Sourcing Policy: Statutes and Statutory Provisions

L. Elaine Halchin
Specialist in American National Government

The federal government’s sourcing policy dates to the 1950s with the publication of three Bureau of the Budget bulletins. The bulletins’ emphasis on governmental reliance on the private sector for the provision of goods and services was followed, in 1966, with the publication of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76. Under the circular, commercial activities performed by federal employees are subjected to public-private competition. Until the late 1990s, the executive branch, namely OMB, almost exclusively, led the competitive sourcing effort, issuing revisions to the circular, overseeing implementation of the policy, and providing guidance to agencies.

Another strain, or facet, of sourcing policy emerged during the Administration of President Barack Obama. OMB’s July 2009 memorandum on multi-sector workforce management, combined with legislation and other government documents, laid the groundwork for this approach, which focuses on agencies determining the appropriate mix of federal employees and contractor employees.

Congressional interest and involvement in sourcing policy, as measured by legislation that has been enacted, has grown over the years. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s (93rd through the first session of the 106th Congresses), a total of 10 bills with provisions related to sourcing policy were enacted, including, for example, the Federal Activities Inventory Reform (FAIR) Act (P.L. 105- 270). The 108th and subsequent Congresses experienced a marked increase in the number of bills enacted with provisions involving sourcing policy. To date, 35 bills have been enacted during five Congresses (108th through 112th). Recently enacted provisions have addressed, for example, protest rights for federal government employees, funding limits on competitive sourcing activities, the development of a single consistent definition of “inherently governmental,” and the development of “insourcing” guidelines. This report will be updated if relevant legislation is enacted.


Date of Report: February 15, 2012
Number of Pages: 36
Order Number: RL32833
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Same-Sex Marriages: Legal Issues

Alison M. Smith
Legislative Attorney

The recognition of same-sex marriages generates debate on both the federal and state levels. Either legislatively or judicially, same-sex marriage is legal in seven states. Other states allow civil unions or domestic partnerships, which grant all or part of state-level rights, benefits, and/or responsibilities of marriage. Some states have statutes or constitutional amendments limiting marriage to one man and one woman. These variations raise questions about the validity of such unions outside the contracted jurisdiction and have bearing on the distribution of federal benefits.

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), P.L. 104-199, prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages and allows individual states to refuse to recognize such marriages performed in other states. Section 3 of DOMA requires that marriage, for purposes of federal benefit programs, be defined as the union of one man and one woman. Lower courts are starting to address DOMA’s constitutionality. On July 8, 2010, a U.S. district court in Massachusetts found Section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional in two companion cases brought by same-sex couples married in Massachusetts. In one case, the court found that DOMA exceeded Congress’s power under the Spending Clause and violated the Tenth Amendment. In the other, the court held that Congress’s goal of preserving the status quo did not bear a rational relationship to DOMA, and thus violated the Fifth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. While the government filed a notice of appeal in these cases, it is unclear whether the cases will continue. In February 2011, the U.S. Attorney General submitted a letter to congressional leadership stating that the government will not defend DOMA’s constitutionality under certain conditions. The Assistant Attorney General subsequently submitted a letter to the First Circuit stating that the government will cease its defense of Section 3 of DOMA. However, the United States will remain a party to the cases presumably to “provide Congress a full and fair opportunity to participate in the litigation.”

Questions regarding same-sex marriages figure prominently in California. After the state supreme court’s decision finding that denying same-sex couples the right to marry violated the state constitution, voters approved a constitutional amendment (“Proposition 8”) limiting the validity and recognition of “marriages” to heterosexual couples. Subsequent court challenges ensued. On February 7, 2012, a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court decision finding that Proposition 8 violates both the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, inasmuch as voters took away a right from a minority group without justification when they approved Proposition 8. In a matter of first impression, the lower court found that Proposition 8 (1) deprived same-sex couples of the fundamental right to marry under the Due Process Clause and (2) excluded such couples from state-sponsored marriage while allowing heterosexual couples access in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. While the appellate court affirmed the lower court’s decision, it did so on much narrower grounds based on historical facts specific to California. As such, it appears that this decision will have little, if any, impact on other jurisdictions. However, the case will likely be appealed to the full Ninth Circuit or directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. It is unclear whether the Court would accept the case for review on the merits, as it pertains to an interpretation of a state constitutional amendment.

This report discusses DOMA and legal challenges to it. It reviews legal principles applied to determine the validity of a marriage contracted in another state and surveys the various approaches employed by states to enable or to prevent same-sex marriage. The report also examines House and Senate resolutions introduced in previous Congresses proposing a constitutional amendment and limiting federal courts’ jurisdiction to hear or determine any question pertaining to the interpretation of DOMA.


Date of Report: February 14, 2012
Number of Pages: 35
Order Number: RL31994
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

The U.S. Postal Service’s Financial Condition: Overview and Issues for Congress

Kevin R. Kosar
Analyst in American National Government

This report provides an overview of the U.S. Postal Service’s (USPS’s) financial condition, legislation enacted to alleviate the USPS’s financial challenges, and possible issues for the 112th Congress. It also includes a side-by-side comparison of two of the postal reform bills, H.R. 2309 and S. 1789.

Since 1971, the USPS has been a self-supporting government agency that covers its operating costs with revenues generated through the sales of postage and related products and services.

In recent years, the USPS has experienced significant financial challenges. After running modest profits from FY2004 through FY2006, the USPS lost $25.4 billion between FY2007 and FY2011. Were it not for congressional action, the USPS would have lost an additional $9.5 billion. In the first quarter of FY2012, the USPS had a $3.3 billion operational loss.

A number of ideas have been advanced that would attempt to improve the USPS’s financial condition in the short term so that it might continue as a self-funding government agency. All of these reforms would require Congress to amend current postal law. The ideas include (1) increasing the USPS’s revenues by altering postage rates and increasing its offering of nonpostal rates and services; and (2) reducing the USPS’s expenses by a number of means, such as recalculating the USPS’s retiree health care and pension obligations and payments, closing postal facilities, and reducing mail delivery to less than six days per week.

This report will be updated after the USPS releases its quarterly financial results in early June 2012, and in the interim should there be any significant developments.


Date of Report: February 13, 2012
Number of Pages: 28
Order Number: R41024
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Congressional Commissions: Overview, Structure, and Legislative Considerations

Matthew Eric Glassman
Analyst on the Congress

Jacob R. Straus
Analyst on the Congress

Congressional advisory commissions are formal groups established to provide independent advice; make recommendations for changes in public policy; study or investigate a particular problem, issue, or event; or perform a duty. While no legal definition exists for what constitutes a “congressional commission,” in this report a congressional commission is defined as a multimember independent entity that (1) is established by Congress, (2) exists temporarily, (3) serves in an advisory capacity, (4) is appointed in part or whole by Members of Congress, and (5) reports to Congress. These five characteristics differentiate a congressional commission from a presidential commission, an executive branch commission, or other bodies with “commission” in their names. Over 90 congressional commissions have been established since 1989.

Throughout American history, Congress has found commissions to be useful entities in the legislative process. By establishing a commission, Congress can potentially provide a highly visible forum for important issues and assemble greater expertise than may be readily available within the legislature. Complex policy issues can be examined over a longer time period and in greater depth than may be practical for legislators. Finally, the non-partisan or bipartisan character of most congressional commissions may make their findings and recommendations more politically acceptable, both in Congress and among the public. Critics argue that many congressional commissions are expensive, often formed to take difficult decisions out of the hands of Congress, and are mostly ignored when they report their findings and recommendations.

The temporary status of congressional commissions and short time period they are often given to complete their work product makes it important that legislators craft statutes creating congressional commissions with care. A wide variety of options are available, and legislators can tailor the composition, organization, and working arrangements of a commission, based on the particular goals of Congress. As a result, individual congressional commissions often have an organizational structure and powers quite different from one another.

This report provides an overview and analysis of congressional advisory commissions, information on the general statutory structure of a congressional commission, and a catalog of congressional commissions created since the 101st Congress.


Date of Report: February 15, 2012
Number of Pages: 32
Order Number: R40076
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Representatives and Senators: Trends in Member Characteristics Since 1945

R. Eric Petersen, Coordinator
Specialist in American National Government

Questions about the characteristics of Members of Congress, including their age, education, previous occupations, and other descriptors, are of ongoing interest to Members, congressional staff, and constituents. Some of these questions may be asked in the context of representation, in efforts to evaluate the extent to which Members of Congress reflect their constituencies and the nation at large. In other instances, questions arise about how the characteristics of Members have changed over time, which may speak in part to the history of Congress.

This report provides profiles of Senators and Representatives in selected Congresses since 1945. It includes data based on Representatives and Senators serving on the first day of the 79th, 82nd, 87th, 92nd, 97th, 102nd, and 107th – 112th Congresses for several demographic characteristics, as well as the tenure of Member service in Congress. The characteristics discussed include age, including the oldest and youngest Members of the House and Senate; congressional service tenure; sex; previous occupation; race and ethnicity; education; religion; and military service.

Following the written summaries of each characteristic, the report provides a number of tables that provide the detailed data by the category on which the summaries are based. All data tables appear in the “Member Characteristics Data Tables” section.

In several categories, the report provides data on the U.S. population that may be comparable to data available on Members of Congress. A detailed discussion of the methods used to develop the data presented in the report, and efforts to provide comparison between Member characteristics and the American public, is provided in an Appendix.

The disclosure of details of a Member’s race, education, previous occupation, or other characteristics appears to be voluntary, and no official, authoritative source has collected Member characteristic data in a consistent manner over time. Member data provided in this report are based on commercially collected information, and academic sources. Comparative data on the U.S. population are taken from the Census Bureau, and are supplemented by private sources.

Members in 2011 are older, more likely to identify a religious affiliation, and include more women and members of racial and ethnic groups than Members in 1945. The data presented in this report suggest that since the 79th Congress, Members have had high levels of education, and worked in professional positions prior to coming to Congress. The number of Members who previously served in the military has risen and fallen, largely in tandem with the levels of service in the broader population.

Other Congressional Research Service reports also provide data and other information on the characteristics of Members. These include CRS Report R41647, Membership of the 112th Congress: A Profile; CRS Report R40086, Membership of the 111th Congress: A Profile; and CRS Report R41545, Congressional Careers: Service Tenure and Patterns of Member Service, 1789- 2011. Due to differences in data collection or characterization, data in other studies on Member characteristics may differ from those presented in this report.


Date of Report: February 17, 2012
Number of Pages: 41
Order Number: R42365
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.