Archival Records of Congress: Frequently Asked Questions

"Congressional offices and committees receive, generate, and process many paper and digital files in the course of their work. Archivists preserve some of this historical material, which can help inform future Congresses and researchers studying congressional history. This report is intended to assist congressional staffers who want to locate and access these historical materials.

Recordkeeping rules, policies, and practices vary by type of congressional office. Materials in a Member’s office are traditionally considered the Member’s personal property. Although some Members choose to donate their papers to an archival repository after they leave office, there is no legal requirement for Members to preserve papers or make them available to researchers. The Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, among other resources, can help users locate Member papers and other relevant archival collections.

Files from congressional committees and House or Senate administrative offices may be official records. House Rule VII and Senate Rule XI govern records for the House and Senate, respectively. In accordance with 44 U.S.C. §2118, the Clerk of the House and Secretary of the Senate transfer noncurrent House and Senate records to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) at the end of each Congress. Although NARA’s Center for Legislative Archives is responsible for preserving those files, they remain the property of Congress.

In general, House records are closed to the public for 30 years, and Senate records are closed for 20 years. Some sensitive congressional records may remain closed for 50 years. In some circumstances, however, Members and congressional staff may be able to access otherwise-restricted records. The House archivist or Senate archivist, respectively, offer guidance and assistance with access to archival records, as well as managing active records and papers.

NARA also stores other legislative-branch records, as well as pre-1789 legislative records. Separately, both NARA and the Library of Congress operate programs to capture and preserve public-facing congressional websites..."
C ongressional Archival Records 

Congressional Serial Set

"About the Congressional Serial Set

The United States Congressional Serial Set collection was digitized by the Law Library of Congress, and is made publicly available through a partnership between the U.S. Government Publishing Office and the Law Library of Congress. The joint digitization project is a multi-year effort. Additional volumes of the Serial Set will be added to this collection as they are available.

The Serial Set is comprised of the numbered Senate and House Documents and Senate and House Reports, bound by Session of Congress. The contents of the Serial Set have varied throughout the publication’s history, and at times have included House and Senate Journals, and the reports of executive departments and agencies.

Each volume is assigned a Serial Number, beginning with the 1st Session of the 15th Congress in 1817. Reports and Documents for each chamber begin with Number 1 at the beginning of the Congress, and are numbered consecutively through all sessions of that Congress. Read More .."
Congressional Serial Set 

Science and Technology Issues in the 117th Congress

"The federal government supports scientific and technological advancement directly by funding and performing research and development, and indirectly by creating and maintaining policies that encourage private sector efforts. Additionally, the federal government regulates many aspects of S&T activities. This report briefly outlines a key set of science and technology policy issues that may come before the 117thCongress.

Many of these issues carry over from previous Congresses, and represent areas of continuing Member interest.Examples include policies on taxation, trade, intellectual property, commercialization of basic scientific research and other overarching issues that affect scientific and technological progress. Other issues may represent new or rapidly evolving areas affected by the threats of pandemic diseases, climate change, and malicious cyber activities, among others. Examples covered in this report include infectious disease modeling and forecasting, digital contact tracing and digital exposure notification, hydrogen pipelines, and expansion of emerging information and communications technologies such as 5G.

These and other S&T-related issues that may come before the 117thCongress are grouped into 10 categories.
 Overarching S&T Policy Issues,
 Agriculture,
 Biotechnology and Biomedical Research and Development,
 Climate Change and Water,
 Defense,
 Energy,
 Homeland Security,
 Information Technology,
 Physical and Material Sciences, and
 Space.

Each of these categories includes concise analysis of multiple policy issues. The material presented in this report should be viewed as illustrative rather than comprehensive. Each section identifies CRS reports, when available, and the appropriate CRS experts to contact for further information and analysis.."
 Science and Technology 

Appointment and Confirmation of Executive Branch Leadership: An Overview

"The Constitution divides the responsibility for populating the top positions in the executive branch of the federal government between the President and the Senate. Article II, Section 2 empowers the President to nominate and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint the principal officers of the United States, as well as some subordinate officers.

These positions are generally filled through the advice and consent process, which can be divided into three stages:
1. The White House selects and clears a prospective appointee before sending a formal nomination to the Senate.
2. The Senate determines whether to confirm a nomination. For most nominations, much of this process occurs at the committee level.
3. The confirmed nominee is given a commission and sworn into office, after which he or she has full authority to carry out the duties of the office.

The President may also be able to fill vacancies in advice and consent positions in the executive branch temporarily through other means. In some cases, the President may be able to designate an official to serve in a vacant position on a temporary basis under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act or under statutory authority specific to the position. Alternatively, if circumstances permit and certain conditions are met, the President could choose to give a recess appointment to an individual. Such an appointment would last until the end of the next session of the Senate. In practice, recess appointments have become less common in recent years.

Congress has selectively included certain types of statutory provisions when establishing specific executive branch positions. These provisions include those that require appointees to have specified qualifications, set fixed terms of office, limit the circumstances under which the President can remove an officeholder, specify how the chair of a collegial board or commission will be selected and may be removed, and allow an incumbent to remain in office past the end of a term until a successor is appointed (also referred to as a holdover provision). Although these types of provisions may be found in the establishing statutes for a variety of positions, they are particularly common for members of regulatory and other collegial boards and commissions. In some cases, these types of provisions have influenced the dynamics of the Senate confirmation process. They may also be factored into the selection and vetting process in the Administration..."
Executive Branch Leadership 

Resolutions to Censure the President: Procedure and History

"Censure is a reprimand adopted by one or both chambers of Congress against a Member of Congress, President, federal judge, or other government official. While Member censure is a disciplinary measure that is sanctioned by the Constitution (Article 1, Section 5), non-Member censure is not. Rather, it is a formal expression or “sense of” one or both houses of Congress.

Censure resolutions targeting non-Members have utilized a range of statements to highlight conduct deemed by the resolutions’ sponsors to be inappropriate or unauthorized. Before the Nixon Administration, such resolutions included variations of the words or phrases unconstitutional, usurpation, reproof, and abuse of power. Beginning in 1972, the most clearly “censorious” resolutions have contained the word censure in the text.

Resolutions attempting to censure the President are usually simple resolutions. These resolutions are not privileged for consideration in the House or Senate. They are, instead, considered under the regular parliamentary mechanisms used to process “sense of” legislation.

Since 1800, Members of the House and Senate have introduced resolutions of censure against at least 12 sitting Presidents. Two additional Presidents received criticism via alternative means (a House committee report and an amendment to a resolution).

The clearest instance of a successful presidential censure is Andrew Jackson. The Senate approved a resolution of censure in 1834. On three other occasions, critical resolutions were adopted, but their final language, as amended, obscured the original intention to censure the President.

In the remaining cases, resolutions remained in committee, without further consideration, or were not adopted in a floor vote. Nevertheless, presidential censure attempts have become more frequent since the Watergate era.

This report summarizes the procedures that may be used to consider resolutions of censure and the history of attempts to censure the President (1 st -116th Congresses). It also provides citations to additional reading material on the subject..."
Censure President Resolution 

Social Media: Misinformation and Content Moderation Issues for Congress

"Social media platforms disseminate information quickly to billions of global users. The Pew Research Center estimates that in 2019, 72% of U.S. adults used at least one social media site and that the majority of users visited the site at least once a week.

Some Members of Congress are concerned about the spread of misinformation (i.e., incorrect or inaccurate information) on social media platforms and are exploring how it can be addressed by companies that operate social media sites. Other Members are concerned that social media operators’ content moderation practices may suppress speech. Both perspectives have focused on Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. §230), enacted as part of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which broadly protects operators of “interactive computer services” from liability for publishing, removing, or restricting access to another’s content.

Social media platforms enable users to create individual profiles, form networks, produce content by posting text, images, or videos, and interact with content by commenting on and sharing it with others. Social media operators may moderate the content posted on their sites by allowing certain posts and not others. They prohibit users from posting content that violates copyright law or solicits illegal activity, and some maintain policies that prohibit objectionable content (e.g., certain sexual or violent content) or content that does not contribute to the community or service that they wish to provide. As private companies, social media operators can determine what content is allowed on their sites, and content moderation decisions could be protected under the First Amendment. However, operators’ content moderation practices have created unease that these companies play an outsized role in determining what speech is allowed on their sites, with some commentators stating that operators are infringing on users’ First Amendment rights by censoring speech..."
Social Media 

The First Day of a New Congress: A Guide to Proceedings on the House Floor

"Summary

Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution sets a term of office of two years for all Members of the House. One House ends at the conclusion of each two-year Congress, and the newly elected Representatives must constitute a new House at the beginning of the next Congress. Consequently, the House must choose its Speaker and officers and adopt the chamber’s rules of procedure every two years.
 

The Constitution mandates that Congress convene at noon on January 3, unless the preceding Congress by law designated a different day. For example, P.L. 113-201 set January 6, 2015, as the convening date of the 114th Congress. Congressional leaders planned that the 115th Congress would convene January 3, 2017, and that the 116th Congress would convene January 3, 2019, obviating the need for a law to set the date. Although no officers will have been elected when the House first convenes, officers from the previous Congress perform certain functions, such as conducting the election of the Speaker.
 
The House follows a well-established first-day routine. The proceedings include—

 a call to order by the Clerk of the House;
 a prayer led by the Chaplain and the Pledge of Allegiance led by the Clerk;
 a quorum call ordered by the Clerk;
 the election of the Speaker, ordered by the Clerk and conducted with the assistance of tellers;
 remarks by the Speaker-elect, followed by his or her swearing-in by the dean of the House;
 the oath of office for the newly elected and re-elected Members, administered by the Speaker;
 adoption of the rules of the House for the new Congress;
 adoption of various administrative resolutions and unanimous consent agreements; and
 announcement of the Speaker’s policies on certain floor practices.

On opening day, the House often adopts resolutions assigning some or many of its Members to committees. This process regularly continues over several more weeks. The committee assignment process occurs primarily within the party groups—the Republican Conference and the Democratic Caucus. Other routine organizational business may also be taken up on the House floor on the first day, such as adoption of a resolution to allow a judge or a Member of Congress to administer the oath of office to one or more Members-elect who are absent.."
New Congress 

CRS Seminars on Disruptive Technologies: Videos

"New technologies, and those that represent an evolutionary improvement of an existing tool or process, that exhibit the potential to have large-scale effects on social and economic activity are often referred to as “disruptive” technologies. They can disrupt existing markets, practices, and processes by displacing and replacing incumbent technologies and actors. The emergence of smartphones through the convergence of mobile phone and computing technologies, for example, profoundly affected the telecommunications sector— including its relevant market actors, service offerings, and hardware and software infrastructures. It has also impacted how individuals and groups communicate through voice, text, images, and video; consume and create media; access and disseminate information; and engage in leisure activities.

The positive and negative short-, medium-, and long-term effects emerging technologies may have are difficult to predict and present a range of issues for Congress. Since the development trajectories and potential outcomes of emerging technologies are uncertain—some that show great promise may ultimately fail to develop as expected and others may have unintended yet profound impacts—systematic data to help guide policy development and legislation is sparse.

To support Congress in examining these opportunities and issues, CRS has held a series of seminars for Congress designed to provide an opportunity for congressional staff to better understand the possible impacts of disruptive technologies of interest. 1 In the seminars held to date, over 30 government and private-sector experts discussed technical, economic, policy, and legal aspects of eight disruptive technology topics: advanced battery energy storage, artificial intelligence, autonomous vehicles, blockchain, commercial spaceflight, cybersecurity, gene editing, and quantum information science. This report describes each of the seminars in the series and provides links to videos of them that are available on the CRS website..."
Distruptive technologies 

Police Reform and the 116th Congress: Selected Legal Issues

"Nationwide protests during the spring and summer of 2020 related to police use of force have prompted calls for increased congressional regulation of federal, state, and local law enforcement.There are an array of legal issues related to federal regulation of law enforcement, including the scope of Congress’s constitutional authority to legislate on law enforcement reform, current federalregulation of law enforcement, and various questions raised by reform proposals introduced in the 116th Congress.

 Congress has extensive power to regulate federal law enforcement. However, federalism principles embodied in the Constitution place limits on Congress’s power to regulate state and local police—an issue that the Constitution generally entrusts to the states.Congress, however, possesses some authority to regulate state and local law enforcement.Two primary tools Congress may use to act in this area are statutes designed to enforce the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment and legislation requiring states to take specified action in exchange for federal funds disbursed under the Spending Clause.

Legislating within the scope of its enumerated powers, Congress has enacted multiple statutes that regulate federal, state, and local law enforcement. Key existing legal authorities related to federal regulation of law enforcement include Department of Justice (DOJ) civil enforcement against patterns and practices of unconstitutional policing, laws imposing civil and criminal liability for officer misconduct, and grant conditions designed to spur state and local compliance with federal policies. Federal courts have supplemented these statutory authorities with certain judicially created doctrines defining the contours of liability for police misconduct..."
Police reform 

Congress, Civilian Control of the Military, and Nonpartisanship

"The possible use of federal armed forces as part of the U.S. executive branch’s response to incidents of violence during racial justice protests has raised questions about how the military is controlled by domestic political institutions and the U.S. military’s relationship with American society. Article I of the U.S. Constitution grants specific powers to Congress, making the legislative branch a key actor in governing, overseeing, and funding the U.S. military.

What Is Civilian Control of the Military?

How to advance the nation’s security while at the same time ensuring that instruments of force do not undermine the practice of American democracy has been a central question since the founding of the United States, if not before.

The designers of the Constitution were deeply skeptical of a standing army, as such a military instrument could also overthrow the government it professed to serve, much like Oliver Cromwell demonstrated in 1653 when he used his army to disband the English Parliament. Consternation regarding British deployment of its military to the American colonies without the consent of local governing officials was among the key grievances listed in the Declaration of Independence. In the context of a new, experimental, and democratic Republic, the Founding Fathers believed that subordination of the military to the authority of civil masters was critically important to prevent the emergence of a new form of tyranny or dictatorship..."
Civilian control of military

Congress and Police Reform: Current Law and Recent Proposals

"In May and June 2020, protests erupted nationwide after the publication of video footage of a Minneapolis police officer pressing his knee into the neck of George Floyd, leading to his death. That incident and its aftermath have sparked heightened interest in Congress’s ability to implement reforms of state and local law enforcement.

As a companion to this Sidebar outlines in greater detail, congressional power to regulate state and local law enforcement is not without limits. The Constitution grants the federal government only certain enumerated authorities, with the Tenth Amendment reserving all other powers for the states. The regulation of state and municipal law enforcement is an area that the Constitution generally entrusts to the states. However, Congress possesses some authority to legislate on that subject, primarily through statutes designed to enforce the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment and legislation requiring states to take specified action in exchange for federal funds disbursed under the Spending Clause. This Sidebar provides an overview of existing federal statutes intended to prevent and redress constitutional violations by state and local public safety officials. It then presents some recent proposals that would change federal regulation of state and local law enforcement..."
Congress and police reform

Congress and Law Enforcement Reform: Constitutional Authority

"Nationwide protests in response to the publication of video footage of a Minneapolis police officer pressing his knee into the neck of George Floyd leading to his death have generated renewed interest in the issue of reforming the policing practices of state and local officials. As discussed in more detail in this companion sidebar, several existing federal laws seek to prevent and redress constitutional violations by state and local law enforcement officials. However, because the Constitution generally grants states the authority to regulate issues of local concern—which includes policing and criminal law—Congress is limited in its ability to legislate on matters related to state and local law enforcement—limits that may inform any new laws Congress seeks to enact on this evolving issue. This Sidebar begins with an overview of Congress’s authority to enact legislation and the limits on those powers. It then discussesin more detail two of the enumerated powers—congressional powers that are found within the Constitution—that may be most relevant when Congress legislates on matters relating to state and local law enforcement..."
Law enforcement reform

Women in Congress, 1917-2020: Service Dates and Committee Assignments by Member, and Lists by State and Congress

"In total 366 women have been elected or appointed to Congress, 247 Democrats and 119 Republicans. These figures include six nonvoting Delegates, one each from Guam, Hawaii, the District of Columbia, and American Samoa, and two from the U.S. Virgin Islands, as well as one Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico. Of these 366 women, there have been

 309 (211 Democrats, 98 Republicans) women elected only to the House of Representatives;
 41 (25 Democrats, 16 Republicans) women elected or appointed only to the Senate; and  16 (11 Democrats, 5 Republicans) women who have served in both houses.

A record 131 women were initially sworn in for the 116th Congress. One has since resigned, and one has been appointed.

Of 131 women currently in Congress, there are
 26 in the Senate (17 Democrats and 9 Republicans);
 101 Representatives in the House (88 Democrats and 13 Republicans); and
 4 women in the House (2 Democrats and 2 Republicans) who serve as Delegates or Resident Commissioner, representing the District of Columbia, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico.

This report includes brief biographical information, committee assignments, dates of service, district information, and listings by Congress and state, and (for Representatives) congressional districts of the 366 women who have been elected or appointed to Congress. It will be updated when there are relevant changes in the makeup of Congress..."
Women in Congress, 1917-2020

Congressionally Mandated Reports: Overview and Considerations for Congress

"Congress frequently requires the President, departments, agencies, and other entities of the federal government to transmit reports, notifications, studies, and other information on a specified timeline. Reporting requirements may direct agency officials to notify Congress or its committees of forthcoming actions or decisions, describe actions taken on a particular matter, establish a plan to accomplish a specified goal, or study a certain problem or concern.

Reporting requirements may be designed to serve a range of purposes that facilitate congressional oversight of the executive branch and inform congressional decisionmaking. Required reports may help legislators monitor executive activity, ensure compliance with legislative intent, focus agency attention on matters of importance to Congress, and assess the effectiveness of existing programs and policies. Certain reports on complex or emerging issues may also help originate or inform legislative proposals.

This report discusses the potential benefits and challenges of reporting requirements, and analyzes a number of statutory reporting requirements enacted during the 115th Congress. (Patterns gleaned from these data may not be generalizable to requirements enacted in other years.) This report analyzes features common to legislative language establishing reporting requirements.."
Congressionally Mandated Reports

COVID-19: China Medical Supply Chains and Broader Trade Issues

"The outbreak of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), first in China, and then globally, including in the United States, is drawing attention to the ways in which the U.S. economy depends on manufacturing and supply chains based in China. This report aims to assess current developments and identify immediate and longer range China trade issues for Congress.

An area of particular concern to Congress is U.S. shortages in medical supplies— including personal protective equipment (PPE) and pharmaceuticals—as the United States steps up efforts to contain COVID-19 with limited domestic stockpiles and insufficient U.S. industrial capacity. Because of China’s role as a global supplier of PPE, medical devices, antibiotics, and active pharmaceutical ingredients, reduced export from China have led to shortages of critical medical supplies in the United States. Exacerbating the situation, in early February 2020, the Chinese government nationalized control of the production and distribution of medical supplies in China—directing all production for domestic use—and directed the bureaucracy and Chinese industry to secure supplies from the global market. Now apparently past the peak of its COVID-19 outbreak, the Chinese government may selectively release some medical supplies for overseas delivery, with designated countries selected, according to political calculations.

Congress has enacted legislation to better understand and address U.S. medical supply chain dependencies, including P.L. 116-136, The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, that includes several provisions to  expand drug shortage reporting requirements;

 require certain drug manufacturers to draw up risk management plans;
 require the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to maintain a public list of medical devices that are determined to be in shortage; and
 direct the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a study of pharmaceutical supply chain security..."
COVID-19 and medical supplies

Over 1,500 Digitized Congressional Hearings Added

"GPO has been digitizing historical Congressional Hearings and making them available on govinfo. Since October 2018, more than 1,500 have been added as part of this ongoing effort to provide increased access.

Congressional hearings are meetings or sessions of a Senate, House, joint, or special committee of Congress, usually open to the public, to gather information and opinions on proposed legislation, conduct an investigation, or evaluate the activities of a government department or implementation of a Federal law. Learn more about hearings and visit Congress.gov to view a Committee Consideration tutorial  explaining hearings within the context of the legislative process and an Executive Business in the Senate tutorial  explaining nomination hearings..."
Congressional Hearings

Congressional Access to Information in an Impeachment Investigation

"Committee investigations in the House of Representatives can serve several objectives. Most often, an investigation seeks to gather information either to review past legislation or develop future legislation, or to enable a committee to conduct oversight of another branch of government. These inquiries may be called legislative investigations because their legal authority derives implicitly from the House’s general legislative power. Much more rarely, a House committee may carry out an investigation to determine whether there are grounds to impeach a federal official—a form of inquiry known as an impeachment investigation.

While the labels “legislative investigation” and “impeachment investigation” provide some context to the objective or purpose of a House inquiry, an investigation may not always fall neatly into one of these categories. This ambiguity has been a topic of interest to many during the various ongoing House committee investigations concerning President Trump. On September 24, 2019, Speaker Pelosi announced that these investigations constitute an “official impeachment inquiry.” Although these committee investigations into allegations of presidential misconduct are proceeding, in the Speaker’s words, under the “umbrella of [an] impeachment inquiry,” most appear to blend lawmaking, oversight, and impeachment purposes..."
Congressional Access

Party Leaders in the United States Congress, 1789-2019

"This report briefly describes current responsibilities and selection mechanisms for 15 House and Senate party leadership posts and provides tables with historical data, including service dates, party affiliation, and other information for each. Tables have been updated as of the report’s issuance date to reflect leadership changes.

Although party divisions appeared almost from the First Congress, the formally structured party leadership organizations now taken for granted are a relatively modern development. Constitutionally specified leaders, namely the Speaker of the House and the President pro tempore of the Senate, can be identified since the First Congress. Other leadership posts, however, were not formally recognized until about the middle of the 19th century, and some are 20th -century creations.

In the earliest Congresses, those House Members who took some role in leading their parties were often designated by the President as his spokesperson in the chamber. By the early 1800s, an informal system developed when the Speaker began naming his lieutenant to chair one of the most influential House committees. Eventually, other Members wielded significant influence via other committee posts (e.g., the post-1880 Committee on Rules). By the end of the 19th century, the formal position of floor leaders had been established in the House..."
Party leaders

Resolutions to Censure the President: Procedure and History

"Censure is a reprimand adopted by one or both chambers of Congress against a Member of Congress, President, federal judge, or other government official. While Member censure is a disciplinary measure that is sanctioned by the Constitution (Article 1, Section 5), non-Member censure is not. Rather, it is a formal expression or “sense of” one or both houses of Congress.

Censure resolutions targeting non-Members have utilized a range of statements to highlight conduct deemed by the resolutions’ sponsors to be inappropriate or unauthorized. Before the Nixon Administration, such resolutions included variations of the words or phrases: unconstitutional, usurpation, reproof, and abuse of power. Beginning in 1972, the most clearly “censorious” resolutions have contained the word, “censure,” in the text.

Resolutions attempting to censure the President are usually simple resolutions. These resolutions are not privileged for consideration in the House or Senate. They are, instead, considered under the regular parliamentary mechanisms used to process “sense of” legislation.

Since 1800, Members of the House and Senate have introduced resolutions of censure against at least 12 sitting Presidents. Two additional Presidents received criticism via alternative means (a House committee report and an amendment to a resolution).

The clearest instance of a successful presidential censure is Andrew Jackson. The Senate approved a resolution of censure in 1834. On three other occasions, critical resolutions were adopted, but their final language, as amended, obscured the original intention to censure the President.

In the remaining cases, resolutions remained in committee, without further consideration, or were not adopted in a floor vote. Nevertheless, presidential censure attempts have become more frequent since the Watergate era.

This report summarizes the procedures that may be used to consider resolutions of censure and the history of attempts to censure the President (1st -115th Congresses). It also provides citations to additional reading material on the subject..."
Censure the President

Technological Convergence: Regulatory, Digital Privacy, and Data Security Issues

"Technological convergence, in general, refers to the trend or phenomenon where two or more independent technologies integrate and form a new outcome. One example is the smartphone. A smartphone integrated several independent technologies—such as telephone, computer, camera, music player, television (TV), and geolocating and navigation tool—into a single device. The smartphone has become its own, identifiable category of technology, establishing a $350 billion industry.

Of the three closely associated convergences—technological convergence, media convergence, and network convergence—consumers most often directly engage with technological convergence. Technological convergent devices share three key characteristics. First, converged devices can execute multiple functions to serve blended purpose. Second, converged devices can collect and use data in various formats and employ machine learning techniques to deliver enhanced user experience. Third, converged devices are connected to a network directly and/or are interconnected with other devices to offer ubiquitous access to users.

Technological convergence may present a range of issues where Congress may take legislative and/or oversight actions. Three selected issue areas associated with technological convergence are regulatory jurisdiction, digital privacy, and data security. First, merging and integrating multiple technologies from distinct functional categories into one converged technology may pose challenges to defining regulatory policies and responsibilities. Determining oversight jurisdictions and regulatory authorities for converged technologies can become unclear as the boundaries that once separated single-function technologies blend together. A challenge for Congress may be in delineating which government agency has jurisdiction over various converged technologies. Defining policies that regulate technological convergence industry may not be simple or straightforward. This may further complicate how Congress oversees government agencies and converged industries due to blending boundaries of existing categories..."
Technological convergence