![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.489583333333333in"
height="1.15625in"}**Legislative
Bulletin...........................................April 17, 2007**

> **Contents:**
>
> **H.R. 886 ---** The Wild Sky Wilderness Act of 2007
>
> **H.Res. 217 ---** Expressing the sense of the House of
> Representatives concerning the 50th anniversary of Celilo Falls
>
> **H.R.609** --- To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater
> Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
> participate in the Central Texas Water Recycling and Reuse Project,
> and for other purposes
>
> **H.R. 768** --- To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater
> Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
> participate in the Los Angeles County Water Supply Augmentation
> Demonstration Project, and for other purposes
>
> **H.R. 309** --- To direct the Secretary of the Interior to establish
> a demonstration program to facilitate landscape restoration programs
> within certain units of the National Park System established by law to
> preserve and interpret resources associated with American history, and
> for other purposes
>
> **H.R. 815 ---** To provide for the conveyance of certain land in
> Clark County, Nevada, for use by the Nevada National Guard

**H.R. 865 ---** Copper Valley Native Allotment Resolution Act of 2007

**H.R. 1677**---Taxpayer Protection Act

> **H. Res. 196 ---** Supporting the goals and ideals of World Water Day
>
> **H.Con.Res. 100 ---** Condemning the recent violent actions of the
> Government of Zimbabwe against peaceful opposition party activists and
> members of civil society
>
> **H.R. 1681** --- American National Red Cross Governance Modernization
> Act of 2007
>
> **H.Res. 293 ---** Supporting the goals and ideals highlighted through
> National Volunteer Week
>
> **H.R. 1515 ---** To amend the Housing and Community Development Act
> of 1974 to treat certain communities as metropolitan cities for
> purposes of the community development block grant program

**H.R. 886 ---The Wild Sky Wilderness Act of 2007**

***(Larsen, D-WA)***

**[Order of Business:]{.underline}** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, April 17, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary:]{.underline}** H.R. 886 would designate 106,000 acres in the
state of Washington as the Wild Sky Wilderness, which would be added to
the National Wilderness Preservation System.

The bill would direct the Secretary of Agriculture to create a system of
*hiking trails* in the Wild Sky Wilderness. H.R. 886 authorizes the use
of a helicopter to construct and maintain a telecommunication repeater
site to improve safety, health and emergency services in the area. H.R.
886 authorizes the Secretary to acquire land within the Wild Sky
Wilderness are by means of purchase, donation or exchange with
preference given to lands identified on a map as "priority acquisition
lands."

The legislation would require the Secretary of Agriculture to accept
lands within the Snoqualmie National Forest from the Chelan County
Public Utility in return for a permanent easement and helicopter access
to maintain an existing telemetry site to monitor snow pack.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: According to a letter
including dissenting views on H.R. 886, some of the land designated as
wilderness by H.R. 886 is not suitable. The letter states, "In 2003,
however, the U.S. Forest Service testified that 90,000 acres of the
proposed area would be appropriate for wilderness. It also concluded
that 16,000 acres were not well-suited for wilderness because it
included previously harvested and roaded areas, private land (some with
patented mining claims that would be acquired by the Forest Service
under HR 866), and vital roads."

The letter goes on to say, "The Committee at that time had also seen a
copy of a petition against Wild Sky with close to 2,000 signatures from
people living in the affected communities. Due to the restrictions of
designated wilderness there are wildfire, land slide, and flood
protection measures that would no longer be available to at-risk
communities."

To learn more about the National Wilderness Preservation System, please
view this site: [www.wilderness.net](http://www.wilderness.net/).

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}**: Some conservatives
might be concerned that wilderness designations restrict the use of
private property.

**[Committee:]{.underline}** H.R. 886 was introduced on February 7,
2007, and was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, which held
a mark-up and reported the bill by voice vote on March 7, 2007.

**[Cost to Taxpayers:]{.underline}** According to CBO enacting H.R. 886
would authorize \$7 million in FY 2008, and \$19 million over five
years.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of 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 not available. However, 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. 217 --- Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives
concerning the 50th anniversary of Celilo Falls *(Wu, D-OR)***

**[Order of Business:]{.underline}** The resolution scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, April 17, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.Res. 217 would resolve that "the House of
Representatives recognizes the 50th anniversary of the flooding of
Celilo Falls and the change of life it imposed upon tribal peoples."

[**Additional Information**:]{.underline} According to the bill, Celilo
Falls, along the Columbia River between Oregon and Washington, was a
historic fishing and trading hub for a variety of Indian tribes in the
region. In 1957, the Dalles Damn was constructed to provide electricity
and irrigation to the area. After the damn was built, the Celilo Falls
basin flooded, changing the landscape of the valley.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.Res. 217 was introduced on March
6, 2007, and referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources, and
then referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power, which took no
official action.

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

[**Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of
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 not available. However, 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. 609 --- To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the Central Texas Water Recycling and Reuse Project, and for other purposes *(Edwards, D-TX)*

## [Order of Business:]{.underline} The bill is scheduled for consideration on Tuesday, April 17, 2007, under a motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill. 

## [Summary]{.underline}: H.R. 609 would amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to work with the city of Waco and other communities in the Central Texas Water Recycling and Reuse Project to create permanent facilities to "reclaim and recycle" water in McLennan County, Texas. The bill would limit the federal share of the costs to 25 percent, and would prohibit the Secretary from funding maintenance. The bill would terminate the Secretary's authority in 10 years. 

## [Additional Information]{.underline}: According to Larry Groth, Waco city manager, "The city has a tremendous cost we are forced to carry with treatment. Representative Edwards' legislation gives us the option of avoiding some of that cost by taking the pressure off our treatment plant. This bill is a win-win because it is not only the right thing to do for the environment; it's good for businesses that buy the recycled water from us at a cheaper cost." 

### However, during the 109^th^ Congress, Jack Garner (acting Deputy Commissioner and Deputy Director of Operations Bureau of Reclamation at the time) testified against identical legislation offered by Rep. Edwards. According to Garner, "The Department opposes authorizing additional construction projects prior to completion of feasibility studies to determine whether these particular projects warrant Federal funding. The city of Waco has developed conceptual plans for this project. However, Reclamation has not reviewed this proposal, nor conducted an appraisal study. The Department also opposes enactment of this legislation because authorizing new construction projects is likely to further burden on Reclamation's already strained budget." 

(Source: <http://edwards.house.gov/html/release.cfm?id=904>;
<http://www.usbr.gov/newsroom/testimony/detail.cfm?RecordID=347>)

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 609 was introduced on January
22, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, which took
no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO estimate for H.R. 609 is not
currently available. However, CBO estimated that a similar bill, H.R.
3418, introduced in the 109^th^ Congress, would have authorized \$6
million over the 2007-2012 period.

**[Does this Bill Expand the Size and Scope of
Government]{.underline}**: The bill authorizes federal funds for a
*local* water recycling project.

**[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 not available. However, 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. 786 --- To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the Los Angeles County Water Supply Augmentation Demonstration Project, and for other purposes *(Sanchez, D-CA)*

## [Order of Business:]{.underline} The bill is scheduled for consideration on Tuesday, April 17, 2007, under a motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill. 

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.R. 786 would authorize the Secretary of
Interior to participate in a water augmentation **demonstration
project** in cooperation with the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers
Watershed Council. The project's aim would be to:

-   "demonstrate the potential for infiltration of stormwater runoff to
    recharge groundwater by retrofitting sites in the Los Angeles area
    with features designed to reflect state-of-the-art best management
    practices for water conservation, pollution reduction and treatment,
    and habitat restoration; and

-   "assess the potential new water supply yield based on increased
    infiltration and the value of the new water."

The bill provides that the federal share of the project costs could not
exceed 25 percent of the total cost of the project. The bill also
includes a sunset provision, terminating authority of the Secretary ten
years after the date of enactment.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}:** According to the Los Angeles
and San Gabriel Rivers Watershed, the Los Angeles basin imports
two-thirds of its water supply from outside sources that are becoming
more and more restricted. The augmentation project seeks to measure the
feasibility of using stormwater runoff to replace and recharge
groundwater reservoirs.

(Source: <http://www.lasgrwc.org/WAS.htm>)

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}:** **Some conservatives
may be concerned that this legislation creates a new demonstration
project, and does not include a CBO score to determine the likely cost
to the taxpayers.**

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 786 was introduced on January
22, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, which took
no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO score was not available at
press time.

**[Does this Bill Expand the Size and Scope of
Government]{.underline}**: The bill authorizes federal funds for a
*local* water augmentation demonstration project.

**[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 not available. However, 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. 309 --- To direct the Secretary of the Interior to establish a demonstration program to facilitate landscape restoration programs within certain units of the National Park System established by law to preserve and interpret resources associated with American history, and for other purposes (Pearce, R-NM)

## [Order of Business:]{.underline} The bill is scheduled for consideration on Tuesday, April 17, 2007, under a motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill. 

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.R. 309 would direct the Secretary of the
Interior to **authorize a demonstration program** in 24 National Park
System parks. Receipts from timber sales in those units would be
retained for an approved restoration plan within the park.

The legislation would permit each of the 24 existing National
Battlefields, National Battlefield Parks, and National Battlefield Sites
to participate, as long as they have a general management plan, cultural
landscape plan, or another resource management plan that is approved by
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.

Each park selected to participate in the program will retain receipts
from the sale of any timber and only use the receipt for landscape
restoration, imperative services, eradication of disease, insects or
invasive species, and fuel load reduction.

H.R. 309 would also direct the Secretary to submit a report a specific
timeline for timber removal in all participating units. The authority
granted to the Secretary would expire in four years.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}:** To learn more about the
National Park System please view this site: <http://www.nps.gov/>.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 309 was introduced on January
5, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources. On February
7, 2007, it was referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests,
and Public Lands, where it was discharged on March 7, 2007. The same
day, the bill was marked-up in the Committee on Natural Resources and
reported to the House by a voice vote.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to the CBO, H.R. 309
would "increase direct spending by negligible amounts," likely less than
\$20,000 in FY 2008, and \$100,000 over the FY 2008-2012 period.

**[Does this Bill Expand the Size and Scope of
Government]{.underline}**: The bill creates a new demonstration program
through the Nation Park System.

**[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 not available. However, 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. 815 --- To provide for the conveyance of certain land in Clark
County, Nevada, for use by the Nevada National Guard (Porter R-NV)**

**[Order of Business:]{.underline}** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, April 17, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 815 would allow the conveyance of 35 to
50 acres of land from Clark County, Nevada, to the Division of State
Lands, to be used by the Nevada National Guard.

[**Additional Information**:]{.underline} According to a Committee
Report for H.R. 4382, a similar bill introduced in the 109^th^ Congress,
the state of Nevada would like to build a National Guard facility (the
Southern Nevada Readiness Center), possibly for the new Weapons of Mass
Destruction Civil Support Team, and need roughly 35 to 50 acres to do
so. This legislation would allow the conveyance of the land for free.
H.R. 4382 passed the House in the 109^th^ Congress by voice vote on
September 26, 2006.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 815 was introduced on February
5, 2007, and referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. On
March 5, 2007, the resolution was referred to the Subcommittee on
National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, which took no further action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO score for H.R. 815 is not
available. However, a CBO estimate for H.R. 4382, a similar bill
introduced in the 109^th^ Congress, concluded that implementation of the
bill would have no significant effect the federal budget.

[**Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of
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 not available. However, 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. 865 --- Copper Valley Native Allotment Resolution Act of 2007**

**(Young, R-AK)**

## [Order of Business]{.underline}: The bill is scheduled for consideration on Tuesday, April 17, 2007, under a motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill. 

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 865 would grant the Copper Valley
Electric Association rights-of-way for electric transmission lines
across 14 specific Alaskan Native land allotments. The legislation would
not apply to any prior or current right-of-way agreements between Ahtna
Inc. and the Cooper Valley Electric Association.

The bill would direct the Secretary of Interior to appraise the value of
the rights-of-way and to compensate any owner of an Alaska Native
allotment accordingly. H.R. 865 would authorize the appropriation of
"such sums" to carry out this Act.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: The Copper Valley Electric
Association is a rural nonprofit electric cooperative serving about
4,000 customers in Alaska's Copper Valley Basin. Copper Valley has
received rights-of-way to construct and maintain electric lines in the
area since 1958. Some of the rights-of-way intersect with Alaska Native
land allotments that have been titled to Native Alaskans under the
management of the BIA. Due to complicated land claims, some of the
allotment owners have disputed the validity of the Copper Valley
Electric Associations' rights-of-way. A 2006 [GAO
report](http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d061107thigh.pdf) on the subject
identifies 14 cases in which allotment owners assert that Copper
Valley's electrical lines unlawfully trespass on their property.

According to the sponsor's office, H.R. 865 is modeled after a
legislative alternative proposed in the GAO report to amicably settle
the dispute.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 865 was introduced on February
6, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, which held
a mark-up and reported the bill by voice vote on March 7, 2007.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: CBO estimates that implementing
H.R. 865 "would increase Bureau of Land Managements administrative costs
by less than \$500,000. In addition, CBO estimates that compensation
paid to land holders could increase direct spending by \$150,000."

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

**[Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government or
Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}** According to CBO, H.R. 865 would
impose a private-sector mandate on certain owners of Native allotments
in Alaska.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report citing
constitutional authority is not available. However, 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. 1677---Taxpayer Protection Act (*Rangel, D-NY*)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Tuesday, April 17^th^, under a motion to suspend the rules
and pass the bill.

**[NOTE]{.underline}**: This bill has been amended since committee
consideration in order to add a revenue increase to avoid a theoretical
PAYGO violation (technically a bill moving under suspension of the rules
is not subject to a PAYGO point of order). The summary below reflects
the amended version.

**[Summary (as amended)]{.underline}**: H.R. 1677 would adjust a variety
of tax laws, as follows:

-   [Family Business Tax Simplification]{.underline}. *(Note: This
    provision has passed the House twice this year already, as part of
    H.R. 976 and H.R. 1591.)* This provision would allow a qualified
    joint venture whose only members are a husband and wife filing a
    joint return to not be treated as a partnership for tax purposes (as
    they currently are required to do). A qualified joint venture is a
    joint venture involving the conduct of a trade or business, if the
    only members of the joint venture are a husband and wife, both
    spouses materially participate in the trade or business, and both
    spouses elect to have the provision apply. Income, gains, losses,
    deductions, and credits would be divided between the spouses
    according to their respective venture interests.  Each spouse would
    then account for his or her share on the appropriate form.
    **Negligible savings to taxpayers.**

-   [Notification of Suspected Identity Theft]{.underline}. This
    provision would direct the Secretary of the Treasury, if (in the
    course of an investigation relating to tax fraud, false statements,
    fraudulent tax returns, or other fraudulent tax-related documents)
    he believes that there may have been unauthorized use of the
    identity of a taxpayer or his dependents, to notify the taxpayer
    ("as soon as practicable and without jeopardizing such
    investigation"). The Secretary would also have to notify the
    taxpayer of any criminal charge that was the result of the
    investigation. In current law, information gathered by the IRS in
    connection with a tax-fraud investigation is subject to
    confidentiality restrictions. **No revenue effect.**

-   [Return of Wrongly Seized Property]{.underline}. This provision
    would extend, from nine months to two years, the period for:

> \--the IRS to return money and the proceeds from the sale of property
> that has been wrongfully levied; and
>
> \--the wronged taxpayer to bring a civil action for wrongful levy.

**Negligible savings to taxpayers.**

-   [Wrongful Levy on Individual Retirement Accounts]{.underline}. This
    provision would allow an individual to recontribute to an Individual
    Retirement Account the amounts withdrawn pursuant to a wrongful or
    premature IRS levy and returned by the IRS (plus interest) within 60
    days of receipt by the individual, regardless of the current-law
    limits on IRA contributions and rollovers. Interest paid under this
    provision would be excludable from gross income for tax purposes,
    once deposited in an IRA, and the returned amounts would not yield
    any new income tax (if deposited in an IRA). **Negligible savings to
    taxpayers.**

-   [IRS Unclaimed Refunds]{.underline}. This provision would allow the
    IRS to use any means of "mass communication," to notify taxpayers of
    undelivered refunds. In current law, when the IRS is unable to find
    a taxpayer due a tax refund, the IRS can use "the press or other
    media" to notify the taxpayer of the refund. The IRS has interpreted
    this definition to exclude the Internet. H.R. 1677 would clarify
    that use of the Internet s permissible for such notification. **No
    revenue effect.**

-   [IRS Debt Indicators for Predatory Loans]{.underline}. This
    provision would prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury from
    providing a debt indicator to any person with respect to any refund
    anticipation loan when the Secretary determines that the business
    practices of such person involve refund anticipation loans and
    related charges and fees that are "predatory" (not defined in the
    bill). In other words, this provision would seek to make it harder
    for so-called predatory lenders to reduce their risk in making
    refund anticipation loans. A "debt indicator" is defined in the bill
    as a notification provided to a tax practitioner or financial
    institution that a taxpayer's refund will be offset to repay debts
    for delinquent federal or state taxes, student loans, child support,
    or other federal agency debt. A "refund anticipation loan" is
    defined in the bill as a "loan of money or any other thing of value
    to a taxpayer secured by the taxpayer's anticipated receipt of a
    federal tax refund." **No revenue effect.**

-   [Misuse of Treasury Names and Symbols]{.underline}. This provision
    would clarify that any electronic mass communication (including
    "phishing," misleading domain names, etc.) that could reasonably be
    interpreted as falsely conveying a connection to, or approval by,
    the Treasury Department (or any of its parts), are subject to the
    current-law civil penalty of \$25,000 per violation and criminal
    penalty of \$50,000 per violation, presently applicable to
    broadcasts and telecasts. The provision would also clarify that the
    use of the words, abbreviations, titles, letters, symbols, or
    emblems associated with the Department of the Treasury (or any of
    its parts) [in an Internet domain name]{.underline} is covered by
    the current-law prohibition against such misuse in general.
    (Disclaimers that the private entity is not affiliated with the IRS
    do **[not]{.underline}** relieve such entities from liability under
    this provision.) **No revenue effect.**

-   [Earned Income Tax Credit Notification]{.underline}. This provision
    would direct the IRS to expand its annual notice requirements
    relating to potential eligibility for the Earned Income Tax Credit
    (EITC)---and its possible refundability---to all potentially
    eligible taxpayers ("to the extend possible"), regardless of whether
    they have filed a tax return for the applicable tax year, and as
    long as time limitation for claiming the credit has not expired
    (three years from the time the relevant tax return was filed, two
    years from the time the related tax was paid, or, if no tax return
    was filed by the taxpayer, then two years after the tax was paid).
    Such notices would have to be in writing and mailed to the
    taxpayer's last known address. **Less than \$500,000 of savings to
    taxpayers a year.**

> In current law, low-income taxpayers can be eligible for the
> refundable EITC, based primarily on the number of children in the
> taxpayer's family, adjusted gross income, and earned income. The EITC
> generally equals a specified percentage of earned income up to a
> maximum dollar amount (over a certain income range and diminishing to
> zero over a specified phase-out range). For more on the EITC, go to
> this webpage:
> <http://www.irs.gov/individuals/article/0,,id=96456,00.html>.

-   [Real Estate Dispositions]{.underline}. This provision would amend
    reporting requirements on dispositions of U.S. real estate. The
    Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) reports that when foreign citizens
    sell their holdings of U.S. real estate, they are subject to income
    tax withholding under the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax
    Act of 1980 (FIRPTA). To avoid such withholding (by the buyer for
    remittance to the U.S. Treasury), the seller has to prove that he or
    she is a U.S. citizen (i.e. file a "nonforeign affidavit"). H.R.
    1677 would give sellers the option to furnish this affidavit of U.S.
    citizenship to an intermediary (a "qualified substitute"), such as
    an attorney or title company. The intermediary would have to inform
    the buyer if the affidavit is known to be false (and would be liable
    for any required withholding if such notice is not given to the
    buyer). JCT estimates that this provision would "reduce compliance
    with the tax laws." **Estimated revenue loss of less than \$500,000
    in FY2007, \$7 million over the FY2007-FY2012 period, and \$17
    million over the FY2007-FY2017 period.**

-   [Prisoners' Fraudulent Returns]{.underline}. This provision would
    authorize the IRS, from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2010,
    to disclose an individual's tax return (or any information from it)
    to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, if the IRS believes that an
    incarcerated individual may have filed (or facilitated the filing
    of) a fraudulent tax return---and only for purposes of, and to the
    extent necessary, in taking administrative actions to address
    possible violations of prison rules (and/or to prevent the filing of
    fraudulent returns). The Bureau could not disclose such information
    to anyone outside the Bureau. **Estimated revenue increase of \$1
    million over the FY2009-FY2011 period, with no revenue impact after
    FY2011.**

-   [Penalty Increase for Bad Checks and Money Orders]{.underline}. This
    provision would increase revenue by increasing the fee on sending
    checks and money orders to the IRS that are "not duly paid."
    Currently, the fee for providing a bad check or money order to the
    IRS is 2% of the amount of such check, except that if the amount of
    such check is less than \$750, the penalty is \$15 or the amount of
    such check, whichever is the lesser. This provision of H.R. 1677
    would raise the threshold for the lesser fee from \$750 to \$1,250
    and would raise the \$15 figure to \$25. **Estimated revenue
    increase of \$2 million in FY2007, \$5 million over the
    FY2007-FY2011 period, and \$6 million over the FY2007-FY2016
    period.**

**[RSC Bonus Fact]{.underline}**: According to the National Center for
Policy Analysis and the Tax Foundation, the combination of EITC and the
child tax credit offsets 100% of the income tax liability for almost all
families with incomes below \$30,000. Because of refundability, 100% of
the payroll tax is also offset for those with incomes below \$20,000.
Those with earnings below \$10,000 pay no income taxes and get a check
from the government for 2.6 times their payroll tax liability.
<http://www.ncpa.org/edo/bb/2003/bb061603.html>.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: On March 26, 2007, the bill was
referred to the Ways & Means Committee, which, on March 28^th^, marked
it up and ordered it reported to the full House by voice vote.

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}**: Some conservatives may
be concerned at the bill's expansion of the IRS' outreach effort on the
Earned Income Tax Credit. In the past, conservatives have expressed
concerns about the notion of IRS as tax advisor and about the EITC
itself (because of its refundability and its ability to turn taxpayers
into benefit recipients). Additionally, some conservatives may be
concerned about the private-sector mandate on Internet domain names (see
below).

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: CBO and the Joint Committee on
Taxation estimate that this legislation would increase revenues by less
than \$2 million in FY2007, by \$1 million in FY2008, by about \$5
million over the FY2007-FY2011 period, by \$6 million over the
FY2007-FY2012 period, and by \$6 million over the FY2007-FY2017 period.

Additionally, CBO estimates that H.R. 1677 would authorize \$3 million
in FY2008, \$13 million over the FY2008-FY2012 period, and \$23 million
over the FY2008-FY2017 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}**: Yes, there is one
private-sector mandate: the prohibition from anyone using words,
abbreviations, titles, or letters associated with the Treasury
Department (or its components) as a part of an Internet domain address
in a manner which could be "reasonably" interpreted as conveying the
false impression that the domain address is connected to, or authorized
by, the Department (regardless of whether it features a disclaimer that
the private entity is not affiliated with the IRS).

CBO notes that, "The costs of the mandate would be the expenditures
incurred to bring the Internet domain address into compliance added to
any loss of net income associated with those changes."

**[Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax
Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?]{.underline}**: The earmarks/limited
tax benefits rule (House Rule XXI, Clause 9(a)) does not apply, by
definition, to legislation considered under suspension of the rules.
However, the Ways & Means Committee, in House Report 110-84, offers this
statement: "Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, the Ways and Means Committee has determined that the
bill as reported contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits within the meaning of that Rule."

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Ways & Means Committee,
in House Report 110-84, cites constitutional authority in Article I,
Section 8, Clause 1 ("The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect
Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises...") and the 16th Amendment (the
congressional power to tax incomes).

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Paul S. Teller,
<paul.teller@mail.house.gov>, (202) 226-9718

**H. Res. 196 -- Supporting the goals and ideals of World Water Day
(*Blumenauer, D-OR*)**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The resolution is scheduled to be
considered on Tuesday, April 17, under a motion to suspend the rules and
pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.Res. 196 resolves that the House of
Representatives:

-   "supports the goals and ideals of World Water Day;

-   "encourages the people of the United States to observe World Water
    Day with appropriate recognition, ceremonies, activities, and
    programs to demonstrate the importance of water and water
    conservation to humanity;

-   "urges an increased effort and the investment of greater resources
    by the Department of State, the United States Agency for
    International Development, and all relevant Federal departments and
    agencies towards providing sustainable and equitable access to safe
    drinking water and sanitation for the poor and very poor; and

-   "recognizes the importance of conserving and managing water
    resources for sustainable development, including environmental
    integrity and the eradication of poverty and hunger, and human
    health and overall quality of life in the United States and across
    the globe."

**[Additional Information]{.underline}:** According to the resolution,
"increasing access to safe drinking water and sanitation advances
efforts towards other United States development objectives including
fighting poverty and hunger, promoting primary education and gender
equality, reducing child mortality, promoting environmental stability,
improving the lives of slum dwellers, and strengthening national
security." H.Res. 196 also states that "*climate change will
increasingly pose a challenge for ensuring the availability of
sufficient water supplies at the appropriate times*," and "*freshwater
resources are further impaired by various forms of industrial, chemical,
human, and agricultural pollution*" (emphasis added).

According to the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, "Agenda
21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally
and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments,
and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the
environment." World Water Day stems from Agenda 21's Chapter 18, which
pertains to fresh water resources. The day is a UN designated observance
that encourages governments to turn UN suggestions into law. One of the
assertions of Chapter 18 is that, "\[i\]n developing and using water
resources, priority has to be given to the satisfaction of basic needs
and the safeguarding of ecosystems. Beyond these requirements, however,
water users should be charged appropriately." Chapter 18 encourages
centralized planning of water distribution on a national level and a
"from each according to his ability, to each according to his need"
sharing of water resources on a global level.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: On February 27, 2007, the bill was
referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. The committee
considered it and reported it to the House by unanimous consent on March
27, 2007.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: The resolution would authorize 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.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: A committee report citing
constitutional authority is not available. However, 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.Con.Res. 100 --- Condemning the recent violent actions of the
Government of Zimbabwe against peaceful opposition party activists and
members of civil society *(Lantos, D-CA)***

**[Order of Business:]{.underline}** The resolution is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, April 17, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.Con.Res. 100 expresses the sense of
Congress that:

-   "the state-sponsored violence taking place in Zimbabwe represents a
    serious violation of fundamental human rights and the rule of law
    and should be condemned by all responsible governments, civic
    organizations, religious leaders, and international bodies; and

-   "the government of Zimbabwe has not lived up to its commitments as a
    signatory to the Constitutive Act of the African Union and African
    Charter of Human and Peoples Rights."

H.Con.Res. 100 condemns:

-   "the government of Zimbabwe's violent suppression of political and
    human rights;

-   "the harassment and intimidation of lawyers attempting to carry out
    their professional obligations to their clients and repeated failure
    by police to comply with court decisions; and

-   "the harassment of foreign officials, journalists, human rights
    workers, and others."

H.Con.Res. 100 commends:

-   "U.S. Ambassador Christopher Dell and other U.S. officials and
    foreign officials for their support to political detainees and
    victims of torture and abuse while in police custody or in medical
    care centers."

H.Con.Res. 100 calls on the government of Zimbabwe to end:

-   "its violent campaign against fundamental human rights, respect the
    courts and members of the legal profession, and restore the rule of
    law;

-   "illegitimate interference in travel abroad by its citizens,
    especially for humanitarian purposes; and

-   "leaders of the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) and the
    African Union (AU) to consult with all Zimbabwe stakeholders to
    intervene with the government of Zimbabwe while applying appropriate
    pressures to resolve the economic and political crisis."

[**Additional Information**:]{.underline} According to H.Res. 100,
Zimbabwe's president, Robert Mugabe, and the ZANU-PF government have
assaulted peaceful protesters, ruthlessly and violently attacked
political opponents, systematically driven over 700,000 Zimbabweans from
their homes and businesses, and denied legal representation or medical
attention to victims of political oppression and government assault.

The 83 year-old Mugabe became prime minister shortly after Zimbabwe
gained independents in 1980 and declared himself president in 1987.
Inflation in Zimbabwe is currently over 1,700% and unemployment stands
at 80%.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.Res. 100 was introduced on March
26, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. On March 27,
2007, a mark-up was held and the resolution was agreed by voice vote.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: H.Res. 100 authorizes no
expenditure.

[**Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of
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 not available. However, 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. 1681 --- American National Red Cross Governance Modernization
> Act of 2007 (Hastings, R-WA)**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, April 17, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 1681 would significantly amend the
congressional charter for the American National Red Cross, largely based
upon recommendations from an independent review and analysis of the role
of the Red Cross' Board of Governors, and an October 2006 report of the
Board of Governors entitled "[American Red Cross Governance for the
21^st^
Century.](http://www.redcross.org/static/file_cont5765_lang0_2202.pdf)"
Specific provisions of the bill are summarized below.

-   Expresses the following sense of Congress: "It is in the national
    interest to clarify the role of the Board of Governors as a
    governance and strategic oversight board and for The American
    National Red Cross to amend its bylaws, consistent with the
    recommendations described in the Governance Report, to clarify the
    role of the Board of Governors and to outline the areas of its
    responsibility, including:

    -   "reviewing and approving the mission statement for The American
        National Red Cross;

    -   "approving and overseeing the corporation's strategic plan and
        maintaining strategic oversight of operational matters;

    -   "selecting, evaluating, and determining the level of
        compensation of the corporation's chief executive officer;

    -   "evaluating the performance and establishing the compensation of
        the senior leadership team and providing for management
        succession;

    -   "overseeing the financial reporting and audit process, internal
        controls, and legal compliance;

    -   "holding management accountable for performance;

    -   "providing oversight of the financial stability of the
        corporation;

    -   "ensuring the inclusiveness and diversity of the corporation;

    -   "ensuring the chapters of the corporation are geographically and
        regionally diverse;

    -   "providing oversight of the protection of the brand of the
        corporation; and

    -   "assisting with fundraising on behalf of the corporation."

-   Outlines a new method of selecting members of the Board of
    Governors, requiring that all board members (except the Chairman) be
    nominated by a single committee of the board of governors, taking
    into account the criteria outlines in the Governance Report to
    assure the expertise, skills, and experience of a governing board.

-   Expresses the sense of Congress that "the effectiveness of the
    American National Red Cross will be promoted by the creation of an
    organizational ombudsman who:

    -   "will be a neutral or impartial dispute resolution practitioner
        whose major function will be to provide confidential and
        informal assistance to the many internal and external
        stakeholders of The American National Red Cross;

    -   "will report to the chief executive officer and the audit
        committee of the Board of Governors; and

    -   "will have access to anyone and any documents in The American
        National Red Cross."

-   Expresses this sense of Congress regarding the Red Cross: "while The
    American National Red Cross is and will remain a Federally chartered
    instrumentality of the United States, and it has the rights and
    obligations consistent with that status, The American National Red
    Cross nevertheless should maintain appropriate communications and
    collaborations with local, community, and faith-based non-profit
    organizations, including those organizations that work within
    minority communities."

-   Amends current law regarding the operation of the Board of
    Governors, including reducing the size of the board from 50 members
    to between 12 and 25 by March 31, 2009, and to between 12 and 20 by
    March 31, 2012. Provides that members of the Board will serve three
    year terms except in certain circumstances.

-   Establishes an advisory council to the Board of Governors, which
    would be composed of between eight to ten members, who would be
    appointed by the President from principal officers of the executive
    departments and senior officers of the Armed Forces whose positions
    and interests qualify them to contribute to carrying out the
    programs and purposes of the Red Cross.

-   Authorizes the Comptroller General to review Red Cross' involvement
    in any federal program or activity that the government carries out
    under law.

-   Directs the Red Cross to establish an Office of the Ombudsman with
    duties and responsibilities as may be provided for in the Red Cross'
    bylaws or a resolution of the Board of Governors.

-   Directs the Office to submit an annual report to Congress regarding
    any trends and systemic matters that the Office has identified as
    "confronting" the Red Cross.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: The bill was introduced on March 26,
2007, and referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, which
considered it, held a mark-up, and reported the bill, as amended, by
voice vote on March 27, 2007.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, enacting H.R.
1681 would have no significant impact on the 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-]{.underline}**

[**Sector Mandates?**:]{.underline} No.

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Committee Report cites
constitutional authority in Article 1, Clause 8 of the Constitution, but
fails to cite a specific clause. However, 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}:** Joelle Cannon;
joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov; 202.226.0718

**H.Res. 293 --- Supporting the goals and ideals highlighted through
National Volunteer Week *(Shea-Porter, D-NH)***

**[Order of Business:]{.underline}** The resolution is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, April 17, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.Res. 293 would resolve that the House:

-   "supports the goals and ideals highlighted through National
    Volunteer Week;

-   "acknowledges the diligent efforts of our major federally funded
    community service and volunteer programs;

-   "recognizes with gratitude the contributions of the millions of
    dedicated and caring individuals who have chosen to serve others
    through volunteerism; and

-   "encourages all American people, of any age and background, to seek
    out opportunities to serve through volunteerism."

[**Additional Information**:]{.underline} According to the resolution,
National Volunteer Week was inaugurated by President Nixon in 1974. An
Executive Order established a week as a celebration of volunteering, and
since that time, every President has signed a proclamation encouraging
the event. National Volunteer Week will be observed this year from April
15 through April 21, 2007. Over 61.2 million individuals volunteered
with a charitable organization between September 2005 and September
2006.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.Res. 293 was introduced on March
29, 2007 and referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor,
which took no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: H.Res. 293 would authorize no
expenditure.

[**Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of
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 not available. However, 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. 1515 --- To amend the Housing and Community Development Act of
1974 to treat certain communities as metropolitan cities for purposes of
the community development block grant program *(Costello, D-IL)***

**[Order of Business:]{.underline}** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, April 17, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 1515 would amend the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974 to include the cities of Alton and
Granite City, Illinois as metropolitan cities for the purposes of
receiving benefits under this program.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: For the purposes of the
Housing and Community Development Act a "metropolitan city" is defined
in current law as, "a city within a metropolitan area which is the
central city of such area, as defined and used by the Office of
Management and Budget," or "any other city, within a metropolitan area,
which has a population of fifty thousands or more." Alton and Granite
City do not meet this population requirement and are, therefore,
ineligible for the community development block grant program. **H.R.
1515 would change the status of these cities to make them eligible for
federal grants.**

According to Committee Report 110-086, "Both Alton and Granite City were
previously eligible under the Office of Management and Budget's 'central
city' definition. However, in 2003 the Office of Management and Budget
adopted new standards for the definition of Metropolitan Statistical
Areas to reflect the 2000 Census data. As result, the Office of
Management and Budget created the designation of 'principal cities' as
communities with a minimum population of 50,000. Neither Alton nor
Granite City meet this new population threshold."

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}**: **Some conservatives
may be concerned that H.R. 1515 would expand eligibility for the House
and Community Development Block Grants to include two new cities, which
do no meet the current definition of a "metropolitan" city.**

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 1515 was introduced on March
14, 2007, and referred to the Financial Services Committee, which held a
mark-up on March 29, 2007, and order the bill reported by voice vote.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, "CBO expects this
reclassification could cause the funding those cities receive to change
by up to several hundred thousand dollars in any year, depending how
Illinois decides to allocate its CDBG funding. As such, CBO estimates
that implementing this bill would have no significant cost to the
federal government over the next five years."

[**Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of
Government**?]{.underline}: H.R. 1515 would expand eligibility for the
House and Community Development Block Grants.

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

**[Constitutional Authority]{.underline}**: The Committee Report cites
constitutional authority in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 (general
welfare) and Clause 3 (regulate interstate commerce).

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