Federal Advisory Committees: An Overview

Wendy Ginsberg
Analyst in American National Government

Federal advisory committees—which may be designated as commissions, councils, or task forces—are created as provisional advisory bodies to collect viewpoints on various policy issues. Advisory bodies have been created to address a host of issues and can help the government manage and solve complex or divisive issues. Congress, the President, or an agency head may create a federal advisory committee to render independent advice or make policy recommendations to various federal agencies or departments.

In 1972, Congress enacted the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA; 5 U.S.C. Appendix— Federal Advisory Committee Act; 86 Stat.770, as amended). Enactment of FACA was prompted by the perception that advisory committees were duplicative, inefficient, and lacked adequate control or oversight. FACA mandates certain formal structural and operational requirements, including formal reporting and oversight procedures. Additionally, FACA requires committee meetings be open to the public, unless they meet certain requirements. Also, FACA committee records are to be accessible to the public. Pursuant to statute, the General Services Administration (GSA) maintains and administers management guidelines for federal advisory committees. During FY2011, 1,029 active committees reported a total of 69,750 members. Operating costs for those committees reportedly was $395,179,373, of which $188,342,083 was reportedly spent on federal staff to support the committees’ operations.

FACA was originally enacted to make executive branch advisory committee operations more accessible and transparent. Congress can decide, however, to apply FACA’s requirements to a legislative branch advisory committee. Existing statutes are sometimes unclear as to whether a congressionally created committee would have to comply with FACA’s requirements—except in cases when the statute includes language that indicates whether the act is to apply.

In the 112th Congress, one bill has been introduced that would modify FACA’s implementation and administration. On October 6, 2011, Representative William Lacy Clay introduced H.R. 3124, the Federal Advisory Committee Act Amendments of 2011. Among other changes, the bill would require the selection of advisory committee members without regard to their partisan affiliation. In addition, H.R. 3124 would create a formal process for the public to recommend potential advisory committee members. The bill seeks to clarify the ethics requirements placed on committee members, and the bill increases records access requirements. On October 6, 2011, the bill was concurrently referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the House Committee on Ways and Means. On October 13, 2011, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform ordered the bill to be reported by unanimous consent. No further action has been taken on the bill.

In addition to considering H.R. 3124, the 112th Congress may create new advisory bodies as well as oversee the operations of existing bodies. This report offers a history of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, examines its current requirements, and analyzes various advisory body design elements and operations.


Date of Report: June 26, 2012
Number of Pages: 31
Order Number: R40520
Price: $29.95

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.


To Order:

R40520.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, 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.

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

U.S. Postal Service Workforce Size and Employment Categories, FY1986-FY2011

Wendy R. Ginsberg
Analyst in Government Organization and Management

Jaclyn Petruzzelli
Research Associate

This report provides data from the past 25 years on the size of the U.S. Postal Service’s (USPS’s) workforce. Further, this report examines trends in workforce composition, particularly focusing on shifts in the ratio between career and non-career employment.

USPS employed 645,950 persons as of September 30, 2011 (FY2011). USPS’s workforce size has dropped by 147,524 employees (18.6%) in the past 25 years, and USPS had 25,737 (3.8%) fewer employees at the end of FY2011 than it did at the end of FY2010. Since 1986, the career/noncareer composition of USPS’s workforce has also changed. The number of career employees has declined 23.8%, while the number of non-career employees has increased 43.7%. In FY2011, USPS hired 10,471 employees for a new non-career position called Postal Support Employee. According to a USPS job announcement, the Postal Support Employees work in mail/retail distribution, as clerks, or in motor vehicle and maintenance.

Facing financial problems, USPS instituted a hiring freeze, froze the pay rate of managers, and offered some employees early retirement options. In FY2011, USPS operated with its smallest workforce in at least 25 years. Employee pay constituted 68% of USPS total expenses in FY2011.


Date of Report: June 28, 2012
Number of Pages: 16
Order Number: RS22864
Price: $29.95

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.

To Order:
 

RS22864.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, 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.

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

Vulnerable Youth: Overview of Issues Affecting Youth Programs Authorized Under the Workforce Investment Act (WIA)

Adrienne L. Fernandes-Alcantara
Specialist in Social Policy

The Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA, P.L. 105-220) is the primary federal law that provides job training and related services to unemployed and underemployed individuals, including vulnerable young people with barriers to employment. All youth job training programs and related services are authorized under Title I of WIA and administered by the Department of Labor (DOL). These programs include the WIA Youth Activities formula program, Job Corps, and YouthBuild. Under the pilot and demonstration authority in Title I, DOL has also carried out the Reintegration of Ex-Offenders program for both youth and adults. Although the programs have distinct activities and goals, each of them seeks to connect eligible youth to educational and employment opportunities, as well as leadership development and community service activities. WIA authorized funding through September 30, 2003; however, WIA programs continue to be funded through annual appropriation acts. In the 112th Congress, policymakers have signaled that WIA may be reauthorized in the near future. On June 7, 2012, the House Education and Workforce Committee reported a bill (H.R. 4297) that would reauthorize WIA.

This report provides an overview of issues that have been raised by stakeholders about youth programs authorized under WIA. First, some policymakers have proposed consolidating these and other workforce programs to make them more efficient and less costly. Other stakeholders assert that at-risk youth and other groups with barriers to employment would be overlooked under such a consolidation. Another issue is the perceived lack of coordination between the workforce system and other systems that serve youth, such as the education system. Stakeholders have suggested that greater coordination can help meet the varied needs of youth, as intended by WIA. Members of Congress and others have also continued to inquire about the effectiveness of programs that serve youth in meeting their objectives and serving the most at-risk youth. To date, only an impact evaluation of Job Corps has been completed; however, DOL recently awarded a contract to a social policy research organization to conduct an impact evaluation of YouthBuild.

In addition to these broader issues, Congress is interested in issues specific to Youth Activities and Job Corps. Youth Activities provides funding for youth employment and training services overseen by a state workforce investment board (WIB) and the governor, in coordination with local WIBs and community organizations. The program targets youth ages 14 through 21 who are low-income and have one or more barriers to employment. Since the start of the program, policymakers and others have discussed the extent to which youth have had to prove their eligibility for the program. Some local workforce investment boards have reported challenges with documenting income and other eligibility criteria, and some proposals would establish different methods for determining eligibility. Further, stakeholders have raised issues about whether the program should focus more on out-of-school youth. Local workforce investment boards have reported challenges recruiting and retaining these youth. Related to this is the age of youth who ought to be eligible for the program. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, P.L. 111-5) temporarily enabled youth ages 22 through 24 to access services under the program. Whether WIA ought to target these older youth, particularly in light of the possible cost of doing so, could be addressed in any reauthorization legislation. The Job Corps program is the oldest federal job training and employment program for young people. Congress has considered proposals to provide federal funding for states to operate Job Corps centers, as a state option, or to close centers. This is due to concerns that the program has had mixed performance outcomes, and that some centers are low performing. This report accompanies two CRS reports— Vulnerable Youth: Employment and Job Training Programs and Vulnerable Youth: Federal Funding for Summer Job Training and Employment.


Date of Report: June 28, 2012
Number of Pages: 30
Order Number: R42583
Price: $29.95

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.

To Order:
 

R42583.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, 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.

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

Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies (THUD): FY2013 Appropriations

Maggie McCarty
Specialist in Housing Policy

David Randall Peterman
Analyst in Transportation Policy

The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies (THUD) appropriations subcommittee is charged with providing annual appropriations for the Department of Transportation (DOT), Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and related agencies. The HUD budget generally accounts for the largest share of discretionary appropriations provided by the subcommittee. However, when mandatory funding is taken into account, DOT’s budget is larger than HUD’s budget, because it includes funding from transportation trust funds. Mandatory funding typically accounts for a little less than half of the bill total.

The President’s FY2013 budget requests $73.4 billion in new budget resources for DOT. The requested funding was $3.5 billion (5%) more than the amount provided for FY2012 (not counting $1.7 billion in FY2012 emergency funding). Both the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations have recommended roughly the same level of funding as in FY2012 (not counting the emergency funding). The House’s pending FY2013 THUD bill (H.R. 5972) would provide no funding for the Transportation Investments Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant program or for the high speed and intercity passenger rail development program, two priorities of the Administration. The pending Senate THUD bill (S. 2322) would fund the TIGER program and provide a minimal level of funding for high speed rail development ($100 million, compared to $1.0 billion requested). The Administration request proposed a restructuring of DOT surface transportation programs reflecting a reauthorization proposal (a similar proposal was included in last year’s request). The Appropriations Committees did not support the requested restructuring; Congress is currently considering its own reauthorization proposals for surface transportation.

The President’s FY2013 budget requests nearly $34 billion in net new budget authority for the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in FY2013. This is about $4 billion less than was provided in FY2012. However, in terms of new appropriations for HUD’s programs and activities, the President’s budget actually requests an increase of more than $512 million compared to FY2012. The difference—a decrease in net budget authority vs. an increase in new appropriations—is attributable to an estimated increase in the amount of excess receipts available from the FHA insurance fund, which are used to offset the cost of the HUD budget. S. 2322 included about $35 billion in net new budget authority for HUD. That is about $1 billion more than the President’s request and over $2 billion less than was provided in FY2012. H.R. 5972 included $33.6 billion for HUD, which is less than the Senate proposed but more than the President requested.

The Administration has threatened to veto the pending House bill. In part this threat came because of the House’s overall discretionary funding level for FY2013, which is below the ceiling allowed for FY2013 in the Budget Control Act of 2011. Another stated reason for the threat is opposition to certain program funding levels in the bill, such as zeroing out the DOT TIGER and high speed rail programs and the HUD Choice Neighborhoods and Sustainable Communities programs, as well as cuts to HUD homeless assistance grants and other programs.


Date of Report: June 25, 2012
Number of Pages: 26
Order Number: R42578
Price: $29.00

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.

To Order:
 

R42578.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, 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.

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

Franking Privilege: An Alalysis of Member Mailings in the House, 1997-2010

Lauren Ploch
Analyst in African Affairs

Nicolas Cook
Specialist in African Affairs

Madagascar, an Indian Ocean island country, ranks among the world’s poorest countries; is the world’s fourth-largest island; and is extremely biologically diverse, with thousands of unique species of flora and fauna. It has experienced political instability since early 2009, initiated by tensions between the country’s last elected president, Marc Ravalomanana, and an opposition movement led by Andry Rajoelina, then the mayor of the capital city, Antananarivo. Mass protests in early 2009 and eventual military support for the ouster of President Ravalomanana culminated in his forced resignation from office. Rajoelina then seized power and, with other leaders, formed an interim self-declared transitional government, the High Transitional Authority (HAT, after its French acronym). Ravalomanana now lives in exile in South Africa.

Periodic protests by Ravalomanana supporters after the takeover led to violent clashes with security forces. Negotiations between the parties led to the signing of an agreement in 2009 in Maputo, Mozambique, to establish an inclusive, transitional government, but Rajoelina subsequently appointed a cabinet seen to be primarily composed of his own supporters. Southern African leaders and Madagascar’s opposition parties rejected the proposed government, and negotiations resumed. Two later agreements also failed to result in a unified transitional process.

The unconstitutional change of power and resulting political impasse have negatively affected economic growth and development efforts and strained Madagascar’s relations with international donors. Foreign governments, including the United States, reacted to Rajoelina’s seizure of power by sanctioning the government in various ways (e.g., through suspension of membership in some multilateral bodies, restrictions on aid, personal sanctions on some individuals, and removal of trade benefits). Aid restrictions have significantly decreased public spending. As a result of the coup d’état, U.S. aid is restricted to selected humanitarian and development programs delivered through non-governmental channels. Madagascar’s Millennium Challenge Account compact, worth an estimated $110 million, was terminated in May 2009. Madagascar is also subject to aid restrictions due to its poor performance in addressing the problem of trafficking in persons.

Until September 2011, when a Southern African Development Community (SADC)-mediated transitional roadmap was signed by most key political movements, international mediation and national efforts to agree upon a transition process had foundered. Notwithstanding continuing political disputes, implementation of the roadmap has gone relatively smoothly. In April, a political amnesty law was enacted, but it remains controversial, as it does not cover former president Ravalomanana due to his conviction for murder in absentia in August 2010; he has not been permitted to return to Madagascar. An impasse over these issues has long stymied the transition process.

Madagascar faces a host of environmental pressures, however, and illegal logging and endangered wildlife exports have reportedly substantially increased under the HAT. Congress has expressed concern with threats to Madagascar’s unique ecosystem, as well as with the country’s ongoing political and development challenges. The House of Representatives passed legislation in 2009, H.Res. 839, condemning the 2009 coup and the illegal extraction of Madagascar’s natural resources.


Date of Report: June 18, 2012
Number of Pages: 22
Order Number: R40448
Price: $29.95

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.

To Order:
 

95-30.pdf  to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART

e-mail congress@pennyhill.com

Phone 301-253-0881

For email and phone orders, 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.

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