![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.489583333333333in"
height="1.0520833333333333in"}

# 

# Legislative Bulletin....................................................September 13, 2006

**Contents:**

> **H.R. 4893** --- To amend section 20 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory
> Act to restrict off-reservation gaming\
> **H.R. 5815** --- Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility
> Authorization Act of 2006
>
> **S. 2590** --- Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of
> 2006\
> **H.R. 6033** --- Thomas J. Manton Post Office Building Designation
> Act\
> **S. 2784** --- Fourteenth Dalai Lama Congressional Gold Medal Act\
> **H.Con.Res. 444** --- Extending the thanks of Congress and the Nation
> to the Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office

H.R. 4893 --- To amend section 20 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act to
restrict off-reservation gaming --- *as amended* (Pombo, R-CA)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, September 13, 2006, under a motion to
suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.

**[Note]{.underline}**: As of 10 a.m. on the day of consideration, the
committee report for this bill was unavailable, and the final bill text
was also unavailable for staff and members to review. The summary below
is based on the bill text available on the Resources Committee website,
not the introduced text.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.R. 4893 would amend Section 20 of the
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) to add additional restrictions on
tribes operating Indian gaming (gambling) outside their existing
reservations.

Under current IGRA provisions (subsection (a) of 25 U.S.C. 2719),
gambling may not be conducted on lands acquired by the Secretary of the
Interior in trust for the benefit of an Indian tribe after October 17,
1988 (the enactment date of IGRA), except under certain circumstances
defined in subsection (b) of IGRA. This bill modifies and narrows those
restrictions, as defined below, further limiting tribes' authority to
operate gambling facilities that are not on their own reservations.

The bill would revise requirements for gambling on lands that have been
taken in trust for the benefit of a newly recognized, restored, or
landless Indian tribe, by requiring the following new criteria
(replacing existing Section 20 text with the provisions below) be met in
order for such tribe to be exempt from the gambling prohibition on lands
held in trust:

A)  the Secretary determines that the specified lands are within the
    state of such tribe and are within the primary geographic, social,
    historical, and temporal nexus of the Indian tribe;

B)  the Secretary determines that the proposed gambling activity would
    not be *detrimental* to the surrounding community and nearby Indian
    tribes \[*emphasis added*\];

C)  the Governor of the state, where the gambling activities would be
    conducted, concurs (and concurrence must conform to the laws of the
    state, such as if state law also requires state legislature consent
    as well);

D)  a memorandum of understanding must be negotiated and signed between
    the Indian tribe and the local county or parish government where the
    gambling facility would be located; the terms of the agreement must
    be limited to local infrastructure and services (such as
    transportation and public safety concerns) that are potentially
    effected by a gambling facility.

The above provisions do not apply to any lands for which an Indian tribe
submitted a fee-to-trust application prior to March 7, 2006, provided
that the lands are located within 1) the state where the Indian tribe
primarily resides, and 2) an area where the Indian tribe has a "primary
geographical, historical, and temporal nexus." In other words, this
would prevent a tribe from acquiring new lands (which do not have tribal
history) solely for the purpose of creating a new gambling enterprise
(referred to as 'reservation shopping').

The bill adds a new section to IGRA that would allow one Indian tribe to
host another (invited) tribe(s) to participate in or benefit from
consolidated class II and class III (see below for definitions) gambling
within the boundaries of the host tribe's reservation. A tribal-state
compact must be agreed upon by all involved tribes and the host state,
and the Indian land used must have been within the reservation
boundaries as of October 17, 1988.

The bill prohibits Indian tribes to conduct gambling on Indian lands
outside of the state in which the tribe is primarily residing and
exercising tribal government authority (on the date of enactment of this
Act), unless the Indian lands contiguous to the lands in the state where
the tribe is primarily residing and exercising tribal government
authority.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}:** As defined by IGRA, Class I
gambling includes social games solely for prizes of minimal value or
traditional forms of Indian gambling engaged in by individuals as a part
of, or in connection with, tribal ceremonies or celebrations. Class II
gambling includes the game of chance commonly known as bingo, which is
played for prizes, including monetary prizes, or card games that are
authorized by state laws or not explicitly prohibited by state laws.
Class III gambling means all forms of gaming/gambling that are not class
I or class II. For more information, see the [IGRA
website](http://nigc.gov/LawsRegulations/IndianGamingRegulatoryAct/tabid/605/Default.aspx#2703).

**[Committee Action]{.underline}:** H.R. 4893 was introduced on March 7,
2006, and referred to the Committee on Resources. The bill was marked-up
on July 26, 2006, and it was reported (amended) to the House by a vote
of 27-9 the same day.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}:** CBO estimates that implementing
H.R. 4893 would not have a significant impact on the federal budget.
Enacting the bill would not affect revenues or direct spending.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}:** H.R. 4893 would add new restrictions on
tribes operating Indian gambling outside their existing reservations.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}:** According to CBO, H.R. 4893
"contains intergovernmental mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA) because it would limit the ability of tribes to
operate gaming on land put in trust after 1988. Because both the outlook
for gaming on these lands under current law and the impact of the
changes made by the bill are very uncertain, CBO cannot determine
whether the aggregate cost to tribes would exceed the annual threshold
established in UMRA (\$64 million in 2006, adjusted annually for
inflation) in any of the next five years."

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}:** A committee report citing
constitutional authority is unavailable.

House Rule XIII, Section 3(d)(1), requires that all committee reports
contain "a statement citing the *specific* powers granted to Congress in
the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint
resolution." *\[emphasis added\]*

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}:** Derek V. Baker;
[derek.baker@mail.house.gov](mailto:Derek.baker@mail.house.gov);
202-226-8585

H.R. 5815 --- Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility
Authorization Act of 2006 --- *as amended* (Brown, R-SC)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, September 13, 2006, under a motion to
suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 5815 would authorize major medical
facility projects and leases for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
for fiscal years 2006 and 2007. Specifically, the bill would authorize
the following construction and renovation projects across the nation:

-   \$310 million for restoration of the VA Medical Center in Biloxi,
    Mississippi, and consolidation of services performed at the VA
    Medical Center in Gulfport, Mississippi

-   \$100 million for Louisiana State University to design, build and
    operate a new joint-use medical center facility in or near New
    Orleans to replace one that was damaged by Hurricane Katrina

-   \$70 million for the Medical University of South Carolina to design,
    build, and operate a new joint-use medical facility in Charleston,
    South Carolina to replace an existing facility

-   \$98 million for the purchase of a site to replace the VA Medical
    Center in Denver, Colorado

-   \$75.3 million for the construction of an outpatient clinic and
    regional office at the VA Medical Center in Anchorage, Alaska

-   \$102 million for the consolidation of clinical and administrative
    functions at the VA Medical Center in Cleveland, Ohio and the VA
    Medical Center in Brecksville, Ohio

-   \$25 million for the construction of the extended care building at
    the VA Medical Center in Des Moines, Iowa

-   \$9.1 million for the renovation of patient wards at the VA Medical
    Center in Durham, North Carolina

-   \$85.2 million for the correction of patient privacy deficiencies at
    the VA Medical Center in Gainesville, Florida

-   \$27.4 million for 7th and 8th floor wards modernization addition at
    the VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, Indiana

-   \$406 million for the construction of a new medical center facility
    at the VA Medical Center in Las Vegas, Nevada

-   \$65.1 million for the construction of an ambulatory
    surgery/outpatient diagnostic support center in the Gulf South
    Submarket of Veterans Integrated Service Network and completion of
    Phase I land purchase in Lee County, Florida

-   \$104.85 million for seismic corrections in buildings 7 and 126 at
    the VA Medical Center in Long Beach, California

-   \$79.9 million for seismic corrections in buildings 500 and 501 at
    the VA Medical Center in Los Angeles, California

-   \$377.7 million for the construction of a new medical center
    facility in Orlando, Florida, to be located at Lake Nona as part of
    a science and research park that is likely to include the proposed
    campus of the medical school of the University of Central Florida

-   \$189.2 million for the consolidation of campuses in Pittsburgh,
    Pennsylvania

-   \$19.1 million for ward upgrades and expansion at the VA Medical
    Center in San Antonio, Texas

-   \$77.7 million for the construction of a spinal cord injury center,
    at the VA Medical Center in Syracuse, New York

-   \$49 million to upgrade essential electrical distribution systems at
    the VA Medical Center in Tampa, Florida

-   \$7.1 million for the expansion of the spinal cord injury center
    addition at the VA Medical Center in Tampa, Florida

-   \$56 million for the blind rehabilitation and psychiatric bed
    renovation and new construction project at the VA Medical Center in
    Temple, Texas

H.R. 5815 would also authorize the following major medical facility
leases for FY 2006:

-   \$10.9 million for an outpatient clinic in Baltimore, Maryland

-   \$8.9 million for an outpatient clinic in Evansville, Indiana

-   \$5 million for an outpatient clinic in Smith County, Texas

H.R. 5815 would also authorize the following major medical facility
leases for FY 2007:

-   \$6.1 million for an outpatient clinic in Austin, Texas

-   \$2.5 million for an outpatient clinic in Lowell, Massachusetts

-   \$4.4 million for an outpatient clinic in Grand Rapids, Michigan

-   \$8.5 million for up to four outpatient clinics in Las Vegas, Nevada

-   \$5 million for an outpatient clinic in Parma, Ohio

The bill would express a sense of Congress that the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs should take steps to explore all options for addressing
the need for medical facility improvements in San Juan, Puerto Rico,
including the option of a public/private partnership to construct and
operate a facility that would replace the current VA medical center in
San Juan. In addition, H.R. 5815 would direct the VA to submit to
Congress, a report identifying and outlining the various options
available for replacing the San Juan facility.

H.R. 5815 would permit the VA to covey to the city of Fort Thomas,
Kentucky, the rights, title and interests of a parcel of property,
including 15 structures located there, consisting of roughly 11.75
acres. Fort Thomas, Kentucky would be required to pay an amount equal to
the fair market value of the transferred real property to the United
States.

H.R. 5815 would establish at the VA, the position of Director,
Construction and Facilities Management, which would be a career position
responsible for construction and facilities management across the
Department.

The bill would direct the VA to submit to Congress, a business plan for
enhanced access to outpatient care for primary care, mental health care,
and specialty care in the Lewiston-Auburn, Houlton, and Dover-Foxcroft
areas of Maine, and Whiteside Country, Illinois.

Finally, H.R. 5815 would direct the VA to submit to Congress, a report
identifying various options available to the VA for the placement of a
VA Medical Center in Okaloosa County, Florida.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: Committee Report
[109-643](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp109:FLD010:@1(hr643))
outlines specific details on each project authorized by H.R. 5815.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 5815 was introduced on July 17,
2006, and was referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, which
considered it, held a mark-up, and reported the bill, as amended, by
voice vote on September 8, 2006.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: CBO confirms that H.R. 5815 would
authorize \$168 million in FY 2006, and \$2.5 billion over five years,
subject to appropriations.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: Yes, the bill authorizes the construction of
several new VA facilities.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: Committee Report 109-643
cites constitutional authority in Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the
United States Constitution (provide for the common defense and the
general welfare).

**[RSC Staff Contact:]{.underline}** Joelle Cannon;
<joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov>, (202) 226-0718.

S. 2590 --- Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006
--- *as received* (Sen. Coburn, R-OK)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, September 13, 2006, under a motion to
suspend the rules and pass the bill.

**[Note]{.underline}**: Unofficial reports indicate that the text of S.
2590 is being amended. However, updated text was not available as of
press time. The RSC will email out an updated summary when the revised
language is available. The summary below reflects the version of S. 2590
as passed by the Senate. Reports indicate that the bill will be revised
to include one database for grants and another for contracts, but
accessible from the same website. Currently, the bill provides for one
database detailing both grants and contracts.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: S. 2590 would direct the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), not later than January 1, 2008, to ensure the
existence and operation of a single searchable website, accessible by
the public at no cost, detailing certain financial information about
federal funding recipients. The website would track all federal
financial assistance and expenditures including grants, contracts,
subgrants, subcontracts, loans, awards, cooperative agreements, purchase
orders, task orders, delivery orders, and other forms of financial
assistance, not including individual transactions below \$25,000 or
credit card transactions before October 1, 2008.

The public website must include for fiscal year 2007 and every fiscal
year thereafter, the following for each financial award:

-   the name of the entity receiving the award;

-   the amount of the award;

-   information on the award including transaction type, funding agency,
    the North American Industry Classification System code or Catalog of
    Federal Domestic Assistance number (where applicable), program
    source, and an award title descriptive of the purpose of each
    funding action;

-   the location of the entity receiving the award and the primary
    location of performance under the award, including the city, state,
    congressional district, and country;

-   a unique identifier of the entity receiving the award and of the
    parent entity of the recipient, should the entity be owned by
    another entity; and

-   any other relevant information specified by the OMB.

In addition, the database would be required to be updated within 30 days
after the award of any federal award required to be posted.

S. 2590 would also direct OMB to establish a pilot program to:

-   test the collection and accession of data about subgrants and
    subcontracts; and

-   determine how to implement a subaward reporting program across the
    federal government, including:

    -   a reporting system under which the entity issuing a subgrant or
        subcontract is responsible for fulfilling the subaward reporting
        requirement; and

    -   a mechanism for collecting and incorporating agency and public
        feedback on the design and utility of the website.

This pilot program would terminate on January 1, 2009. In addition,
based on the pilot program, not later than January 1, 2009, the OMB
would be directed to:

-   ensure that data regarding subawards are disclosed in the same
    manner as data regarding other federal awards, as required by this
    Act; and

-   ensure that the method for collecting and distributing data about
    subawards:

    -   minimizes burdens imposed on federal award recipients and
        subaward recipients;

    -   allows federal award recipients and subaward recipients to
        allocate reasonable costs for the collection and reporting of
        subaward data as indirect costs; and

    -   establishes cost-effective requirements for collecting subaward
        data under block grants, formula grants, and other types of
        assistance to state and local governments.

S. 2590 would direct OMB to submit to the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Government
Reform of the House of Representatives, an annual report regarding the
implementation of the website established by this Act. The report is to
include:

-   data regarding the usage and public feedback on the utility of the
    site (including recommendations for improving data quality and
    collection);

-   an assessment of the reporting burden placed on federal award and
    subaward recipients; and

-   an explanation of any extension of the subaward reporting deadline.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: According to news reports, GSA
estimates the federal government gives out \$300 billion in grants to
some 30,000 organizations every year. According to the sponsor's office,
"The purpose of S. 2590 is to require full disclosure of all entities
and organizations that receive federal funding. OMB would be responsible
for making that information accessible to the public through a
searchable website. Whereas many of the databases and websites currently
available (such as FPDS, FAADS, CFFR) contain information only on select
parts of the budget, this bill would provide one-stop shopping for
nearly all federal spending. ...The legislation does not require that
OMB re-invent the wheel by creating an entirely new database to capture
this information. It is flexible enough to allow OMB to utilize existing
databases so that work is not duplicated. The point of the bill is
rather to require OMB to create one single interface for the public to
access all of the information, instead of requiring it to chase down
countless obscure federal websites."

In an August 28, 2006, article in the *Washington Times*, Clay Johnson,
Deputy Director for Management at OMB, stated the following:

> "We want to see the bill enacted, so whatever we can do to be
> supportive of Senators Coburn's and Obama's efforts, we'll be
> supportive. ...What we like is transparency. We believe that the more
> public information that's available about how programs work, about
> where we\'re spending our money, who's getting grants, who's getting
> contracts, the more accountability there is,"

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: S. 2590 was passed in the Senate by
unanimous consent on September 7, 2006, and received in the House on the
following day.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: CBO confirms that S. 2590
authorizes \$5 million in FY 2007, and \$16 million over five years.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: Yes, it creates a new, two-year pilot
program.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[RSC Staff Contact:]{.underline}** Joelle Cannon;
<joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov>, (202) 226-0718.

H.R. 6033 --- To designate the facility of the United States Postal
Service located at 39-25 61st Street in Woodside, New York, as the
"Thomas J. Manton Post Office Building" --- *as introduced* *(Crowley,
D-NY)*

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, September 13, 2006, under a motion to
suspend the rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 6033 would designate the facility of the
United States Postal Service located at 39-25 61st Street in Woodside,
New York, as the "Thomas J. Manton Post Office Building."

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: Former Democrat Congressman
Thomas Manton died July 22, 2006 of prostate cancer at age 73. Manton
served in the 99^th^ through the 105^th^ Congresses.

According to the New York Times, "Mr. Manton was born on Nov. 3, 1932.
He attended private Catholic schools in Queens and Brooklyn, served in
the Marine Corps from 1951 to 1953. He graduated from St. John's
University in 1958, where he received his law degree in 1962." Manton
was a police officer from 1955 to 1960, and he was admitted to the bar
in 1963. Manton served on the New York City Council from 1970 to 1984,
and was chairman of the Queen Democratic organization.

According to Henry J. Stern, who served with Manton on the New York City
Council, Manton was a Marine, and was able to choose his successor, the
bill's sponsor, Rep. Crowley. Stern asserts Manton was "particularly
outraged at the gay rights bill." Additionally, Manton is listed on the
Democrats for Life of America website. (sources:
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/23/nyregion/24mantoncnd.html?ex=1311307200&en=f011644d0c08def4&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss>,
<http://gograssroots.org/readingroom/?p=27>, and
<http://www.democratsforlife.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=194&Itemid=2>)

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R 6033 was introduced on September
6, 2006, and referred to the Committee on Government Reform, which took
no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: The only costs associated with a
postal facility renaming are those for sign and map changes, none of
which significantly affect the federal budget.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: Although no committee report
citing constitutional authority is available, Article I, Section 8,
Clause 7 of the Constitution grants Congress the authority to establish
Post Offices and post roads.

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Marcus Kelley;
<marcus.kelley@mail.house.gov>; (202) 226-9717

S. 2784 --- Fourteenth Dalai Lama Congressional Gold Medal Act --- *as
received* *(Sen. Feinstein, D-CA)*

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, September 13, 2006, under a motion to
suspend the rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: S. 2784 would direct the Speaker of the House
and President of the Senate, on behalf of Congress, to present the
Fourteenth Dalai Lama with a gold medal for, "his many enduring
contributions to peace and religious understanding." The bill directs
the Secretary of the Treasury to design and strike the gold medal. S.
2784 also allows the Secretary of the Treasury to strike and sell bronze
duplicates of the medal.

S. 2784 authorizes the United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund to use
such funds as are necessary to design and strike the medals, and directs
proceeds from the sale of the bronze duplicates to be deposited into
United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund.

[]{.mark}

The bill finds that the Dalai Lama:

-   "is recognized in the United States and throughout the world as a
    leading figure of moral and religious authority;

-   "is the unrivaled spiritual and cultural leader of the Tibetan
    people, and has used his leadership to promote democracy, freedom,
    and peace for the Tibetan people through a negotiated settlement of
    the Tibet issue, based on autonomy within the People's Republic of
    China;

-   "has led the effort to preserve the rich cultural, religious, and
    linguistic heritage of the Tibetan people and to promote the
    safeguarding of other endangered cultures throughout the world;

-   "was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989 for his efforts to
    promote peace and non-violence throughout the globe, and to find
    democratic reconciliation for the Tibetan people through his 'Middle
    Way' approach;

-   "has significantly advanced the goal of greater understanding,
    tolerance, harmony, and respect among the different religious faiths
    of the world through interfaith dialogue and outreach to other
    religious leaders; and

-   "has used his moral authority to promote the concept of universal
    responsibility as a guiding tenet for how human beings should treat
    one another and the planet we share.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: The Congressional Gold Medal
of Honor is the nation's highest and most distinguished civilian award.
The medal is presented both for singular acts of exceptional service and
for lifetime achievement. The Rule 3(f)(1)(c) of the Rules for the
Committee on Financial Services governs the award of Congressional Gold
Medals. This rule states, "the recipient shall have performed an
achievement that has an impact on American history and culture that is
likely to be recognized as a major achievement in the recipient's field
long after the achievement."

On September 11, 2006, gold's closing price was around \$590.40.
According to the Treasury, each Congressional Gold Medal contains 14.5
troy ounces or 16 regular ounces of gold. Thus, the gold in a medal
minted today is worth roughly \$9,446.40. As stated below, the CBO
estimates the cost of the bill to be \$35,000. Sales of most duplicate
medals are not strong enough to offset the cost of the gold medal.
(source: <http://goldprice.org/gold-price.html>)

For additional information on Congressional Gold Medals, please see this
RSC document:
<http://www.house.gov/pence/rsc/doc/GW_050906_Gold_Medal_2006.doc>.

H.R. 54, which passed the House on January 26, 2005 (231-173), would
have limited Congress to awarding only two congressional gold medals per
year. Both Crowley amendments, which would have effectively gutted H.R.
54, failed. H.R. 54 is currently being considered in the Senate
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: S. 2784 was received from the Senate
on June 6, 2006, and referred to the Committee on Financial services,
which took no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: CBO estimates that implementing S.
2784 would cost \$35,000 including \$10,000 for the gold and \$25,000 to
engrave, design, engrave, and manufacture the medal, resulting in an
insignificant impact on direct spending.

[]{.mark}

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report citing
constitutional authority is unavailable.

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Marcus Kelley;
<marcus.kelley@mail.house.gov>; (202) 226-9717

H.Con.Res. 444 --- Extending the thanks of Congress and the Nation to
the Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office, the Joint POW/MIA Accounting
Command of the Department of Defense, the Armed Forces DNA
Identification Laboratory, the Air Force Life Sciences Equipment
Laboratory, and the military departments and to the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam for their efforts to achieve the fullest possible accounting
of all Americans unaccounted for as a result of the Vietnam War
[]{.mark}

--- *as introduced* (Simmons, R-CT)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The resolution is scheduled for
consideration on Wednesday, September 13, 2006, under a motion to
suspend the rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.Con.Res. 444 resolves that Congress:

-   "applauds the personnel of the Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office
    (DPMO), the Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command of the Department of
    Defense, the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory, the Air
    Force Life Sciences Equipment Laboratory, and the military
    departments for continuing their mission of achieving the fullest
    possible accounting of all Americans unaccounted for as a result of
    the Nation's previous conflicts;

-   "extends the thanks of the Congress and the Nation to the personnel
    of those offices, commands, and laboratories in the United States
    and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam for their efforts to achieve
    the fullest possible accounting of all Americans who remain
    unaccounted for as a result of the Vietnam War;

-   "encourages the United States Government to use all available means
    to continue the mission ... at current or greater levels until the
    fullest possible accounting is achieved;

-   "recognizes the assistance of host nations in supporting the efforts
    of the United States Government to achieve the fullest possible
    accounting of all Americans unaccounted for as a result of the
    Nation's previous conflicts; and

-   "thanks the Socialist Republic of Vietnam for continued assistance
    and cooperation in the humane recovery, identification, and
    repatriation of the remains of American personnel remaining
    unaccounted for from the Vietnam era."

[]{.mark}

The resolution lists a number of findings, including the following:

-   "the Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO), an element of the
    Office of the Secretary of Defense, exercises policy, control and
    oversight within the Department of Defense of the process of
    investigation, analysis, recovery, and fullest possible accounting
    of Americans missing as a result of the Nation's previous conflicts;

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   "the Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command (JPAC), located on the island
    of Oahu in Hawaii, is charged with the mission of achieving the
    fullest possible accounting of all Americans missing as a result of
    the Nation's previous conflicts;

    -   "as diplomatic relations of the United States with the Socialist
        Republic of Vietnam have improved, so has access to archival
        information and on-site investigations relative to
        unaccounted-for Americans;

    -   "as of June 28, 2006, the remains of 604 Americans have been
        repatriated from Vietnam, identified, and returned to their
        families;

    -   "as of June 28, 2006, the remains of 208 Americans have been
        repatriated from Laos, identified, and returned to their
        families;

    -   "as of June 28, 2006, the remains of 29 Americans have been
        repatriated from Cambodia, identified, and returned to their
        families; and

    -   "the United States has a historic commitment to the recovery of
        and full accounting for Americans who are missing from the
        Nation's wars and conflicts."

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.Con.Res. 444 was introduced on
June 29, 2006, and referred to the Committee on Armed Services
Subcommittee on Military Personnel, and the Committee on International
Relations, neither of which took official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: The resolution authorizes no
expenditure.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}**: No.

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: No.

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Marcus Kelley;
<marcus.kelley@mail.house.gov>; (202) 226-9717