It's Complicated: Modernization Requires Legal Statute(s)

On March 20, 2024 the Modernization Subcommittee of the Committee on House Administration of the U.S. House of Representatives held a hearing entitled "Legislative Proposals to Support Modernizing the Congressional Research Service and the Use of Federal Data.” 

The Congressional Research Service, or CRS, serves as nonpartisan shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. Since 1914, CRS has existed by law as a department of the Library of Congress and works directly for Congress. CRS gathers, synthesizes, and analyzes information and data to assist in the formation and enaction of legislation – from earliest bill drafting through oversight of implementation. The CRS approaches complex topics and policy issues with meticulous and comprehensive research, expert and diversified resources, confidential consultation, and a nonpartisan mindset. The statute empowering the CRS was last updated in 1970. 

Much of the information in CRS reports relies on data from the various Federal agencies which are under the authority of the Executive Branch of the government. Federal agencies are required by law to comply with a request for information by the CRS when the request has been authorized by a Congressional committee. 

The first bill before the subcommittee was a CRS request to be freed from the legal requirement to publish a print edition of the Constitution of the United States Analysis and Interpretation, also called Constitution Annotated or CONAN. In 1970 Congress passed a law requiring CRS to publish every 10 years annotations of all cases decided by the Supreme Court up to that date, with biennial cumulative updates. (Previous annotations had been published but not at regular intervals.) The last published edition cost $1 million to produce. However, since 2019, CRS has also maintained the Constitution Annotated website which is updated much more frequently. Eliminating the print edition of CONAN would free up time, personnel, and financial resources for the CRS. 

A second bill discussed in the subcommittee hearing addresses the need for CRS to have access to data produced by federal agencies. Although federal agencies must comply with a CRS request for information authorized by a committee, they do not have to legally comply with requests authorized by an individual member of Congress. This bill would also allow CRS on its own to request information when they anticipate a need for information. 

Other elements of modernization CRS is exploring at this time are presentation and use of data (use of visualizations, data dashboards, cloud based solutions, etc.) in their reports and implementation of AI.

To see the opening remarks of Mr. Robert Randolph Newlen, Interim Director, Congressional Research Service click here.

To see the opening remarks of witnesses (Ms. Elise Bean, Director, Washington Office, Carl Levin Center for Oversight & Democracy, Dr. Matthew Glassman, Senior Fellow, Government Affairs Institute, Georgetown University, and Dr. Nicholas Hart, President & CEO, Data Foundation) in support of the second bill click here.  

 

Junk Fees to be Scrapped

Everyone – students, families, Democrats, Republicans, Representatives, Senators, the President, even universities and colleges themselves – agree that higher education is too expensive.  Both the legislative and executive branches have pledged to implement policies that lower those costs.  Last Thursday, theBiden-Harris Administration announced their plans to help in this area with strategies to “crack down on junk fees.”  These junk fees include non-refunded meal account funds, bank fees associated with using a college-sponsored credit card or banking account, automatic charges for textbooks and supplies included in tuition, and finance charges for taking out a student loan.

Colleges and universities often partner with banks for disbursement of financial aid through credit or debit cards.  Unfortunately, many of these bank cards include excessive and/or hidden fees that can cost students significantly.  Problems with these fees have recently been reported to Congress by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and were reported by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) as far back as 2014. 

Another, often hidden, fee students and parents incur is the loan origination fee.  This administrative fee can be from 1 to 4 percent of the amount of the loan and is frequently added to the loan amount and, therefore, continuously incurs interest throughout the life of the loan.  According to the Biden-Harris Administration “These fees are a relic of an era when the government compensated private lenders to issue these loans.  Today, this fee is nothing more than a tax imposed on students by the government, costing consumers more than $1 billion annually.” 

Colleges and universities are not on board with all the Administration’s plans, however.  For instance, universities would now be required to return all unused “flex dollars” in the students’ meal plan accounts.  Moreover, students would have to opt-in to include textbook fees into their tuition charges.  The Administration and the Department of Education say this will allow students to be aware of what prices they pay for textbooks and allow them to find cheaper sources for materials.  Universities contend that this will impede their ability to provide students with materials at below market prices on the first day of class. 

These announced strategies build upon regulations released in late 2023 which include investing in the Open Textbooks Pilot Program to lower textbook costs, requiring universities to adhere to more stringent requirements of transparency on all college costs, requiring universities when they act as lenders to adhere to federal consumer financial protection laws, and preventing colleges from withholding transcripts of courses paid for with federal money. 

While not quite ready to rival McDonalds' number of hamburgers sold yet

the Office of Information Policy did recently announce that in 2023 the 120 federal government agencies combined processed over one million Freedom of Information Act requests. 

This number of requests is nearly 30% higher than in 2022 and indicates a continuing trend of growing demand for government information. 

All data on information requests is held at FOIA.gov which since 2011 has been the dashboard for reporting by government agencies on statistics concerning FOIA requests. Reporting FOIA statistics is required by law; each agency must submit a report to the Attorney General annually. Since these reports are all published on FOIA.gov, the public can retrieve historical data as well as compile comparative data among agencies. There is no central agency for receiving and processing FOIA requests, but FOIA.gov is the central arena for agencies to submit their reports. 

The Freedom of Information Act was first passed by Congress in 1966 and last amended in 2016. It gives any member of the public the right to request information from any federal agency. There are nine exemptions to agencies’ required response based on personal privacy, national security, and law enforcement. Agencies are required to report partial information on requested topics when they can. The Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) helps resolve disputes between requesters of information and government agencies who say they cannot disclose the information requested. The Office of Information Policy within the Department of Justice is responsible for guidance to the government agencies on FOIA.