Correspondence issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "In a prior report we suggested that the consolidation of certain offices of inspectors general (IG) could strengthen the independence, efficiency, and effectiveness of the IGs in the federal government. Based on the potential for benefits and the similarities in their basic missions, we identified the Amtrak Office of Inspector General and the Department of Transportation (DOT) Office of Inspector General as among those Congress might consider for consolidation. We reported that by consolidating the office of the Amtrak IG with the larger DOT IG office, the resulting office would have a larger budget and more staff with which to achieve its mission. Potential benefits include an increased ability to improve the allocation of human and financial resources and to attract and retain an adequate and skilled workforce. We concluded that consolidation of smaller IG offices, if implemented properly with specific plans to mitigate potential weaknesses, is a means of achieving economies of scale and greater independence and of providing critical mass and range of skills, particularly given the ever increasing need for technical staff with specialized skills. This report responds to a Congressional request that, building on …

Agenda and minutes of the meeting for Stonewall Democrats of Texas on March 4, 2000, listing discussion points, selection of new officers, membership dues, bylaws, and other business.

Agenda for the March 4, 2000 meeting of the Stonewall Democrats of Texas, listing election of officers, reports, bylaws and other businesses. An email from Christy Kinsler to Al regarding an agenda for March 4, 2000.

An agenda for the March 4, 2007 meeting of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus Meeting in Austin, Texas.

Bylaws of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus, amended on March 4, 2007.

Bylaws of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus, revised and adopted on March 4, 2007.

Bylaws of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus revised on March 4, 2007 and proposed revisions on August 2007.

Bylaws of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus revised on March 4, 2007.

Bylaws of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus revised on March 4, 2007 and proposed revisions on August 2007.

Bylaws of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus revised on March 4, 2007 and proposed revisions on August 2007.

Bylaws of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus revised on March 4, 2007.

Bylaws of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus revised on March 4, 2007.

Bylaws of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus revised on March 4, 2007 and proposed revisions on August 2007.

Bylaws of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus revised on March 4, 2007.

Bylaws of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus revised on March 4, 2007. Email correspondence between Christina Ocasio to officers discussing changes to bylaw amendments.

Bylaws of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus revised on March 4, 2007.

Bylaws of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus amended March 4, 2007.

Correspondence issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "The federal government assumes insurance risk for a wide range of activities that are funded through numerous federal budget accounts and administered by a variety of federal organizations. For some activities, such as those funded through the National Flood Insurance account, the federal government assumes the entire insurance risk. The federal government also assumes part of the risk for insurance activities that are administered by state and local governments--for example, those funded through the Unemployment Trust Fund or that are partly underwritten by private insurers, such as those funded through the Special Workers' Compensation Expenses account. These insurance risks, whether fully or partially assumed by the federal government, are in lines of insurance that private insurers also recognize: health, life, disability, and property/casualty insurance. The federal government has generally assumed insurance risks for at least two reasons. First, the government may step in when insurance is not widely available because private insurers cannot collectively absorb or affordably price the insurance risk. For example, when private insurers were unable to offer affordable terrorism insurance in the aftermath of September 11, 2001, the federal government created a terrorism insurance program. …

Testimony issued by the General Accounting Office with an abstract that begins "The September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks highlighted the importance of data collection, information sharing, and coordination within the U.S. government. Such efforts are important whether focused on terrorism or as an integral part of a broader strategy for combating money laundering. In this testimony, GAO addresses (1) the challenges the U.S. government faces in deterring terrorists' use of alternative financing mechanisms, (2) the steps that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have taken to implement a May 2003 Memorandum of Agreement concerning terrorist financing investigations, and (3) whether the annual National Money Laundering Strategy (NMLS) has served as a useful mechanism for guiding the coordination of federal efforts to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. GAO's testimony is based on two reports written in September 2003 (GAO-03-813) and November 2003 (GAO-04-163) for the Caucus and congressional requesters within the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, as well as a February 2004 report (GAO-04-464R) on related issues for the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security."

News release promoting the use of DART and Trinity Railway Express services to travel to several DFW-area museums, where discounts on admission are available with a valid ticket or pass as part of DART's "destination deals" program.

News release promoting the use of DART and Trinity Railway Express services to travel to several DFW-area museums, where discounts on admission are available with a valid ticket or pass as part of DART's "destination deals" program.

Testimony issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "The Department of Energy (DOE) manages over 100 construction projects with estimated costs over $90 billion and 97 nuclear waste cleanup projects with estimated costs over $230 billion. DOE has about 14,000 employees to oversee the work of more than 93,000 contractor employees. Due to DOE's history of inadequate oversight and management of contractors, GAO continues to include DOE contract and project management on its list of government programs at high risk for fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement. This testimony discusses (1) recent GAO work on contract and project management within two of DOE's largest program offices--the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and the Office of Environmental Management (EM), (2) preliminary results of ongoing GAO work on project management at NNSA's Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility (MFFF) project at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina, and (3) actions needed by NNSA and EM to improve contract and project management. GAO's reports over the past 3 years have contained nearly 60 recommendations collectively calling for DOE to ensure that project management requirements are consistently followed, to improve oversight of contractors, and to strengthen accountability. While DOE has generally …

Photocopy of an envelope addressed to Al Daniels at Dallas, Texas from Daniel Graney at San Antonio, Texas.

Other written product issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "This document is an E-supplement to GAO-09-144. It presents information from a GAO survey of states' trade offices throughout the United States on the nature of states' export promotion services and their partnerships with the Commercial Service (CS) of the U.S. Department of Commerce. We surveyed these offices to obtain information including (1) the types of export promotion services these states' trade offices provide and the user fees charged, (2) the number of state trade office staff providing these services, (3) whether small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) can use state grant programs or direct payments to defray the cost of CS's export promotion programs and services, (4) the importance of CS services to the operations of states' trade offices, and (5) the effect of CS user fees on SMEs' participation in CS export promotion programs. We surveyed all 50 states' trade offices and received responses from 45 of them. For a further discussion of our scope and methodology, see Export Promotion: Commerce Needs Better Information to Evaluate Its Fee-Based Programs and Customers. (GAO-09-144). We administered the survey from May 2008 to October 2008 in accordance with …