This paper focuses on three select groups of children and youth who appear to be "at risk" for depressed educational attainment - those from single-parent families, those from persistently poor families, and those who give birth during their teenage years. It addresses three basic questions: (1) Are these groups of children and youth at risk of depressed educational attainment? (2) How might these characteristics lead to depressed educational attainment? (3) What implications does the current research have for examining Federal responses to the educational needs of these children and youth?,Abstract -- Introduction -- Analytical Summary -- Public Policy and the Education of "At Risk" Children and Youth -- Educational Attainment -- Children from Single-Parent Families. Summary of Findings ; Statistical Overview ; Educational Attainment and Performance -- Children from Persistently Poor Families ; Summary of Findings ; Statistical Overview ; Educational Attainment and Performance -- Childbearing Teenagers. Summary of Findings ; Statistical Overview ; Educational Attainment and Performance -- Conclusion -- Appendix A: Technical Note.,James B. Stedman, Specialist in Education, Education and Public Welfare Division,CRS 87-290 EPW,"April 1, 1987.",SuDoc# 14. 18/3

This report discusses the major factors which have made, and continue to make, the comparison of risks from different energy sources a difficult task. In particular, it addresses six areas of fundamental difficulty in making such comparisons. These areas include--portion of the fuel cycle included, technologies to be used, level of technology, assumptions of market penetration and siting, allocations between energy and non-energy risks, and comparing dissimilar risks. The report illustrates the magnitude of the problems of risk comparison by demonstrating the range of results obtained from some of the major energy risk assessments. A compilation of recent major energy risk assessments and energy risk comparisons in both the U.S. and other countries is also included.,Abstract -- Introduction -- Analytical Difficulties. What portions of the Fuel Cycle Are/Should Be Incorporated in the Computation of Total Risk? ; What Technologies Are/Should Be Used to Compute the Risk From Each Source? ; What Level of Technology Should Be Used to Compute Risks for Each Energy Source? ; Should the Same Market Penetration, Siting, and Other Factors be Assumed for Each Technology? ; How Should Risks Be Allocated Between Energy and Non-Energy Sectors ; How Does One Compare Apples and Oranges? -- Conclusion -- Appendix I: References.,Gail H. Marcus, specialist in Science and Technology, Science Policy Research Division,CRS 85-730 SPR,"May 2, 1985.",SuDoc# 14. 18/3

This study assesses the effects of three tax reform proposals: the Administration's proposal, the House passed bill (H.R. 3838), and a proposal for a business transfer tax made by Senator William V. Roth on international competitiveness. The results suggest that the effects of these proposals will be relatively small and that international competitiveness is not a major issue in evaluating tax proposals.

The Commission on Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Salaries is activated every four years for the purpose of studying the compensation available to top officials of the U.S. Government. The enabling legislation for this Commission has been substantially amended several times. This report provides a topical history of the Commission. It discusses the responsibilities of the Commission, the President, and the Congress. Membership, funding, and staff support are also discussed. The closing section of the report contains tables showing various Commission's recommendations, those of the President, and the disposition of the Presidential recommendations. The five tables at the end of the report present the following salary rate data: 1) salary in effect when Commission met; 2) Commission salary recommendations; 3) President's salary recommendations; and 4) information on whether the President's recommendations went into effect. [N.B. No summary is provided for this report because it is not conducive to being succinctly or usefully summarized.] For companion CRS reports see: Paul E. Dwyer and Frederick H. Pauls, A Brief History of Congressional Pay, CRS Report No., 86-1022 GOV, November 24, 1986 and, by the same authors, A Brief Report on Congressional Pay, CRS Report 86-1051 GOV, December 29, 1986; CRS Report 86-1004 GOV, Rate of Increase of Selected Public and Private Wages and Public Pensions Compared with Change in Consumer Price Index, 1969-1987, by Frederick H. Pauls, Paul E. Dwyer, Kirk Brown and Roger Walke, November 20, 1986; and, Federal Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Compensation, Report No. 86-1021 GOV, December 30, 1986, by James P. McGrath.

In recent years, spouse abuse has received increased public and congressional attention. Although there are varying estimates on the number of abused spouses, many observers suggest that the problem is widespread. Many States and the Federal Government have responded to the problem by providing some form of assistance to victims. This paper presents a brief discussion of the issues relating to spouse abuse, its incidence, and Federal programs that may provide services to victims.

This paper summarizes the final report of the Study Group on the Conditions of Excellence in American Higher Education. The report was released in October 1984 and represents the first of several studies on higher education quality that are anticipated over the next 18 months. The Study Group consisted of seven members appointed by the Director of the National Institute of Education.,David S. Osman, Specialist in Education, Education and Public Welfare Division,CRS 85-506 EPW,"December 28, 1984.",SuDoc# 14. 18/3

This report delineates in detail the provisions of the Higher Education Amendments of 1986 (P.L. 99-498), the major piece of legislation reauthorizing the Higher Education Act of 1965 (P.L. 89-329, as amended) through FY 1991. Additional titles of Higher Education Amendments of 1986 are discussed that add authorities and amend legislation other than the Higher Education Act.

This report compares the potential economic effects of several tax reform and deficit reduction proposals on the State-local sector, through their treatment of deductibility of State-local taxes from Federal taxable income and the exemption of interest on State-local bonds. The proposals considered are the Treasury, Kemp-Kasten, Bradley-Gephardt, DeConcini, and Quayle tax reform plans, and the floor and ceiling deductibility proposals for deficit reduction. Among the more important conclusions are that these proposals would differ in their potential effects on the State-local sector's own tax revenues and the distribution of the sector's revenue losses across States. Also, the effect on the State-local bond market from the Treasury, Bradley-Gephardt, and Kemp-Kasten proposals would differ from the effect of the DeConcini and Quayle proposals.,Dennis Zimmerman, Specialist in Public Finance, Economics Division,CRS 85-503 E,"January 18, 1985.",SuDoc# 14. 18/3

This illustrative collection of editorials is taken from newspapers monitored by CRS. The sources look at the controversy surrounding the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings amendment to the debt limit increase for the purpose of reducing budget deficits and balancing the budget by 1991. An introductory section contains newspaper articles presenting press coverage on the issue. The articles and editorials are arranged chronologically, with the most recent dates appearing first. [Current Editorial CE79 on budget deficits is also available; it includes editorials on this topic received in Library Services since November 1, 1985.],Felix Chin, Senior Bibliographer, Economics, Library Services Division,CRS 85-1029 L,"October 1985.",SuDoc# LC 14. 18/3

The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-570) established a program of grants to State and local agencies for drug law enforcement. Under that statute, the Bureau of Justice Assistance is authorized, under the State and Local Assistance for Narcotics Control Formula Grant Program, to make grants to States, for use by States and local units of government. These grants are awarded to State and local governments to enforce laws that establish offenses similar to offenses established in the Controlled Substances Act. These funds may be used to support programs which improve the apprehension, prosecution, adjudication, detention, and rehabilitation of drug offenders. Eradication programs, treatment programs, and programs which concentrate on major drug offenders are also eligible for funding.

This paper presents the potential implications funding reductions might have for selected programs administered by the Department of Education. Also included is data on program funding levels since FY 1980 adjusted for inflation, the estimated number of recipients, the estimated Federal share of financing the program, and the types of services provided and activities supported by these programs.,Angela M. Evans, Specialist in Education, Education and Public Welfare Division.,CRS 85-521 EPW,"January 14, 1985.",SuDoc# 14. 18/3

Karen J. Lewis, Legislative Attorney, American Law Division,CRS 85-664 A,"March 11, 1985.",SuDoc# 14. 18/3

This report traces the major Medicare amendments which have effected hospitals, physicians, and beneficiaries since 1980. It also reviews the major Medicaid amendments affecting Federal financial participation in the program, coverage of pregnant mothers and children, as well as those amendments designed to give States increased flexibility in administering their programs. Lastly, the report describes the consolidation of Federal health service programs for mothers and children under a new block grant authority.,Janet Kline, Jennifer O'Sullivan, Specialists in Social Legislation and Joseph A. Cislowski, Analyst in Social Legislation, Education and Public Welfare Division,CRS 87-296 EPW,"April 3, 1987.",SuDoc# 14. 18/3

The President's budget for fiscal year 1988 asks for a total of $3 billion for Federal programs to prevent or control the use of narcotics and other dangerous drugs. In the form of a table, this CRS report shows budget authority (BA) requested, by agency, as compared with actual BA for FY 1986 and estimated BA for FY 1987. In the case of FY 1987, increased amounts authorized by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 are also indicated, as are appropriations made pursuant to the Act under a separate title of the omnibus appropriations statute for that year, P.L. 99-571. A separate column shows the FY87 budget as proposed to be revised.

John E. Blodgett, Claudia Copeland, Specialists; James Aidala, Donald Feliciano, Maria Grimes, Joan Hartmann, Martin Lee, Mark Reisch, Analysts, Environment and Natural Resources Policy Division,CRS 85-517 ENR,"January 1985.",SuDoc# 14. 18/3

Thomas M. Durbin, Legislative Attorney, American Law Division,CRS 85-857 A,"June 19, 1985.",SuDoc# 14. 18/3

Karen J. Lewis, Legislative Attorney, American Law Division,CRS 85-725 A,"April 25, 1985.",SuDoc# 14. 18/3

Introduction -- Caselaw on the Right to Refuse Treatment. Introduction ; Rennie v. Klein ; Mills v. Rogers ; Judicial Decisions Since Rennie and Rogers -- Summary.,Nancy Lee Jones, Legislative Attorney, American Law Division.,CRS 85-548 A,"January 24, 1985.",SuDoc# 14. 18/3

CRS 85-697 EPW,"April 12, 1985.",SuDoc# 14. 18/3

Introduction -- Illustration of the Investment Tax Credit at Work -- Summary of the Historic Preservation Legislation and Tax Incentive Legislation. National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 ; Tax Reform Act of 1976 ; Revenue Act of 1978 ; Economic Recover Act of 1981 ; Deficit Reduction Act of 1984/Tax Reform Act of 1984 -- Historic Preservation Today - A Guide to Tax Incentives. The Roles of the IRS and the NPS in the Historic Preservation Process ; Current Application of the Investment Tax Credit for Qualified Rehabilitation Expenditures ; Historic Preservation Easements or Restrictions -- Judicial Review of Historic and Landmark Preservation Ordinances -- The Future of Tax Incentives for Historic Preservation -- Conclusion -- Appendices.,CRS 85-813 Ann"June 12, 1985."nnSuDoc # LC 14. 18/3