The Experts below are selected from a list of 10596 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ida A. Brudnick - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Legislative Branch fy2018 appropriations
2017Co-Authors: Ida A. BrudnickAbstract:This report discusses the the Legislative Branch appropriations bill (FY2018, which provides funding for the Senate; House of Representatives;Joint Items; Capitol Police; Office of Compliance; Congressional Budget Office (CBO); Architect of the Capitol (AOC); Library of Congress (LOC), including the Congressional Research Service (CRS); Government Publishing Office (GPO); Government Accountability Office (GAO); Open World Leadership Center; and the John C. Stennis Center.
-
Legislative Branch: Fiscal Year 2017 Appropriations
2017Co-Authors: Ida A. BrudnickAbstract:This report discuses the Legislative Branch appropriations for fiscal year 2017. It first provides an overview of the consideration of FY2017 Legislative Branch appropriations, with subsections covering each action followed by a section on prior year actions and funding, which contains historical tables. The report then addresses the FY2017 budget requests, requested administrative language, and selected funding issues for individual Legislative Branch agencies and entities. Finally, Table 5 through Table 9 list enacted funding levels for FY2016 and FY2017, while the Appendix lists House, Senate, and conference bills and reports; public law numbers; and enactment dates since FY1998.
-
Legislative Branch: FY2017 Appropriations
2016Co-Authors: Ida A. BrudnickAbstract:The first section of this report provides an overview of the consideration of FY2017 Legislative Branch appropriations, with subsections covering each action. It is followed by a section on prior year actions and funding, which contains historical tables. The report then addresses the FY2017 budget requests, requested administrative language, and selected funding issues for individual Legislative Branch agencies and entities.
-
Senators' Official Personnel and Office Expense Account (SOPOEA): History and Usage
2016Co-Authors: Ida A. BrudnickAbstract:This report provides a history of the Senators' Official Personnel and Office Expense Account (SOPOEA) and an overview of recent developments, including funding levels. It also analyzes actual SOPOEA spending patterns in selected years. The allowance is provided on a fiscal year basis (i.e., October 1-September 30) in the annual Legislative Branch appropriations bills.
-
Legislative Branch: FY2016 Appropriations
2016Co-Authors: Ida A. BrudnickAbstract:This report provides an overview of the consideration of FY2016 Legislative Branch appropriations, with subsections covering each action. It also addresses the FY2016 budget requests, hearings, and requested administrative language or other major funding issues for individual Legislative Branch agencies and entities.
Boleslaw K. Szymanski - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the evolution of polarization in the Legislative Branch of government
Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 2019Co-Authors: Jianxi Gao, Boleslaw K. SzymanskiAbstract:The polarization of political opinions among members of the US Legislative chambers measured by their voting records is greater today than it was 30 years ago. Previous research efforts to find causes of such increase have suggested diverse contributors, like growth of online media, echo chamber effects, media biases or disinformation propagation. Yet, we lack theoretic tools to understand, quantify and predict the emergence of high political polarization among voters and their legislators. Here, we analyse millions of roll-call votes cast in the US Congress over the past six decades. Our analysis reveals the critical change of polarization patterns that started at the end of 1980s. In earlier decades, polarization within each Congress tended to decrease with time. By contrast, in recent decades, the polarization has been likely to grow within each term. To shed light on the reasons for this change, we introduce here a formal model for competitive dynamics to quantify the evolution of polarization patterns in the Legislative Branch of the US government. Our model represents dynamics of polarization, enabling us to successfully predict the direction of polarization changes in 28 out of 30 US Congresses elected in the past six decades. From the evolution of polarization level as measured by the Rice index, our model extracts a hidden parameter-polarization utility which determines the convergence point of the polarization evolution. The increase in the polarization utility implied by the model strongly correlates with two current trends: growing polarization of voters and increasing influence of election campaign donors. Two largest peaks of the model's polarization utility correlate with significant political or Legislative changes happening at the same time.
-
The evolution of polarization in the Legislative Branch of government.
Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 2019Co-Authors: Jianxi Gao, Boleslaw K. SzymanskiAbstract:The polarization of political opinions among members of the U.S. Legislative chambers measured by their voting records is greater today than it was thirty years ago. Previous research efforts to find causes of such increase have suggested diverse contributors, like growth of online media, echo chamber effects, media biases, or disinformation propagation. Yet, we lack theoretic tools to understand, quantify, and predict the emergence of high political polarization among voters and their legislators. Here, we analyze millions of roll-call votes cast in the U.S. Congress over the past six decades. Our analysis reveals the critical change of polarization patterns that started at the end of 1980's. In earlier decades, polarization within each Congress tended to decrease with time. In contrast, in the recent decades, the polarization has been likely to grow within each term. To shed light on the reasons for this change, we introduce here a formal model for competitive dynamics to quantify the evolution of polarization patterns in the Legislative Branch of the U.S. government. Our model represents dynamics of polarization, enabling us to successfully predict the direction of polarization changes in 28 out of 30 U.S. Congresses elected in the past six decades. From the evolution of polarization level as measured by the Rice index, our model extracts a hidden parameter - polarization utility which determines the convergence point of the polarization evolution. The increase in the polarization utility implied by the model strongly correlates with two current trends: growing polarization of voters and increasing influence of election campaign funders. Two largest peaks of the model's polarization utility correlate with significant political or Legislative changes happening at the same time.
Jessica Reed - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
ResearchGuides. Federal Government. The Legislative Branch.
2012Co-Authors: Jessica ReedAbstract:information about the 3 Branches of federal government -- executive, Legislative & judicial general information about the Legislative Branch
-
ResearchGuides. Federal Government. Legislative Branch FAQs.
2012Co-Authors: Jessica ReedAbstract:information about the 3 Branches of federal government -- executive, Legislative & judicial answers to frequently asked questions about our Legislative Branch
-
ResearchGuides. Government Frequently Asked Questions. Legislative Branch FAQs.
2012Co-Authors: Jessica ReedAbstract:answers to many government-related frequently asked questions answers to frequently asked questions about our Legislative Branch
Thomas Havrilesky - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Legislative Branch pressures on monetary policy 1914 1994
1995Co-Authors: Thomas HavrileskyAbstract:The history of Congressional involvement with monetary policy in this century has two distinct aspects. The first is Congress’ concern with the structure of the central bank, particularly whether it would be controlled by political appointees or by representatives of the financial sector, specifically the banking industry. The second aspect is the Legislative Branch’s concern with the management of monetary policy. While there is overlap between the two concerns,1 Congressional focus on each is concentrated in two distinct time periods. Involvement with private sector versus political control occupied the Congressional consciousness for the first third of the century, interrupted by Congressional dabblings in monetary policy management in 1921, 1926, 1928 and 1933. The control issue was resolved in favor of political appointees by the Banking Act of 1935. Since 1935, legislation has perennially but unsuccessfully been brought before Congress which would increase the power of executive Branch appointees to the Federal Reserve Board. For the second half of the century, Congressional concern shifted to the management of monetary policy. It came into prominence with the emancipation of Federal Reserve monetary policy from Treasury control in the Accord of 1951, an event in which Congress played a pivotal role. It was the centerpiece of reforms in the mid 1970s which required biannual Congressional oversight hearings on monetary policy. The management of monetary policy resurfaced in 1994 when Congressional pressure resulted in increased Federal Reserve accountability (less secrecy) regarding its policy intentions.
-
Legislative Branch Pressures on Monetary Policy: 1914–1991
The Pressures on American Monetary Policy, 1993Co-Authors: Thomas HavrileskyAbstract:The history of Congressional involvement with monetary policy in this century has two distinct aspects. The first is Congress’ concern with the structure of the central bank, particularly whether it would be controlled by political appointees or by representatives of the financial sector, specifically the banking industry. The second aspect is the Legislative Branch’s concern with the management of monetary policy. While there is overlap between the two concerns,1 Congressional focus on each is concentrated in two distinct time periods. Involvement with private sector versus political control occupied the Congressional consciousness for the first third of the century interrupted by Congressional dabblings in monetary policy management in 1921, 1926, 1928 and 1933. The control issue was resolved in favor of political appointees by the Banking Act of 1935. For the second half of the century, Congressional concern shifted to the management of monetary policy. This concern came into prominence with the emancipation of Federal Reserve monetary policy from Treasury control in the Accord of 1951, an event in which Congress played a pivotal role.
-
Legislative Branch pressures on monetary policy 1914 1991
1993Co-Authors: Thomas HavrileskyAbstract:The history of Congressional involvement with monetary policy in this century has two distinct aspects. The first is Congress’ concern with the structure of the central bank, particularly whether it would be controlled by political appointees or by representatives of the financial sector, specifically the banking industry. The second aspect is the Legislative Branch’s concern with the management of monetary policy. While there is overlap between the two concerns,1 Congressional focus on each is concentrated in two distinct time periods. Involvement with private sector versus political control occupied the Congressional consciousness for the first third of the century interrupted by Congressional dabblings in monetary policy management in 1921, 1926, 1928 and 1933. The control issue was resolved in favor of political appointees by the Banking Act of 1935. For the second half of the century, Congressional concern shifted to the management of monetary policy. This concern came into prominence with the emancipation of Federal Reserve monetary policy from Treasury control in the Accord of 1951, an event in which Congress played a pivotal role.
Jianxi Gao - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the evolution of polarization in the Legislative Branch of government
Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 2019Co-Authors: Jianxi Gao, Boleslaw K. SzymanskiAbstract:The polarization of political opinions among members of the US Legislative chambers measured by their voting records is greater today than it was 30 years ago. Previous research efforts to find causes of such increase have suggested diverse contributors, like growth of online media, echo chamber effects, media biases or disinformation propagation. Yet, we lack theoretic tools to understand, quantify and predict the emergence of high political polarization among voters and their legislators. Here, we analyse millions of roll-call votes cast in the US Congress over the past six decades. Our analysis reveals the critical change of polarization patterns that started at the end of 1980s. In earlier decades, polarization within each Congress tended to decrease with time. By contrast, in recent decades, the polarization has been likely to grow within each term. To shed light on the reasons for this change, we introduce here a formal model for competitive dynamics to quantify the evolution of polarization patterns in the Legislative Branch of the US government. Our model represents dynamics of polarization, enabling us to successfully predict the direction of polarization changes in 28 out of 30 US Congresses elected in the past six decades. From the evolution of polarization level as measured by the Rice index, our model extracts a hidden parameter-polarization utility which determines the convergence point of the polarization evolution. The increase in the polarization utility implied by the model strongly correlates with two current trends: growing polarization of voters and increasing influence of election campaign donors. Two largest peaks of the model's polarization utility correlate with significant political or Legislative changes happening at the same time.
-
The evolution of polarization in the Legislative Branch of government.
Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 2019Co-Authors: Jianxi Gao, Boleslaw K. SzymanskiAbstract:The polarization of political opinions among members of the U.S. Legislative chambers measured by their voting records is greater today than it was thirty years ago. Previous research efforts to find causes of such increase have suggested diverse contributors, like growth of online media, echo chamber effects, media biases, or disinformation propagation. Yet, we lack theoretic tools to understand, quantify, and predict the emergence of high political polarization among voters and their legislators. Here, we analyze millions of roll-call votes cast in the U.S. Congress over the past six decades. Our analysis reveals the critical change of polarization patterns that started at the end of 1980's. In earlier decades, polarization within each Congress tended to decrease with time. In contrast, in the recent decades, the polarization has been likely to grow within each term. To shed light on the reasons for this change, we introduce here a formal model for competitive dynamics to quantify the evolution of polarization patterns in the Legislative Branch of the U.S. government. Our model represents dynamics of polarization, enabling us to successfully predict the direction of polarization changes in 28 out of 30 U.S. Congresses elected in the past six decades. From the evolution of polarization level as measured by the Rice index, our model extracts a hidden parameter - polarization utility which determines the convergence point of the polarization evolution. The increase in the polarization utility implied by the model strongly correlates with two current trends: growing polarization of voters and increasing influence of election campaign funders. Two largest peaks of the model's polarization utility correlate with significant political or Legislative changes happening at the same time.