This year marks the 10th anniversary of the Congressional Review Act (CRA). Congressional oversight of rulemaking using the CRA can be an important and useful tool for monitoring the regulatory process and balancing and accommodating the concerns of American citizens and businesses with the effects of federal agencies' rules. This statement provides an overview of the purpose and provisions of CRA; GAO's role and activities in fulfilling its responsibilities under the Act; and trends on CRA within the broader context of developments in presidential and congressional oversight of federal agencies' rulemaking.

The USA Patriot Act One is of the most controversial and possibly one of the most misunderstood laws Congress has ever enacted. For many Americans, it is synonymous with an egregious and unjustifiable suspension of the Bill of Rights. Others, troubled but more cautious, identify the Patriot Act with the grant of unprecedented powers that put civil liberties at some risk. Many who reject these concerns nonetheless accept their underlying assumption —that the Patriot Act does indeed give the federal government a package of powerful new search and surveillance tools.In Rethinking the Patriot Act, Stephen J. Schulhofer explains the act's most important provisions and reviews the best information currently available to gauge their usefulness and their effects in practice. Contrary to conventional wisdom, Schulhofer argues that much of the Patriot Act was essential, and some of it, if not essential, was reasonably defensible. In fact, the act includes provisions —seldom noticed —that add new protections for certain civil liberties, extend new benefits to certain immigrant groups, and provide new remedies for violations of individual rights. Nonetheless, Schulhofer concludes, many of the act's new powers are far too broad, and even where the case for broad powers is strong, they were typically conferred with little effort to assure transparency and accountability.

This powerfully argued appraisal of judicial review may change the face of American law. Written for layman and scholar alike, the book addresses one of the most important issues facing Americans today: within what guidelines shall the Supreme Court apply the strictures of the Constitution to the complexities of modern life? Until now legal experts have proposed two basic approaches to the Constitution. The first, “interpretivism,” maintains that we should stick as closely as possible to what is explicit in the document itself. The second, predominant in recent academic theorizing, argues that the courts should be guided by what they see as the fundamental values of American society. John Hart Ely demonstrates that both of these approaches are inherently incomplete and inadequate. Democracy and Distrust sets forth a new and persuasive basis for determining the role of the Supreme Court today. Ely’s proposal is centered on the view that the Court should devote itself to assuring majority governance while protecting minority rights. “The Constitution,” he writes, “has proceeded from the sensible assumption that an effective majority will not unreasonably threaten its own rights, and has sought to assure that such a majority not systematically treat others less well than it treats itself. It has done so by structuring decision processes at all levels in an attempt to ensure, first, that everyone’s interests will be represented when decisions are made, and second, that the application of those decisions will not be manipulated so as to reintroduce in practice the sort of discrimination that is impermissible in theory.” Thus, Ely’s emphasis is on the procedural side of due process, on the preservation of governmental structure rather than on the recognition of elusive social values. At the same time, his approach is free of interpretivism’s rigidity because it is fully responsive to the changing wishes of a popular majority. Consequently, his book will have a profound impact on legal opinion at all levels—from experts in constitutional law, to lawyers with general practices, to concerned citizens watching the bewildering changes in American law.

With nuanced perspective and detailed case studies, Due Process of Lawmaking explores the law of lawmaking in the United States, South Africa, Germany, and the European Union. This comparative work deals broadly with public policymaking in the legislative and executive branches. It frames the inquiry through three principles of legitimacy: democracy, rights, and competence. Drawing on the insights of positive political economy, the authors explicate the ways in which courts uphold these principles in the different systems. Judicial review in the American presidential system suggests lessons for the parliamentary systems in Germany and South Africa, while the experience of parliamentary government yields potential insights into the reform of the American law of lawmaking. Taken together, the national experiences shed light on the special case of the EU. In dialogue with each other, the case studies demonstrate the interplay between constitutional principles and political imperatives under a range of different conditions.

This innovative book explores the nature and function of 'sunset clauses' and experimental legislation, or temporary legislation that expires after a determined period of time, allowing legislators to test out new rules and regulations within a set time frame and on a small-scale basis.

Elections seem to be constantly being reformed be it electronic voting systems, soft money laws, internet voting ad nauseam. Reforms and changes are essential to both keep up with technology and to pretend that the playing field is level even though it is quite clear to seasoned observes that the so called reforms in most cases are only window dressing for preserving the overwhelming edge for incumbents and the super-wealthy. This new book presents detailed analyses of the latest reforms and laws. CONTENTS: Preface; Elections Reform: Overview and Issues (Kevin J. Coleman and Eric A. Fisher); Election Projections: First Amendment Issues (Henry Cohen); Election of the President and Vice-President by Congress: Contingent Election (Thomas H. Neale); Congressional Authority to Standardize National Election Procedures (Kenneth R. Thomas); Campaign Finance Reform: Constitutional Issues Raised by Disclosure Requirements (L. Paige Whitaker); Campaign Financing: Highlights and Chronology of Current Federal Law (Joseph E. Cantor); Campaign Finance Reform: A Legal Analysis of Issue and Express Advocacy (L. Paige Whitaker); Campaign Finance in the 2000 Federal Elections: Overview and Estimates