You limited your search to:

 Resource Type: Report
 Decade: 2000-2009
 Collection: Congressional Research Service Reports
The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA): Origin, Characteristics, and Institutional Authorities
Responsibility for overseeing reconstruction in post-conflict Iraq initially fell to the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA). Established in early 2003, ORHA had been replaced by June of that year by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA). On June 28, 2004, CPA ceased operations. Whether CPA was a federal agency is unclear. Some executive branch documents supported the notion that it was created by the President. Another possibility is that the authority was created by, or pursuant to, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483. This report discusses the issue of CPA's status as an agency, including the uncertain circumstances regarding its creation and demise, as well as relevant legislation and subsequent lawsuits. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10420/
The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA): Origin, Characteristics, and Institutional Authorities
The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA or “the authority”) was established approximately one month after United States and coalition forces took control of Baghdad in Iraq on April 9, 2003.1 The authority’s mission was “to restore conditions of security and stability, to create conditions in which the Iraqi people can freely determine their own political future, (including by advancing efforts to restore and establish national and local institutions for representative governance) and facilitating economic recovery, sustainable reconstruction and development. This report discusses two views on how the authority was established, reviews selected characteristics of the authority, identifies statutory reporting requirements concerning the authority and the reconstruction of Iraq, and explores several policy issues. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9933/
Department of Homeland Security Reorganization: The 2SR Initiative
This report focuses primarily on the conclusions and proposals resulting from 2SR pertaining to organization and managerial lines of authority matters. In one of his first actions as Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge’s successor, Michael Chertoff, on March 2, 2005, announced in testimony before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security that he was “initiating a comprehensive review of the Department’s organization, operations, and policies.” This effort, he said, would begin “within days.” The results of that undertaking, which came to be known as the Second Stage Review or 2SR, were made public in mid-July. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9942/
State Department and Related Agencies: FY2006 Appropriations and FY2007 Request
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10132/
Homeland Security: The Presidential Coordination Office
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1706/
Homeland Security: The Presidential Coordination Office
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5888/
Homeland Security: The Presidential Coordination Office
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5889/
Executive Branch Reorganization
This issue brief views reorganization as involving the alteration and relocation of both programs and the administrative structure of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes--Congress or the President--and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? Some other related administrative and management reforms are tracked as well. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1195/
Homeland Security: The Presidential Coordination Office
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2742/
Homeland Security: The Presidential Coordination Office
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2743/
Homeland Security Office: Issues and Options
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2779/
Executive Branch Reorganization and Management Initiatives
This issue brief views reorganization and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes or sets management policy—Congress or the President— and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2727/
Executive Branch Reorganization and Management Initiatives
This issue brief views reorganization and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes or sets management policy—Congress or the President— and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2728/
Executive Branch Reorganization and Management Initiatives
This issue brief views reorganization and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes or sets management policy—Congress or the President— and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2729/
Executive Branch Reorganization and Management Initiatives
This issue brief views reorganization and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes or sets management policy—Congress or the President— and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2726/
Executive Branch Reorganization and Management Initiatives
This issue brief views reorganization and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes or sets management policy—Congress or the President— and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2731/
Executive Branch Reorganization and Management Initiatives
This issue brief views reorganization and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes or sets management policy—Congress or the President— and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2730/
Executive Branch Reorganization and Management Initiatives
This issue brief views reorganization and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes or sets management policy—Congress or the President— and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4575/
Executive Branch Reorganization and Management Initiatives
This issue brief views reorganization and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes or sets management policy—Congress or the President— and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4577/
Executive Branch Reorganization and Management Initiatives
This issue brief views reorganization and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes or sets management policy—Congress or the President— and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4578/
Executive Branch Reorganization and Management Initiatives
This issue brief views reorganization and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes or sets management policy—Congress or the President— and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4574/
Executive Branch Reorganization and Management Initiatives
This issue brief views reorganization and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes or sets management policy—Congress or the President— and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4579/
Executive Branch Reorganization and Management Initiatives
This issue brief views reorganization and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes or sets management policy—Congress or the President— and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4576/
Executive Branch Reorganization and Management Initiatives
This issue brief views reorganization and management as involving the alteration of the program administrative structure and operations of the executive branch for reasons of efficiency, economy, and direction. The underlying issue is who reorganizes or sets management policy—Congress or the President— and by what authority and, also, for what purpose? digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4573/
Peer Review: OMB's Proposed, Revised, and Final Bulletins
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7779/
Continuity of Operations (COOP) in the Executive Branch: Background and Issues for Congress
This report discusses the background of COOP planning, discusses elements of an effective COOP plan, and reviews the current policies governing COOP planning in the executive branch. The final two sections address issues and policy questions, including, among other matters, the status of agency preparedness, maintaining COOP preparedness, congressional committee oversight of COOP activity, and funding for contingency planning. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5890/
Continuity of Operations (COOP) in the Executive Branch: Issues in the 109th Congress
Spurred in part by occasional warnings of potential terrorist threats in the post- 9/11 era, some policymakers have intensified their focus on continuity of operations (COOP) issues. COOP planning is a segment of federal government contingency planning linked to continuity of government (COG). Together, COOP and COG are designed to ensure survival of a constitutional form of government and the continuity of essential federal functions. This report focuses primarily on executive branch COOP activities. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs6223/
Continuity of Operations (COOP) in the Executive Branch: Background and Issues for Congress
This report discusses the background of COOP planning, discusses elements of an effective COOP plan, and reviews the current policies governing COOP planning in the executive branch. The final two sections address issues and policy questions, including, among other matters, the status of agency preparedness, maintaining COOP preparedness, congressional committee oversight of COOP activity, and funding for contingency planning. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4620/
The FY2007 Budget Request for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10153/
Defense Authorization and Appropriations Bills: FY1970-FY2006
This report is a research aid, which lists the DOD authorization bills (Table 1) and appropriations bills (Table 2). This report includes all the pertinent information on the passage of these bills through the legislative process: bill numbers, report numbers, dates reported and passed, recorded vote numbers and vote tallies, dates of passage of the conference reports with their numbers and votes, vetoes, substitutions, dates of final passage, and public law numbers. Table 3 shows real growth or decline in national defense funding for FY1940-FY2009. Table 4 gives a more detailed picture of both regular and supplemental defense appropriations from the 103rd Congress to the present (FY1993-FY2005). Table 5 shows the President’s DOD appropriations budget requests for FY1950-FY2005 vs. final amount enacted. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10518/
Small Business Administration: Overview and Issues
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1689/
The National Security Agency: Issues for Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1701/
Defense Authorization and Appropriations Bills: FY1970-FY2006
This report is a research aid, which lists the DOD authorization bills (Table 1) and appropriations bills (Table 2). This report includes all the pertinent information on the passage of these bills through the legislative process: bill numbers, report numbers, dates reported and passed, recorded vote numbers and vote tallies, dates of passage of the conference reports with their numbers and votes, vetoes, substitutions, dates of final passage, and public law numbers. Table 3 shows real growth or decline in national defense funding for FY1940-FY2009. Table 4 gives a more detailed picture of both regular and supplemental defense appropriations from the 103rd Congress to the present (FY1993-FY2005). Table 5 shows the President’s DOD appropriations budget requests for FY1950-FY2005 vs. final amount enacted. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9737/
Federal Spending by Agency and Budget Function, FY2001-FY2005
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8127/
The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA): Origin, Characteristics, and Institutional Authorities
The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA or “the authority”) was established approximately one month after United States and coalition forces took control of Baghdad in Iraq on April 9, 2003.1 The authority’s mission was “to restore conditions of security and stability, to create conditions in which the Iraqi people can freely determine their own political future, (including by advancing efforts to restore and establish national and local institutions for representative governance) and facilitating economic recovery, sustainable reconstruction and development. This report discusses two views on how the authority was established, reviews selected characteristics of the authority, identifies statutory reporting requirements concerning the authority and the reconstruction of Iraq, and explores several policy issues. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5898/
The Quasi Government: Hybrid Organizations with Both Government and Private Sector Legal Characteristics
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8656/
Small Business Administration: Overview and Issues
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1193/
The Quasi Government: Hybrid Organizations with Both Government and Private Sector Legal Characteristics
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs6224/
The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA): Origin, Characteristics, and Institutional Authorities
The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA or “the authority”) was established approximately one month after United States and coalition forces took control of Baghdad in Iraq on April 9, 2003.1 The authority’s mission was “to restore conditions of security and stability, to create conditions in which the Iraqi people can freely determine their own political future, (including by advancing efforts to restore and establish national and local institutions for representative governance) and facilitating economic recovery, sustainable reconstruction and development. This report discusses two views on how the authority was established, reviews selected characteristics of the authority, identifies statutory reporting requirements concerning the authority and the reconstruction of Iraq, and explores several policy issues. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs6482/
Federal Government Corporations: An Overview
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9156/
Polygraph Use by the Department of Energy: Issues for Congress
This report examines how the Department of Energy's (DOE) polygraph testing program has evolved and reviews certain scientific findings with regard to the polygraph's scientific validity. Several issues include whether: DOE's new screening program is focused on an appropriate number of individuals occupying only the most sensitive positions; the program should be expanded in order to adequately safeguard certain classified information; further research into the polygraph's scientific validity is needed; there are possible alternatives to the polygraph; and whether DOE should continue polygraph screening. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc462298/
U.S. National Science Foundation: An Overview
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10168/
The National Institute of Standards and Technology: An Overview
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10131/
Border Security: Key Agencies and Their Missions
After the massive reorganization of federal agencies precipitated by the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), there are now four main federal agencies charged with securing the United States’ borders: the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), which patrols the border and conducts immigrations, customs, and agricultural inspections at ports of entry; the Bureau of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which investigates immigrations and customs violations in the interior of the country; the United States Coast Guard, which provides maritime and port security; and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which is responsible for securing the nation’s land, rail, and air transportation networks. This report is meant to serve as a primer on the key federal agencies charged with border security; as such it will briefly describe each agency’s role in securing our nation’s borders. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10146/
Economic Development Administration: Overview and Issues
The Economic Development Administration (EDA), targeted for elimination or major "reinvention" early in the 104th Congress, gained a new lease on life in the waning days of the 105th. Having been kept alive via appropriations bills since its last authorizing legislation expired in 1982, P.L. 105-393 reauthorized the EDA and its programs for 5 years digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1611/
Economic Development Administration: Overview and Issues
The Economic Development Administration (EDA), targeted for elimination or major “reinvention” early in the 104th Congress, gained a new lease on life in the waning days of the 105th. Having been kept alive via appropriations bills since its last authorizing legislation expired in 1982, P.L. 105-393 reauthorized the EDA and its programs for 5 years. On October 27, Congress approved a conference agreement recommending $286.7 million for EDAP and $28 million for S&E, for a totalFY2001 appropriation of$411.9 million for EDA. It became part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act (H.R. 4942, P.L. 106-553) signed into law on December 21, 2000. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1610/
The National Institute of Standards and Technology: An Overview
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10026/
Forest Service FY2001 Budget Issues, Including Proposals for Land Sales and Trust Funds
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1099/
The Peace Corps: Current Issues
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8440/
Awards of Attorneys' Fees by Federal Courts and Federal Agencies
In the United States, the general rule, which derives from common law, is that each side in a legal proceeding pays for its own attorney. There are many exceptions, however, in which federal courts, and occasionally federal agencies, may order the losing party to pay the attorneys’ fees of the prevailing party. The major common law exception authorizes federal courts (not agencies) to order a losing party that acts in bad faith to pay the prevailing party’s fees. This report discusses the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), which makes the United States liable for attorneys’ fees of up to $125 per hour in many court cases and administrative proceedings that it loses (and some that it wins) and fails to prove that its position was substantially justified. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8337/
FIRST PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT LAST