![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.489583333333333in"
height="1.15625in"}**Legislative
Bulletin...........................................February 27, 2007**

> **Contents:**
>
> **H.Con.Res. 47** - Supporting the goals and ideals of a National
> Medal of Honor Day to celebrate and honor the recipients of the Medal
> of Honor
>
> **H.R. 755** --- Promoting Transparency in Financial Reporting Act of
> 2007
>
> **H.R. 1066** --- To increase community development investments by
> depository institutions
>
> **H.R. 644** --- Brownfields Redevelopment Enhancement Act
>
> **H.R. 884** --- Promoting Anti-terrorism Cooperation through
> Technology and Science (PACTS) Act
>
> **H.Res. 42** --- Recognizing Ann Richards' extraordinary
> contributions to Texas and American public life
>
> **H.R. 990** - Pell Grant Equity Act of 2007\
> **H.Res. 126** - Commending the University of Southern California
> Trojan football team for its victory in the 2007 Rose Bowl\
> **H.Res. 103** - Congratulating the Mount Union College Purple Raiders
> for winning the 2006 NCAA Division III Football National Championship\
> **H.R. 1129** - To provide for the construction, operation, and
> maintenance of an arterial road in St. Louis County, Missouri\
> **H.R. 494** - To provide for the conditional conveyance of any
> interest retained by the United States in St. Joseph Memorial Hall in
> St. Joseph, Michigan\
> **H.Con.Res. 52** - Supporting the goals and ideals of American Heart
> Month\
> **H.Con.Res. 74** - Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the
> need for additional research into the chronic neurological condition
> hydrocephalus, and for other purposes\
> **H.R. 710** - Living Kidney Organ Donation Clarification Act

H.Con.Res. 47 --- Supporting the goals and ideals of a National Medal of
Honor Day to celebrate and honor the recipients of the Medal of Honor
(*Skelton, D-MO*)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The resolution is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend
the rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.Con.Res. 47 would resolve that Congress:

1)  recognizes the heroism and sacrifice of Medal of Honor recipients
    for the United States;

2)  recognizes the educational opportunity that a National Medal of
    Honor Day would present to the American public; and

3)  supports the goals and ideals of a National Medal of Honor Day to
    celebrate and honor the contributions of Medal of Honor recipients.

The resolution also states a number of findings, including the
following:

-   "the Medal of Honor is the highest award that can be bestowed to a
    member of the Armed Forces for valor in action against an enemy
    force;

-   "the Medal of Honor is awarded by the President, in the name of the
    Congress, to members of the Armed Forces who have distinguished
    themselves conspicuously by gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of
    their lives above and beyond the call of duty;

-   "the United States will forever be in debt to the recipients of the
    Medal of Honor for their bravery and sacrifice in times of war or
    other armed conflict;

-   "the Medal of Honor was first awarded on March 25, 1863, during the
    Civil War;

-   "of the millions of men and women who have served in the Armed
    Forces in war, military operations, or other armed conflicts, only
    3,443 members have thus far been awarded the Medal of Honor;

-   "111 Medal of Honor recipients are still living as of January 1,
    2007;

-   "March 25 would be an appropriate date to observe National Medal of
    Honor Day."

**[Committee Action]{.underline}:** H.Con.Res. 47 was introduced on
January 30, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Armed Services, which
took no official action.

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

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

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

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

H.R. 755 --- Promoting Transparency in Financial Reporting Act of 2007
(Davis, R-KY)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend
the rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.R. 755 would require the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB), and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) to
provide oral testimony by their respective Chairpersons (or their
designee) annually, beginning in 2007 every five years thereafter, to
the House Financial Services Committee on their efforts to reduce the
complexity in financial reporting to provide more accurate and clear
financial information to investors. Their oral report would include:

1)  "reassessing complex and outdated accounting standards;

2)  "improving the understandability, consistency, and overall usability
    of the existing accounting and auditing literature;

3)  "developing principles-based accounting standards;

4)  "encouraging the use and acceptance of interactive data; and

5)  "promoting disclosures in 'plain English'."

The bill also states these findings:

-   Transparent and clear financial reporting is integral to the
    continued growth and strength of our capital markets and the
    confidence of investors.

-   The increasing detail and volume of accounting, auditing, and
    reporting guidance pose a major challenge.

-   The complexity of accounting and auditing standards in the United
    States has added to the costs and effort involved in financial
    reporting.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}:** H.R. 755 was introduced on January
31, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Financial Services, which
took no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}:** A CBO score of H.R. 755 is
unavailable, but the bill does not authorize new 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.

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

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

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

H.R. 1066 --- To increase community development investments by
depository institutions (*Frank, D-MA*)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend
the rules and pass the bill.

An almost identical bill, H.R. 6062, passed the House during the 109^th^
Congress by a voice vote on September 27, 2006.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.R. 1066 would allow a federal savings
association to make (direct or indirect) investments to "promote the
public welfare" -- including the welfare of low- and moderate-income
communities or families -- through the provision of housing, services,
and jobs (community development investments). The bill would permit such
investments to be made directly or by purchase of interests in an entity
primarily engaged in making such investments, and prohibits a federal
savings association from making an investment which would subject it to
unlimited liability to any person.

The bill would also require the Office of Thrift Supervision to
establish: 1) the amount any savings association may invest in any one
project; and 2) the aggregate amount of investment of any savings
association. Finally, the bill prohibits the maximum aggregate amount of
investments of any savings association from exceeding the same 15% of
its capital stock actually paid in and unimpaired and 15% of its
unimpaired surplus as imposed by this Act on national banking
associations and state member banks.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}**: The provisions of H.R. 1066
were also largely encompassed in the Financial Services Regulatory
Relief Act (H.R. 3505) in the 109^th^ Congress, sponsored by Rep. Jeb
Hensarling, that passed the House on March 8, 2006, by a vote of 415 to
2.

[]{.mark}

**[Committee Action]{.underline}:** H.R. 1066 was introduced on February
15, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Financial Services, which
took no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}:** A CBO score of H.R. 1066 is
unavailable, but the bill does not authorize new 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.

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

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

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

H.R. 644 --- Brownfields Redevelopment Enhancement Act (Miller, R-CA)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend
the rules and pass the bill.

An identical bill, H.R. 280, passed the House during the 109^th^
Congress by a voice vote on December 13, 2005.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.R. 644 includes several findings regarding
the redevelopment of brownfields,

including: returning the Nation s brownfield sites to productive
economic use could generate more than 550,000 additional jobs and up to
\$2,400,000,000 in new tax revenues for cities and towns; \[a\] lack of
funding for redevelopment is a primary obstacle impeding the reuse of
brownfield sites; redevelopment of brownfield sites and reuse of
infrastructure at such sites will protect natural resources and open
spaces; and grants under the Brownfields Economic Development Initiative
of the Department of Housing and Urban Development provide local
governments with a flexible source of funding to pursue brownfields
redevelopment through land acquisition, site preparation, economic
development, and other activities.

H.R. 2941 authorizes HUD to make Brownfields Economic Development
Initiative (BEDI) grants to eligible public entities (defined in current
law as any unit of general local government, including units of general
local government in non-entitlement areas) and Indian tribes for the
environmental cleanup and development of brownfields. Grants would be
made only for (1) acquisition of real property or the rehabilitation of
real property; (2) housing rehabilitation; (3) economic development
activities; (4) construction of housing by nonprofit organizations for
homeownership; (5) the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, or
installation of public facilities; or (6) public works and site or other
improvements.

The bill also eliminates the requirement that local governments obtain
section 108 loan guarantees as a condition to receiving BEDI funding.
Grants are authorized at such sums for fiscal years 2006 to 2010. H.R.
280 allows Community Development Block Grant funds to be used for
renewal communities and includes mine-scarred lands as eligible
brownfields sites.

**[Additional Background]{.underline}:** The Environmental Protection
Agency defines brownfields as abandoned, idled or under-used industrial
and commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment is
complicated by real or perceived environmental problems. There are an
estimated 500,000 such sites across the country.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}:** H.R. 644 was introduced on January
23, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Financial Services, which
took no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}:** A CBO score of H.R. 644 is
unavailable. **However, CBO estimated that an identical bill (H.R. 280)
in the 109^th^ Congress would cost \$99 million over five years**

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

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

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

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

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

H.R. 884 --- Promoting Anti-terrorism Cooperation through Technology and
Science (PACTS) Act (King, R-NY)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend
the rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.R. 884 would direct the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) Under Secretary for Science and Technology to
establish a **new** Science and Technology Homeland Security
International Cooperative Programs Office. It would create a **new
position** of Director to head the office, and require that director to:

1)  develop understandings or agreements that allow and support
    international cooperative activity in support of homeland security
    research, development, and comparative testing;

2)  develop strategic priorities for such activity; and

3)  facilitate the planning, development, and implementation of
    international cooperative activity to address such priorities.

The bill would require the Director to: 1) facilitate the matching of
U.S. entities with non-U.S. entities that may partner in homeland
security research activities; and 2) ensure that activities are
coordinated with those of other relevant research agencies. The bill
authorizes the Director to hold international homeland security
technology workshops and conferences, and also authorizes the Under
Secretary to carry out international cooperative activities to support
specified responsibilities, including through the award of grants and
enter into cooperative agreements and contracts.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}:** H.R. 884 was introduced on February
7, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, which took
no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}:** A CBO score of H.R. 884 is
unavailable. **The bill authorizes \$100 million over the FY08-FY11 time
period from "amounts otherwise authorized for the Directorate of Science
and Technology.**

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

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

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

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

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

H.Res. 42 --- Recognizing Ann Richards' extraordinary contributions to
Texas and American public life (*Ortiz, D-TX*)

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The resolution is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend
the rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.Res. 42 would resolve that the House of
Representatives recognizes and commends Ann Richards' extraordinary
contributions to Texas and American public life.

The resolution also states a number of findings, including the
following:

-   "Dorothy Ann Willis Richards, the First Lady of Texas politics, an
    American icon and patriot, who touched the lives of Texans and
    Americans across the Nation, passed away September 13, 2006, after a
    valiant fight with esophageal cancer;

-   "her political philosophy was one of government openness and she was
    a forceful champion for economic and social justice for all
    Americans, opening Texas government to all Texans, including African
    Americans, Hispanics, women, and the disadvantaged;

-   "before her service ended, of her nearly 3,000 appointments, 46
    percent were female, 15 percent were black, 20 percent were Hispanic
    and 2 percent were Asian American;

-   "her service to Texas and the Nation included teaching Texas
    schoolchildren, serving as County Commissioner in Travis County,
    serving 2 terms as Texas State Treasurer, and finally serving as the
    Governor of Texas;

-   "Governor Richards revitalized the Texas economy, yielding 2 percent
    growth when the United States economy was shrinking; she streamlined
    Texas\'s government and regulatory institutions for business and the
    public; she revitalized and positioned Texas\'s corporate
    infrastructure for the explosive economic growth it experienced
    later in the decade, and she saved Texas taxpayers more than \$6
    billion;

-   "Richards reformed the Texas prison system by establishing a
    substance abuse program for inmates, reducing the number of violent
    offenders released, and increasing prison space to deal with a
    growing prison population;

-   "Richards instituted the Texas lottery to supplement school finances
    and she sought to decentralize control over education policy to
    districts and individual campuses, instituting site-based
    management;

-   "in 2004, she authored \`I\'m Not Slowing Down, Winning My Battle
    with Osteoporosis\' and became an international spokesperson for
    women battling the disease;

-   "after her diagnosis with esophageal cancer, Richards inspired all
    of us with her determination to win against all the odds, and her
    fearless battle until the very last day in her beloved Austin,
    Texas; and

-   "Governor Dorothy Ann Willis Richards was an American original, an
    irreplaceable public servant, a patriot who loved the Nation and its
    expansive land, ideas, and the Constitution."

**[Committee Action]{.underline}:** H.Res. 42 was introduced on January
9, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Government Reform, which took
no official action.

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

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

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

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

**H.R. 990 --- Pell Grant Equity Act of 2007 *(George Miller, D-CA)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The bill is scheduled to be
considered on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the bill.

**[Note]{.underline}**: As of yesterday, the version of H.R. 990
scheduled to be considered, would have increased direct spending by \$11
million.  As such, this bill (if considered under regular order) would
have been subject to a PAYGO point of order. In addition, the increase
in mandatory spending would have also caused the Education and Labor
Committee to further exceed its 302 allocation in new budget authority. 
However, this morning, RSC staff was provided with an updated version of
the legislation, which includes a provision to offset the increase in
direct spending.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: Current Pell Grant law requires that for any
academic year for which an appropriation Act provides a maximum basic
grant of more than \$2,700 (which has been every year since 1997), the
amount of a student's Pell Grant is to equal \$2,700 plus:

-   one-half of the amount by which such maximum basic grant exceeds
    \$2,700; plus

-   the lesser of---

    -   the remaining one-half of such excess; or

    -   the sum of the student's tuition and, if the student has
        dependent care expenses or disability-related expenses, an
        allowance determined by the institution for these expenses.

In short, this provision, known as "tuition sensitivity," provides that
if a student attends an institution that costs less than the Pell Grant
award, then the grant award is adjusted accordingly, so that the student
is not compensated for more than the total cost of attending school.

H.R. 990 would prohibit the above provision from applying to the
determination of a student's basic grant for the 2007-2008 academic
years. As such, students with a cost of attendance less than the
allotted Pell Grant award, would now be eligible to receive the portion
of the award in excess of their actual costs. For example, if the
maximum grant awarded is \$5, and attending college in State X costs \$5
per semester, but the cost of college in State Y is only \$1, under H.R.
990, students in both states would be eligible to receive the full \$5
award, even though the cost in State Y is significantly less.

In order to pay for the increase in mandatory spending, H.R. 990 would
reduce over two years, from 24% to 22%, the amount that guarantee
agencies earn from the money recovered from defaulted borrowers.
Reportedly, this provision will save \$20 million. However, a CBO score
for this portion of the bill is unavailable.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.R. 990 was introduced on February
12, 2007, and referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor,
which took no official action.

**[Cost to Taxpayers]{.underline}**: According to a CBO estimate of a
previous version of the bill, it would have increased mandatory spending
by \$11 million during the FY 2007 and FY 2008 period. However, with the
new offsetting provision, the bill appears to be at least budget
neutral.

**[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}**: Joelle Cannon;
<joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov>, (202) 226-9717

**H.Res. 126 ---** **Commending the University of Southern California
Trojan football team for its victory in the 2007 Rose Bowl *(Watson,
D-CA)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The resolution is scheduled to be
considered on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.Res. 126 would resolve that the House of
Representatives:

-   "commends the University of Southern California Trojan football team
    and USC President Steven B. Sample for USC's victory in the 2007
    Rose Bowl; and

-   "recognizes the achievements of the players, coaches, students,
    alumni, and staff who were instrumental in helping the University of
    Southern California win the Rose Bowl."

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

-   "the University of Southern California (USC) Trojan football team
    achieved many historic accomplishments during the 2006 season;

-   "the USC Trojan football team achieved its fifth consecutive
    Associated Press (AP) Top 4 finish;

-   "USC was invited to make an unprecedented fifth consecutive Bowl
    Championship Series bowl appearance;

-   "USC achieved its fifth consecutive season of at least 11 victories,
    an achievement equaled by only 3 other Division I schools in the
    history of National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) football;

-   "USC has won 56 of its last 60 games;

-   "USC head football coach Pete Carroll has the best winning
    percentage of any current NCAA Division I football coach with at
    least 5 years of experience; and

-   "under the leadership of USC's 10th president, Steven B. Sample, USC
    has established itself as a world-class research university, known
    for its leadership in the fields of communication, media, the
    sciences, and the arts."

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.Res. 126 was introduced on
February 5, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Education and Labor,
which took no official action.

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

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

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

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Joelle Cannon;
<joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov>, (202) 226-9717

**H.Res. 103 ---** **Congratulating the Mount Union College Purple
Raiders for winning the 2006 NCAA Division III Football National
Championship**

**(Regula, R-OH)**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}**: The resolution is scheduled to be
considered on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend the
rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}**: H.Res. 103 would resolve that the House of
Representatives:

-   "congratulates the Mount Union College Purple Raiders for winning
    the 2006 NCAA Division III Football National Championship; and

-   "recognizes all the players, coaches, and support staff who were
    instrumental in this achievement."

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

-   "on December 16, 2006, the Mount Union College Purple Raiders of
    Alliance, Ohio, won the 2006 National Collegiate Athletic
    Association (NCAA) Division III Football National Championship by
    defeating the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater Warhawks by a score
    of 35-16 in the Amos Alonzo Stagg Bowl;

-   "while there are currently 231 schools playing NCAA Division III
    college football, during the last 14 years the Purple Raiders have
    won an unprecedented 9 NCAA Division III Football National
    Championships;

-   "Mount Union College currently has the second longest winning streak
    in all of college football with 23 consecutive victories;

-   "the Purple Raiders hold college football\'s two longest winning
    streaks\--55 consecutive games won from 2000 to 2003 and 54
    consecutive wins from 1996 to 1999; and

-   "in winning the 2006 National Championship, Mount Union College
    Football Head Coach Larry Kehres completed his 21st season as head
    coach of the Purple Raiders."

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: H.Res. 103 was introduced on January
29, 2007, and referred to the Committee on Education and Labor, which
took no official action.

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

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

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

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Joelle Cannon;
<joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov>, (202) 226-9717.

**H.R. 1129 --- To provide for the construction, operation, and
maintenance of an arterial road in St. Louis County, Missouri
*(Carnahan, D-MO)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend
the rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.R. 1129 provides that the St. Louis County
arterial road 1151, known as the "Lemay Connector Road" in St. Louis
City and County, Missouri, may be constructed, operated, and maintained
pursuant to certain federal laws regarding the development of property
that requires the property to be maintained for open space, recreation,
or wetland management. Specifically, the bill provides that this road is
to be identified as a FEMA route in the documents titled "Lemay
Connector Road for Long-Term Recovery, Recreational Enhancements, &
Community, & Economic Development," which is dated June 1, 2006, and is
on file with the St. Louis County department of highways and traffic.

St. Louis County is directed to ensure that the project is constructed,
operated, and maintained in a manner that would not cause any future
additional flood damage that would not have occurred without the
project. Prior to constructing the project, St. Louis County, or its
assignee, must identify and agree to restrict a nearby parcel of land of
equal or greater size to the deed restricted land used for the project
is maintained for open space, recreation, or wetland management.

### H.R. 1129 also provides that federal government is not liable for future flood damage caused by the project, and that the property is not eligible for any future disaster assistance from any other federal sources. 

**[Additional Information:]{.underline}** According to the
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, H.R. 1129 authorizes the
construction of a road on land that is currently restricted because it
was flooded in 2002, and as part of the Flood Insurance program, if a
certain area receives compensation due to flooding, there is a
restriction on that area from any further development. However, the bill
provides that the federal government is not liable for any future flood
damage.

[**Committee Action**:]{.underline} H.R. 1129 was introduced on February
16, 2007, and was referred to the House committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.

[**Cost to Taxpayers**:]{.underline} A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

[**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}**: Joelle Cannon;
<joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov>, (202) 226-9717.

**H.R. 494 --- To provide for the conditional conveyance of any interest
retained by the United States in St. Joseph Memorial Hall in St. Joseph,
Michigan**

**(Upton, R-MI)**

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend
the rules and pass the bill.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** The bill directs the Administrator of General
Services to convey by, quitclaim deed, St. Joseph Memorial Hall to the
city of St. Joseph, Michigan, for \$10,000. The Administrator of General
Services may require such additional terms and conditions to the
conveyance as he considers appropriate to protect the interest of the
United States.

**[Additional Information:]{.underline}** The city of St. Joseph
received the building and property from the federal government through
Public Act 81 on May 28, 1935. This conveyance required that the
property be used for public park purposes "or such other wholly public
use as may be approved by the United States."

According to the sponsor, the city of St. Joseph wants to redevelop the
Bluffside area and is concerned that, although incorporated into a
larger effort to provide public recreation and education to the
community, possible alternative uses of the Memorial Hall property may
technically be prohibited by the 1935 deed restriction, and could impede
the entire Bluffside development. This bill will eliminate the deed
restrictions imposed by the federal interest in the hall.

[**Committee Action**:]{.underline} H.R. 494 was introduced on January
16, 2007, and was referred to the House committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.

[**Cost to Taxpayers**:]{.underline} A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

[**Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?**:]{.underline} The bill decreases federal land holdings,
and thus slightly contracts the size of government.

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

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Joelle Cannon;
<joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov>, (202) 226-9717.

**H.Con.Res. 52 --- Supporting the goals and ideals of American Heart
Month *(Millender-McDonald, D-CA)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The resolution is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend
the rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.Con.Res. 52 resolves that the Congress:

-   "supports the goals and ideals of American Heart Month;

-   "invites the chief executive officers of the States, territories,
    and possessions of the United States to issue proclamations
    designating American Heart Month and recognizing the goals and
    ideals of American Heart Month;

-   "commends the efforts of States, territories and possessions of the
    United States, localities, non-profit organizations, businesses, and
    other entities, and the people of the United States who support the
    goals and ideals of American Heart Month;

-   "recognizes and reaffirms our Nation's commitment to fighting heart
    disease by promoting awareness about its causes, risks, and
    prevention and **by promoting new education programs**, supporting
    research, and expanding access to medical treatment;

-   "recognizes all Americans battling heart disease, expresses
    gratitude to their family members and friends who are a source of
    love and encouragement to them as they combat this disease, and
    salutes the health care professionals and medical researchers who
    provide assistance to those so afflicted and continue to work to
    find cures and improve treatments; and

-   "encourages each and every American to take to heart the four simple
    healthy life, healthy heart goals identified by the HealthierUS
    Initiative of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services:
    exercise regularly and maintain a healthy weight; develop good
    eating habits; avoid tobacco products, drugs and excessive alcohol;
    and have regular medical checkups to take advantage of screenings
    that can detect heart-disease related problems early" (emphasis
    added).

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

-   "heart disease affects adult men and women of every age and race in
    the United States;

-   "heart disease continues to be the leading cause of death in the
    United States;

-   "an estimated 79 million adult Americans, nearly one in every 3,
    have 1 or more types of heart disease, including high blood
    pressure, coronary heart disease, congestive heart failure, stroke,
    and congenital heart defects;

-   "these studies have identified the following as major risk factors
    that cannot be changed: age (the risk of developing heart disease
    gradually increases as people age; advanced age significantly
    increases the risk); gender (men have greater risk of developing
    heart disease than women); and heredity (children of parents with
    heart disease are more likely to develop it themselves; African
    Americans have more severe high blood pressure than Caucasians and
    therefore are at higher risk; the risk is also higher among Latina
    Americans, some Asian Americans, and Native Americans and other
    indigenous populations);

-   "these studies have identified the following as major risk factors
    that Americans can modify, treat or control by changing their
    lifestyle or seeking appropriate medical treatment: high blood
    pressure, high blood cholesterol, smoking tobacco products and
    exposure to tobacco smoke, physical inactivity, obesity, and
    diabetes mellitus;

-   "these studies have identified the following as contributing risk
    factors that Americans can also take action to modify, treat or
    control by changing their lifestyle or seeking appropriate medical
    treatment: individual response to stress, excessive consumption of
    alcoholic beverages, use of certain illegal drugs, and hormone
    replacement therapy;

-   "the American Heart Association projects that in 2007 1.2 million
    Americans will have a first or recurrent heart attack and 452,000 of
    these people will die as a result; and

-   "every year since 1964 the President has issued a proclamation
    designating the month February as 'American Heart Month'."

[**Committee Action**:]{.underline} H.Con.Res. 52 was introduced on
January 31, 2007, and referred to the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce.

[**Cost to Taxpayers**:]{.underline} The resolution would authorize no
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}**: Joelle Cannon;
<joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov>, (202) 226-9717.

**H.Con.Res. 74 --- Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the
need for additional research into the chronic neurological condition
hydrocephalus *(Thompson, D-CA)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The resolution is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend
the rules and pass the resolution.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** H.Con.Res. 74 would resolve that the Congress
commends the Director of the National Institutes of Health for working
with leading scientists and researchers to organize the first-ever
National Institutes of Health conference on hydrocephalus. The
resolution also states the following Sense of the Congress:

-   "the Director of the National Institutes of Health should continue
    the current collaboration with respect to hydrocephalus among the
    National Eye Institute; the National Human Genome Research
    Institute; the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and
    Bioengineering; the National Institute of Child Health and Human
    Development; the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and
    Stroke; the National Institute on Aging; and the Office of Rare
    Diseases;

-   "further research into the epidemiology, pathophysiology, disease
    burden, and improved treatment of hydrocephalus should be conducted
    or supported; and

-   "public awareness and professional education regarding hydrocephalus
    should increase through partnerships between the Federal Government
    and patient advocacy organizations, such as the Hydrocephalus
    Association."

H.Con.Res. 74 lists a number of findings, including the following:

-   "hydrocephalus is a serious neurological condition, characterized by
    the abnormal buildup of cerebrospinal fluids in the ventricles of
    the brain;

-   "there is no known cure for hydrocephalus;

-   "hydrocephalus affects an estimated one million Americans;

-   "with appropriate diagnosis and treatment, people with hydrocephalus
    are able to live full and productive lives;

-   "there are fewer than 10 centers in the United States specializing
    in the treatment of adults with normal pressure hydrocephalus; and

-   "each year, the people of the United States spend in excess of \$1
    billion to treat hydrocephalus;

-   "a September 2005 conference sponsored by 7 institutes of the
    National Institutes of Health---'Hydrocephalus: Myths, New Facts,
    Clear Directions'\--resulted in efforts to initiate new,
    collaborative research and treatment efforts."

[**Committee Action**:]{.underline} H.Con.Res. 74 was introduced on
January 16, 2007, and was referred to the House committee on Committee
on Energy and Commerce.

[**Cost to Taxpayers**:]{.underline} A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

[**Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal
Government?**:]{.underline} The bill decreases federal land holdings,
and thus slightly contracts the size of government.

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

**[RSC Staff Contact]{.underline}**: Joelle Cannon;
<joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov>, (202) 226-9717.

**H.R. 710 --- Charlie W. Norwood Living Kidney Organ Donation
Clarification Act *(Norwood, R-GA)***

**[Order of Business]{.underline}:** The bill is scheduled for
consideration on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, under a motion to suspend
the rules and pass the bill.

Note: On February 13, 2007, long-time conservative activist, Rep.
Charlie Norwood lost his long battle with cancer.  RSC Chairman Jeb
Hensarling (R-TX) released [[this
statement]{.underline}](http://www.house.gov/hensarling/rsc/doc/CA_022007_hensarlingnorwood.doc)
in honor of Rep. Norwood.

**[Summary]{.underline}:** Current law prohibits any person from
knowingly acquiring, receiving, or otherwise transferring any human
organ for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation if the
transfer affects interstate commerce. H.R. 710 would provide that this
prohibition does not apply with respect to the paired donation of human
kidneys.

H.R. 710 provides the following definition of "paired donation of human
kidney:"

-   "the donation and receipt of human kidneys under the following
    circumstances:

-   "An individual (referred to as the first donor) desires to make a
    living donation of a kidney specifically to a particular patient
    (referred to as the first patient), but such donor is biologically
    incompatible as a donor for such patient.

-   "A second individual (referred to as the 'second donor') desires to
    make a living donation of a kidney specifically to a second
    particular patient (referred to as the 'second patient'), but such
    donor is biologically incompatible as a donor for such patient.

-   "the first donor is biologically compatible as a donor of a kidney
    for the second patient, and the second donor is biologically
    compatible as a donor of a kidney for the first patient.

-   "If there is any additional donor-patient pair, each donor in the
    group of donor-patient pairs is biologically compatible as a donor
    of a kidney for a patient in such group.

-   "All donors and patients in the group of donor-patient pairs
    (whether two pairs or more than two pairs) enter into a single
    agreement to donate and receive such kidneys, respectively,
    according to such biological compatibility in the group."

In short, the paired donation system allows for those patients with a
willing, living donor, to be paired up with living donors for other
patients (also with living donors), so that biologically compatible
donors are found for individuals with living donors. For example, assume
that Patient A has a friend who is a living, willing donor (Donor A),
but Donor A is not biologically compatible (for example, has a different
blood type) with their friend. Then, assume that Patient B also has a
friend who is a living, willing donor (Donor B), but who also is not
compatible with this friend. However, Patient A is compatible with Donor
B, and Patient B is compatible with Donor A. The paired donation system
would allow these donors to provide kidneys to these patients, without
the patients being placed on the kidney donation list, waiting for a
kidney from a deceased individual.

**[Additional Information]{.underline}**: According to the sponsor's
office, "Currently, 73,000 Americans are in need of a kidney transplant.
The average wait time to receive a kidney is over 4 years. Paired
transplantation is a way to solve the dilemma faced by people who want
to become living organ donors for a family member or friend, but are
unable to do so because they are biologically incompatible. In the
process of kidney paired donor transplants, a pair consisting of a
kidney transplant candidate and an incompatible living donor is matched
with another such incompatible pair to enable two transplants that
otherwise would not occur.

The controversy over paired organ donation began with a previous
interpretation by the Department of Health and Human Services stating
that paired donation may be in violation of the National Organ
Transplant Act's (NOTA) valuable consideration clause, which was
intended to outlaw the buying and/or selling of organs. As a result of
HHS' past questioning reflecting a sentiment that no longer exists,
sentiment wary of performing paired donation remains in some corners of
the transplant community but not of the procedure itself \-- even though
it has never been recognized as unlawful. Several states have begun to
allow paired donation to take place, but because the United Network for
Organ Sharing (UNOS) and create a national database until federal
guidance is given and thus will not track eligibility for paired
donation, thousands of people die waiting on a transplant list who could
be saved through paired donation.

Letters of strong support for H.R. 710 have been issued by the United
Network for Organ Sharing, the American Society of Transplantation,
Association of Organ Procurement Organizations, the National Kidney
Foundation, the American Society of Pediatric Nephrology, NATCO, Cedars
Sinai Health Systems, Johns Hopkins, and the American Society of
Transplant."

[**Committee Action**:]{.underline} H.R. 710 was introduced on January
29, 2007, and was referred to the House committee on Committee on Energy
and Commerce.

[**Cost to Taxpayers**:]{.underline} Although a CBO cost estimate is
unavailable, this bill does not appear to affect federal 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}**: Joelle Cannon;
<joelle.cannon@mail.house.gov>, (202) 226-9717.

\###