensions cumulatively add an estimated $29.3 billion to direct spending. CBO estimates that the other health provisions cumulatively result in offsets of all but $800 million as a result of the direct effects of the provisions and the interactions between provisions. While some sections of ATRA make changes to federal health programs that result in savings to the federal budget, other sections addressing federal health care programs have little or no impact on direct spending in the federal budget.

Jan 31, 2013

R41523American Law

Small Business Administration and Job Creation

The Small Business Administration (SBA) administers several programs to support small businesses, including loan guaranty programs; disaster loan programs; management and technical assistance training programs; and federal contracting programs. Congressional interest in these programs has increased in recent years, primarily because they are viewed as a means to stimulate economic activity, create jobs, and assist in the national economic recovery. This report examines the economic research on net job creation to identify the types of businesses that appear to create the most jobs.

Jan 30, 2013

R42941Health Policy

Medicaid’s Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP), FY2014

Medicaid is a means-tested entitlement program that finances the delivery of primary and acute medical services as well as long-term care. Medicaid is jointly funded by the federal government and the states. The federal government’s share of a state’s expenditures is called the federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP) rate. The remainder is referred to as the nonfederal share, or state share. Generally determined annually, the FMAP formula is designed so that the federal government pays a larger portion of Medicaid costs in states with lower per capita incomes relative to the national average (and vice versa for states with higher per capita incomes). FMAP rates have a statutory minimum of 50% and a statutory maximum of 83%. For FY2014, regular FMAP rates range from 50.00% to 73.05%. The FMAP rate is used to reimburse states for the federal share of most Medicaid expenditures, but exceptions to the regular FMAP rate have been made for certain states, situations, populations, providers, and services. Some recent issues related to FMAP include FMAP changes in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA, P.L. 111-148 as amended), federal deficit reduction proposals that would amend the FMAP rate, and the disaster-related FMAP adjustment. The ACA contains a number of provisions affecting FMAP rates. Most notably, the ACA provides initial FMAP rates of up to 100% for certain “newly eligible” individuals. Also, under the ACA, “expansion states” receive an enhanced FMAP rate for certain individuals. In addition, ACA provides increased FMAP rates for certain disaster-affected states, primary care payment rate increases, specified preventive services and immunizations, smoking cessation services for pregnant women, specified home and community-based services, health home services for certain people with chronic conditions, home and community-based attendant services and supports, and state balancing incentive payments. Since federal Medicaid expenditures are a large and growing portion of the federal budget, controlling federal Medicaid spending has been included in some federal deficit reduction proposals. Some of the federal deficit reduction proposals include provisions that would amend the current FMAP structure through either a blended FMAP or a reduction to the statutory FMAP floor. The ACA included a provision providing a disaster-recovery FMAP adjustment for states that have experienced a major, statewide disaster. Louisiana is the only state that has been eligible for the disaster-recovery adjusted FMAP since the fourth quarter of FY2011 (when the adjustment was first available). Both the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-96) and the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21, P.L. 112-141) amended the formula for the disaster-recovery adjusted FMAP. This report describes the FMAP calculation used to reimburse states for most Medicaid expenditures, and it lists the statutory exceptions to the regular FMAP rate. In addition, this report discusses other FMAP-related issues, including FMAP changes in ACA, federal deficit reduction proposals affecting the FMAP rate, and the disaster-recovery FMAP adjustment.

Jan 30, 2013

R42936

Unemployment Insurance: Legislative Issues in the 113th Congress

This report provides a brief overview of the three unemployment insurance programs — unemployment Compensation (UC), temporary Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC08), and Extended Benefits (EB) — that may currently pay benefits to eligible unemployed workers.

Jan 25, 2013

R42948Foreign Affairs

U.S.-India Security Relations: Strategic Issues

In today’s fluid geopolitical environment, the relationship between the United States, the world’s oldest democracy and an established global power, and India, its most populous democracy and an aspiring global power, is seen as a key variable in the unfolding international dynamics of the 21st century. As U.S. foreign policy attention shifts toward the Asia-Pacific (or Indo-Pacific) region, and as India’s economic and military capabilities grow, Washington’s pursuit of a strategic partnership with New Delhi demonstrates that the mutual wariness of the Cold War era has rapidly faded. A vital and in some ways leading aspect of this partnership has been security relations, and today the two countries are engaging in unprecedented levels of military-to-military ties, defense trade, and counterterrorism and intelligence cooperation. Still, although considerable enthusiasm for deepened security engagement is found in both capitals—and not least in the U.S. Congress—there is also a persistent sense that this aspect of the bilateral relationship lacks purpose and focus. Some observers argue that the potential of the relationship has been oversold, and that the benefits either hoped for or expected may not materialize in the near future. While Obama Administration officials variously contend that India is now or will be a net provider of security in its region, many independent analysts are skeptical that this aspiration can be realized, at least in the near-term. Nongovernmental analyses of the course and pace of U.S.-India security relations are oftentimes incompatible or even conflicting in their assumptions and recommendations. Such incompatibility is frequently the result of the differing conclusions rooted in short-term versus long-term perspectives. The Obama Administration—along with numerous pro-India analysts in Washington—has tended to emphasize the anticipated benefits of long-term engagement as opposed to a short-term approach that seeks gains derived through more narrow transactions. This latter tack can have the effect of raising and then thwarting expectations in Washington, as was the case with the ultimate failure of U.S. defense firms to secure the multi-billion-dollar contracts to supply new combat aircraft to India. At the same time, frustrations among many in the United States have arisen from the sense that India’s enthusiasm for further deepening bilateral security cooperation is limited, and that New Delhi’s reciprocity has been insufficient. Looking ahead, there is widespread concurrence among many officials and analysts that the security relationship would benefit from undergirding ambitious rhetoric with more concrete action in areas of mutual agreement. In their view, defining which actions will provide meaningful gains, even on a modest scale, appears to be the central task facing U.S. and Indian policy makers in coming years. To assist Members of Congress and their staffs in clarifying the status of and outlook for bilateral security cooperation, this report—a companion to CRS Report R42823, India-U.S. Security Relations: Current Engagement, by K. Alan Kronstadt and Sonia Pinto—takes a systematic approach to the major strategic perspectives held by policy makers in both countries and the ways in which these perspectives are variously harmonious, discordant, or, in some cases, both. The report opens with a brief review of the pre-2005 history of U.S.-India security relations. This is followed by discussion of key U.S. security interests related to India. Next is a focus on India’s defense posture writ large. With this context set, the report reviews key areas of convergent and divergent security interests and perspectives. A brief discussion of the outlook for future security cooperation closes. For information on U.S.-India relations more broadly, see CRS Report RL33529, India: Domestic Issues, Strategic Dynamics, and U.S. Relations, coordinated by K. Alan Kronstadt.

Jan 24, 2013

R42930Foreign Affairs

Maritime Territorial Disputes in East Asia: Issues for Congress

Jan 23, 2013

R42869Agricultural Policy

FY2013 Supplemental Funding for Disaster Relief: Summary and Considerations for Congress

This report analyzes the Administration's request, the House-passed legislation, and the Senate position as reflected in Senate-amended H.R. 1 from the 112th Congress. (The newly constituted Senate has not taken up legislation establishing its position on the supplemental request as of the date of publication.) It includes information on legislative provisions as well as funding levels.

Jan 23, 2013

R42933Appropriations

Regular Appropriations Bills: Terms of Initial Consideration and Amendment in the House, FY1996-FY2012

This report examines the terms under which the regular appropriations bills are typically brought up and initially considered on the House floor, as well as the practices of the House with regards to amendment opportunities and the waiver of points of order, for FY1996 to FY2012 (104th-112th Congresses).

Jan 23, 2013

R42934Environmental Policy

Air Quality: EPA's 2013 Changes to the Particulate Matter (PM) Standard

This report summarizes Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) January 15, 2013, final and June 2012 proposed changes to the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and includes comparisons with previous (1997 and 2006) promulgated and proposed standards. Key actions leading up to the agency's determination, and potential issues and concerns associated with changing the Particulate Matter annual standard, are also highlighted.

Jan 23, 2013

R42931Appropriations

Progress in Combating Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs): U.S. and Global Efforts from FY2006 to FY2013

This report discusses the prevalence of "neglected tropical diseases" (NTDs), U.S. and global actions to address them, and options the 113th Congress might consider.

Jan 22, 2013

R42937Appropriations

The Federal Prison Population Buildup: Overview, Policy Changes, Issues, and Options

Since the early 1980s, there has been a historically unprecedented increase in the federal prison population. Some of the growth is attributable to changes in federal criminal justice policy during the previous three decades. An issue before Congress is whether policymakers consider the rate of growth in the federal prison population sustainable, and if not, what changes could be made to federal criminal justice policy to reduce the prison population while maintaining public safety. This report explores the issues related to the growing federal prison population.

Jan 22, 2013

R42892Appropriations

Summary Report: Congressional Action on the FY2013 Disaster Supplemental

In late October 2012, Hurricane Sandy impacted a wide swath of the East Coast of the United States, resulting in more than 120 deaths and the major disaster declarations for 12 states plus the District of Columbia. The Administration submitted a request to Congress on December 7, 2012, for $60.4 billion in supplemental funding and legislative provisions to address both the immediate losses and damages from Hurricane Sandy, as well as to mitigate the damage from future disasters in the impacted region. This summary report analyzes the Administration's request, the House-passed legislation, and the Senate position as reflected in Senate-amended H.R. 1 from the 112th Congress.

Jan 22, 2013

R42929Constitutional Questions

Procedures for Considering Changes in Senate Rules

This report discusses procedures and related issues involved in considering changes to Senate rules. The Constitution empowers each house of Congress to determine its own rules. The Senate normally considers changes to its Standing Rules in the form of a simple resolution, which (like any ordinary measure) can be adopted by a majority of Senators voting, a quorum being present (“simple majority”). Like most measures, however, such a resolution is debatable. Senate rules place no general limits on how long consideration of a measure may last, and allow such limits to be imposed only by a supermajority vote for cloture. As a result, opponents may be able to prevent the resolution from coming to a vote by filibustering. For changes in Standing Rules, the supermajority requisite for cloture is two-thirds of Senators voting, with a quorum present. Except by unanimous consent, moreover, the Senate can normally take up a resolution changing rules (or any other measure) only by adopting a motion to proceed to consider. A simple majority can adopt this motion, but the motion is itself debatable, so that in order to reach a vote, it may be necessary to obtain a two-thirds supermajority to invoke cloture first on the motion to proceed, then also on the measure itself. For these reasons, in cases in which opponents are willing to filibuster, it can become necessary, in practice, to obtain supermajority support in order to bring the Senate to the point at which it can vote on a proposal to amend Senate Rules, even though a simple majority can then adopt the proposal itself. Changes to Standing Rules could also be included in other forms of resolution, or in bills, but any motion to consider a measure containing such provisions is still always debatable, and a two-thirds supermajority is still required for cloture. Procedural changes could also be established as standing orders, or as certain other kinds of procedural regulation. A motion to proceed to consider a measure establishing procedural regulations in any such form would also be debatable, but cloture on such a measure would require three-fifths of the full membership of the Senate. Finally, the Senate may also change its procedures by establishing new precedents that interpret existing rules or other standards differently from before. This might be achieved either by a ruling that directly establishes an altered practice or by one that permits a simple majority to bring the Senate to a vote on a change in rules. If a point of order asserts a new interpretation, the chair will normally overrule it on the basis of existing precedents, but if that decision is appealed to the full Senate, a simple majority could establish the new interpretation by voting to reverse the decision. Appeals are normally debatable, however, so that opponents may be able to prevent any vote to overturn the ruling by filibustering the appeal, unless a supermajority would vote for cloture. Proceedings that would permit the Senate to reinterpret rules without requiring a supermajority vote in the process have been called the “nuclear option,” or, if implemented through raising a point of order on constitutional grounds, the “constitutional option.” It is not clear that any such form of proceeding can be proposed that would not require violations of existing rules in the process of changing them. Some of the proceedings proposed would require the chair to make a ruling contrary to precedent, or else to submit to the decision of the Senate a settled procedural question on which the chair would routinely rule. Others would require the Senate to entertain a novel motion through which a simple majority could close debate, or would involve disposing of a motion through proceedings that would be in order only if the Senate were already to have approved the motion.

Jan 22, 2013

R42924Constitutional Questions

Prosecutorial Discretion in Immigration Enforcement: Legal Issues

This report begins by discussing the sources of federal power to regulate immigration and, particularly, the allocation of power between Congress and the President in this area. It next addresses the constitutional and other foundations for the doctrine of prosecutorial discretion, as well as the potential ways in which prosecutorial discretion may be exercised in the immigration context. It concludes by addressing potential constitutional, statutory, and administrative constraints upon the exercise of prosecutorial discretion.

Jan 17, 2013

R42925American Law

Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.: Corporate Liability and Extraterritoriality Under the Alien Tort Statute

Jan 17, 2013

R42651Appropriations

FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues

Military personnel issues typically generate significant interest from many Members of Congress and their staffs. Recent military operations in Iraq and ongoing operations in Afghanistan, along with the operational role of the Reserve Components, further heighten interest in a wide range of military personnel policies and issues. The Congressional Research Service (CRS) has selected a number of the military personnel issues considered in deliberations on the House and Senate versions of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2013. This report provides a brief synopsis of sections that pertain to personnel policy. These include end strengths, pay raises, health care, sexual assault, issues related to the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, as well as less prominent issues that nonetheless generate significant public interest. This report focuses exclusively on the annual defense authorization process. It does not include language concerning appropriations, veterans’ affairs, tax implications of policy choices, or any discussion of separately introduced legislation. Some issues were addressed in the FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act and discussed in CRS Report R41874, FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act: Selected Military Personnel Policy Issues, coordinated by David F. Burrelli. Those issues that were considered previously are designated with a “*” in the relevant section titles of this report.

Jan 16, 2013

R42917Energy Policy

Mexico: Background and U.S. Relations

This report provides an overview of political and economic conditions in Mexico followed by assessments of some key issues of congressional interest in Mexico: migration, trade, security, human rights, energy, and water issues. The report summarizes legislative action that has occurred related to these topics and refers to other CRS products and experts that can be consulted for further information.

Jan 16, 2013