> ![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.489583333333333in" height="1.15625in"}

**Legislative
Bulletin...............................................June 9, 2008**

**Contents:**

> **H.R. 3022---**Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Park Wilderness Act of
> 2007
>
> **H.R. 2632---**Sabinoso Wilderness Act of 2007
>
> **H.Res.1158---**Recognizing the 100th anniversary of the
> establishment of the Ozark National Forest in Arkansas
>
> **H.R. 3682---**California Desert and Mountain Heritage Act
>
> **H.R. 5680---**To amend certain laws relating to Native Americans,
> and for others purposes
>
> **S.2516---**Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act
>
> **H.R. 5569---**To extend for 5 years the EB-5 regional center pilot
> program
>
> **H.R. 5938---**To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide
> secret service protection to former Vice Presidents, and for other
> purposes
>
> **H.R. 5593---**Congressional Review Act Improvement Act
>
> **S. 188---**A bill to revise the short title of the Fannie Lou Hamer,
> Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization
> and Amendments Act of 2006
>
> **H.Res. \_\_\_**--- Resolution Honoring the Passing of Bo Diddley
>
> **H.Res. 1229**--- Recognizing the achievements of America\'s high
> school valedictorians of the graduating class of 2008, promoting the
> importance of encouraging intellectual growth, and rewarding academic
> excellence of all American high school students
>
> **H. Res. 1225**---Expressing support for designation of June 2008 as
> "National Safety Month"
>
> **H.R. 5524**--- Reconnecting Homeless Youth Act of 2008
>
> **H.R. 4926**---Josh Miller HEARTS Act
>
> **H.Res. 1243**---Recognizing the immeasurable contributions of
> fathers in the healthy development of children, supporting responsible
> fatherhood, and encouraging greater involvement of fathers in the
> lives of their children, especially on Father's Day
>
> **H.Res. 127**---Recognizing and celebrating the 50th anniversary of
> the entry of Alaska in the Union as the 49th State
>
> **H.R. 5683**---Government Accountability Office Act of 2008
>
> **H.R. 5778**---District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority
> Independence Preservation Act
>
> **S. 1245**---A bill to reform mutual aid agreements for the National
> Capital Region

**H.R. 3022---Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Park Wilderness Act of 2007
*(Costa, D-CA)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 3022 would designate approximately
69,500 acres of the Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks in
California as the John Krebs Wilderness. The bill would require the
Secretary of Agriculture, through the U.S. Forest Service, to preserve
and protect the land from any future development or mechanized vehicle
use.

H.R. 3513 would also designate an additional 45,186 acres of land in the
Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks as a permanent part of the
already established Sequoia-Kings Canyon Wilderness. According the
Committee on Natural Resources, H.R. 3022 would designate "virtually
all" of the Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks as wilderness.

The bill would stipulate that the designations may not be construed to
restrict the operation or maintenance of small check dams, which prevent
soil erosion, or water impoundments on Lower Franklin Lake, Crystal
Lake, Upper Monarch Lake, and Eagle Lake. H.R. 3022 would also allow the
use of helicopters within the Sequoia-Kings Canyon Wilderness for the
operation, maintenance, and repair of the small check dams and water
impoundments.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: The [Wilderness
Act](http://wilderness.nps.gov/document/wildernessAct.pdf) was signed in
1964 in order to preserve and protect federal land that was especially
pristine and untouched by human development. According to the text of
the Act, the purpose of the designation is to ensure that human
expansion and mechanized growth does not occupy or modify all lands in
the U.S. As such, federal land designated as "wilderness" is prohibited
from being used for any resource extraction such as logging or mining,
but is generally open to the public for camping, hiking, hunting, and
fishing. Mechanized vehicles are strictly prohibited on wilderness
lands. Since the wilderness designation is only given to lands that are
already controlled by the federally government, this bill would not add
new land to the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) domain. Once
designated, wilderness areas remain under the control of the federal
department that originally managed the land, in this case, the
Department of the Interior operating through the BLM. Because of the
tight land-use restriction placed on federal land designated as
wilderness, there is often local controversy associated with the
designation.

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}**: Some conservatives
might be concerned that wilderness designations restrict the use of
public lands and could possibly restrict the use of private property
land within the designation. Some conservatives may also be concerned
that wilderness designations completely and permanently block resource
extraction such as mining, drilling, and logging on federally owned land
within the designation.\
\
**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 3022 was introduced on July 12,
2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources. On May 14,
2008, a mark-up was held and the bill was reported, as amended, by voice
vote.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, H.R. 3022 would
have "no significant effect on 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.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}** According to the
Committee on Natural Resources, in [House Report
110-694](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr694)),
"H.R. 3022 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e) or
9(f) of rule XXI."

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Committee on Natural
Resources, in [House Report
110-694](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr694)),
cites constitutional authority in Article 1, Section 8, and Article IV,
Section 3, but fails to cite a specific clause. 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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**H.R. 2632---Sabinoso Wilderness Act of 2007 *(Costa, D-CA)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 2632 would designate approximately
15,995 acres of land controlled by the Taos Field Office of the Bureau
of Land Management (BLM) in New Mexico as the Sabinoso Wilderness. The
bill would require the Secretary of Agriculture, through the U.S. Forest
Service, to preserve and protect the land from any future development or
mechanized vehicle use.

H.R. 2632 would stipulate that any land within the wilderness area that
is acquired by the government after the enactment of the bill would be
designated as wilderness. The bill would also state that any grazing of
livestock that was agreed to by the BLM before the land was designated
as wilderness would be continued. However, H.R. 2632 would prohibit any
new grazing rights from being established. The bill would also state
that nothing in the designation shall be construed to affect the
jurisdiction or responsibilities of the State of New Mexico to establish
and oversee fish and wildlife in the wilderness area.

H.R. 2632 would prohibit any mining, mineral leasing, or geothermal
leasing on land within the wilderness designation.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: The [Wilderness
Act](http://wilderness.nps.gov/document/wildernessAct.pdf) was signed in
1964 in order to preserve and protect federal land that was especially
pristine and untouched by human development. According to the text of
the Act, the purpose of the designation is to ensure that human
expansion and mechanized growth does not occupy or modify all lands in
the U.S. As such, federal land designated as "wilderness" is prohibited
from being used for any resource extraction such as logging or mining,
but is generally open to the public for camping, hiking, hunting, and
fishing. Mechanized vehicles are strictly prohibited on wilderness
lands. Since the wilderness designation is only given to lands that are
already controlled by the federally government, this bill would not add
new land to the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) domain. Once
designated, wilderness areas remain under the control of the federal
department that originally managed the land, in this case, the
Department of Interior operating through the Bureau of Land Management.
Because of the tight land-use restriction placed on federal land
designated as wilderness, there is often local controversy associated
with the designation.

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}**: Some conservatives
might be concerned that wilderness designations restrict the use of
public lands and could possibly restrict the use of private property
land within the designation. Some conservatives may also be concerned
that wilderness designations completely and permanently block resource
extraction such as mining, drilling, and logging on federally owned land
within the designation.\
\
**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 2632 was introduced on June 7,
2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources. On May 14,
2008, a mark-up was held and the bill was reported, as amended, by voice
vote.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, H.R. H.R. 2632
would have "no significant effect on 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.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}** According to the
Committee on Natural Resources, in [House Report
110-695](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr695)),
"H.R. 2632 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e) or
9(f) of rule XXI."

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Committee on Natural
Resources, in [House Report
110-695](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr695)),
cites constitutional authority in Article 1, Section 8, but fails to
cite a specific clause. 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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**H.R. 3682---California Desert and Mountain Heritage Act**

**(Bono-Mack, R-CA)**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 3682 would designate approximately
146,000 acres of public land in California as wilderness. The bill would
also designate 43,000 acres as land to be studied as potential
wilderness area, 31 miles as wild and scenic rivers, and add
approximately 8,500 acres to the Santa Rosa-San Jacinto Mountains
National Monument.

H.R. 3682 would create four new wilderness areas and add land to six
others. In addition, the bill would also add four new areas to the Santa
Rosa-San Jacinto Mountains National Monument.

Specifically, the bill would add the following designations:

-   Beauty Mountain Wilderness Area (15,621 acres)

-   Cahuilla Mountain Wilderness Area (5,585 acres)

-   Pinto Mountain Wilderness Area (24,404 acres)

-   South Fork San Jacinto Wilderness Area (20,217 acres)

The bill also adds land to existing wilderness areas as follows:

-   Agua Tibia Wilderness Area (2,053 acres);

-   Chuckwalla Mountains Wilderness Area (12,815 acres)

-   Joshua Tree Wilderness Area (36,700 acres of new wilderness, as well
    as 43,300 acres of potential wilderness to be studied)

-   Orocopia Mountains Wilderness Area (4,635 acres);

-   Palen-McCoy Wilderness Area (22,645 acres); and

-   Santa Rosa Wilderness Area (2,149 acres).

Finally, the bill would add 31 miles of rivers in Riverside, California,
as portions of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, including
Bautista Creek, the north fork of the San Jacinto River and its
tributary Fuller Creek, and Palm Canyon Creek.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: H.R. 3682 would designate
multiple public lands within Southwest California as wilderness areas.
According to the Committee on Natural Resources, in [House Report
110-693](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr693)),
"The various units provide habitat for a wide variety of rare species
including arroyo toads, San Bernardino kangaroo rats, southwestern
willow fly-catchers and gray vireos, red rattlesnakes, desert tortoises,
and Mojave fringe-toed lizards as well as the chuckwalla (an iguana-like
lizard), and many other creatures."

According to the Committee on Natural Resources, the U.S. Forest
Service, which will oversee much of the new wilderness land, opposed the
initial version of H.R. 3682 because several proposed boundaries did not
match the Forest Service's current plans for the areas. The committee
also reported that, while the administration was opposed to certain
provisions, it "did not oppose the wild and scenic river designations,
and supported the expansion of the national monument." During committee
consideration of the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute
was considered and passed in order to address the U.S. Forest Service's
specific issues with the legislation. Following the insertion of
substitute language, the bill passed the committee by voice vote.

The [Wilderness
Act](http://wilderness.nps.gov/document/wildernessAct.pdf) was signed in
1964 in order to preserve and protect federal land that was especially
pristine and untouched by human development. According to the text of
the Act, the purpose of the designation is to ensure that human
expansion and mechanized growth does not occupy or modify all lands in
the U.S. As such, federal land designated as "wilderness" is prohibited
from being used for any resource extraction such as logging or mining,
but is generally open to the public for camping, hiking, hunting, and
fishing. Mechanized vehicles are strictly prohibited on wilderness
lands. Since the wilderness designation is only given to lands that are
already controlled by the federally government, this bill would not add
new land to the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) domain. Once
designated, wilderness areas remain under the control of the federal
department that originally managed the land, in this case, the
Department of Interior operating through the Bureau of Land Management.
Because of the tight land-use restriction placed on federal land
designated as wilderness, there is often local controversy associated
with the designation.

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}**: Some conservatives
might be concerned that wilderness designations restrict the use of
public lands and could possibly restrict the use of private property
land within the designation. Some conservatives may also be concerned
that wilderness designations completely and permanently block resource
extraction such as mining, drilling, and logging on federally owned land
within the designation.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 3682 introduced on September
27, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources. On May 14,
2008, a mark-up was held and the bill was reported, as amended, by voice
vote.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, H.R. H.R. 3682
would have "no significant effect on 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.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}** According to the
Committee on Natural Resources, in [House Report
110-693](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr693)),
"H.R. 3682 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e) or
9(f) of rule XXI."

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Committee on Natural
Resources, in [House Report
110-693](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr693)),
cites constitutional authority in Article 1, Section 8, but fails to
cite a specific clause. 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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**H.Res. 1158**---**Recognizing the 100th anniversary of the
establishment of the Ozark National Forest in Arkansas** **(Boozman,
R-AR)**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The resolution is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.Res. 1158 would express the sense that the
House or Representatives "recognizes the 100th Anniversary of the
establishment of the Ozark National Forest in Arkansas."

The resolution lists a number of findings, including:

-   "On March 6, 1908, President Theodore Roosevelt set aside by
    proclamation 917,944 acres of land for conservation purposes, which
    was designated as the Ozark National Forest;

-   "The Ozark National Forest was the first federally protected stand
    of hardwoods in the United States;

-   "The Ozark National Forest is home to Arkansas\'s tallest mountain,
    Mount Magazine;

-   "The Ozark National Forest is home to Blanchard Springs Caverns,
    which is a magnificent limestone cave system, and the only cave
    system featuring guided tours administered by the Forest Service;

-   "In 2006, the Ozark National Forest helped enrich the lives of 2.1
    million visitors by sharing the beauty of Arkansas, which is known
    as 'The Natural State'; and

-   "Diverse flora in the region include more than 500 species of trees
    and woody plants, and hardwoods occupy 65 percent of the forests."

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.Res. 1158 was introduced on April
29, 2008, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, which took no
official action.\
\
**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: The resolution does not authorize
expenditures.\
\
**[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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**H.R. 5680---To amend certain laws relating to Native Americans, and
for others purposes *(Grijalva, D-TX)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 5680 would make a number of changes to
current law regarding seven distinct Indian tribes and Native Alaskans.
The bill's specific measures are listed below.

*Colorado River Tribes*: The bill would provide mandatory annual
payments to Colorado River Indian tribes in return for proceeds from
electrical power produced by the Bureau of Indian Affairs' (BIA)
operation of a power system on the Colorado River Reservation. The
payments, which would not be subject to appropriation, would be between
\$200,000 and \$350,000 each year and would be paid from receipts that
the BIA receives from operating the power system. The receipts, which
average \$10 million each year, would be used by the Colorado River
Indian Tribes to create the Office of the Colorado Indian Tribes
Reservation Energy Development.

*Gila River Indian Community Contracts*. H.R. 5680 would allow the Gila
River Indian Tribe to allow the tribe to enter into binding arbitration
regarding construction contracts on their reservation in Arizona. Under
current law, the tribe may only enter into binding arbitration
concerning commercial land leases and contracts.

*Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa*. H.R. 5680 would authorize the
Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa of Michigan to transfer land that is
not held in trust without the approval of the Secretary of the Interior.
The provision, which concerns lands donated by the tribe for the
construction of a new hospital in St Ignace, Michigan, would apply
retroactively to 2005, when the land was transferred from the tribe to
the Mackinac Straits Hospital Authority.

*Morongo Tribe Lease Extension*. The bill allows the Morongo Band of
Mission Indians in California, to enter into to lease contracts on their
reservation for periods of up to 50 years. Under current law, the tribes
are only authorized to enter into leases of up to 25 years. The tribe
believes that it will be more successful developing industrial
production facilities on the reservation with a longer lease period.

*Cow Creek Band Leasing Authority*. The bill allows the Cow Creek Band
of Umpqua Indians in Oregon, to enter into to lease contracts on their
reservation for periods of up to 99 years. Under current law, the tribes
are only authorizes to enter into leases of up to 25 years.

*Native Alaskan Common Stock Settlement*. H.R. 5680 would amend the
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) to allow Alaskan Regional
Development Corporations to make stock payments to shareholders'
descendants, elderly, or others who have been left out of the stock
distribution. Stock given to shareholder's descendants, elderly, or
others who have been left out would be cancelled when the stockholder
died, and no payment would be made to the stockholders' estate.

*Miccosukee Indiana Tribe*. Finally, the bill would place land owned by
the Miccosukee Tribe in Florida into trust. The land is near, but not
adjacent to, the tribe's reservation, and contains the Miccosukee Golf
and Country Club. According to the Natural Resources Committee, "the
entire application, including environmental studies, is complete and has
been pending for 5 years."\
\
**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 5680 introduced on April 4,
2008, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources. On May 14,
2008, a mark-up was held and the bill was reported, as amended, by
unanimous consent.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, H.R. 5680 would
increase direct spending by \$300,000 annually to make payments to
Colorado River Indian Tribes to fund the Office of the Colorado Indian
Tribes Reservation Energy Development.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}** Yes, the bill increases direct spending for
payments to Colorado Indian Tribes with electrical production on their
reservation that it operated by the federal government. The bill would
also increase the amount of land that is held in trust by the U.S.
government.

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

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}** According to the
Committee on Natural Resources, in [House Report
110-692](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr692)),
"H.R. 5680 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e) or
9(f) of rule XXI."

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Committee on Natural
Resources, in [House Report
110-692](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr692)),
cites constitutional authority in Article 1, Section 8, but fails to
cite a specific clause. 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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

S. 2516---Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act *(Sen. Mikulski,
D-MD)*

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: S.2516 would require the Secretary of
Homeland Security to allow for the use of fingerprints that an
individual provides when they enlist into the Armed Forces for
fingerprint requirements of naturalization applications. To meet the
requirement, an individual must submit the application within 24 months
of enlistment.

The bill would require the Secretary to update the appropriate
application forms, instructions, and guidebooks for obtaining
naturalization to reflect these changes.

The bill would also require the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit
a report within 120 days of enactment on the entire process for the
adjudication of an application for naturalization of service members.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: According to a *Washington
Post* Article from November 5, 2005, Kendall K. Frederick was a U.S.
Reservist with the 983^rd^ Engineer Battalion stationed in Monclova,
Ohio. Frederick was born in Trinidad and came to the United States with
his family when he was 14 years old. He attended high school in
Randallstown, Maryland, where he joined the ROTC. Following graduation,
Frederick moved to Michigan to find work and joined the Army Reserve.
There he was called up for active duty service with the 983^rd^ based in
Ohio.

Following his initial tour, Frederick returned home for leave but was
quickly called back for a second six-month stint. Three weeks after his
second arrival in Iraq, Frederick was killed by an improvised explosive
device near Tikrit.

Though he had applied for citizenship well before he was first deployed,
Frederick's application process was delayed because his fingerprints
were misfiled. Fredrick was still in the process of obtaining his
citizenship when he was killed on October 19, 2007. Following his death
he was posthumously awarded United States citizenship and laid to rest
in Arlington National Cemetery. According to the *Washington Post*,
after his death, "Frederick was also awarded a Purple Heart, a Bronze
Star, a Meritorious Service Medal, and a posthumous promotion to
Sergeant."

On November 6, 2007, the House passed similar legislation, H.R. 2884, by
voice vote.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: S.2516 passed in the Senate by
unanimous consent on March 11, 2008. The following day the bill was
received in the House of Representatives, which took no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO score for S.2516 was not
available at press time. A score for H.R. 2884 stated that the
legislation would authorize less then \$500,000 annually, subject to
appropriation.

**[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.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}**: An earmarks/revenue
benefits statement required under House Rule XXI, Clause 9(a) was not
available at press time.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A House Report citing
constitutional authority was not available at press time. 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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**H.R. 5569---To extend for 5 years the EB-5 regional center pilot
program *(Lofgren, D-CA)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 5569 would extend the fifth
employment-based preference (EB-5) immigrant visa category (EB-5)
regional center pilot program for five years, through FY 2013. The visa
program allows immigrants who seek to invest in a commercial enterprise
that will add at least 10 jobs in the U.S. economy to enter the country.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: The EB-5 visa program was
created in 1990 to encourage commercial investment in the U.S. economy.
The program makes up to 10,000 visas available annually for immigrants
who are investing \$1 million or more into a commercial endeavor in the
U.S. The amount of required investment may be lowered to \$500,000 if
investments are made in rural areas or areas with high unemployment
rates. According to Judiciary [Committee Report
110-698](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr698)),
the program has been traditionally underutilized, with an all-time high
number of 806 investors participating in the program in 2007. Despite
the moderately low participation rate, the committee estimates that the
program has garnered more than \$1 billion in immigrant investments and
produced more than 20,000 jobs over the past several years. CBO
estimates that reauthorizing the EB-5 program would increase revenue
from EB-5 visa fee collection by \$500,000 annually.\
\
**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 5569 was introduced on March
10, 2008, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on
Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International
Law. On March 12, 2008, a subcommittee mark-up was held and the bill was
forwarded to the full committee by voice vote. On April 2, 2008, the
full committee held a mark-up and reported the bill by voice vote.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, H.R. 5569 would
increase revenue from EB-5 visa fee collection by \$500,000 annually.

**[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.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}** According to the
Committee on the Judiciary, in [Committee Report
110-698](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr698)),
"H.R. 5680 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e) or
9(f) of rule XXI."

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Committee on the
Judiciary, in [Committee Report
110-698](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr698)),
cites constitutional authority in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4
(granting Congress the power to "establish an uniform Rule of
Naturalization").

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**H.R. 5938---To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide secret
service protection to former Vice Presidents, and for other purposes
*(Conyers, D-MI)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 5938 would direct the Department of
Homeland Security to supply former Vice Presidents with Secret Service
protection for six months after their departure from office. Secret
Service protection would also be given to a former Vice President's wife
and any children under the age of 16. Under current law, such protection
is not mandatory, but it has been extended legislatively to Vice
Presidents in the past, including Al Gore and Dan Quayle.

H.R. 5938 would allow the Secretary of Homeland Security to extend
Secret Service protection beyond the six month period if they determined
that such protection was necessary.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: According the Committee on the
Judiciary, in [Committee Report
110-696](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr696)),
every former president and their family is granted Secret Service
protection following their term. For Presidents who served prior to
1997, protection is given for their lifetime. In 1994, Congress passed a
law to reduce the period of Secret Service protection for former
Presidents to ten years. President Bush will be the first President to
retire under the new law. The 1994 statute would allow the Secret
Service to continue to provide protection beyond ten years if a
continued threat was determined.

Vice Presidents have not traditionally been granted Secret Service
protection following their service in the White House. However, the last
two former Vice presidents, Al Gore and Dan Quayle, were given
protection until the July following their terms in office. H.R. 5938
would permanently extend this protection to every Vice President,
beginning with the current Vice President, Dick Cheney. CBO estimates
that the bill would cost the Department of Homeland Security roughly \$4
million every time a Vice President left office, subject to
appropriation.\
\
**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 5938 introduced on May 1, 2008,
and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee Crime,
Terrorism, and Homeland Security. On May 6, 2008, a subcommittee mark-up
was held and the bill was forwarded to the full committee by voice vote.
On May 14, 2008, the full committee held a mark-up and reported the bill
by voice vote.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, H.R. 5569 would
authorize approximately \$4 million every time a Vice President left
office, subject to appropriation.

**[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.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}** According to the
Committee on the Judiciary, in [Committee Report
110-696](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr696)),
"H.R. 5680 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e) or
9(f) of rule XXI."

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Committee on the
Judiciary, in [Committee Report
110-696](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr696)),
cites constitutional authority in Article 1, Section 8, but fails to
cite a specific clause. 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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**H.R. 5593---Congressional Review Act Improvement Act**

***(Linda Sanchez, D-CA)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 5593 would amend the Congressional
Review Act to remove a requirement that all agencies submit all copies
of all final rules and reports on final rules to both the House and the
Senate. The bill would establish the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) as the sole recipient of agency rules. The Comptroller General
would be required to make a weekly list of all final agency rules
published in the Federal Register. H.R. 5593 would still require
agencies to submit rules and reports on rules to both the House and the
Senate if the rules were not printed in the Federal Register for
whatever reason. The bill would still allow the Congress to disapprove
of an agency rule as established by the Congressional Review Act.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: The Congressional Review Act,
which was passed as a part of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (aka, the Contract with America Advancement Act of
1996), allows Congress to review every federal regulation and object to
rules, regulations, and guidance from agencies. The Congress is required
to pass a joint resolution to overrule or veto an agency regulation.
According to the Committee on the Judiciary, in [Committee Report
110-700](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr700)),
agencies are required to send any new rules or regulations to both the
House and the Senate for review. In an effort to make the process less
burdensome and more efficient, H.R. 5593 would require rules be sent to
one entity, the GAO, and that the GAO's head must distribute the
information to Congress via the Federal Registry.\
\
**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 5593 introduced on March 11,
2008, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on
Commercial and Administrative Law. On April 24, 2008, a subcommittee
mark-up was held and the bill was forwarded to the full committee by
voice vote. On April 30, 2008, the full committee held a mark-up and
reported the bill by voice vote.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, H.R. 5593 would
have " no significant impact on 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.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}** According to the
Committee on the Judiciary, in [Committee Report
110-700](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr700)),
"H.R. 5680 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e) or
9(f) of rule XXI."

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Committee on the
Judiciary, in [Committee Report
110-700](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr700)),
cites constitutional authority in Article 1, Section 8, but fails to
cite a specific clause. 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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**S. 188---A bill to revise the short title of the Fannie Lou Hamer,
Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and
Amendments Act of 2006 *(Sen. Salazar, D-CO)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: S. 188 would retroactively change the title
of the "Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act
Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006" to the "Lou Hamer, Rosa
Parks, Coretta Scott King, Cesar E. Chavez, Barbara C. Jordan, William
C. Velasquez, and Dr. Hector P. Garcia Voting Rights Act Reauthorization
and Amendments Act of 2006."

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: The Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and
Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act
of 2006 amended the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to modify and extend
provisions regarding election examiners, disfranchising voting
qualifications, bilingual balloting, payment of certain attorney fees in
enforcement proceedings, etc. The bill, H.R. 9, passed in the House on
July 13, 2006, by a vote of
[390-33](http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2006/roll374.xml). On July 31, 2006,
the bill was signed by President Bush and became Public Law No. 109-246.
S. 188 would amend the law to add the names of Cesar E. Chavez, Barbara
C. Jordan, William C. Velasquez, and Dr. Hector P. Garcia to the bill's
short title.

*[Background of Cesar Chavez]{.underline}*: Cesar Estrada Chavez was
born in Yuma, Arizona, in 1927 and worked with his family as a migrating
farm laborer. In 1952, Chavez joined the Community Service Organization,
a Hispanic civil rights organization, where he became active in the
migrant worker labor movement. Ten years later, Chavez founded the
United Farm Workers of America (UFWA), which promoted organized labor
and unionization among migrant workers in the American Southwest. From
1962 until his death in 1993, Chavez worked to increase the size and
power of the UFWA, staging strikes, boycotts, rallies, and marches and
zealously recruiting migrant farmers.

Opinions concerning Chavez's overall historic legacy have been mixed.
Although Chavez is a hero to organized labor and immigrant rights
groups, some argue that he and his UFWA representatives often used
violence and intimidation against farmers or laborers that did not wish
to join the organization.

Former UFWA organizer and associate of Chavez, Joe R. Hicks, testified
against the proposed study and subsequent historic designations before
the Natural Resources Committee on March 29, 2007. Hicks said that,
"while Chavez was laid to rest and eulogized as a man of peace and
nonviolence, almost none of his followers -- those that I had known and
worked with -- has eschewed the use of violence against those who
opposed them and their tactics. It was clear to me that they believed
that Chavez quietly approved of their heavy-handed tactics -- in the
main employed against impoverished agricultural field workers." Hicks
argued that, because there is no consensus concerning Chavez's actual
legacy, the government should not honor him in the same way it has
honored other important Americans.

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}**: Some conservatives may
be concerned that S. 188 would retroactively add Cesar Chavez---a labor
organizer who is accused by some of encouraging violence and
intimidation as tools to organize laborers---to the list of historic
civil rights leaders for whom voting rights legislation was named.\
\
**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: S.2516 passed in the Senate by
unanimous consent on February 15, 2008. The following day the bill was
received in the House of Representatives and referred to the Committee
on the Judiciary, which took no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, S. 188 would have
"no significant impact on 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.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}**: An earmarks/revenue
benefits statement required under House Rule XXI, Clause 9(a) was not
available at press time.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A House Report citing
constitutional authority was not available at press time. 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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**H.Res. \_\_\_---** **Resolution Honoring the Passing of Bo Diddley
(*Conyers, D-MI)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: H. Res. \_\_\_ is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: The text of the resolution was not available
at press time.

**[RSC Bonus Fact]{.underline}**: According to artist's official
Website:

> Born Otha Ellas Bates (later known as Ellas McDaniel), 28 December
> 1928, McComb, Mississippi, USA. After beginning his career as a boxer,
> where he received the sobriquet "Bo Diddley", the singer worked the
> blues clubs of Chicago with a repertoire influenced by Louis Jordan,
> John Lee Hooker and Muddy Waters. In late 1954, he teamed up with
> Billy Boy Arnold and recorded demos of "I'm A Man" and "Bo Diddley".
> Re-recorded at Chess Studios with a backing ensemble comprising Otis
> Spann (piano), Lester Davenport (harmonica), Frank Kirkland (drums)
> and Jerome Green (maracas), the a-side, "Bo Diddley", became an R&B
> hit in 1955. Before long, Diddley's distorted, amplified, custom-made
> guitar, with its rectangular shape and pumping rhythm style became a
> familiar, much-imitated trademark, as did his self-referential songs
> with such titles as "Bo Diddley's A Gunslinger", "Diddley Daddy" and
> "Bo's A Lumberjack". His jive-talking routine with "Say Man" (a US Top
> 20 hit in 1959) continued on "Pretty Thing" and "Hey Good Lookin'",
> which reached the lower regions of the UK charts in 1963. By then,
> Diddley was regarded as something of an R&B legend and found a new
> lease of life courtesy of the UK beat boom. The Pretty Things named
> themselves after one of his songs, while his work was covered by such
> artists as the Rolling Stones, the Animals, Manfred Mann, the Kinks,
> the Yardbirds, Downliners Sect and the Zephyrs. Diddley subsequently
> jammed on albums by Chuck Berry and Muddy Waters and appeared
> infrequently at rock festivals. His classic version of "Who Do You
> Love" became a staple cover for a new generation of US acts ranging
> from Quicksilver Messenger Service to the Doors, Tom Rush and Bob
> Seger, while the UK's Juicy Lucy took the song into the UK Top 20.

[Committee Action]{.underline}: H. Res. \_\_\_ will likely be introduced
on June 9, 2008.

[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}: The text of the resolution was not
available at press time he resolution, but it is likely that he
resolution does not authorize expenditures.\
\
[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}: Sarah Makin; 202-226-0718;
[**sarah.makin@mail.house.gov**](mailto:sarah.makin@mail.house.gov).

**H.Res. 1229---Recognizing the achievements of America\'s high school
valedictorians of the graduating class of 2008, promoting the importance
of encouraging intellectual growth, and rewarding academic excellence of
all American high school students (*Meeks, D-NY)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: H. Res. 1229 is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H. Res. 1229 would express that the House of
Representatives:

-   "honors and recognizes the valedictorians and graduating seniors of
    the class of 2008 for their academic achievements and contributions
    to their communities;

-   "encourages all valedictorians and graduating seniors to further
    their intellectual inquiry and academic studies in universities and
    postsecondary educational institutions; and

-   "supports the continued social engagement of valedictorians and
    graduating seniors, which utilizes their knowledge and skills for
    the betterment of their communities and the social, cultural, and
    economic advancement of the Nation."

The bill lists the following findings:

-   "valedictorians are conferred as the highest academically-ranked
    student in their high school's graduating class;

-   "over 15,000 of our Nation's secondary schools honor their highest
    academically-ranked students with the 'valedictorian' title;

-   "valedictorians have demonstrated consistency in their intellectual
    inquiry, academic discipline, and utilization of teacher mentoring
    throughout their high school careers;

-   "valedictorians serve as peer role models to fellow high school
    students by succeeding academically and contributing to community
    improvement;

-   "valedictorians are charged with the duty of giving a graduation
    speech that reflects upon the intellectual development and community
    involvement of the graduating class and inspires all graduating
    students to further their academic studies and social engagement;

-   "numerous valedictorians and graduating seniors will further their
    intellectual interests and academic studies by enrolling in
    universities and postsecondary educational institutions;

-   "family members, teachers, school administrators, and community
    members have nurtured the intellectual growth and rewarded the
    academic achievements of valedictorians and graduating seniors; and

-   "valedictorians and graduating seniors will become America's future
    civic, business, and political leaders, maintaining our Nation's
    global leadership position and strengthening its economic
    competitiveness."

[Committee Action]{.underline}: H. Res. 1229 was introduced on May 22,
2008 and referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor, which
took no official action.

[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}: The resolution does not authorize
expenditures.\
\
[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}: Sarah Makin; 202-226-0718;
[**sarah.makin@mail.house.gov**](mailto:sarah.makin@mail.house.gov).

**H.Res. 1225---Expressing support for designation of June 2008 as
"National Safety Month" (*Davis, D-IL)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: H. Res. 1225 is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H. Res. 1225 would express that the House of
Representatives:

-   "supports the designation of 'National Safety Month';

-   "recognizes the contributions of the National Safety Council and its
    ongoing commitment to raising awareness about the need for the
    implementation of safe practices in our schools and jobs; and

-   "encourages citizens to observe the 'National Safety Month' with
    appropriate ceremonies and educate themselves about the importance
    of implementing safe practices in our schools and on our jobs to
    prevent unintentional injury and death."

The bill lists the following findings:

-   "after years of decline, the rate of unintentional injuries and
    deaths in the United States has risen to new and unacceptable
    levels;

-   "deaths from motor vehicle collisions, poisonings from unintentional
    overdoses, and falls remain as the three leading causes of
    preventable death in the United States;

-   "the cost of unintentional injuries to Americans exceeds
    \$650,000,000,000 each year and causes great suffering among
    individuals and their families;

-   "the cost of unintentional injuries to workers and their employers
    is \$164,700,000,000 each year, including the value of 120,000,000
    days of lost productivity;

-   "preventing unintentional injury and death requires the cooperation
    of all levels of government, the Nation's employers, and the general
    public;

-   "the National Safety Council, founded in 1913, was congressionally
    chartered in 1953 to lead this Nation in injury prevention through
    safety and health education, training, and advocacy in the United
    States;

-   "the National Safety Council educates the workforce about policies,
    practices, and procedures leading to increased safety, protection,
    and health in business and industry, as well as in schools and
    colleges, on roads and highways, and in homes and communities;

-   "since the summer season is a time of increased rates of preventable
    injuries and death, it is an appropriate time to focus the attention
    of our workforce and community leaders on injury risks and
    preventions by celebrating June 2008 as 'National Safety Month'; and

-   "the National Safety Council in 2008 as part of its public education
    about safety and health will provide this Nation a month-long
    campaign in June with the theme 'Make a Difference'."

[Committee Action]{.underline}: H. Res. 1225 was introduced on May 22,
2008 and referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor, which
took no official action.

[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}: The resolution does not authorize
expenditures.\
\
[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}: Sarah Makin; 202-226-0718;
[**sarah.makin@mail.house.gov**](mailto:sarah.makin@mail.house.gov).

**H.R. 5524---Reconnecting Homeless Youth Act of 2008 *(Yarmouth,
D-KY)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: H. R. 5524 is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the resolution.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 5524 would amend the Runaway and
Homeless Youth Act to revise requirements for services provided under
grants for centers for runaway and homeless youth and their families.
Currently, the Secretary of Health and Human Services makes grants
available to fund youth shelters that provide emergency shelter, food,
clothing, outreach services, and crisis intervention for runaway and
homeless youth. The shelters also offer services to help reunite youth
with their families whenever possible.

The bill authorizes \$150 million for FY 2009 and such sums for FY
2010-2013 for the basic center grant program. The bill also authorizes
\$30 million for FY 2009 and such sums as may be necessary for FY
2010-2013 for the Street Outreach Program (SOP) (Note: The Street
Outreach Program provides education, treatment, counseling, and
referrals for runaway, homeless, and street youth who have been
subjected to or are at risk of being subjected to sexual abuse and
exploitation). **Previous authorization was \$105 million for FY 2004,
and did not contain funding authorization for the SOP.**

The bill limits the length of stay in such a center, unless it is
located in a state or locality with a child or youth-serving-facility
licensure law or regulation that permits a longer length of stay.

The bill also increases the grant allotments for states and specified
U.S. territories.

The bill requires the plan proposed by grant applicants for a runaway
and homeless youth center to include an adequate emergency preparedness
and management plan.

The bill redefines the age limits of homeless youth served under the Act
as "between 13 years of age and 25 years of age."

The bill would require the Secretary to report periodically to Congress
with estimates of the incidence and prevalence of runaway and homeless
individuals between 13 to 25 years of age.

The bill would require the Secretary to: (1) conduct a national homeless
youth awareness campaign; and (2) establish priorities for making grants
for research, evaluation, demonstration, and service projects.

The bill would require the Secretary to: (1) give priority to public
and, as under current law, nonprofit private agencies for sexual abuse
programs; (2) establish performance standards for grant recipients; and
(3) establish appeals procedures regarding amounts or denials of such
grants.

The bill also defines "runaway youth" as an individual under the age of
18 who absents himself or herself from home or place of legal residence
without the permission of parents or legal guardians.

The bill lists the following findings:

-   "services to such young people should be developed and provided
    using a positive youth development approach that ensures the young
    person a sense of---safety and structure; belonging and membership;
    self-worth and social contribution; independence and control over
    one's life; and closeness in interpersonal relationships."

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 5524 was introduced on March 4,
2008, and was referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor
where no further action was taken.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO score for H.R. 5524 was
unavailable, but the bill authorizes \$150 million for FY 2009 and such
sums for FY 2010-2013 for the basic center grant program. The bill also
authorizes \$30 million for FY 2009 and such sums as may be necessary
for FY 2010-2013 for the Street Outreach Program (SOP).

**[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.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}** A Committee Report
citing compliance with rules regarding earmarks, limited tax benefits,
or limited tariff benefits was not available. Such a report is not
required because the bill is being considered under a suspension of the
rules.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A Committee Report citing
constitutional authority was not available.

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Sarah Makin;
<sarah.makin@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-0718.

**H.R. 4926---Josh Miller HEARTS Act *(Sutton, D-OH)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: H. R. 4926 is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 4926 would amend the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 to direct the Secretary of Education to
award matching grants to local educational agencies (LEAs) to:

-   purchase automated external defibrillators (AEDs) for use in their
    schools; and/or

-   provide training to meet the requirement that at least five adult
    employees or volunteers at each school with an AED successfully
    complete training in its use and in cardiopulmonary resuscitation
    (CPR).

The bill also requires LEA grant applicants also to demonstrate that the
AEDs are integrated into the schools' medical emergency response
procedures and that emergency service personnel are notified of their
locations.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 4926 was introduced on December
19, 2007, and was referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor
where no further action was taken.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO score for H.R. 4926 was
unavailable, but the bill authorizes such sums as may be necessary for
FY 2008-2013.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}** Yes, this bill create a new grant program at
the Department of Education.

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

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}** A Committee Report
citing compliance with rules regarding earmarks, limited tax benefits,
or limited tariff benefits was not available. Such a report is not
required because the bill is being considered under a suspension of the
rules.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A Committee Report citing
constitutional authority was not available.

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Sarah Makin;
<sarah.makin@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-0718.

**H.Res. 1243---Recognizing the immeasurable contributions of fathers in
the healthy development of children, supporting responsible fatherhood,
and encouraging greater involvement of fathers in the lives of their
children, especially on Father's Day (Sullivan, R-OK)**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: H. Res. 1243 is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H. Res. 1243 would express that the House of
Representatives

-   "commends the millions of fathers who serve as wonderful, caring
    parents for their children;

-   "calls on fathers across the United States to use Father's Day to
    reconnect and rededicate themselves to their children's lives, to
    spend Father's Day with their children, and to express their love
    and support for their children;

-   "urges men to understand the level of responsibility fathering a
    child requires, especially in the encouragement of the moral,
    academic, and spiritual development of children; and

-   "encourages active involvement of fathers in the rearing and
    development of their children, including the devotion of time,
    energy, and resources."

The bill lists the following findings:

-   "fathers factor significantly in the lives of children;

-   "fathers play an important role in teaching their children life
    lessons and preparing them to succeed in school and in life;

-   "children with involved fathers are more likely to do well in
    school, have a better sense of well-being, and have fewer behavioral
    problems;

-   "supportive fathers promote the positive physical, social,
    emotional, and mental development of children;

-   "promoting responsible fatherhood can help increase the chances that
    children will grow up with two caring parents;

-   "when fathers are actively involved in the upbringing of children,
    the children demonstrate greater self-control and a greater ability
    to take initiative;

-   "responsible fatherhood can help reduce child poverty;

-   "responsible fatherhood strengthens families and communities; and

-   "Father's Day is the third Sunday in June."

[Committee Action]{.underline}: H. Res. 1243 was introduced on June 5,
2008 and referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor, which
took no official action.

[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}: The resolution does not authorize
expenditures.\
\
[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}: Sarah Makin; 202-226-0718;
[**sarah.makin@mail.house.gov**](mailto:sarah.makin@mail.house.gov).

**H.Res. 127---Recognizing and celebrating the 50th anniversary of the
entry of Alaska in the Union as the 49th State (Young, R-AK)**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: H. Res. 127 is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H. Res. 127 would express that the House of
Representatives recognizes and celebrates the 50th anniversary of the
entry of Alaska into the Union as the 49th State.

The bill lists the following findings:

-   "July 7, 2008, marks the 50th anniversary of the enactment of the
    Alaska Statehood Act as approved by the United States Congress and
    signed by President Dwight D. Eisenhower;

-   "the Alaska Statehood Act authorized the entry of Alaska into the
    Union on January 3, 1959;

-   "the land once known as 'Seward\'s Folly' is now regarded as
    critical to the strategic defense of the United States and important
    to our national and economic security;

-   "the people of Alaska remain committed to the preservation and
    protection of the Union, with among the highest rates of veterans
    and residents in active military service of any State in the Nation;

-   "Alaska is the northernmost, westernmost, and easternmost State of
    the Union, encompassing an area one-fifth the size of the United
    States;

-   "the State of Alaska has an abundance of natural resources vital to
    the Nation;

-   "Alaska currently provides over 16 percent of the daily crude oil
    production in the United States and has 44 percent of the
    undiscovered oil resources and 36 percent of undiscovered
    conventional gas in the United States;

-   "Alaska's 34,000 miles of shoreline form a gateway to one of the
    world's greatest fisheries, providing over 60 percent of the
    country\'s commercial seafood harvest;

-   "over 230 million acres of Alaska are set aside in national parks,
    wildlife refuges, national forests, and other conservation units for
    the benefit of the entire country;

-   "over 58 million acres are designated wilderness in Alaska,
    representing 55 percent of the wilderness areas in the United
    States;

-   "Alaska Natives, the State's first people, are an integral part of
    Alaska's history, and preserving the culture and heritage of
    Alaska's Native people is of primary importance;

-   "the passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act in 1971
    signaled a new era of economic opportunity for Alaska Natives;

-   "Alaska's Native people have made major contributions to the
    vitality and success of Alaska as a State;

-   "the people of Alaska represent the pioneering spirit that built
    this great Nation and contribute to our cultural and ethnic
    diversity; and

-   "the golden anniversary, on January 3, 2009, provides an occasion to
    honor Alaska's entry into the Union."

[Committee Action]{.underline}: H. Res. 127 was introduced on February
5, 2007 and referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform, which held a mark-up of the bill on April 18, 2008 and reported
the bill by voice vote.

[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}: The resolution does not authorize
expenditures.\
\
[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}: Sarah Makin; 202-226-0718;
[**sarah.makin@mail.house.gov**](mailto:sarah.makin@mail.house.gov).

**H.R. 5683---Government Accountability Office Act of 2008**

***(Davis, D-IL)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 5683 would amend current laws regarding
the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to provide retroactive pay
increases to certain employees, increase the agency's investigative
authority, and provide reimbursements from agencies when the GAO
conducts audits. The particular provisions in the bill are listed below.

***Future Annual Pay Adjustments***

-   H.R. 5683 would require the GAO to guarantee that all GAO employees
    who perform at a level that "meets expectations" receive an annual
    pay increase equal to the annual adjustment for General Schedule
    (GS) employees in the same locality.

***Pay Adjustments for Previous Years***

-   The bill would require that GAO retroactively reimburse some 300
    employees who met the expectations of the job but were not given pay
    increases in 2006 and/or 2007. The payment must be given as a lump
    sum of the difference of what the employee earned over the period
    and what they would have earned with the annual GS increase.

***Payment for Performance-Based Compensation***

-   The bill would require the GAO to retroactively reimburse employees
    who met the expectations of the job but were not given pay increases
    in 2006 and/or 2007 for any performance-based compensation that was
    limited by their rate of pay.

***Reimbursement of Audit Costs***

-   This section would provide GAO the authority to demand reimbursement
    from federal agencies for any financial statement audits that GAO
    initiates.  This provision has been opposed by the Office of
    Management and Budget in the past, since GAO's (and, indirectly
    Congress') ability to initiate audits would no longer be constrained
    by GAO's budgetary limitations but instead would intrude on an
    Executive Branch agency's authority and ability to administer that
    agency's own appropriations. 

***Financial Disclosure***

-   The bill would allow alter requirements for GAO employees regarding
    financial disclosure requirements. Under current law GAO employees
    are required to file financial disclosure forms if there basic pay
    is more than 120% of the basic GS-15 step-1 rate (\$95,390 in 2008).
    H.R. 5683 would allow GAO employees to subtract additional locality
    pay from the financial disclosure calculation.

***Increased Highest Pay Rate***

-   H.R. 5683 increases the highest pay rate for GAO employees from
    GS-15 step 10 (\$124,010), to Executive Level III (\$158,500).

***Treatment of Pay for Retirement***

-   Finally, H.R. 5683 would provide that when determining a GAO
    employee's salary for the purpose of computing their federal
    retirement benefits, the calculation must include any non-permanent
    merit bonuses. Under current law, a federal employee's retirement
    benefits are based on an average salary of the three highest-paid
    years of the employee's career, but the calculation does not
    consider bonuses as income. The application of bonuses would only
    apply to GAO employees and no other federal workers.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: According to [House Report
110-671](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr671)),
many of H.R. 5683's provisions were first considered during hearings for
the GAO Reform Act of 2004. During consideration of the bill, then
Comptroller General (CG) David Walker reported that the GAO was in the
process of implementing across-the-board annual pay increases for
employees performing a t a satisfactory level. According to the report,
the CG did not raise pay across-the-board for every employee who met
minimum expectations in 2006 and 2007. In testimony before the House and
Senate Subcommittees on the Federal Workforce, Mr. Walker stated that a
study had determined that employees who did not receive annual pay
increases had been paid above the market rate, and therefore did not
need a pay increase to maintain a standard of living. Members of the
House Subcommittee, including the bill's sponsor, disputed the validity
of the report, and the ongoing investigations resulted in H.R. 5683. The
bill's purpose, among other things, is to guarantee annual
across-the-board pay increases to every GAO employee who meets minimum
performance standards.

Many of the additional provisions in H.R. 5683 are highly controversial.
The bill's requirement that agencies pay for GAO investigations have
brought up certain constitutional concerns regarding agency spending
authority. In addition, there have been concerns raised regarding
retroactive payments and the Comptroller General's increased access to
secure information. Because of these and other concerns, the
Administration had indicated that it was very likely to issue a veto
threat against H.R. 5683. However, certain provisions from the reported
version of the bill have since been removed. Though the Administration
is still reported to have problems with portions of the bill, it is now
unlikely that a veto threat will be issued.

The following is a list of provisions that were removed from the
reported version of H.R. 5683:

***Administration of Oaths***

-   The reported version of H.R. 5683 would have authorized the GAO,
    while conducting investigations and audits, to administer oaths and
    interview agency employees under oath.

***Increased Access to Information***

-   The reported version of H.R. 5683 would have increased the GAO's
    ability to gain access to certain high-level information. The bill
    would have required the Department of Health and Human Services to
    give the GAO certain information with regard to Medicare Party D.
    The bill would have also required that the Food and Drug
    Administration disclose any "trade secret" information that the GAO
    requests.

***Comptroller General Reports***

-   The bill would have required the CG to make annual reports to
    Congress regarding each agency's cooperation with the GAO.
    Specifically, the CG would have been required to detail each
    agency's willingness and helpfulness to provide personnel for
    interviews, written responses to questions, access to records and
    submitting to oaths.

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}**: Some conservatives may
have some concerns with provisions that were not removed from H.R. 5683,
including:

-   **[Reimbursements]{.underline}**: Some conservatives may be
    concerned that H.R. 5683 would provide the GAO authority to demand
    reimbursement from federal agencies for any financial statement
    audits that GAO initiates.  Some conservatives may be concerned that
    this would establish a precedent with constitutional implications,
    because GAO's ability to initiate audits would no longer be
    constrained by GAO's budgetary limitations. As a result the GAO
    could intrude on an executive branch agency's authority and ability
    to administer its own appropriations.

-   **[Retroactive Payment]{.underline}**: Some conservatives may be
    concerned that H.R. 5683 would provide an unfunded retirement
    liability by providing certain GAO employees with retroactive
    payments that must be used in calculating retirement benefits
    without requiring the related retirement contributions based on
    these payments.  In addition, some conservatives may be concerned
    that these payments would be made despite that Comptroller General's
    assertion that those employees receiving retroactive payment under
    this act had already been paid above the market rate, and therefore
    did not need a pay increase to maintain a standard of living.

-   **[Treatment of Pay for Retirement]{.underline}**: Some
    conservatives may be concerned that H.R. 5683 would include any
    non-permanent merit bonuses when determining a GAO employee's salary
    for the purpose of computing their federal retirement benefits. Some
    conservatives may be concerned that this provision would increase
    direct spending by including bonuses in federal employee's benefits
    determinations (which are already calculated more generously than
    the private sector).

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 5683 was introduced on April 2,
2008, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources and the
Oversight and Government Reform. On September May 1, 2008, the committee
held a markup and reported the bill, as amended, by voice vote.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, H.R. 5683 would
authorize \$3 million in FY 2009 and \$11 million over the FY 2009---FY
2013 period.

**[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.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}** According to the
Committee on Agriculture, in [House Report
110-671](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr671)http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr671)),
"H.R. 5683 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e) or
9(f) of rule XXI."

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Committee on
Agriculture, in [House Report
110-671](http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr671)http://www.congress.gov/cgi-lis/cpquery/R?cp110:FLD010:@1(hr671)),
cites constitutional authority in Article I, Section 8, Clause 18, (the
"necessary and proper" clause).

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**H.R. 5778---District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority
Independence Preservation Act *(Van Hollen, D-MD)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: H. R. 5778 is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 5778 would amend the District of
Columbia Home Rule Act to declare that the Chief Financial Officer of
the District of Columbia does not have authority over the District of
Columbia Water and Sewer Authority's personnel.

The bill requires the financial management, personnel, and procurement
functions and responsibilities of the District of Columbia Water and
Sewer Authority to be: (1) established exclusively pursuant to rules and
regulations adopted by its Board of Directors; and (2) consistent with
the Water and Sewer Authority Establishment and Department of Public
Works Reorganization Act of 1996, as in effect as of the enactment of
this Act.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 5778 was introduced on April
10, 2008, and was referred to the House Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform where no further action was taken.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO score for H.R. 5778 is
unavailable, but the bill does not authorize any funds.

**[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.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}** A Committee Report
citing compliance with rules regarding earmarks, limited tax benefits,
or limited tariff benefits was not available. Such a report is not
required because the bill is being considered under a suspension of the
rules.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A Committee Report citing
constitutional authority was not available.

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Sarah Makin;
<sarah.makin@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-0718.

**S. 1245---A bill to reform mutual aid agreements for the National
Capital Region *(Sen. Cardin, D-MD)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: S. 1245 is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, June 9, 2008, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: S. 1245 would amend provisions of the
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 relating to the
implementation of a mutual aid agreement for the National Capital Region
in the event of a regional or national emergency to:

-   remove the requirement that agents and volunteers acting on behalf
    of a regional organization or entity be committed in a mutual aid
    agreement in order to prepare for or respond to such an emergency;
    and

-   expand the list of organizations or entities authorized to enter
    into and be covered by such an agreement to include any governmental
    agency, authority, or institution within the Region.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: S. 1245 was introduced on April 26,
2007, and was referred to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs where the bill was reported favorably without
amendment on August 1, 2007.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO score for S. 1245 is
unavailable, but the bill does not authorize any funds.

**[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.

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}** A Committee Report
citing compliance with rules regarding earmarks, limited tax benefits,
or limited tariff benefits was not available. Such a report is not
required because the bill is being considered under a suspension of the
rules.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A Committee Report citing
constitutional authority was not available.

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Sarah Makin;
<sarah.makin@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-0718.