![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.489583333333333in"
height="1.15625in"}**Legislative
Bulletin................................................March 31, 2008**

> **Contents:**
>
> **H.R. 1187---**Gulf of the Farallones and Cordell Bank National
> Marine Sanctuaries Boundary Modification and Protection Act
>
> **H.R. 2342---**National Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation Act
> of 2007\
> **H.R. 4933**---Captive Wildlife Safety Technical Amendments Act of
> 2008\
> **H.R. 3352**---Hydrographic Services Improvement Act Amendments
>
> **H.R. 3891**---To amend the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
> Establishment Act to increase the number of Directors on the Board of
> Directors of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation\
> **H. R. 2675**---Help to Access Land for the Education (HALE) of
> Scouts Act\
> **H. R. 3651**---Utah National Guard Readiness Act\
> **H. R. 2515**---Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation
> Program Act\
> **H. Con. Res. 302**---Supporting the observance of Colorectal Cancer
> Awareness Month, and for other purposes

**H.R. 1187---Gulf of the Farallones and Cordell Bank National Marine
Sanctuaries Boundary Modification and Protection Act *(Woolsey, D-CA)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, March 31, 2008, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 1187 would expand the boundaries of the
Gulf of Farallones and Cordell National Marine Sanctuaries in Northern
California. The bill would expand the existing sanctuary areas by
approximately 1,200 nautical miles, effectively doubling both areas.

H.R. 1187 would also require the Secretary of Commerce to create a
revised management plan for both sanctuary areas and issue revised
regulations to include the new boundaries. The Secretary would be
required to consider public and private use of the national marine
sanctuaries as well as marine protection and research when developing
the revised management plans for the areas. The bill would prohibit
leasing, exploration, development, production, or transporting by
pipeline of minerals or hydrocarbons within the Sanctuaries.

Finally, the bill would authorize \$3 million annually for FY 2009
through FY 2013 for expansion purposes (excluding construction) and
\$3.5 million in FY 2009 for construction and acquisition projects.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: According to the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the [National Marine
Sanctuary System](http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/welcome.html) was
established to manage "specially designated areas of the nation's oceans
and Great Lakes that contain unique habitats; threatened and endangered
species; and historic, archeological, recreational, and esthetic
resources." The system currently contains 14 different sanctuaries that
cover more than 113,000 nautical miles. The Gulf of Farallones and
Cordell Bank National Marine sanctuaries currently combine to include
1,347 nautical miles of sanctuary area in Northern California.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 1187 was introduced on February
16, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, which
referred the bill to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and
Oceans. On February 13, 2008, a subcommittee mark-up was held and the
bill was referred to the full committee, as amended, by unanimous
consent. On March 12, 2008, the full committee held a mark-up and
reported the bill, as amended, by voice vote.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO score for H.R. 1187 was not
available at press time.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}** Yes, it would expand the size of the Gulf of
Farallones and Cordell National Marine Sanctuaries in Northern
California.

**[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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**H.R. 2342---National Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation Act of
2007 *(Allen, D-ME)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, March 31, 2008, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 2342 would establish the National
Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System. The system would be
compromised of federal and non-federal components that would gather and
disseminate costal and ocean data for the purpose of supporting
"national defense, marine commerce, energy production, scientific
research, ecosystem-based marine and coastal resource management, and
public safety."

H.R. 2342 would also stipulate that collected data be used to "improve
the Nation's capability to measure, track, explain, and predict events
related directly and indirectly to climate change, natural climate
variability, and interactions between the oceanic and atmospheric
environments."

The bill would authorize activities to develop, test, and deploy
improvements in costal observation technologies to improve "our
conceptual knowledge of global climate change and physical, chemical,
and biological dynamics of the ocean and coastal and Great Lakes
environments."

The bill would establish the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the
Administrator of NOAA, as the lead federal agency for the system. The
Secretary would be authorized to certify and coordinate with Regional
Information Coordination Entities to gather and disseminate costal
information according to the purposes of the bill. The bill would
authorize departments and agencies that are members of the [National
Ocean Research Leadership
Council](http://www.nopp.org/Dev2Go.web?id=207765) to make grants and
agreements to carry out the purposes of the bill, subject to
appropriation.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: According to, [*An Ocean
Blueprint for the 21st
Century:*](http://www.oceancommission.gov/documents/full_color_rpt/welcome.html)

[*Final Report of the U.S. Commission on Ocean
Policy*](http://www.oceancommission.gov/documents/full_color_rpt/welcome.html),
costal and oceanic observation technology in the U.S., though
sufficient, is not adequately integrated to be considered a functional
national program. H.R. 2342 seeks to integrate costal and oceanic
integration efforts by establishing the National Integrated Coastal and
Ocean Observation System, under the administration of NOAA and the
National Ocean Research Leadership Council.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 2342 was introduced on May 16,
2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources and the
Committee on Science and Technology. The same day, the Committee on
Natural Resources referred the bill to the Subcommittee on Fisheries,
Wildlife, and Oceans. On February 13, 2008, a subcommittee mark-up was
held and the bill was referred to the full committee, as amended, by
unanimous consent. On March 12, 2008, the full committee held a mark-up
and reported the bill, as amended, by voice vote. The Committee on
Science and Technology took no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO score for H.R. 2342 was not
available at press time.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}** Yes, it would create the National Integrated
Coastal and Ocean Observation System, directed by the Secretary of
Commerce, through the Administrator of NOAA and the National Ocean
Research Leadership Council.

**[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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**H.R. 4933---Captive Wildlife Safety Technical Amendments Act of 2008
*(Bordallo, D-GU)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, March 31, 2008, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 4933 would make technical changes to the
Captive Wildlife Safety Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-191) to allow for improved
prosecution of those who import, transport, or receive live lions,
tigers, leopards, cheetahs, jaguars, and cougars. In addition, the bill
would reauthorize \$3 million annually over the FY 2009 through FY 2013
to carry out the purposes of the bill.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: In order to support states in
their efforts to increase wildlife populations, the Lacey Act of 1900
made it illegal for wildlife taken in violation of state law to be
transported, received, or sold. In 2003, the Captive Wildlife Safety Act
amended the Lacey Act to prohibit the export, transport, or sale of live
lions, tigers, leopards, cheetahs, jaguars, and cougars by placing those
animals on the Lacey Act's "prohibit wildlife species" list.

According to the Natural Resources' Republican staff, the Captive
Wildlife Safety Act has been difficult to enforce because the previous
Lacey Act violations have been held to a two step standard. First, a
prosecutor must prove that the animal was taken in contravention of
existing law. Second, a prosecutor must prove that the animal was
transported, received, or sold. However, since many of the animals
covered by the Captive Wildlife Safety Act are obtained overseas, it is
nearly impossible to demonstrate the first step. This legislation seeks
to rectify this problem by making technical amendments to create a
one-step standard for live lions, tigers, leopards, cheetahs, jaguars,
and cougars.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 4933 was introduced on January
15, 2008, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, which
referred the bill to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and
Oceans. On February 13, 2008, a subcommittee mark-up was held and the
bill was referred to the full committee, as amended, by unanimous
consent. On March 12, 2008, the full committee held a mark-up and
reported the bill, as amended, by voice vote.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO score for H.R. 4933 was not
available at press time.

**[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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**H.R. 3352---Hydrographic Services Improvement Act Amendments**

**(Young, R-AK)**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, March 31, 2008, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 3352 would reauthorize the Commerce
Department's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to
carry out hydrographic (underwater coastal mapping) research and provide
hydrographic services for the purpose of:

-   Supporting the conservation and management of coastal and ocean
    resources.

-   Saving and protecting life and property.

-   Supporting the resumption of commerce in response to emergencies,
    natural disasters, and man-made disasters.

-   Meeting homeland security and maritime domain awareness needs.

The bill would also authorize NOAA to alter the composition of the
Hydrographic Services Review Panel and compensate its voting members.

H.R. 3352 would also authorize funding for hydrographic research and
services as follows.

To carry out nautical mapping and charting functions:

-   \$55 million in FY 2009

-   \$56 million in FY 2010

-   \$57 million in FY 2011

-   \$58 million in FY 2012

To contract for private hydrographic surveys:

-   \$32.1 million in FY 2009

-   \$32.7 million in FY 2010

-   \$33.4 million in FY 2011

-   \$34 million in FY 2012

To operate hydrographic survey vessels owned by NOAA:

-   \$25.9 million in FY 2009

-   \$26.4 million in FY 2010

-   \$26.9 million in FY 2011

-   \$27.4 million in FY 2012

To carry out geodetic functions:

-   \$32.6 million in FY 2009

-   \$32.3 million in FY 2010

-   \$33.9 million in FY 2011

-   \$34.5 million in FY 2012

To carry out tide and current measurement functions:

-   \$27 million in FY 2009

-   \$27.5 million in FY 2010

-   \$28 million in FY 2011

-   \$28.5 million in FY 2012

Finally, the bill would authorize \$75 million for NOAA to acquire a
hydrographic survey vessel capable of staying at sea for at least 30
days.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: Hydrographic surveys, conducted
by NOAA's [Office of Coast
Survey](http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/topics/navops/hydrosurvey/welcome.html)
(OCS), measure the depth and bottom configuration of water bodies in
order to create nautical charts across the U.S. [Exclusive Economic
Zone](http://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/csdl/eez.htm), which includes some
3.4 million nautical miles of water. According to NOAA, the surveys are
used to support a variety of activities such as port and harbor
maintenance (dredging), coastal engineering (beach erosion and
replenishment studies), [coastal zone
management](http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/topics/coasts/management/welcome.html),
and offshore resource development.

From the inception of the program, NOAA carried out ocean-bottom mapping
by itself. A 1994 report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO),
[*NOAA Needs to Consider Alternatives to the Acquisition of New
Vessels*](http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat2/152300.pdf), found that NOAA's
operation of vessels and the hydrographic program were "high risk" (of
waste, fraud and abuse) activities. As a result of that study and
additional congressional oversight, NOAA was required to begin privately
contracting hydrographic surveys. For instance, amendments made to
Department of Commerce appropriations bills required NOAA to privately
contract at least 50% of its underwater mapping programs and to begin to
reduce the size of its fleet in order to reduce government waste. The
Hydrographic Services Improvement Act of 1998 (HSIA) continued to
require private contracting in order to improve the efficiency of NOAA's
ocean-bottom mapping. The HSIA also created the Hydrographic Services
Review Panel, which asked NOAA to produce an analysis of in-house versus
contractor performance.

Currently, NOAA contracts 50% of hydrographic surveys privately, but has
not produced a performance report comparing the efficiency of private
surveys and surveys produced by NOAA. H.R. 3352 does not increase
private contracting requirements for hydrographic mapping, nor does the
bill require NOAA or the GAO to produce a report on the merits of
private contracting.

**[Possible Conservative Concerns]{.underline}**: Some conservatives
maybe concerned that H.R. 3352 would authorize \$953 million to expand
hydrographic mapping programs carried out by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)---including the purchase of a new
ship---when the GAO has found in the past that NOAA's fleet operates
with a high risk for waste, fraud, and abuse. Conservatives may also be
concerned that the bill would not increase private contracting
requirements, despite GAO's contention that hydrographic mapping is more
efficiently carried out by private contracting.

In addition, conservatives may be concerned that H.R. 3352 is scheduled
under a suspension of the rules and, as such, Members will not have an
opportunity to offer amendments to reduce the authorization level or
increase competitive private contracting requirements. Finally, some
conservatives may be concerned that H.R. 3352 authorizes nearly \$1
billion, but is not accompanied by a CBO score or a committee report.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 3352 was introduced on August
2, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, which
referred the bill to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and
Oceans. On February 13, 2008, a subcommittee mark-up was held and the
bill was referred to the full committee, as amended, by unanimous
consent. On March 12, 2008, the full committee held a mark-up and
reported the bill, as amended, by unanimous consent.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO score for H.R. 3352 was not
available at press time. However, the bill would authorize \$953 million
from FY 2009 through FY 2012 for hydrographic underwater mapping
services.

**[Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?]{.underline}** Yes, it would authorize NOAA to expand its
fleet by creating a new hydrographic survey vessel.

**[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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

**H.R. 3891---To amend the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
Establishment Act to increase the number of Directors on the Board of
Directors of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (Brown, R-SC)**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, March 31, 2008, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.\
\
**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 3891 would increase the number of board
members serving on the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Board of
Directors from 25 to 30. The bill would also require that each board
member be a U.S. citizen.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: The National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation (NFWF) is a nonprofit organization established by Congress in
1984. The NFWF's purpose is to sustain and restore the nation's fish and
wildlife habitats through conservation investments with public and
private partners. According to their website, the NFWF has "awarded
nearly 9,500 grants to over 3,000 organizations in the United States and
abroad and leveraged---with its partners---more than \$400 million in
federal funds into over \$1.3 billion for conservation." The NFWF has
agreements with more than 14 federal agencies and "has traditionally
exceeded its 1:1 matching requirement and often attracts three or more
additional project dollars for each federal dollar invested."

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 3891 was introduced on October
18, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, which
referred the bill to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and
Oceans. On February 13, 2008, a subcommittee mark-up was held and the
bill was referred to the full committee, as amended, by unanimous
consent. On March 12, 2008, the full committee held a mark-up and
reported the bill, as amended, by unanimous consent.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: A CBO score for H.R. 3891 was not
available at press time.

**[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}**: Andy Koenig;
<andy.koenig@mail.house.gov>; 202-226-9717.

H. R. 2675---Help to Access Land for the Education (HALE) of Scouts Act
*(Boren, D-OK)*

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: H. R. 2675 is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, March 31, 2008, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 2675 would require the Secretary of
Agriculture to convey, at fair market value, approximately 140 acres of
land in the Ouachita National Forest, Oklahoma, to the Indian Nations
Council, Inc. (a chartered council of the Boy Scouts of America).

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 2675 was introduced June 12,
2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources. On March 12,
2008, a mark-up was held in Committee, and the bill was reported, as
amended, by unanimous consent.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, "Based on
information from the Forest Service, CBO estimates that implementing
this legislation would have no significant effect on the federal budget.
The council would be required to pay any administrative costs associated
with the conveyance. Further, the Forest Service would be able to retain
the proceeds from the sale of the land to acquire other land. Enacting
the legislation would not affect revenues."

**[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; 202-226-0718;
<sarah.makin@mail.house.gov>

H. R. 3651---Utah National Guard Readiness Act (Bishop, R-UT)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: H. R. 3651 is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, March 31, 2008, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 3651 directs the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) to convey, without consideration, about 430 acres of
land in Utah to the state. The conveyed property would be used by Utah
for activities of the state national guard.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: According to the sponsor's
office, "the Utah National Guard is one of only a few states that have
met its recruiting and retention goals for the past several years. As a
result, the Utah Guard is expected to grow by several hundred personnel
positions over the next few years. Camp Williams is the existing
headquarters of the Utah National Guard and the main cantonment area was
planned and developed in the 1940s and sits on lands owned by the State
of Utah. In order to accommodate future expansion needs identified in
its master plan for the main cantonment area, the Utah Guard must
acquire ownership of contiguous lands already within the existing
boundaries of Camp Williams which are technically owned by the federal
government.

"HR 3651 would transfer fee ownership of approximately 431 acres of
federal land at Camp Williams, under the administrative control of the
Bureau of Land Management of the Department of the Interior, to the Utah
National, as identified in the Guard\'s master plan. The legislation
will also help consolidate checkerboard land ownership patterns in the
area leading to more efficient management of the affected lands. The
transfer is subject to a reverter that the lands must be used for
National Guard or defense purposes."

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 3651 was introduced September
25, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources. On March
12, 2008, a mark-up was held in Committee, and the bill was reported, as
amended, by unanimous consent.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, "implementing
H.R. 3651 would have no effect on the federal budget. The land to be
conveyed to Utah is already reserved for military purposes of the U.S.
Army and the Utah National Guard and does not produce income for the
federal government."

**[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; 202-226-0718;
<sarah.makin@mail.house.gov>

H. R. 2515---Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program Act
(Heller, R-NV)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: H. R. 2515 is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, March 31, 2008, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.R. 2515 would authorize the Secretary of
the Interior to participate in the Lower Colorado River Multi-Species
Conservation Program. This program is a collaborative effort between the
federal government and entities in the states of Nevada, Arizona, and
California to address the needs of threatened and endangered fish and
wildlife along the lower Colorado River while developing water and power
deliveries to the states involved in the program.

**[Background]{.underline}**: According to their website, "The Lower
Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program (MSCP) is a
coordinated, comprehensive, long-term multi-agency effort to conserve
and work towards the recovery of endangered species, and protect and
maintain wildlife habitat on the lower Colorado River. The MSCP's
purposes are: protect the lower Colorado River environment while
ensuring the certainty of existing river water and power operations,
address the needs of threatened and endangered wildlife under the
Endangered Species Act, and reduce the likelihood of listing additional
species along the lower Colorado River. The MSCP covers areas up to and
including the full-pool elevations of Lakes Mead, Mohave and Havasu and
the historical floodplain of the Colorado River from Lake Mead to the
United States-Mexico Southerly International Boundary, a distance of
about 400 river miles. Conservation measures currently focus on the area
from Hoover Dam to the border, but may include Grand Canyon in the
future."

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 2515 was introduced May 24,
2007, and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources. On March 12,
2008, a mark-up was held in Committee, and the bill was reported, as
amended, by unanimous consent.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to CBO, "based on
information from the Bureau of Reclamation, CBO estimates that the
program would cost approximately \$70 million to implement over the next
five years and several hundred million dollars over the 50-year life of
the program. The bureau, however, has been implementing the program
since 2005 under existing authorities, and this legislation would not
authorize any activities beyond those in which the bureau already is
engaged. Hence, CBO estimates that implementing this bill would not
significantly affect the federal budget. Enacting the bill would not
affect direct spending or revenues."

**[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; 202-226-0718;
<sarah.makin@mail.house.gov>

**H. Con. Res. 302---Supporting the observance of Colorectal Cancer
Awareness Month, and for other purposes (Granger, R-TX)**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: H. Con. Res. 302 is scheduled to be
considered on Monday, February 25, 2008, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H. Con. Res. 302 would express the sense that
the House:

-   "Supports the observance of Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month in
    order to provide a special opportunity to offer education on the
    importance of early detection and screening;

-   "Recognizes and applauds the national and community organizations
    for their work in promoting awareness about colorectal cancer,
    providing information on the importance of prevention and early
    detection through regular screening, and facilitating access to
    treatment for its sufferers; and

-   "Urges organizations and health practitioners to 'earn a Blue Star'
    by using this opportunity to promote awareness about colorectal
    cancer and to support early identification and removal of
    pre-cancerous polyps, detectable only through colorectal cancer
    screenings."

The resolution lists a number of findings, including:

-   "Colorectal cancer is the second most common cause of cancer deaths
    for men and women in the United States;

-   "Colorectal cancer affects men and women equally;

-   "More than 148,810 people in the United States will be diagnosed
    with colon cancer this year;

-   "Over 49,960 people in the United States will die from colon cancer
    this year;

-   "Every 3.5 minutes, someone is diagnosed with colorectal cancer and
    every 9 minutes someone dies from colorectal cancer;

-   "Every 5 seconds someone who should be screened for colorectal
    cancer is not;

-   "the vast majority of colon cancer deaths can be prevented through
    proper screening and early detection;

-   "The survival rate of individuals who have colorectal cancer is 90
    percent when detected in the early stages versus only a 10 percent
    survival rate when colorectal cancer is diagnosed after it has
    spread to distant organs;

-   "only 39 percent of colorectal cancer patients have their cancers
    detected at an early stage;

-   "Uninsured Americans are more likely to be diagnosed with late stage
    colon cancer than patients with private insurance;

-   "Only 18.8 percent of those without health coverage in the United
    States have currently been properly screened for colorectal cancer;

-   "If the majority of Americans age 50 or older were screened
    regularly for colorectal cancer, the death rate from this disease
    could plummet by up to 80 percent;

-   "Regular colorectal cancer screening has been ranked as one of the
    most cost effective screening interventions available, with the
    potential to save more than 30,000 lives a year;

-   "Treatment costs for colorectal cancer are extremely high, estimated
    at \$8,400,000,000 for 2004;

-   "Increasing the number of people between the ages of 50 years and 64
    years of age who are regularly screened in the United States, would
    provide significant savings in billions of dollars to the Medicare
    program from cancer prevention and treatment costs;

-   "The Blue Star, developed by the Members of the National Colorectal
    Cancer Roundtable, the American Cancer Society, the Colon Cancer
    Alliance, and C3: Colorectal Cancer Coalition represents the
    collective fight against colon cancer, the eternal memory of the
    people whose lives have already been lost to the disease, and the
    shining hope for a future free of colon cancer;

-   "Coaches vs. Cancer (a partnership between the American Cancer
    Society and the National Association of Basketball Coaches), the
    Colon Cancer Alliance, and Ethicon Endo-Surgery have created 'Earn a
    Blue Star Day' as a means for individuals and corporations to raise
    awareness of the importance of screening for colon cancer;

-   "Greater awareness of this cancer and the means to prevent it will
    save the lives of tens of thousands of Americans each year; and

-   "Observing a Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month during the month of
    March would provide a special opportunity to offer education on the
    importance of early detection and screening."

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H. Con. Res. 302 was introduced on
February 25, 2008, and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce,
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>.