U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

46–137 

" ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 110TH CONGRESS

2d Session 

REPORT

2009

110–937 

Union Calendar No. 610 

REPORT ON THE ACTIVITY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

FOR THE

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

JANUARY 3, 2009.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 

the State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTSE:\Seals\Congress.#13
(II) 

MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

(Ratio 31–26) 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan, Chairman 

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

RICK BOUCHER, Virginia 

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey 

BART GORDON, Tennessee 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

BART STUPAK, Michigan 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

Vice Chair 

LOIS CAPPS, California 

MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

JANE HARMAN, California 

TOM ALLEN, Maine 

JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

HILDA L. SOLIS, California 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas 

JAY INSLEE, Washington 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

MIKE ROSS, Arkansas 

DARLENE HOOLEY, Oregon 

ANTHONY D. WIENER, New York 

JIM MATHESON, Utah 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana 

JOHN BARROW, Georgia 

BARON P. HILL, Indiana 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

JOE BARTON, Texas 

RALPH M. HALL, Texas 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

NATHAN DEAL, Georgia 

ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky 

BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico 

JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona 

CHARLES W. ‘‘CHIP’’ PICKERING, 

Mississippi 

VITO FOSSELLA, New York 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

STEVE BUYER, Indiana 

GEORGE RADANOVICH, California 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

MARY BONO MACK, California 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

LEE TERRY, Nebraska 

MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey 

MIKE ROGERS, Michigan 

SUE WILKINS MYRICK, North Carolina 

JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma 

TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(III)

COMMITTEE ORGANIZATION AND MEMBERSHIP CHANGES

The Committee on Energy and Commerce organized on January 

10, 2007, the Honorable John D. Dingell (D–MI), presiding. Seven 

were new to the Committee at the beginning of the Congress: Ms. 

Hooley, Messrs. Weiner, Matheson, Butterfield, Melancon, Barrow, 

and Hill. 

One vacancy was created by the death of Hon. Charles W. Norwood, Jr. (R–GA) on February 13, 2007. This vacancy was later 

filled on March 13, 2007, by Hon. Marsha Blackburn (R–TN), who 

served on this Committee in the previous, to rank after Rep. Burgess. Rep. Blackburn assumed the subcommittee vacancies left by 

the death of Rep. Norwood. 

A number of other changes occurred in the first session of the 

110th Congress regarding the membership of the Committee and 

its subcommittees. Soon after the Committee organization in January, Ms. Hooley (D–OR) resigned from the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials and was replaced by Ms. 

Schakowsky (D–IL), to rank after Mr. Green (D–TX). Mr. Sullivan 

(R–OK) took a temporary leave of absence from the Committee and 

was replaced by Hon. Paul E. Gillmor (R–OH) on June 19, 2007. 

Mr. Gillmor was assigned to the Subcommittee on Health by unanimous consent. On June 27, 2007, Mr. Gillmor resigned from the 

Committee and Mr. Sullivan was elected to return to the Committee and his subcommittee assignments. A vacancy was created 

by the resignation from the House of Representatives of Hon. Dennis Hastert (R–IL) on November 27, 2007. The resignation of Mr. 

Hastert left a vacancy in the ranking Republican member of the 

Subcommittee. This vacancy was subsequently filled on December 

18, 2007, with the election to the Committee of Hon. Roy Blunt (R– 

MO), to rank after Mr. Fossella (R–NY). 

On December 13, 2007, the Ranking minority member, Rep. Barton (R–TX), presented a resolution that was approved by the Committee making certain changes in the Republican membership and 

Ranking Members of the standing subcommittees for the One Hundred Tenth Congress, due to the retirement of Mr. Hastert. The 

Ranking Minority members of the Subcommittee changed as follows: Mr. Upton (R–MI) for Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality; Mr. Stearns for Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the 

Internet; Mr. Whitfield (R–KY) for Subcommittee on Commerce, 

Trade, and Consumer Protection; Mr. Shimkus (R–IL) for Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations; and Mr. Shadegg (R– 

AZ) for Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials. 

On December 18, 2007, the Committee approved the appointment 

of Mr. Blunt to the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality, to 

rank behind Mr. Pickering (R–MS). Further changes to the Republican membership were made in a resolution offered by Mr. 

Shimkus in full Committee markup on March 13, 2008. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
IV

In the second session of the 110th Congress, Hon. Albert R. 

Wynn (D–MD), chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment and 

Hazardous Materials, resigned on April 9, 2008, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The vacancy created by his resignation was filled by Hon. Doris Matsui (D–CA), who was elected 

to the Committee on June 18, 2008. Ms. Matsui became a member 

of the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials, 

ranking behind Ms. Schakowsky, and the Subcommittee on Energy 

and Air Quality, ranking after Mr. Matheson (D–UT). 

Mr. Green was approved to serve as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials on July 18, 

2008, to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Mr. Wynn. 

Ms. Capps (D–CA) was appointed on June 18, 2008, by Chairman 

Dingell to serve as Vice Chair of the Subcommittee on Health, 

which was formerly held by Mr. Green. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(V)

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE, 

Washington, DC, January 3, 2009. 

Hon. LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk, House of Representatives, 

Washington, DC. 

DEAR MS. MILLER: Pursuant to clause 1(d) of Rule XI of the 

Rules of the House of Representatives, I present herewith a report 

on the activity of the Committee on Energy and Commerce for the 

110th Congress, including the Committee’s review and study of legislation within its jurisdiction and the oversight activities undertaken by the Committee. 

With every good wish, 

Sincerely, 

JOHN D. DINGELL, 

Chairman. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(VII) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Jurisdiction ............................................................................................................... 1 

Rules for the Committee ......................................................................................... 3 

Members and Organization ..................................................................................... 11 

Legislative and Oversight Summary ...................................................................... 19 

Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection .......................... 21 

Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality ............................................................. 45 

Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials .................................. 61 

Subcommittee on Health ......................................................................................... 73 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations .................................................... 197 

Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet ..................................... 243 

Oversight Plan for the 110th Congress .................................................................. 273 

Appendix I—Statistical Summary of Activity ....................................................... 291 

Appendix II—Public Laws ...................................................................................... 293 

Appendix III—Publications of the Committee ....................................................... 295 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
Union Calendar No. 610 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 110–937 

REPORT ON THE ACTIVITY OF THE COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND COMMERCE FOR THE 110TH CONGRESS 

JANUARY 3, 2009.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State 

of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. DINGELL, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

ACTIVITY OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 

COMMERCE, 110th CONGRESS 

The jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, as 

prescribed by Clause 1(f) of Rule X of the Rules of the House of 

Representatives, is as follows: 

(1) Biomedical research and development. 

(2) Consumer affairs and consumer protection. 

(3) Health and health facilities (except health care supported by 

payroll deductions). 

(4) Interstate energy compacts. 

(5) Interstate and foreign commerce generally. 

(6) Exploration, production, storage, supply, marketing, pricing, 

and regulation of energy resources, including all fossil fuels, solar 

energy, and other unconventional or renewable energy resources. 

(7) Conservation of energy resources. 

(8) Energy information generally. 

(9) The generation and marketing of power (except by federally 

chartered or Federal regional power marketing authorities); reliability and interstate transmission of, and ratemaking for, all 

power; and siting of generation facilities (except the installation of 

interconnections between Government waterpower projects). 

(10) General management of the Department of Energy and management and all functions of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 

(11) National energy policy generally. 

(12) Public health and quarantine. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
2 

(13) Regulation of the domestic nuclear energy industry, including regulation of research and development reactors and nuclear 

regulatory research. 

(14) Regulation of interstate and foreign communications. 

(15) Travel and tourism. 

The committee shall have the same jurisdiction with respect to 

regulation of nuclear facilities and of use of nuclear energy as it 

has with respect to regulation of non-nuclear facilities and of use 

of non-nuclear energy. 

In addition, clause 3(e) of Rule X of the Rules of the House of 

Representatives provides that the Committee on Energy and Commerce shall review and study on a continuing basis laws, programs, 

and Government activities relating to nuclear and other energy and 

nonmilitary nuclear energy research and development including 

the disposal of nuclear waste. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(3) 

RULES FOR THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 110TH 

CONGRESS 

(Adopted January 10, 2007) 

RULE 1.—GENERAL PROVISIONS

(a) Rules of the Committee.—The Rules of the House are the 

rules of the Committee on Energy and Commerce (hereinafter the 

‘‘Committee’’) and its subcommittees so far as is applicable, except 

that a motion to recess from day to day, and a motion to dispense 

with the first reading (in full) of a bill or resolution, if printed copies are available, is nondebatable and privileged in the Committee 

and its subcommittees. 

(b) Rules of the Subcommittees.—Each subcommittee of the Committee is part of the Committee and is subject to the authority and 

direction of the Committee and to its rules so far as applicable. 

Written rules adopted by the Committee, not inconsistent with the 

Rules of the House, shall be binding on each subcommittee of the 

Committee. 

RULE 2.—TIME AND PLACE OF MEETINGS

(a) Regular Meeting Days.—The Committee shall meet on the 

fourth Tuesday of each month at 10 a.m., for the consideration of 

bills, resolutions, and other business, if the House is in session on 

that day. If the House is not in session on that day and the Committee has not met during such month, the Committee shall meet 

at the earliest practicable opportunity when the House is again in 

session. The chairman of the Committee may, at his discretion, 

cancel, delay, or defer any meeting required under this section, 

after consultation with the ranking minority member. 

(b) Additional Meetings.—The chairman may call and convene, as 

he considers necessary, additional meetings of the Committee for 

the consideration of any bill or resolution pending before the Committee or for the conduct of other Committee business. The Committee shall meet for such purposes pursuant to that call of the 

chairman. 

(c) Vice Chairmen; Presiding Member.—The chairman shall designate a member of the majority party to serve as vice chairman 

of the Committee, and shall designate a majority member of each 

subcommittee to serve as vice chairman of each subcommittee. The 

vice chairman of the Committee or subcommittee, as the case may 

be, shall preside at any meeting or hearing during the temporary 

absence of the chairman. If the chairman and vice chairman of the 

Committee or subcommittee are not present at any meeting or 

hearing, the ranking member of the majority party who is present 

shall preside at the meeting or hearing. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
4 

(d) Open Meetings and Hearings.—Except as provided by the 

Rules of the House, each meeting of the Committee or any of its 

subcommittees for the transaction of business, including the markup of legislation, and each hearing, shall be open to the public including to radio, television and still photography coverage, consistent with the provisions of Rule XI of the Rules of the House. 

RULE 3.—AGENDA

The agenda for each Committee or subcommittee meeting (other 

than a hearing), setting out the date, time, place, and all items of 

business to be considered, shall be provided to each member of the 

Committee at least 36 hours in advance of such meeting. 

RULE 4.—PROCEDURE

(a)(1) Hearings.—The date, time, place, and subject matter of any 

hearing of the Committee or any of its subcommittees shall be announced at least one week in advance of the commencement of such 

hearing, unless the Committee or subcommittee determines in accordance with clause 2(g)(3) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House 

that there is good cause to begin the hearing sooner. 

(2)(A) Meetings.—The date, time, place, and subject matter of any 

meeting (other than a hearing) scheduled on a Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday when the House will be in session, shall be announced at least 36 hours (exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and 

legal holidays except when the House is in session on such days) 

in advance of the commencement of such meeting. 

(3) Motions.—Pursuant to clause 1(a)(2) of rule XI of the Rules 

of the House, privileged motions to recess from day to day, or recess subject to the call of the Chair (within 24 hours), and to dispense with the first reading (in full) of a bill or resolution if printed 

copies are available shall be decided without debate. 

(B) Other Meetings.—The date, time, place, and subject matter of 

a meeting (other than a hearing or a meeting to which subparagraph (A) applies) shall be announced at least 72 hours in advance 

of the commencement of such meeting. 

(b)(1) Requirements for Testimony.—Each witness who is to appear before the Committee or a subcommittee shall file with the 

clerk of the Committee, at least two working days in advance of his 

or her appearance, sufficient copies, as determined by the chairman 

of the Committee or a subcommittee, of a written statement of his 

or her proposed testimony to provide to members and staff of the 

Committee or subcommittee, the news media, and the general public. Each witness shall, to the greatest extent practicable, also provide a copy of such written testimony in an electronic format prescribed by the chairman. Each witness shall limit his or her oral 

presentation to a brief summary of the argument. The chairman of 

the Committee or of a subcommittee, or the presiding member, may 

waive the requirements of this paragraph or any part thereof. 

(2) Additional Requirements for Testimony.—To the greatest extent practicable, the written testimony of each witness appearing 

in a non-governmental capacity shall include a curriculum vitae 

and a disclosure of the amount and source (by agency and program) 

of any federal grant (or subgrant thereof) or contract (or subVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
5 

contract thereof) received during the current fiscal year or either 

of the two preceding fiscal years by the witness or by an entity represented by the witness. 

(c)(1) Questioning Witnesses.—The right to interrogate the witnesses before the Committee or any of its subcommittees shall alternate between majority and minority members. Each member 

shall be limited to 5 minutes in the interrogation of witnesses until 

such time as each member who so desires has had an opportunity 

to question witnesses. No member shall be recognized for a second 

period of 5 minutes to interrogate a witness until each member of 

the Committee present has been recognized once for that purpose. 

While the Committee or subcommittee is operating under the 5 

minute rule for the interrogation of witnesses, the chairman shall 

recognize in order of appearance members who were not present 

when the meeting was called to order after all members who were 

present when the meeting was called to order have been recognized 

in the order of seniority on the Committee or subcommittee, as the 

case may be. 

(2) Questions for the Record.—Each member may submit to the 

Chairman of the Committee or the subcommittee additional questions for the record, to be answered by the witnesses who have appeared. Each member shall provide a copy of the questions in an 

electronic format to the clerk of the Committee no later than ten 

business days following a hearing. The Chairman shall transmit all 

questions received from members of the Committee or the subcommittee to the appropriate witness, and include the transmittal 

letter and the responses from the witnesses in the hearing record. 

(d) Explanation of Subcommittee Action.—No bill, recommendation, or other matter reported by a subcommittee shall be considered by the full Committee unless the text of the matter reported, 

together with an explanation, has been available to members of the 

Committee for at least 36 hours. Such explanation shall include a 

summary of the major provisions of the legislation, an explanation 

of the relationship of the matter to present law, and a summary 

of the need for the legislation. All subcommittee actions shall be reported promptly by the clerk of the Committee to all members of 

the Committee. 

(e) Opening Statements.—(1) All written opening statements at 

hearings conducted by the committee or any of its subcommittees 

shall be made part of the permanent hearing record. 

(2) Statements shall be limited to 5 minutes each for the chairman and ranking minority member (or their respective designee) of 

the Committee or subcommittee, as applicable, and 3 minutes each 

for all other members. With the consent of the Committee, prior to 

the recognition of the first witness for testimony, any Member, 

when recognized for an opening statement, may completely defer 

his or her opening statement and instead use those three minutes 

during the initial round of questioning. 

(3) At any hearing of the full Committee, the chairman may limit 

opening statements for Members (including, at the discretion of the 

Chairman, the chairman and ranking minority member) to one 

minute. At any hearing conducted by any subcommittee, the chairman of that subcommittee, with the consent of its ranking minority 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
6 

member, may reduce the time for statements by members or defer 

statements until the conclusion of testimony. 

RULE 5.—WAIVER OF AGENDA, NOTICE, AND LAYOVER

REQUIREMENTS

Requirements of rules 3, 4(a)(2), and 4(d) may be waived by a 

majority of those present and voting (a majority being present) of 

the Committee or subcommittee, as the case may be. 

RULE 6.—QUORUM

Testimony may be taken and evidence received at any hearing at 

which there are present not fewer than two members of the Committee or subcommittee in question. A majority of the members of 

the Committee shall constitute a quorum for the purposes of reporting any measure or matter, of authorizing a subpoena, or of 

closing a meeting or hearing pursuant to clause 2(g) of Rule XI of 

the Rules of the House (except as provided in clause 2(g)(2)(A) and 

(B)). For the purposes of taking any action other than those specified in the preceding sentence, one-third of the members of the 

Committee or subcommittee shall constitute a quorum. 

RULE 7.—OFFICIAL COMMITTEE RECORDS

(a)(1) Journal.—The proceedings of the Committee shall be recorded in a journal which shall, among other things, show those 

present at each meeting, and include a record of the vote on any 

question on which a record vote is demanded and a description of 

the amendment, motion, order, or other proposition voted. A copy 

of the journal shall be furnished to the ranking minority member. 

(2) Record Votes.—A record vote may be demanded by one-fifth 

of the members present or, in the apparent absence of a quorum, 

by any one member. No demand for a record vote shall be made 

or obtained except for the purpose of procuring a record vote or in 

the apparent absence of a quorum. The result of each record vote 

in any meeting of the Committee shall be made available in the 

Committee office for inspection by the public, as provided in Rule 

XI, clause 2(e) of the Rules of the House. 

(b) Archived Records.—The records of the Committee at the National Archives and Records Administration shall be made available for public use in accordance with Rule VII of the Rules of the 

House. The chairman shall notify the ranking minority member of 

any decision, pursuant to clause 3 (b)(3) or clause 4 (b) of the Rule, 

to withhold a record otherwise available, and the matter shall be 

presented to the Committee for a determination on the written request of any member of the Committee. The chairman shall consult 

with the ranking minority member on any communication from the 

Archivist of the United States or the Clerk of the House concerning 

the disposition of noncurrent records pursuant to clause 3(b) of the 

Rule. 

RULE 8.—SUBCOMMITTEES

There shall be such standing subcommittees with such jurisdiction and size as determined by the majority party caucus of the 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
7 

Committee. The jurisdiction, number, and size of the subcommittees shall be determined by the majority party caucus prior to the 

start of the process for establishing subcommittee chairmanships 

and assignments. 

RULE 9.—POWERS AND DUTIES OF SUBCOMMITTEES

Each subcommittee is authorized to meet, hold hearings, receive 

testimony, mark up legislation, and report to the Committee on all 

matters referred to it. Subcommittee chairmen shall set hearing 

and meeting dates only with the approval of the chairman of the 

Committee with a view toward assuring the availability of meeting 

rooms and avoiding simultaneous scheduling of Committee and 

subcommittee meetings or hearings whenever possible. 

RULE 10.—REFERENCE OF LEGISLATION AND OTHER MATTERS

All legislation and other matters referred to the Committee shall 

be referred to the subcommittee of appropriate jurisdiction within 

two weeks of the date of receipt by the Committee unless action is 

taken by the full committee within those two weeks, or by majority 

vote of the members of the Committee, consideration is to be by the 

full Committee. In the case of legislation or other matter within the 

jurisdiction of more than one subcommittee, the chairman of the 

Committee may, in his discretion, refer the matter simultaneously 

to two or more subcommittees for concurrent consideration, or may 

designate a subcommittee of primary jurisdiction and also refer the 

matter to one or more additional subcommittees for consideration 

in sequence (subject to appropriate time limitations), either on its 

initial referral or after the matter has been reported by the subcommittee of primary jurisdiction. Such authority shall include the 

authority to refer such legislation or matter to an ad hoc subcommittee appointed by the chairman, with the approval of the 

Committee, from the members of the subcommittee having legislative or oversight jurisdiction. 

RULE 11.—RATIO OF SUBCOMMITTEES

The majority caucus of the Committee shall determine an appropriate ratio of majority to minority party members for each subcommittee and the chairman shall negotiate that ratio with the minority party, provided that the ratio of party members on each subcommittee shall be no less favorable to the majority than that of 

the full Committee, nor shall such ratio provide for a majority of 

less than two majority members. 

RULE 12.—SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

(a) Selection of Subcommittee Members.—Prior to any organizational meeting held by the Committee, the majority and minority 

caucuses shall select their respective members of the standing subcommittees. 

(b) Ex Officio Members.—The chairman and ranking minority 

member of the Committee shall be ex officio members with voting 

privileges of each subcommittee of which they are not assigned as 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
8 

members and may be counted for purposes of establishing a 

quorum in such subcommittees. 

RULE 13.—MANAGING LEGISLATION ON THE HOUSE FLOOR

The chairman, in his discretion, shall designate which member 

shall manage legislation reported by the Committee to the House. 

RULE 14.—COMMITTEE PROFESSIONAL AND CLERICAL STAFF

APPOINTMENTS

(a) Delegation of Staff.—Whenever the chairman of the Committee determines that any professional staff member appointed 

pursuant to the provisions of clause 9 of Rule X of the House of 

Representatives, who is assigned to such chairman and not to the 

ranking minority member, by reason of such professional staff 

member’s expertise or qualifications will be of assistance to one or 

more subcommittees in carrying out their assigned responsibilities, 

he may delegate such member to such subcommittees for such purpose. A delegation of a member of the professional staff pursuant 

to this subsection shall be made after consultation with subcommittee chairmen and with the approval of the subcommittee 

chairman or chairmen involved. 

(b) Minority Professional Staff.—Professional staff members appointed pursuant to clause 9 of Rule X of the House of Representatives, who are assigned to the ranking minority member of the 

Committee and not to the chairman of the Committee, shall be assigned to such Committee business as the minority party members 

of the Committee consider advisable. 

(c) Additional Staff Appointments.—In addition to the professional staff appointed pursuant to clause 9 of Rule X of the House 

of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee shall be entitled 

to make such appointments to the professional and clerical staff of 

the Committee as may be provided within the budget approved for 

such purposes by the Committee. Such appointee shall be assigned 

to such business of the full Committee as the chairman of the Committee considers advisable. 

(d) Sufficient Staff.—The chairman shall ensure that sufficient 

staff is made available to each subcommittee to carry out its responsibilities under the rules of the Committee. 

(e) Fair Treatment of Minority Members in Appointment of Committee Staff.—The chairman shall ensure that the minority members of the Committee are treated fairly in appointment of Committee staff. 

(f) Contracts for Temporary or Intermittent Services.—Any contract for the temporary services or intermittent service of individual consultants or organizations to make studies or advise the 

Committee or its subcommittees with respect to any matter within 

their jurisdiction shall be deemed to have been approved by a majority of the members of the Committee if approved by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee. Such approval shall not be deemed to have been given if at least one-third 

of the members of the Committee request in writing that the Committee formally act on such a contract, if the request is made within 10 days after the latest date on which such chairman or chairVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
9 

men, and such ranking minority member or members, approve 

such contract. 

RULE 15.—SUPERVISION, DUTIES OF STAFF

(a) Supervision of Majority Staff.—The professional and clerical 

staff of the Committee not assigned to the minority shall be under 

the supervision and direction of the chairman who, in consultation 

with the chairmen of the subcommittees, shall establish and assign 

the duties and responsibilities of such staff members and delegate 

such authority as he determines appropriate. 

(b) Supervision of Minority Staff.—The professional and clerical 

staff assigned to the minority shall be under the supervision and 

direction of the minority members of the Committee, who may delegate such authority as they determine appropriate. 

RULE 16.—COMMITTEE BUDGET

(a) Preparation of Committee Budget.—The chairman of the Committee, after consultation with the ranking minority member of the 

Committee and the chairmen of the subcommittees, shall for the 

110th Congress prepare a preliminary budget for the Committee, 

with such budget including necessary amounts for professional and 

clerical staff, travel, investigations, equipment and miscellaneous 

expenses of the Committee and the subcommittees, and which shall 

be adequate to fully discharge the Committee’s responsibilities for 

legislation and oversight. Such budget shall be presented by the 

chairman to the majority party caucus of the Committee and thereafter to the full Committee for its approval. 

(b) Approval of the Committee Budget.—The chairman shall take 

whatever action is necessary to have the budget as finally approved 

by the Committee duly authorized by the House. No proposed Committee budget may be submitted to the Committee on House Administration unless it has been presented to and approved by the 

majority party caucus and thereafter by the full Committee. The 

chairman of the Committee may authorize all necessary expenses 

in accordance with these rules and within the limits of the Committee’s budget as approved by the House. 

(c) Monthly Expenditures Report.—Committee members shall be 

furnished a copy of each monthly report, prepared by the chairman 

for the Committee on House Administration, which shows expenditures made during the reporting period and cumulative for the year 

by the Committee and subcommittees, anticipated expenditures for 

the projected Committee program, and detailed information on 

travel. 

RULE 17.—BROADCASTING OF COMMITTEE HEARINGS

Any meeting or hearing that is open to the public may be covered 

in whole or in part by radio or television or still photography, subject to the requirements of clause 4 of Rule XI of the Rules of the 

House. The coverage of any hearing or other proceeding of the 

Committee or any subcommittee thereof by television, radio, or still 

photography shall be under the direct supervision of the chairman 

of the Committee, the subcommittee chairman, or other member of 

the Committee presiding at such hearing or other proceeding and 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
10 

may be terminated by such member in accordance with the Rules 

of the House. 

RULE 18.—COMPTROLLER GENERAL AUDITS

The chairman of the Committee is authorized to request 

verification examinations by the Comptroller General of the United 

States pursuant to Title V, Part A of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (Public Law 94–163), after consultation with the 

members of the Committee. 

RULE 19.—SUBPOENAS

The Committee, or any subcommittee, may authorize and issue 

a subpoena under clause 2(m)(2)(A) of Rule XI of the House, if authorized by a majority of the members of the Committee or subcommittee (as the case may be) voting, a quorum being present. 

Authorized subpoenas may be issued over the signature of the 

chairman of the Committee or any member designated by the Committee, and may be served by any person designated by such chairman or member. The chairman of the Committee may authorize 

and issue subpoenas under such clause during any period for which 

the House has adjourned for a period in excess of 3 days when, in 

the opinion of the chairman, authorization and issuance of the subpoena is necessary to obtain the material set forth in the subpoena. 

The chairman shall report to the members of the Committee on the 

authorization and issuance of a subpoena during the recess period 

as soon as practicable but in no event later than one week after 

service of such subpoena. 

RULE 20.—TRAVEL OF MEMBERS AND STAFF

(a) Approval of Travel.—Consistent with the primary expense 

resolution and such additional expense resolutions as may have 

been approved, travel to be reimbursed from funds set aside for the 

Committee for any member or any staff member shall be paid only 

upon the prior authorization of the chairman. Travel may be authorized by the chairman for any member and any staff member 

in connection with the attendance of hearings conducted by the 

Committee or any subcommittee thereof and meetings, conferences, 

and investigations which involve activities or subject matter under 

the general jurisdiction of the Committee. Before such authorization is given there shall be submitted to the chairman in writing 

the following: (1) the purpose of the travel; (2) the dates during 

which the travel is to be made and the date or dates of the event 

for which the travel is being made; (3) the location of the event for 

which the travel is to be made; and (4) the names of members and 

staff seeking authorization. 

(b) Approval of Travel by Minority Members and Staff.—In the 

case of travel by minority party members and minority party professional staff for the purpose set out in (a), the prior approval, not 

only of the chairman but also of the ranking minority member, 

shall be required. Such prior authorization shall be given by the 

chairman only upon the representation by the ranking minority 

member in writing setting forth those items enumerated in (1), (2), 

(3), and (4) of paragraph (a). 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(11) 

MEMBERSHIP AND ORGANIZATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

(Ratio 31–26) 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan, Chairman 

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

RICK BOUCHER, Virginia 

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey 

BART GORDON, Tennessee 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

BART STUPAK, Michigan 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

Vice Chair 

LOIS CAPPS, California 

MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

JANE HARMAN, California 

TOM ALLEN, Maine 

JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

HILDA L. SOLIS, California 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas 

JAY INSLEE, Washington 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

MIKE ROSS, Arkansas 

DARLENE HOOLEY, Oregon 

ANTHONY D. WIENER, New York 

JIM MATHESON, Utah 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana 

JOHN BARROW, Georgia 

BARON P. HILL, Indiana 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

JOE BARTON, Texas 

RALPH M. HALL, Texas 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

NATHAN DEAL, Georgia 

ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky 

BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico 

JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona 

CHARLES W. ‘‘CHIP’’ PICKERING, 

Mississippi 

VITO FOSSELLA, New York 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

STEVE BUYER, Indiana 

GEORGE RADANOVICH, California 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

MARY BONO MACK, California 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

LEE TERRY, Nebraska 

MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey 

MIKE ROGERS, Michigan 

SUE WILKINS MYRICK, North Carolina 

JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma 

TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
12 

SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERSHIPS AND JURISDICTION 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION

(Ratio 16–13) 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois, Chairman 

JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

Vice Chairman 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

JOHN BARROW, Georgia 

BARON P. HILL, Indiana 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

RICK BOUCHER, Virginia 

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas 

MIKE ROSS, Arkansas 

DARLENE HOOLEY, Oregon 

ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York 

JIM MATHESON, Utah 

CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan 

(Ex Officio) 

ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

CHARLES W. ‘‘CHIP’’ PICKERING, 

Mississippi 

VITO FOSSELLA, New York 

GEORGE RADANOVICH, California 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

MARY BONO MACK, California 

LEE TERRY, Nebraska 

SUE WILKINS MYRICK, North Carolina 

JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

JOE BARTON, Texas (Ex Officio) 

Jurisdiction: Interstate and foreign commerce, including all trade matters within the jurisdiction of the full committee; regulation of commercial practices (the FTC), including sportsrelated matters; consumer affairs and consumer protection, including privacy matters generally; 

consumer product safety (the CPSC); and product liability; and motor vehicle safety; and 

regulation of travel, tourism, and time. 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND AIR QUALITY

(Ratio 18–15) 

RICK BOUCHER, Virginia, Chairman 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

Vice Chairman 

CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana 

JOHN BARROW, Georgia 

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

JANE HARMAN, California 

TOM ALLEN, Maine 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas 

JAY INSLEE, Washington 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

MIKE ROSS, Arkansas 

DARLENE HOOLEY, Oregon 

ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York 

JIM MATHESON, Utah 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan 

(Ex Officio) 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

RALPH M. HALL, Texas 

ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona 

CHARLES W. ‘‘CHIP’’ PICKERING, 

Mississippi 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

MARY BONO MACK, California 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

MIKE ROGERS, Michigan 

SUE WILKINS MYRICK, North Carolina 

JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

JOE BARTON, Texas (Ex Officio) 

Jurisdiction: National energy policy generally; fossil energy, renewable energy resources 

and synthetic fuels; energy conservation; energy information; energy regulation and utilization; 

utility issues and regulation of nuclear facilities; interstate energy compacts; nuclear energy 

and waste; The Clean Air Act; and, all laws, programs, and government activities affecting 

such matters. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
13 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

(Ratio 16–13) 

GENE GREEN, Texas, Chairman 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey 

BART STUPAK, Michigan 

LOIS CAPPS, California 

TOM ALLEN, Maine 

HILDA L. SOLIS, California 

Vice Chairman 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

JOHN BARROW, Georgia 

BARON P. HILL, Indiana 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

ANTHONY D. WIENER, New York 

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California 

JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan (Ex Officio) 

JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona 

RALPH M. HALL, Texas 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

NATHAN DEAL, Georgia 

HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico 

VITO FOSSELLA, New York 

GEORGE RADANOVICH, California 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

LEE TERRY, Nebraska 

MIKE ROGERS, Michigan 

JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma 

TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

JOE BARTON, Texas (Ex Officio) 

Jurisdiction: Environmental protection in general, including the Safe Drinking Water Act 

and risk assessment matters; solid waste, hazardous waste and toxic substances, including 

Superfund and RCRA; mining, oil, gas, and coal combustion wastes; and, noise pollution control. 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH

(Ratio 18–15) 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey, Chairman 

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California 

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York 

BART GORDON, Tennessee 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

LOIS CAPPS, California 

Vice Chairman 

TOM ALLEN, Maine 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

HILDA L. SOLIS, California 

MIKE ROSS, Arkansas 

DARLENE HOOLEY, Oregon 

ANTHONY D. WIENER, New York 

JIM MATHESON, Utah 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan (Ex Officio) 

NATHAN DEAL, Georgia 

RALPH M. HALL, Texas 

BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming 

HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico 

JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona 

STEVE BUYER, Indiana 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey 

MIKE ROGERS, Michigan 

SUE WILKINS MYRICK, North Carolina 

JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma 

TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

JOE BARTON, Texas (Ex Officio) 

Jurisdiction: Public health and quarantine; hospital construction; mental health and research; 

biomedical programs and health protection in general, including Medicaid and national health 

insurance; food and drugs; and drug abuse. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
14 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS

(Ratio 9–7) 

BART STUPAK, Michigan, Chairman 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana 

Vice Chairman 

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

JAY INSLEE, Washington 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan (Ex Officio) 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

JOE BARTON, Texas (Ex Officio) 

Jurisdiction: Responsibility for oversight of agencies, departments, and programs within 

the jurisdiction of the full committee, and for conducting investigations within such jurisdiction. 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND THE INTERNET

(Ratio 18–15) 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts, Chairman 

MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

Vice Chairman 

JANE HARMAN, California 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas 

JAY INSLEE, Washington 

BARON P. HILL, Indiana 

RICK BOUCHER, Virginia 

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey 

BART GORDON, Tennessee 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

BART STUPAK, Michigan 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

LOIS CAPPS, California 

HILDA L. SOLIS, California 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan (Ex Officio) 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

NATHAN DEAL, Georgia 

BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico 

CHARLES W. ‘‘CHIP’’ PICKERING, 

Mississippi 

VITO FOSSELLA, New York 

STEVE BUYER, Indiana 

GEORGE RADANOVICH, California 

MARY BONO MACK, California 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

LEE TERRY, Nebraska 

MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey 

JOE BARTON, Texas (Ex Officio) 

Jurisdiction: Interstate and foreign telecommunications, including but not limited to all 

telecommunication and information transmission by broadcast, radio, wire, microwave, satellite, 

or other mode. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
15 

COMMITTEE STAFF 

DENNIS B. FITZGIBBONS, Chief of Staff 

GREGG A. ROTHSCHILD, Deputy Chief of Staff and Chief Counsel 

SHARON E. DAVIS, Chief Clerk 

CAROLINE AHEARN, Counsel/EHM 

JOHN ARLINGTON, Senior Investigative Counsel 

JUDITH BAILEY, Counsel/CTCP 

VALERIE BARON, Legislative Clerk/CTCP 

ALEX BARRON, Professional Staff Member/Climate and Energy 

KEVIN S. BARSTOW, Investigative Counsel 

KRISTINE BLACKWOOD, Investigative Counsel 

RACHEL BLESHMAN, Legislative Clerk, Energy and Environment 

LAUREN BLOOMBERG, Assistant Press Secretary 

JIM CAHILL, Printing Editor 

KYLE CHAPMAN, Legislative Clerk/Oversight and Investigations 

ROBERT CLARK, Policy Coordinator/Health 

LISA CODY, Assistant Clerk 

SEAN CORCORAN, Assistant Clerk/Records and Legislative Calendar 

JONATHAN J. CORDONE, General Counsel 

WALTER J. CROSS, Technology Support Specialist 

COLIN CROWELL, Professional Staff Member/Telecommunications and the Internet 

ANGELA E. DAVIS, Assistant Clerk/Oversight and Investigations 

MATTHEW EISENBERG, Staff Assistant 

LUKE ENTELIS, Special Assistant 

ELIZABETH ERTEL, Assistant Clerk 

CHRISTIAN TAMOTSU FJELD, Policy Coordinator/CTCP 

YVETTE FONTENOT, Professional Staff Member/Health Finance 

JOHN FORD, Senior Counsel/Public Health 

MILLS FORNI, Press Assistant 

RICHARD A. FRANDSEN, Chief Counsel for Environment 

BRIN FRAZIER, Speechwriter/Deputy Communications Director 

WILLIAM GARNER, Professional Staff Member 

LINDA A. GOOD, Assistant Clerk for EAQ/EHM 

PETER GOODLOE, Legislative Counsel 

KATHERINE GRAHAM, Staff Assistant 

TIM GRONNIGER, Professional Staff Member 

SARAH L. GUERRIERI, Assistant Clerk 

BYRON GWINN, Staff Assistant 

CAITLIN HABERMAN, Staff Assistant 

AMY B. HALL, Professional Staff Member/Health Finance 

BRUCE HARRIS, Chief Policy Advisor, Energy and Air Quality 

ALEX HAUREK, Press Secretary 

CARLY HEPOLA, Legislative Clerk/Public Health 

VONCILLE TROTTER HINES, Assistant Investigator 

KARRIN HOESING, Legislative Analyst/EHM 

CARLA R. HULTBERG, Deputy Clerk for Technology and Administration 

JEANNE IRELAND, Chief Public Health Policy Advisor 

JOHN JIMISON, Counsel/EAQ 

PURVEE KEMPF, Counsel/Health Finance 

RAYMOND R. KENT, Jr., Deputy Clerk/Finance and Administration 

CHRISTOPHER KNAUER, Senior Investigator/Professional Staff Member 

AMY LEVINE, Senior Counsel/Telecommunications and the Internet 

JESSICA A. MCNIECE, Professional Staff Member 

JACK MANIKO, Counsel/Public Health 

RICHARD MILLER, Investigator/Professional Staff Member 

PHILIP MURPHY, Legislative Clerk/Telecommunications and the Internet 

DAVID NELSON, Senior Investigator 

TOMMY PAPAGEORGE, Assistant Clerk 

KELLY PUTZ, Web Content Specialist 

STEVEN RANGEL, Investigative Counsel 

JOANNE ROYCE, Investigative Counsel 

CAITLIN SANDERS, Staff Assistant 

HASAN SARSOUR, Legislative Clerk/Health Finance 

SCOTT SCHLOEGEL, Professional Staff Member/Oversight and Investigations 

LORIE SCHMIDT, Senior Counsel/Air Quality and Climate Change 

JODI B. SETH, Communications Director 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
16 

MELISSA SIDMAN, Legislative Analyst/Public Health 

JOHN SOPKO, Chief Counsel for Oversight 

BRIDGETT TAYLOR, Chief Health Finance Policy Advisor 

CHRISTOPHER A. TREANOR, Policy Analyst/Energy and Environment 

LAURA VAUGHT, Policy Coordinator/EAQ 

DAVID A. VOGEL, Legislative Analyst/Telecommunications and the Internet 

DREW WALLACE, Policy Coordinator/EHM 

EDDIE WALKER, Network Engineer 

CONSUELA M. WASHINGTON, Chief Counsel, CTCP 

ANDREW WOELFLING, Professional Staff Member/CTCP 

DETAILEES FROM U.S. AGENCIES

BENJAMIN HENGST, EPA 

PAUL JUNG, HHS-PHS 

KENNETH MARTY, HHH-OIG 

MARK G. SEIFERT, FCC 

CALVIN WEBB, ICE 

RICHARD WILFONG, DHS 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
17 

COMMITTEE STAFF

DAVID L. CAVICKE, Staff Director 

LANCE KOTSCHWAR, General Counsel/Chief Counsel for Commerce 

HEATHER COURI, Deputy Chief of Staff 

LAWRENCE A. NEAL, Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications 

R. CLAYTON ALSPACH, Counsel 

MELISSA BARTLETT, Counsel 

WILLIAM CARTY, Professional Staff Member 

KAREN E. CHRISTIAN, Counsel 

BRANDON J. CLARK, Policy Coordinator 

JEAN COLSANT, Director of Information Technology 

SAMUEL COSTELLO, Staff Assistant 

GERALD COURI, Policy Coordinator 

WHITNEY DREW, Special Assistant 

NEIL R. FRIED, Senior Counsel 

GARRETT J. GOLDING, Legislative Analyst 

CHAD GRANT, Legislative Analyst 

PETER E. KIELTY, Legislative Analyst 

KEVIN KOHL, Special Assistant 

RYAN LONG, Chief Counsel 

BRIAN MCCULLOUGH, Professional Staff Member 

AMANDA MERTENS CAMPBELL, Counsel 

LISA MILLER, Deputy Communications Director 

ANH NGUYEN, Legislative Clerk 

WILLIAM D. O’BRIEN, Legislative Analyst for Health Policy 

COURTNEY ANDERSON REINHARD, Counsel 

KRISTA CARPENTER ROSENTHALL, Counsel 

AARTI SHAH, Counsel 

ALAN M. SLOBODIN, Chief Counsel 

PETER SPENCER, Professional Staff Member 

LINDA WALKER, Administrative & Human Resources Coordinator 

SHANNON WEINBERG, Counsel 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(19) 

LEGISLATIVE AND OVERSIGHT ACTIVITY OF THE 

COMMITTEE 

SUMMARY

The full Committee and its six subcommittees were extremely active during the 110th Congress and had a significant record of 

achievement. Of the 1,531 bills referred to the Committee, 58 

measures became public law as a result of the Committee’s work. 

The full Committee and its subcommittees held a combined total of 

170 days of hearings and 47 markups. 

Key accomplishments include crafting legislation that will: 

• Remove more than 10 billion tons of carbon dioxide from the 

atmosphere by 2030 as a result of improved energy efficiency 

standards, expand use of biofuels, and increase motor vehicle fuel 

economy. 

• Ban lead in children’s products and prohibit the use of dangerous phthalates in toys and child care articles. 

• Strengthen the Consumer Product Safety Commission by providing it with significantly greater resources and personnel. 

• Ensure that 44 million Medicare beneficiaries can continue to 

see the doctors they know and trust by blocking a 10 percent pay 

cut for physicians who serve them. 

• Improve the safety of prescription drugs by creating a new 

FDA program to monitor drugs after they are on the market, increase the penalties for drug companies that violate safety standards, and impose stricter conflict-of-interest provisions. 

• Protect States and 55 million Medicaid beneficiaries by preventing damaging new regulations issued by the Administration 

that would slash Medicaid funding by $18 billion. 

• Ban discrimination based on genetic information by prohibiting 

health insurance companies and employers from discriminating 

against people on the basis of genetic test results. 

• Provide healthcare coverage for 10 million children by renewing and improving the State Children’s Health Insurance Program 

(SCHIP). 

• Strengthen Medicare by enhancing prevention and mental 

health benefits, creating and extending programs for low-income 

Medicare beneficiaries, and improving access to care for rural seniors. 

• Strengthen environmental protections and improve air quality 

by removing elemental mercury from our environment. 

• Improve public safety by ensuring that consumers using Internet-based phone services can access 911 emergency services. 

In perhaps its most complex legislative effort in the 110th Congress, the Committee worked on the development of comprehensive 

climate change legislation with the goal of reducing our Nation’s 

greenhouse gas emissions by 60 to 80 percent by the year 2050 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
20 

without putting our economy at a disadvantage. To this end, more 

than 20 hearings were held; perspectives from scores of industry 

groups, non-governmental organizations and labor unions were collected; and a series of White Papers focusing on elements of the climate change problem in need of further discussion were produced. 

On October 7, 2008, after nearly two years of intensive work, the 

discussion draft of climate change legislation was released. 

One of the most significant shortfalls of the 110th Congress was 

the presidential veto of the Children’s Health Insurance Program 

reauthorization legislation, and the subsequent failure of the House 

to override that veto. 

The Committee’s oversight and investigative efforts were as robust as its legislative endeavors in all areas of its jurisdiction— 

ranging from drug and food safety to currency manipulation and 

energy speculation. 

The environment continued to be a major concern of the Committee through vigorous oversight of existing environmental laws 

and regulation as well as specific examinations of carbon sequestration; Superfund cleanups (including the significant slowdown of 

cleanups at highly contaminated sites in the years since 2000); the 

Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Inspector General proposed buyout of employees and office closings; and concentrated 

animal feeding operations. 

The work of the six subcommittees is detailed in the pages following the list of hearings held by the full Committee. 

HEARINGS HELD

A Review of the Department of Health and Human Services Fiscal 

Year 2008 Budget—Oversight hearing on the Department of Health 

and Human Services Fiscal Year 2008 Budget. Hearing held on 

February 6, 2007. PRINTED, Serial Number 110–2. 

Department of Energy’s Budget for Fiscal Year 2008—Oversight 

hearing on the Department of Energy’s Fiscal Year 2008 budget. 

Hearing held on February 8, 2007. PRINTED, Serial Number 110– 

3. 

Combating Pretexting: H.R. 936, the ‘‘Prevention of Fraudulent 

Access to Phone Records Act’’—Hearing on H.R. 936, the ‘‘Prevention of Fraudulent Access to Phone Records Act.’’ Hearing held on 

March 9, 2007. PRINTED, Serial Number 110–16. 

Department of Energy’s Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Proposal—Oversight hearing on the Department of Energy’s budget proposal for 

fiscal year 2009. Hearing held on February 7, 2008. PRINTED, Serial Number 110–86. 

A Review of the Department of Health and Human Services Fiscal 

Year 2009 Budget—Oversight hearing on the Department of Health 

and Human Services budget proposal for fiscal year 2009. Hearing 

held on February 28, 2008. PRINTED, Serial Number 110–90. 

Department of Commerce Fiscal Year 2009 Budget—Oversight 

hearing on the Department of Commerce budget proposal for fiscal 

year 2009. Hearing held on March 13, 2008. PRINTED, Serial 

Number 110–94. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(21) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION

LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES

VIRGINIA GRAEME BAKER POOL AND SPA SAFETY ACT

Public Law 110–140, Title XIV—Pool and Spa Safety (H.R. 6, H.R. 

1721, S. 1771) 

To increase the safety of swimming pools and spas by requiring 

the use of proper anti-entrapment drain covers and pool and spa 

drainage systems, by establishing a swimming pool safety grant 

program administered by the Consumer Product Safety Commission to encourage States to improve their pool and spa safety laws, 

and to educate the public about pool and spa safety. 

Summary 

H.R. 1721 increases the safety of swimming pools and spas by requiring the use of proper anti-entrapment drain covers and pool 

and spa drainage systems. H.R. 1721 also establishes a swimming 

pool safety grant program, authorized at $2 million annually (as 

enacted as part of H.R. 6) for five years, administered by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to encourage States to 

pass comprehensive swimming pool and spa safety laws that require layers of protection against childhood drowning, including 

specified barriers, anti-entrapment drains, and safety vacuum releases. Further, H.R. 1721 requires CPSC to develop a national 

education program to prevent drowning and entrapment in swimming pools, spas, and ornamental pools, authorized at $5 million 

annually for five years. Finally, H.R. 1721 requires the CPSC to report to Congress on the effectiveness of the grant program for all 

applicable fiscal years. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 1721 was introduced on March 27, 2007, by Representative 

Wasserman Schultz and referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. On March 28, 2007, H.R. 1721 was referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On June 6, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection held a hearing on four bills intended to increase the safety of consumer products intended for children, including H.R. 1721. The invited witnesses included The Honorable 

Nancy A. Nord, Acting Chairman, Consumer Product Safety Commission (submitting written testimony only); Edmund Mierzwinski, 

Consumer Program Director, United States Public Interest Research Group; and Sally Greenberg, Senior Product Safety Counsel, 

Consumers Union. 

On July 31, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection met in open markup session and approved 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
22 

H.R. 1721 for full Committee consideration, amended, by a voice 

vote. 

On September 27, 2007, the full Committee met in open markup 

session and H.R. 1721 was ordered favorably reported to the 

House, as amended, by a voice vote, a quorum being present. 

On October 9, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 1721 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–365). 

On October 9, 2007, H.R. 1721 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules and passed, as amended, by a voice 

vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 1721 was received in the Senate, read 

twice, and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under general 

orders. 

On December 13, 2007, the text of H.R. 1721 and S. 1771 (companion Senate legislation), as amended, was included as title XIV 

of H.R. 6, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, 

which was passed by the Senate. 

On December 18, 2007, the House agreed to the Senate amendment to the House amendments to the Senate amendments to H.R. 

6, containing the provisions of H.R. 1721 and S. 1771, by a rollcall 

vote: 314–100. This action cleared H.R. 6 for the White House. 

On December 19, 2007, H.R. 6, containing provisions of H.R. 

1721 and S. 1771, was signed by the President (Public Law 110– 

140). 

DO-NOT-CALL IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–187 (H.R. 3541) 

To amend the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act to eliminate the 

automatic removal of telephone numbers registered on the Federal 

Do-Not-Call registry. 

Summary 

H.R. 3541 amends the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act to prohibit the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) from removing phone 

numbers from its Do-Not-Call registry, except upon request of the 

person to whom the number is assigned or upon narrow circumstances keyed to keeping the list accurate. The registry contains a list of consumers that telemarketers are prohibited from 

calling. When the registry was created in 2003, the FTC developed 

rules that required customers to re-register their telephone numbers every five years and required the FTC to remove disconnected 

numbers periodically. The bill requires the FTC to check periodically telephone numbers on the registry against appropriate databases and to remove invalid, disconnected, and reassigned numbers. Not later than nine months after enactment, the FTC is required to report to Congress on efforts taken to improve the accuracy of the registry. 

Legislative History 

On September 17, 2007, H.R. 3541 was introduced by Representative Doyle and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H.R. 3541 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
23 

On October 30, 2007, the full Committee met in open markup 

session and H.R. 3541 was ordered favorably reported to the 

House, amended, by a voice vote. 

On December 11, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

reported H.R. 3541 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–486). 

On December 11, 2007, H.R. 3541 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules and passed, as amended, by a voice 

vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On December 12, 2007, H.R. 3541 was received in the Senate, 

read twice, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation. 

On February 6, 2008, H.R. 3541 was discharged from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation by unanimous 

consent, and passed the Senate, without amendment, by unanimous consent, clearing H.R. 3541 for the White House. 

On February 12, 2008, H.R. 3541 was presented to the President 

and was signed by the President on February 15, 2008 (Public Law 

110–187). 

DO-NOT-CALL REGISTRY FEE EXTENSION ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–188 (S. 781, H.R. 2601) 

To amend the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act to extend the authority of the Federal Trade Commission to collect fees to administer and enforce the provisions relating to the Do-Not-Call registry 

of the Telemarketing Sales Rule. 

Summary 

H.R. 2601 amends the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act to authorize the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to continue to collect 

and spend fees to operate the national Do-Not-Call registry and enforce the Telemarketing Sales Rule, contingent on approval of the 

fees in annual appropriations acts. The authority to collect those 

fees expired at the end of fiscal year 2007. The bill also requires 

the FTC to prepare two reports about the use and effectiveness of 

the registry. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 2601 was introduced on June 6, 2007, by Representative 

Stearns and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

That same day, H.R. 2601 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On October 23, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection held a hearing on H.R. 2601. The sole 

witness was the Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. After conclusion of the hearing, the Subcommittee met in open 

markup session to consider H.R. 2601, and the bill was forwarded 

to the full Committee, amended, by a voice vote. 

On October 30, 2007, the full met in open markup session and 

H.R. 2601 was ordered favorably reported to the House, amended, 

by a voice vote. 

On December 11, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

reported H.R. 2601 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–485). 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
24 

On December 11, 2007, H.R. 2601 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules and passed, as amended, by a voice 

vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On December 12, 2007, H.R. 2601 was received in the Senate, 

read twice, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation. 

On December 12, 2007, the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation reported substantially similar legislation, S. 

781, to the Senate, amended (S. Rept. 110–244). 

On December 17, 2007, S. 781 passed the Senate, amended, by 

unanimous consent. 

On February 6, 2008, S. 781 was considered in the House under 

suspension of the rules and passed by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. This action cleared the measure for the White 

House. 

On February 13, 2008, S. 781 was presented to the President; 

and on February 15, 2008, the President signed S. 781 (Public Law 

110–188). 

CHILDREN’S GASOLINE BURN PREVENTION ACT

Public Law 110–278 (H.R. 814) 

To require the Consumer Product Safety Commission to issue 

regulations mandating child-resistant closures on all portable gasoline containers. 

Summary 

H.R. 814 requires the same child-resistant caps for all gasoline 

containers, whether sold with or without gasoline. The legislation 

directs the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to issue 

regulations mandating child-resistant closures on all portable gasoline containers, and provides that any revisions to the applicable 

child resistance requirements proposed by ASTM International 

shall be incorporated in the consumer product safety rule, unless 

the CPSC determines within 60 days that such revisions do not 

meet the purpose of this legislation. H.R. 814 also requires the 

CPSC to report to Congress two years after enactment of the legislation on compliance by industry, agency enforcement actions, and 

any reported incidents involving children and portable gasoline 

cans. 

Legislative History 

On February 5, 2007, H.R. 814 was introduced by Representative 

Moore and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On February 6, 2007, H.R. 814 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On June 6, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection held a hearing on four bills intended to increase the safety of consumer products intended for children, including H.R. 814. The invited witnesses included The Honorable 

Nancy A. Nord, Acting Chairman, Consumer Product Safety Commission (submitting written testimony only); Edmund Mierzwinski, 

Consumer Program Director, United States Public Interest ReVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
25 

search Group; and Sally Greenberg, Senior Product Safety Counsel, 

Consumers Union. 

On July 31, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection met in open markup session and forwarded 

H.R. 814, amended, to the full Committee, by a voice vote. 

On September 27, 2007, the full Committee met in open markup 

session and H.R. 814 was ordered favorably reported to the House, 

as amended, by a voice vote. 

On October 9, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 814 to the House, as amended (H. Rept. 110–367). 

On October 9, 2007, H.R. 814 was considered in the House under 

suspension of the rules and passed, as amended, by a voice vote, 

two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 814 was received in the Senate, read 

twice, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Technology. 

On June 16, 2008, H.R. 814 was discharged from the Senate 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation by unanimous consent, and passed the Senate without amendment by unanimous consent. This action cleared the measure for the White 

House. 

On July 7, 2008, H.R. 814 was presented to the President, who 

signed it into law on July 17, 2008 (Public Law 110–278). 

DANNY KEYSAR CHILD PRODUCT SAFETY NOTIFICATION ACT

Public Law 110–314 (H.R. 1699, H.R. 4040) 

To direct the Consumer Product Safety Commission to require 

certain manufacturers to provide consumer product registration 

forms to facilitate recalls of durable infant and toddler products. 

Summary 

H.R. 1699 requires the Consumer Product Safety Commission 

(CPSC) to promulgate a rule requiring manufacturers of a defined 

list of 12 durable infant and toddler products (including cribs, high 

chairs, bath seats, play yards, strollers, walkers, and swings) to: (1) 

provide postage-paid, privacy-protected registration cards with each 

product for consumer registration by mail or via the internet; (2) 

maintain a database of consumer-provided contact information; and 

(3) permanently place manufacturer contact and model information 

on each product sold as practicable. H.R. 1699 also requires the 

CPSC to conduct a study and report to Congress within four years 

after the date of enactment on the effectiveness of the registration 

forms in facilitating recalls. 

Legislative History 

On March 26, 2007, H.R. 1699 was introduced by Representative 

Schakowsky and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On March 27, 2007, H.R. 1699 was referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On June 6, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection held a hearing on four bills intended to increase the safety of consumer products intended for children, including H.R. 1699. The invited witnesses included The Honorable 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
26 

Nancy A. Nord, Acting Chairman, Consumer Product Safety Commission (submitting written testimony only); Edmund Mierzwinski, 

Consumer Program Director, United States Public Interest Research Group; and Sally Greenberg, Senior Product Safety Counsel, 

Consumers Union. 

On July 31, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection met in open markup session and forwarded 

H.R. 1699, amended, to the full Committee, by a voice vote. 

On September 27, 2007, the full Committee met in open markup 

session and H.R. 1699 was ordered favorably reported to the 

House, as amended, by a voice vote. 

On October 9, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 1699 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–366). 

On October 9, 2007, H.R. 1699 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules and passed, as amended, by a voice 

vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 1699 was received in the Senate, read 

twice, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation. 

On December 19, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

reported H.R. 4040 to the House, amended, and included the provisions of H.R. 1699, as amended (H. Rept. 110–501). 

On December 19, 2007, H.R. 4040, as amended, was considered 

in the House under suspension of the rules and passed by a rollcall 

vote: 407–0. 

On July 30, 2008, the House agreed to the conference report to 

accompany H.R. 4040 (H. Rept. 110–787), which included in section 

104 the provisions of H.R. 1699, as amended, under suspension of 

the rules by a rollcall vote: 424–1. 

On July 31, 2008, the Senate agreed to the conference report to 

accompany H.R. 4040, containing the text of H.R. 1699, as amended, by a rollcall vote: 89–3. This action cleared H.R. 4040 for the 

White House. 

On August 6, 2008, H.R. 4040 was presented to the President. 

On August 14, 2008, H.R. 4040 was signed by the President 

(Public Law 110–314). 

PRODUCT SAFETY CIVIL PENALTIES IMPROVEMENT ACT

Public Law 110–314 (H.R. 2474, H.R. 4040) 

To provide for an increased maximum civil penalty for violations 

under the Consumer Product Safety Act. 

Summary 

H.R. 2474 amends the Consumer Product Safety Act, the Flammable Fabrics Act, and the Federal Hazardous Substances Act to 

increase the maximum civil penalties that the CPSC may assess 

for knowing product safety violations from the current level of 

$1.825 million to (as enacted) $15 million. H.R. 2474 also expands 

the factors that the CPSC must consider in assessing the amount 

of such penalty, including whether a violator is a recidivist or a 

first-time offender. As enacted, the increase would take effect on 

the date that is the earlier of one year after the effective date, or 

when the CPSC issues final regulations. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
27 

Legislative History 

On May 24, 2007, H.R. 2474 was introduced by Representative 

Rush and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On 

June 5, 2007, H.R. 2474 was referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On June 6, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection held a hearing on four bills intended to increase the safety of consumer products intended for children or to 

improve consumer product safety enforcement generally, including 

H.R. 2474. The invited witnesses included The Honorable Nancy A. 

Nord, Acting Chairman, Consumer Product Safety Commission 

(submitting written testimony only); Edmund Mierzwinski, Consumer Program Director, United States Public Interest Research 

Group; and Sally Greenberg, Senior Product Safety Counsel, Consumers Union. 

On, July 31, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection met in open markup session and forwarded 

H.R. 2474, amended, to the full Committee, by a voice vote. 

On September 27, 2007, the full Committee met in open markup 

session and H.R. 2474 was ordered favorably reported to the 

House, as amended, by a voice vote. 

On October 9, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 2474 to the House, as amended (H. Rept. 110–364). 

On October 9, 2007, H.R. 2474 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules and passed, as amended, by a voice 

vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 2474 was received in the Senate, read 

twice, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation. 

On December 19, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

reported H.R. 4040, as amended, to the House, and included the 

text of H.R. 2474, as amended (H. Rept. 110–501). 

On December 19, 2007, H.R. 4040, as amended, was considered 

in the House under suspension of the rules and passed by a rollcall 

vote: 407–0. 

On July 30, 2008, the House agreed to the conference report to 

accompany H.R. 4040 (H. Rept. 110–787), which included in section 

217 the provisions of H.R. 2474, as amended, under suspension of 

the rules by a rollcall vote: 424–1. 

On July 31, 2008, the Senate agreed to the conference report to 

accompany H.R. 4040, containing the text of H.R. 2474, as amended, by a rollcall vote: 89–3. This action cleared the measure for the 

White House. 

On August 6, 2008, H.R. 4040 was presented to the President. 

On August 14, 2008, was signed by the President (Public Law 

110–314). 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–314 (H.R. 4040, S. 2663) 

To establish consumer product safety standards and other safety 

requirements for children’s products and to reauthorize and modernize the Consumer Product Safety Commission. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
28 

Summary 

H.R. 4040, The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, as 

enacted, contains two titles. 

Title I concerns children’s product safety, and: (1) limits the 

amount of lead in children’s products and lowers the amount of 

lead permitted in paint used on consumer products; (2) requires 

mandatory third-party testing for certain children’s products and 

conformity assessment certifications for a broad range of consumer 

products covered by mandatory requirements; (3) mandates tracking labels for children’s products; (4) imposes consumer registration 

and mandatory safety standards for certain nursery products; (5) 

requires cautionary statements for toys and games at direct points 

of sale; (6) requires mandatory safety standards for toys; (7) requires a study by the Government Accountability Office on preventable deaths and injuries to minority children from consumer products; and (8) permanently prohibits the sale of certain children’s 

toys and products that contain certain phthalates (plastic softeners) 

and requires an interim prohibition on the sale of certain children’s 

products that contain certain other phthalates until an examination and report have been conducted by a Chronic Hazard Advisory 

Panel. 

Title II, Subtitle A concerns administrative improvements to reform the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and: (1) reauthorizes the CPSC; (2) reinstates funding for five Commissioners 

and provides for a temporary quorum; (3) reinstates a requirement 

on the submission of certain documents; (4) provides for the option 

of expedited rulemaking; (5) requires the Inspector General to conduct certain audits and submit reports; (6) bans industry-sponsored 

travel by CPSC personnel; (7) permits CPSC sharing of information 

with other governmental agencies under certain circumstances; (8) 

permits CPSC employee exchanges with foreign governments; and 

(9) requires annual reports on recalls and their effectiveness. 

Title II, Subtitle B concerns enhanced enforcement authority to 

reform the CPSC, and: (1) allows for greater public disclosure of information; (2) requires the establishment of a public consumer 

product safety database; (3) expands the prohibition against stockpiling; (4) enhances the CPSC’s authority to recall unsafe consumer 

products and require specific corrective actions; (5) authorizes the 

CPSC to inspect certain conformity assessment bodies and require 

certain information about product supply chains; (6) amends the 

list of prohibited acts under consumer product safety laws; (7) increases maximum civil and criminal fines for violations of consumer product safety laws; (8) amends provisions permitting State 

Attorneys General to enforce specific provisions of Federal consumer product safety laws; and (9) extends whistleblower protection to employees of manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of 

consumer products. 

Title II, Subtitle C concerns specific import-export provisions to 

reform the CPSC and: (1) expands prohibitions on the export of recalled and non-conforming products; (2) requires the CPSC to develop a methodology for risk assessment of imported products; (3) 

requires the CPSC to identify classes of products with characteristics that are likely to constitute substantial product hazards; (4) requires the CPSC to study and recommend to U.S. Customs and 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
29 

Border Protections bond amounts to cover the cost of destruction 

for imported products; and (5) requires the CPSC to study and report on the effectiveness of its current authority to prevent the importation of unsafe consumer products. 

Title II, Subtitle D contains miscellaneous provisions and: (1) 

clarifies provisions on preemption of other laws; (2) provides for 

mandatory standards for all-terrain vehicles; (3) clarifies that costbenefit analysis is not required to establish standards under the 

Poison Prevention Packaging Act; (4) requires a study on the use 

of formaldehyde in the manufacture of certain articles; (5) defines 

terms, such as ‘‘children’s products’’ and makes conforming 

changes; (6) provides for expedited judicial review of certain standards or rules promulgated by the CPSC; (7) repeals section 30(d) 

of the Consumer Product Safety Act requiring certain findings; (8) 

makes technical amendments to the Pool and Spa Safety provision 

of the Energy Independence and Security Act (Public Law 110– 

140); and (9) provides for certain delayed effective dates and the 

severability of provisions. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 4040 was developed after a series of hearings related to 

issues involving consumer product safety, as follows: 

On May 15, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection held a hearing entitled ‘‘Protecting Our Children: Current Issues in Children’s Product Safety.’’ Testimony was 

received from the Honorable Nancy A. Nord, Acting Chairman, 

Consumer Product Safety Commission; Alan Korn, Public Policy 

Director and General Counsel, Safe Kids Worldwide; Rachel 

Weintraub, Director of Product Safety and Senior Counsel, Consumer Federation of America; Frederick Locker, Esq., Locker, 

Brainin & Greenberg, New York, NY; Marla Felcher, Ph.D., Adjunct Lecturer, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, and author, ‘‘It’s No Accident: How Corporations Sell Dangerous Baby Products’’ (Common Courage Press, 2001); James A. 

Thomas, President, ASTM International; Nancy A. Cowles, Executive Director, Kids in Danger. 

On June 6, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection held a hearing entitled ‘‘Legislation to Improve Consumer Product Safety for Children: H.R. 2474, H.R. 1699, 

H.R. 814, and H.R. 1721.’’ Testimony was received from The Honorable Nancy A. Nord, Acting Chairman, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission (submitting written testimony only); Edmund 

Mierzwinski, Consumer Program Director, United States Public Interest Research Group; and Sally Greenberg, Senior Product Safety 

Counsel, Consumers Union. 

On September 19 and 20, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, 

Trade, and Consumer Protection held a two-day hearing, entitled 

‘‘Protecting Children from Lead-Tainted Imports.’’ Testimony was 

received from the Honorable Nancy A. Nord, Acting Chairman, 

Consumer Product Safety Commission; The Honorable Thomas H. 

Moore, Commissioner, Consumer Product Safety Commission; Robert Eckert, President and Chief Executive Officer, Mattel, Inc.; 

Dana Best, M.D., M.P.H., Fellow, American Academy of Pediatrics; 

Olivia D. Farrow, Esq., Assistant Commissioner, Division of EnviVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
30 

ronmental Health, City of Baltimore; Michael Green, Executive Director, Center for Environmental Health; Mary Teagarden, Professor of Global Strategy, Thunderbird School of Global Management; Lori Wallach, Director, Global Trade Watch; Gary E. Knell, 

Chief Executive Officer and President, Sesame Workshop; Carter 

Keithley, President, Toy Industry Association; Allen Thompson, 

Vice President for Global Supply Chain Management, Retail Industry Leaders Association; Michael Gale, Executive Director, Fashion 

Jewelry Trade Association. 

On November 1, 2007, H.R. 4040 was introduced by Representative Rush and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On November 2, 2007, H.R. 4040 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On November 6, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection held a hearing on H.R. 4040, entitled, 

‘‘Comprehensive Children’s Product Safety and Consumer Product 

Safety Commission Reform Legislation.’’ Testimony was received 

from the Honorable Nancy A. Nord, Acting Chairman, Consumer 

Product Safety Commission; The Honorable Thomas H. Moore, 

Commissioner, Consumer Product Safety Commission; Kathrin 

Belliveau, Managing Attorney, Commercial and Global Operations, 

Hasbro, Inc.; Dana Best, M.D., M.P.H., Fellow, American Academy 

of Pediatrics; Lane Hallenbeck, Vice President, Accreditation Services, American National Standards Institute (ANSI); Alan Korn, 

Public Policy Director and General Counsel, Safe Kids Worldwide; 

Joseph M. McGuire, President, Association of Home Appliance 

Manufacturers (AHAM), testifying on behalf of the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM); and Rachel Weintraub, Director of 

Product Safety and Senior Counsel, Consumer Federation of America. 

On November 15, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection met in open markup session and forwarded H.R. 4040, amended, to the full Committee, by a voice vote. 

On December 13, 2007, the full Committee met in open markup 

session and began consideration of H.R. 4040. 

On December 18, 2007, the full Committee again met in open 

markup session and H.R. 4040 was ordered favorably reported to 

the House, amended, by a rollcall vote: 51–0. 

On December 19, 2007, the bill was reported to the House, 

amended (H. Rept. 110–501). That same day, H.R. 4040, as amended, was considered in the House under suspension of the rules and 

passed by a rollcall vote: 407–0. 

On December 19, 2007, H.R. 4040 was received in the Senate 

and read for the first time and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar. 

On March 6, 2008, H.R. 4040 was laid before the Senate by 

unanimous consent. During consideration, the Senate struck all 

after the enacting clause and substituted the language of S. 2663, 

as amended. H.R. 4040 then passed by the Senate, amended, by a 

rollcall vote: 79–13. 

On April 29, 2008, the Senate insisted on its amendment, requested a conference, and appointed conferees: Senators Inouye, 

Pryor, Boxer, Klobuchar, Stevens, Hutchison, and Sununu. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
31 

On May 14, 2008, the Dingell motion that the House disagree to 

the Senate amendment, and agree to a conference, was agreed to 

without objection. The Whitfield motion that the House instruct the 

managers on the part of the House to insist upon the provisions 

contained in the House bill, was agreed to by a rollcall vote: 405– 

0. The Speaker appointed as conferees Representatives Dingell, 

Waxman, Rush, DeGette, Schakowsky, Barton (TX), Whitfield (KY), 

and Stearns. 

On June 24, 2008, the Kirk motion to instruct conferees to insist 

on the provisions contained in the House bill with regard to the 

definition of ‘‘children’s product’’ was adopted by a rollcall vote: 

415–0. 

The conference committee met on June 25 and July 17, 2008. 

On July 29, 2008, the conference report to accompany H.R. 4040 

was filed (H. Rept. 110–787). 

On July 30, 2008, the conference report to accompany H.R. 4040 

was considered by the House and adopted by a rollcall vote: 424– 

1. 

On July 31, 2008, the Senate agreed to the conference report to 

accompany H.R. 4040 by a rollcall vote: 89–3, clearing the measure 

for the White House. 

On August 6, 2008, H.R. 4040 was presented to the President. 

On August 14, 2008, the President signed H.R. 4040 (Public Law 

110–314). 

SAFEGUARDING AMERICA’S FAMILIES BY ENHANCING AND REORGANIZING NEW AND EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGIES ACT (SAFER NET ACT)

Public Law 110–385 (S. 1492, H.R. 3461) 

To require the Federal Trade Commission to carry out a nationwide public awareness campaign regarding Internet safety. 

Summary 

H.R. 3461 requires the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to carry 

out a nationwide program to increase public awareness and education regarding Internet safety. 

The bill also requires the FTC to submit a report to Congress not 

later than March 31 of each year on its activity to promote Internet 

safety. The bill, as amended, authorizes $5 million for one year to 

carry out the public awareness campaign. Finally, the bill establishes a working group through the National Telecommunications 

and Information Administration to review and evaluate industry 

efforts to promote online safety and protect children from inappropriate material online. 

Legislative History 

On August 4, 2007, H.R. 3461 was introduced by Representative 

Bean and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On 

August 4, 2007, the bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On October 23, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection held a hearing on H.R. 3461. The sole 

witness was the Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. After conclusion of the hearing, the Subcommittee met in open 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
32 

markup session to consider H.R. 3461; and the bill was forwarded 

to the full Committee, amended, by a voice vote. 

On October 30, 2007, the full Committee met in open markup 

session and H.R. 3461 was ordered favorably reported to the 

House, amended, by a voice vote. 

On November 13, 2007, H.R. 3461 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules and passed, as amended, by a rollcall 

vote: 398–6. 

On November 14, 2007, H.R. 3461 was received in the Senate, 

read twice, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation. 

On September 26, 2008, S. 1492, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute reported by the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation, was laid before the Senate; it then 

passed the Senate, amended, by unanimous consent. As amended, 

Title I consists of the text of the Broadband Data Improvement Act. 

Title II includes the provisions of H.R. 3461. 

On September 27, 2008, S. 1492 was received in the House, and 

referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On September 29, 2008, S. 1492 was discharged from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and passed the House, amended, 

by unanimous consent. 

On September 30, 2008, the Senate agreed to the House amendments by unanimous consent, clearing S. 1492 for the White 

House. 

On October 2, 2008, S. 1492 was presented to the President. 

On October 10, 2008, the President signed S. 1492 (Public Law 

110–385). 

SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER PROTECTION ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 948) 

To strengthen the authority of the Federal Government to protect individuals from certain acts and practices in the sale and purchase of Social Security numbers and Social Security account numbers, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 948 protects consumers by prohibiting the public display 

and the purchase and sale of Social Security numbers in interstate 

commerce to prevent the use of such numbers to commit fraud, deception, or crime, and prevent risk of bodily, emotional, or financial 

harm to individuals. The bill makes it unlawful to intentionally display Social Security numbers on a Web site or to provide access 

thereto through the Internet, to display Social Security numbers on 

membership or identity cards, or to require customers to use Social 

Security numbers as passwords for access to any goods or services, 

account, or protected access Web site. The legislation also requires 

the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to promulgate rules within 

one year, after consultation with the Attorney General and Commissioner of Social Security, restricting the sale and purchase of 

Social Security numbers and defining unfair or deceptive acts or 

practices related to the sale and purchase of Social Security numbers. H.R. 948 requires the FTC regulations to include exceptions 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
33 

for certain enumerated purposes such as law enforcement, emergencies, and public health. 

Legislative History 

On February 8, 2007, H.R. 948 was introduced by Representative 

Markey. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for 

a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each 

case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On February 9, 2007, H.R. 948 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On May 11, 2006, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection held a hearing on H.R. 1078, substantially 

similar legislation considered in the 109th Congress. 

On May 10, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection was discharged from further consideration of 

H.R. 948, and the full Committee met in open markup session to 

consider the measure. H.R. 948 was ordered favorably reported to 

the House, amended, by a voice vote. 

On June 13, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 948 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–191, Part 1). 

On June 13, 2007 and subsequently, the Committee on Ways and 

Means was granted a series of extensions for further consideration 

ending not later than January 3, 2009. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 948 in the 110th Congress. 

SECURELY PROTECT YOURSELF AGAINST CYBER TRESPASS ACT (SPY

ACT)

(H.R. 964) 

To protect users of the Internet from unknowing transmission of 

their personally identifiable information through spyware programs, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 964, the Securely Protect Yourself Against Cyber Trespass 

Act, or SPY ACT, makes it unlawful for any person who is not the 

owner or authorized user of a protected computer to engage in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in connection with specified conduct, including: (1) taking unsolicited control of the computer; (2) 

modifying computer settings; (3) collecting personally identifiable 

information; (4) inducing the owner or authorized user to disclose 

personally identifiable information; (5) inducing the unsolicited installation of computer software; and (6) removing or disabling a security, anti-spyware, or anti-virus technology. 

Further, H.R. 964 makes it unlawful for a person to: (1) transmit 

to a protected computer any information collection program (a program that collects personally identifiable information and uses the 

information to send advertising), unless such program provides notice required by the SPY ACT before execution of any of the program’s collection functions; or (2) execute any collection information 

program installed on a protected computer unless, before execution, 

the user has consented to such execution under bill’s notice reVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
34 

quirements. The SPY ACT provides exceptions with respect to: (1) 

Web pages visited within a particular Web site and (2) in the case 

of any Internet-based search functions, user-supplied search terms 

necessary to complete the search and return results to the user, 

when the information collected is sent only to the provider of the 

Web site accessed or Internet-based search function. 

The bill provides for enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) of violations of the SPY ACT as unfair or deceptive acts 

or practices under the Federal Trade Commission Act. It also 

makes the SPY ACT inapplicable with respect to: (1) law enforcement actions; (2) monitoring undertaken for network security; (3) 

Good Samaritan actions (actions taken in good faith, and with the 

user’s consent, by a computer software or service provider to remove or disable a program which violates the SPY ACT); (4) certain third party branded computer software; and (5) certain services provided by cable operators and satellite carriers. 

H.R. 964 directs the FTC to report to Congress regarding: (1) the 

applicability of the information collection prohibitions to information that is input directly by users in a field provided on a Web 

site; (2) the use of computer tracking cookies in the delivery or display of advertising to computer owners and users; and (3) information collection programs installed before the effective date of the 

SPY ACT. The bill becomes effective 12 months after its enactment, 

and is inapplicable after December 31, 2013. 

Legislative History 

On February 8, 2007, H.R. 964 was introduced by Representative 

Towns and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On February 9, 2007, H.R. 964 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On March 15, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection held a hearing on H.R. 964. Testimony was 

received from two technology companies, an online-marketing trade 

association, and two nonprofit organizations that promote online 

privacy. 

On April 19, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection met in open markup session to consider H.R. 

964, and the bill was forwarded to the full Committee, amended, 

by a voice vote. 

On May 10, 2007, the full Committee met in open markup session and H.R. 964 was ordered favorably reported to the House, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On May 24, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 964 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–169). 

On June 6, 2007, H.R. 964 was considered in the House under 

suspension of the rules and passed, as amended, by a rollcall vote: 

368–48. 

On June 7, 2007, H.R. 964 was received in the Senate, read 

twice, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 964 in the 110th Congress. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
35 

CALL CENTER CONSUMER’S RIGHT TO KNOW ACT

(H.R. 1776) 

To require employees at a call center who either initiate or receive telephone calls to disclose the physical location of such employees. 

Summary 

H.R. 1776 requires every call center employee, when initiating or 

receiving phone calls, to identify the physical location of the employee at the beginning of the call. The bill further requires companies that utilize call centers to certify their compliance with the 

Federal Trade Commission (FTC). H.R. 1776 directs the Commission to prescribe rules providing for effective monitoring and compliance with the Act, including the imposition of appropriate civil 

penalties. 

Legislative History 

On March 29, 2007, H.R. 1776 was introduced by Representative 

Altmire and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On March 30, 2007, H.R. 1776 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On September 11, 2008, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection held a hearing on H.R. 1776. The Subcommittee heard testimony from the FTC, the Communications 

Workers of America, the American Teleservices Association, and an 

academic specializing in the call center industry. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1776 in the 110th Congress. 

PROTECTING CONSUMER ACCESS TO GENERIC DRUGS ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 1902) 

To prohibit brand name drug companies from compensating generic drug companies to delay the entry of a generic drug into the 

market, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 1902 prohibits drug patent legal settlements in which a generic company receives payment or value from a brand-name drug 

company in exchange for an agreement not to research, develop, 

manufacture, market, or sell the generic drug. The bill provides for 

exceptions to this prohibition and does not affect any other type of 

drug patent settlement. Such violations are treated as an unfair 

and deceptive act or practice and as an unfair method of competition as prohibited under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. H.R. 1902 further establishes new triggers for the ‘‘failure 

to market’’ forfeiture of the 180-day exclusivity period under the 

Federal, Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. 

Legislative History 

On April 17, 2007, H.R. 1902 was introduced by Mr. Rush. It was 

referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
36 

of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 

concerned. 

On April 18, 2007, H.R. 1902 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On May 2, 2007, the Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R. 1902. 

The Subcommittee received testimony from the Federal Trade 

Commission, a consumer group, two generic drug companies, an 

academic, and a prominent lawyer specializing in intellectual property law. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1902 in the 110th Congress. 

TRAVEL PROMOTION ACT OF 2008

(H.R. 3232, S. 1661) 

To establish a non-profit corporation to communicate United 

States entry policies and otherwise promote tourist, business, and 

scholarly travel to the United States. 

Summary 

H.R. 3232 establishes the Corporation for Travel Promotion (Corporation) as a nonprofit corporation within the District of Columbia. The Corporation is required to provide information to people 

interested in traveling to the United States, identify and address 

perceptions in other countries regarding U.S. entry policies, and 

promote U.S. travel. The bill establishes within the Treasury the 

Travel Promotion Fund, which is funded by user fees from an automated electronic travel authorization system, should one be implemented. These fees, in addition to voluntary matching contributions from the private sector, are intended to fund the Corporation, 

which is authorized to borrow an amount not to exceed $10 million 

from the Treasury to fund its first-year expenses and activities. For 

subsequent years through 2013 the Secretary of the Treasury must 

transfer to the Fund not more than $100 million which shall be 

available to the Corporation subject to the conditions set forth in 

the legislation. 

H.R. 3232 also amends the International Travel Act of 1961 to 

replace certain references to the United States National Tourism 

Organization with references to the Corporation, as well as modifies various requirements applicable to the Tourism Policy Council. 

Finally, the bill amends the Department of Commerce and Related 

Agencies Appropriations Act of 2003 to remove provisions establishing the United States Travel and Tourism Promotion Advisory 

Board. 

Legislative History 

On July 31, 2007, H.R. 3232 was introduced by Mr. Delahunt. It 

was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in 

addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, and Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 

each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. That same day, H.R. 3232 

was referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
37 

On September 11, 2008, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection held a hearing on H.R. 3232. The two 

witnesses present were the Travel Industry Association’s senior 

vice president for public affairs and the director of East Carolina 

University’s Center for Sustainable Tourism. The Subcommittee requested witnesses from the Department of Commerce and the Department of the Treasury; both departments instead submitted 

written testimony for the record. 

On September 16, 2008, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection met in open markup session to consider 

H.R. 3232, and the bill was forwarded to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 23, 2008, the full Committee met in open markup 

session and H.R. 3232 was ordered favorably reported to the 

House, amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 25, 2008, H.R. 3232 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules and passed, as amended, by a voice 

vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On September 26, 2008, H.R. 3232 was received in the Senate. 

On October 2, 2008, H.R. 3232 was read twice and placed on the 

Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 3232 in the 110th Congress. 

CALLING CARD CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT

(H.R. 3402) 

To require accurate and reasonable disclosure of the terms and 

conditions of prepaid telephone calling cards and services. 

Summary 

H.R. 3402, as passed, requires clear and conscious disclosure of 

all critical terms of prepaid calling cards, including the name of the 

provider and a customer service telephone number, the dollar value 

of the card, the number of available minutes, the per-minute rate, 

all applicable fees, and any expiration date. It provides that any 

violation of these requirements shall be considered violations of a 

rule defining unfair or deceptive acts or practices under the Federal Trade Commission Act, mandates a rulemaking by the Federal 

Trade Commission to issue regulations to carry out this legislation, 

and provides for enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission 

against common carriers and non-common carriers alike. It further 

provides for enforcement by State Attorneys General and certain 

other State authorities, and preempts State laws that prescribe disclosure requirements on prepaid calling cards. Finally, H.R. 3402 

requires a study by the Government Accountability Office on the effectiveness of this legislation. 

Legislative History 

On August 3, 2007, H.R. 3402 was introduced by Representative 

Engel and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

That same day, the bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On September 16, 2008, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection held a hearing on H.R. 3402. The invited 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
38 

witnesses included The Honorable William Kovacic, Chairman, 

Federal Trade Commission; Sally Greenberg, Executive Director, 

National Consumers League; Yvette Zaragoza, Small Business 

Manager, Latino Economic Development Corporation; Julia Marlowe, Professor Emeritus, University of Georgia; and John 

Eichberger, Vice President, Government Relations, National Association of Convenience Stores. 

On, September 16, 2008, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection met in open markup session and forwarded H.R. 3402 to the full Committee by a voice vote. 

On September 23, 2008, the full Committee met in open markup 

session and H.R. 3402 was ordered favorably reported to the 

House, amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 25, 2008, H.R. 3402 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules and passed, as amended, by a voice 

vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On October 2, 2008, H.R. 3402 was received in the Senate, read 

twice, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 3402 in the 110th Congress. 

REGULATORY AUTHORITY OVER UNFAIR AND DECEPTIVE ACTS AND

PRACTICES BY BANKS

(H.R. 3526) 

To include all banking agencies within the existing regulatory 

authority under the Federal Trade Commission Act with respect to 

depository institutions, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 3526 is intended to provide financial consumers with additional protections against unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or 

affecting commerce by expanding the range of financial regulators 

with authority to promulgate regulations defining with specificity 

and containing requirements for the purpose of preventing such 

acts or practices under the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC 

Act). H.R. 3526 amends the FTC Act to expand the range of regulators with promulgation authority under Section 18(f) of the FTC 

Act (currently the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve with 

respect to banks, the Office of Thrift Supervision with respect to 

savings and loan institutions, and the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) with respect to Federal credit unions) to include the other Federal banking regulators, namely the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Office of the Comptroller of 

the Currency with respect to institutions that they regulate. 

The legislation requires these entities to prescribe any such regulations in consultation with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), 

and that such regulations shall be prescribed jointly by such agencies to the extent practicable. H.R. 3526 also provides that, whenever the Federal banking agencies and NCUA commence rulemaking under the FTC Act for entities that they regulate, the FTC 

may promulgate consistent and comparable rules for the entities 

that it regulates. The legislation allows the FTC, in those instances, to use standard notice and comment rulemaking proceVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
39 

dures under the Administrative Procedure Act. Finally, the bill requires the Comptroller General to conduct a study and report to 

Congress on the status of regulations of the Federal banking agencies and the NCUA regarding unfair or deceptive acts or practices 

by depository institutions. 

Legislative History 

On June 13, 2007, the Committee on Financial Services held a 

hearing on the need for improved Federal consumer protection in 

financial services. Testimony was received from a Governor of the 

Federal Reserve Board, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Chairman 

of the FTC, the Deputy Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision, 

the Attorney General of the State of Iowa, and the Commissioner 

of Banks for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 

On July 25, 2007, the Committee on Financial Services held an 

additional hearing, and received testimony from three consumer 

groups and two industry representatives. 

On September 14, 2007, H.R. 3526 was introduced by Representative Frank. It was referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 

for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each 

case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On September 15, 2007, H.R. 3526 was referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On October 23, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection held a hearing on H.R. 3526. The sole 

witness was the Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. After the conclusion of the hearing, the Subcommittee met in 

open markup session to consider H.R. 3526, and the bill was forwarded to the full Committee, amended, by a voice vote. 

On October 30, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

met in open markup session and H.R. 3526 was ordered favorably 

reported to the House, amended, by a voice vote. 

On December 5, 2007, the Committee on Financial Services reported H.R. 3526 to the House (H. Rept. 110–472, Part 1). 

On December 5, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

reported H.R. 3526 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–472, Part 

2). 

On December 5, 2007, H.R. 3526 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules and passed, as amended, by a voice 

vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On December 6, 2007, H.R. 3526 was received in the Senate, 

read twice, and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, 

and Urban Affairs. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 3526 in the 110th Congress. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
40 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF NATIONAL CONSUMER

PROTECTION WEEK

(H. Res. 94) 

Summary 

H. Res. 94 expresses the support of the House of Representatives 

for the goals and ideals of the Ninth Annual National Consumer 

Protection Week, including raising public awareness about the importance of consumer protection. The resolution calls on the President to issue a proclamation calling upon Government and private 

sector organizations to provide citizens with information necessary 

to effectively protect themselves against consumer fraud, and encourage all citizens to take an active role in protecting their personal information. 

Legislative History 

On January 24, 2007, H. Res. 94 was introduced by Representative Hinojosa and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On February 2, 2007, H. Res. 94 was referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On February 5, 2007, H. Res. 94 was considered under suspension of the rules and passed the House, amended, by a rollcall vote: 

398–0. 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF NATIONAL INTERNET SAFETY

MONTH

(H. Res. 455) 

Summary 

H. Res. 455 expresses the support of the House of Representatives for the goals and ideals of National Internet Safety Month, 

and commends and recognizes national and community organizations for promoting awareness of the dangers of the Internet and 

providing information and training regarding online safety. 

Legislative History 

On June 5, 2007, H. Res. 455 was introduced by Representative 

Bean and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

That same day, H. Res. 455 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. 

On June 12, 2007, H. Res. 455 was considered under suspension 

of the rules and passed the House, amended, by a voice vote, twothirds having voted in favor. 

OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES

THE LACK OF DIVERSITY IN LEADERSHIP POSITIONS IN NCAA SPORTS

On February 28, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on The Lack 

of Diversity in Leadership Positions in NCAA Sports. The Subcommittee examined whether people of color have made progress in 

obtaining head coaching and athletic director positions in all levels 

of sports governed by the National Collegiate Athletic Association 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
41 

(NCAA). The Subcommittee further examined the obstacles to and 

possible steps towards achieving greater diversity in leadership positions in NCAA sports. Witnesses included the NCAA, a prominent civil rights leader, an athletic director, an academician, the 

Black Coaches Association, and a prominent former college basketball coach. 

CURRENCY MANIPULATION AND ITS EFFECTS ON U.S. BUSINESSES AND

WORKERS

On May 9, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection held a joint oversight hearing with the Ways 

and Means Subcommittee on Trade and the Financial Services 

Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, 

Trade, and Technology to consider whether, and to what extent, the 

Chinese renminbi (RMB) and the Japanese yen are undervalued as 

a result of foreign government intervention in the currency markets, as well as the immediate and long term impact an undervalued RMB or yen has on the economy of the United States. In 

addition, the three subcommittees examined potential actions the 

United States should take in order to address exchange rate manipulation. There were three panels of witnesses: one for economists, another for representatives of industry and labor organizations, and a third for Administration officials. 

LEAD-TAINTED IMPORTED TOYS AND CHILDREN’S PRODUCTS

On August 22, 2007, Chairman Bobby L. Rush and Ranking 

Member Cliff Stearns of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection sent comprehensive information requests 

to 19 companies that had imported, overwhelmingly from China, 

toys and other children’s products that were recalled by the Consumer Products Safety Commission for unsafe levels of lead substrate or lead paint. Collectively, the 19 companies were responsible for 9 million children’s products that had been recalled over 

approximately the previous nine months. The purpose of the letters 

was to gather detailed information on breakdowns in commercial 

and regulatory conditions surrounding the manufacture, importation, and safety of these products. This included the names and locations of the companies and facilities in China that manufactured 

the recalled products; the importers’ legal agreements with Chinese 

or other manufacturers regarding the use of lead or lead paint; the 

steps taken by importers to test imported products before they 

were sent to retail outlets; how and when the violative lead levels 

were discovered, as well as when the CPSC was notified; the details of recall actions undertaken; and consumer responses to the 

recalls. On October 30, 2007, Chairman Rush and Ranking Member 

Stearns sent follow-up letters to four companies requesting clarifications and further details to the responses submitted to the 

original request letter. Information gleaned from responses to these 

letters informed the lead provisions of H.R. 4040, the Consumer 

Product Safety Improvement Act, signed by the President on August 14, 2008 (Public Law 110–314). 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
42 

FROM IMUS TO INDUSTRY: THE BUSINESS OF STEREOTYPES AND

DEGRADING IMAGES

On September 25, 2007, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on The Business of Stereotypes and Degrading Images. The Subcommittee examined how corporate media companies portray stereotypes of 

women and people of color and what effect such imagery has on 

American culture. The Subcommittee particularly focused on the 

commercial nature of such media portrayals, with emphasis on the 

business practices of the music and video game industries. Witnesses included top executives from the recording and video game 

industry, recording artists, and prominent academicians and civil 

rights activists. 

DRUGS IN SPORTS: COMPROMISING THE HEALTH OF ATHLETES AND

UNDERMINING THE INTEGRITY OF COMPETITION

On February 27, 2008, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade 

and Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on Drugs in 

Sports: Compromising the Health of Athletes and Undermining the 

Integrity of Competition. The Subcommittee examined the prevalence of performance enhancing drugs in professional sports in the 

wake of the release of the ‘‘Mitchell Report’’, the independent report by Senator George Mitchell commissioned by Major League 

Baseball, on the use of steroids and other performance enhancing 

drugs in professional baseball. Furthermore, the Subcommittee examined the drug policies implemented by various sports leagues 

and explored possible reforms and government initiatives to eliminate the use of performance enhancing drugs. Witnesses included 

the commissioners and player union executive directors of the four 

major professional sports leagues, the U.S. anti-doping agency, the 

U.S. Olympic Committee, the National Collegiate Athletics Association, the National Federation of State High School Associations, 

and the National Thoroughbred Racing Association. 

SAFETY OF PHTHALATES AND BISPHENOL-A IN EVERYDAY CONSUMER

PRODUCTS

On June 10, 2008, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and 

Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing entitled ‘‘The Safety of Phthalates and Bisphenol-A in Everyday Consumer Products.’’ 

Phthalates are a family of compounds used to soften certain plastics, while bisphenol-A is a building block of polycarbonate plastic 

and is often found in hard, clear plastic products. The Subcommittee examined the prevalence and potency of these chemicals 

in consumer products; the emerging science on the health effects 

from exposure to these chemicals, especially for infants and children; and government agency findings and activities concerning the 

effects of these chemicals on human health. Witnesses included scientists from four government agencies: the Consumer Product Safety Commission; the National Toxicology Program at the National 

Institutes of Health; the Food and Drug Administration; and the 

Environmental Protection Agency. Other witnesses represented industry (American Chemistry Council); State government (Department of Toxic Substances Control, the State of California); and conVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
43 

sumer advocacy groups (Science and Environmental Health Network and the Center for Health, Environment and Justice). A provision prohibiting the inclusion of certain phthalates in toys and 

other children’s products was included in the conference report to 

H.R. 4040, the ‘‘Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act,’’ which 

passed the House of Representatives on July 30, 2008, and was 

signed by the President on August 14, 2008 (Public Law 100–314). 

BREEDING, DRUGS, AND BREAKDOWNS: THE STATE OF THOROUGHBRED

HORSERACING AND THE WELFARE OF THE THOROUGHBRED RACEHORSE

On June 19, 2008, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and 

Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on Breeding, 

Drugs, and Breakdowns: The State of Thoroughbred Horseracing 

and the Welfare of the Thoroughbred Racehorse. The Subcommittee examined commercial breeding practices, the prevalence 

of performance enhancing drugs, the safety of racetracks and other 

issues affecting the safety of jockeys and racehorses. The Subcommittee also examined the sport’s regulatory framework that 

governs these issues and heard testimony on needed reforms. Witnesses included prominent breeders and owners, an ESPN analyst, 

the Jockey Club, the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, 

prominent equine veterinarians, and a racehorse retirement organization. 

HEARINGS HELD

The Lack of Diversity in Leadership Positions in NCAA Collegiate 

Sports.—Hearing on the Lack of Diversity in Leadership Positions 

in NCAA Collegiate Sports. Hearing held on February 28, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–7. 

Combating Spyware: H.R. 964, the ‘‘SPY ACT’’.—Hearing on 

Combating Spyware: H.R. 964, the ‘‘SPY ACT’’. Hearing held on 

March 15, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–21. 

H.R. 1902, the ‘‘Protecting Consumer Access to Generic Drugs Act 

of 2007’’.—Hearing on H.R. 1902, the ‘‘Protecting Consumer Access 

to Generic Drugs Act of 2007’’. Hearing held on May 2, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–39. 

Currency Manipulation and Its Effects on American Business and 

Workers.—Hearing on Currency Manipulation and Its Effects on 

American Business and Workers. Joint hearing held with the Committee on Financial Services Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology, and the Committee on Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade on May 9, 

2007. PRINTED by the Committee on Ways and Means, Ways and 

Means Serial No. 110–38. 

Protecting Our Children: Current Issues in Children’s Product 

Safety.—Hearing on Protecting Our Children: Current Issues in 

Children’s Product Safety. Hearing held on May 15, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–44. 

Legislation to Improve Consumer Product Safety for Children: 

H.R. 2474, H.R. 1699, H.R. 814, and H.R. 1721.—Hearing on Legislation to Improve Consumer Product Safety for Children: H.R. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
44 

2474, H.R. 1699, H.R. 814, and H.R. 1721. Hearing held on June 

6, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–52. 

Protecting Children from Lead-Tainted Imports.—Hearing on 

Protecting Children from Lead-Tainted Imports. Hearings held 

September 19, 20, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–65. 

From Imus to Industry: The Business of Stereotypes and Degrading Images.—Hearing on From Imus to Industry: The Business of 

Stereotypes and Degrading Images. Hearing held September 25, 

2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–67. 

Enhancing FTC Consumer Protection in Financial Dealings, With 

Telemarketers, and on the Internet.—Hearing on Enhancing FTC 

Consumer Protection in Financial Dealings, with Telemarketers, 

and on the Internet. Hearing held October 23, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–72. 

Comprehensive Children’s Product Safety and Consumer Product 

Safety Commission Reform Legislation.—Hearing on children’s 

product safety and Consumer Product Safety Commission reform 

legislation. Hearing held November 6, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 

110–75. 

Drugs in Sports: Compromising the Health of Athletes and Undermining the Integrity of Competition.—Hearing on Drugs in 

Sports: Compromising the Health of Athletes and Undermining the 

Integrity of Competition. Hearing held February 27, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–93. 

Safety of Phthalates and Bisphenol-A in Everyday Consumer 

Products.—Hearing on Safety of Phthalates and Bisphenol-A in Everyday Consumer Products. Hearing held June 10, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–125. 

Breeding, Drugs, and Breakdowns: The State of Thoroughbred 

Horseracing and the Welfare of the Thoroughbred Racehorse.— Hearing on Breeding, Drugs, and Breakdowns: The State of Thoroughbred Horseracing and the Welfare of the Thoroughbred Racehorse. Hearing held June 19, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–129. 

Economic and Security Concerns in Tourism and Commerce: H.R. 

3232 and H.R. 1776.—Hearing on Economic and Security Concerns 

in Tourism and Commerce: H.R. 3232 and H.R. 1776. Hearing held 

September 11, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–146. 

H.R. 3402, the ‘‘Calling Card Consumer Protection Act’’.—Hearing on H.R. 3402, the ‘‘Calling Card Consumer Protection Act’’. 

Hearing held September 16, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–147. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(45) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND AIR QUALITY

LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES

ENERGY INDEPENDENCE AND SECURITY ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–140 (H.R. 6, H.R. 453, H.R. 632, H.R. 1705, H.R. 

1721, H.R. 1933, H.R. 2635, H.R. 2701, H.R. 3221, H.R. 4773, S. 

103, S. 193, S. 357, S. 62, S. 987, S. 992, S. 1321, S. 1419, S. 

1656, S. 1657, S. 1771) 

Summary 

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) moves 

the United States towards increased energy independence and security through increases in the production of clean renewable fuels, 

by protecting consumers, by promoting research and deployment of 

greenhouse gas capture and storage options, by improving the energy efficiency of Federal Government operations, and by increasing the energy efficiency of products, buildings, and vehicles. Provisions within the jurisdiction of Energy and Commerce are highlighted below. 

EISA provides for extensive energy efficiency improvements for 

appliances. It adopts a consensus agreement developed by manufacturers and appliance efficiency advocates, which sets new appliance efficiency standards for residential clothes washers, dishwashers, and dehumidifiers. Updated standards are also mandated 

by certain dates for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers. New efficiency standards are implemented for stationary general and special purpose electric motors and residential boilers, as 

well. 

EISA authorizes the Department of Energy (DOE) to establish, 

after a detailed study of costs and benefits involving all stakeholders, up to three regional variations in energy efficiency appliance standards for non-portable heating or air-conditioning products and requires labeling. Any such regional standards are expected by the Committee to be enforced pursuant to Sections 333 

through 335 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, including 

self-enforcement by purchasers of such equipment sold into regions 

for which it is not labeled. Section 325(p)(1) of the Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act (EPCA), which requires an advanced rulemaking process prior to a proposed rulemaking process, was repealed. 

EISA also expedites the appliance standard rulemaking process 

when stakeholders submit consensus positions regarding new appliance efficiency standards. It also corrects a misinterpretation of 

the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT), which blocked implementation of final rules adopted by DOE on commercial package air-conVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
46 

ditioning equipment, and adopted new appliance efficiency standards based on such final rules. 

EISA provides that DOE may set more than one performance 

standard to prescribe minimum energy efficiency or maximum energy use for covered products (and may of course accept more than 

one as part of a consensus agreement), with separate provisions regarding covered products that use or handle water to allow standards that cover both water and energy where appropriate. 

Under this law, DOE is required to review appliance efficiency 

standards by 6 years after their establishment and propose new 

standards if warranted based on technical and economic factors. 

The law sets a 2-year deadline for finalization of new standards. 

Where DOE determines new standards are not warranted, it must 

revisit that determination after three years. EISA also requires 

DOE to report its progress in keeping schedule to establish new appliance efficiency standards every six months and to report any 

delays or missed deadlines, sending such reports directly to relevant congressional committees, and also to the court and parties 

involved in an operative consent decree under which DOE makes 

up prior failures to meet such deadlines. The purpose is to facilitate a separate agreement reached between efficiency advocates 

and relevant manufacturers and associations to bring further joint 

legal action in Federal court to require DOE compliance, in lieu of 

allowing a lapse of preemption of State appliance efficiency standards. Furthermore, under EISA all appliance test procedures must 

be reviewed every seven years. For furnace fans, DOE must complete rulemaking by July 1, 2013 when permitted, but not required, 

by EPAct 2005. 

EISA also requires that Federal agencies that purchase and utilize appliances which include external and certain internal standby 

power devices, to purchase only such products that use not more 

than 1 watt in the standby mode, or the lowest wattage available 

for such a product, except where impracticable or where the performance of the product might thereby be compromised. Appliance 

efficiency standards for external power-supply devices were also 

adopted and DOE is required to review such standards in 2011 and 

2015, with any updated standards being effective 2 years thereafter. 

In adopting lighting standards, EISA establishes that for general 

service lamps, 100-watt incandescent bulbs emitting less than 60 

lumens per watt be prohibited in 2012 and thereafter. A set schedule by which general service electric lamps sold each year should 

meet stated minimum energy efficiency improvement targets. 

Under the law, exemptions for special purpose lamps and conditional exceptions for other designated lamps are created as well as 

incentives, public education, labeling and sales data tracking system. 

EISA creates minimum efficiency standards for incandescent reflector lamps and certain fluorescent lamps. It also required that 

the federal government substitute energy-efficient lighting for incandescent bulbs wherever feasible. Manufactured housing must 

also meet updated efficiency codes unless it is not cost effective to 

do so. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
47 

EISA allows States to premise energy budgets in building codes 

on use of appliances with energy efficiency greater than the Federal minimum standards. It also reauthorizes the Weatherization 

Assistance Program through 2012. 

Commercial and Federal building energy efficiency requirements 

are increased under EISA. An Office of High-Performance Green 

Buildings is established within DOE (within the Office of Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy). The law requires that the Director will coordinate green building activities within the Federal government, and create and enter into public-private partnerships to 

leverage private investments to achieve green building objectives. 

EISA also provides for the review and adoption of a national goal 

to reduce commercial building energy use and achieve commercial 

buildings that—through efficiency and use of renewable energy— 

eliminate net use of fossil fuels. The provision sets goals that such 

buildings be generally constructed after 2025, attain 50 percent of 

all commercial buildings by 2035 through retrofitting green technologies, and are achieved in all commercial buildings by 2050. The 

Director of the new office is required to develop and implement lifecycle budgeting and costing methodologies and tools for green 

buildings. The Director also is responsible for identifying and implementing incentives through recognition awards and to allow 

agencies to retain savings achieved through green building practices. 

Under EISA, the Director of the Office of Federal Procurement 

is required to modify procurement guidelines to employ green 

building materials and technologies and reduce environmental impacts. Federal agencies must also identify energy and water saving 

measures that could be undertaken in each building (with 12-yearor-shorter paybacks), and within three years to implement and 

publicize such measures on the Internet and develop a 

benchmarking system by which each agency’s success will be 

scored. 

The building efficiency provisions of EISA also require at least 

five demonstration projects of green building technology at Federal 

facilities and four at universities in different regions of the U.S. An 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) program is established to 

assist in achieving greater efficiency in buildings housing data centers and server farms. 

EISA provides additional energy efficiency gains in the industrial 

sector by amending the Energy Conservation and Policy Act by 

adding three new sections. First, a survey of wasted industrial energy recovery and potential use requires that EPA create a registry 

of sites with economically feasible waste energy recovery, disqualifying any with use of thermal energy that would not be separately 

justifiable, or that fail to demonstrate a reasonable and efficient 

balance between useful thermal and electric energy output. Second, 

EISA creates incentives for recovery, utilization and prevention of 

industrial waste energy by providing grants to support waste energy recovery and supported access to market for any excess power 

generated from waste energy, requiring consideration of alternate 

regulatory structures to allow such market access. Lastly, the bill 

establishes Clean Energy Application Center, which strengthens 

and renames existing Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Application 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
48 

Centers, to provide expert resources on energy efficiency, CHP, 

waste energy recovery, and energy-efficient materials usage, working directly with affected industries. 

Another EISA provision promotes CHP and district energy systems in public institutions and public school districts, providing 

funding to help meet initial capital costs through Federal grants 

and revolving fund loans. Under the law, the State Energy Program is also reauthorized through 2012 and the ESPC program 

sunset was eliminated. EISA creates an energy efficiency financing 

advisory committee to advise DOE on ways of lowering costs and 

increasing investments in energy efficiency. 

Another energy efficiency provision of EISA establishes block 

grant programs for state and local energy efficiency improvements. 

The program also provided for public education and technical assistance to spread awareness of opportunities for energy efficiency. 

Under the green buildings retrofit provision, the Director of the Office of High Performance Green Buildings guarantees loans to cover 

up to 80 percent of the costs to retrofit and renovate existing buildings to meet green building standards. 

EISA includes provisions to facilitate the development and implementation of a Smart Grid. A Federal policy was put in place to 

encourage the use of smart grid technologies. Under the policy, the 

Department of Energy is directed to lead the Federal effort and to 

work with States and utilities supported by both a Federal agency 

smart grid task force and a smart grid advisory committee from 

stakeholder interests. It also tasks a study of smart grid technologies and completes, assesses, and reports on the barriers to and 

requirements of a successful smart grid. 

The demand response provision of EISA amends the National 

Energy Conservation Policy Act by adding a National Action Plan 

for Demand Response which required the Commission to conduct 

an assessment of demand response potential and to prepare a plan 

to achieve that potential through assistance to States, and an Environmental Attributes and Impacts of Demand Response and Smart 

Grid Systems which required an EPA Study of environmental effects of demand response and Smart Grid implementation. 

EISA also amends section 1702(c) of EPACT to (1) retain the existing statutory limit on DOE’s authority to make a loan guarantee 

for an eligible project (up to 80 percent of the project cost of a facility); (2) clarify that DOE should approve an amount likely to attract nonguaranteed investment adequate to capitalize the project; 

(3) provide that while DOE has discretion to guarantee up to 100 

percent of the loan amount (subject to the existing 80 percent of 

project cost cap), DOE may not issue a generic rule establishing a 

lower percentage limit; and (4) require that a recipient of a loan 

guarantee provide reasonable assurances that construction workers 

will be paid not less than prevailing wages consistent with the 

Davis-Bacon Act. 

The bill provides for the development and improvements of renewable fuels infrastructure. It requires that DOE establish a 

grant program to assist with the installation, replacement, or conversion of existing infrastructure so that it may be used with renewable fuel, including E85. It also provides for technical assistance and marketing grants, authorized $200 million annually to 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
49 

DOE for purposes of carrying out this section, and prohibits the 

awarding of any grant to a large, vertically integrated oil company. 

The Petroleum Marketing Practices Act (PMPA) is amended to 

prohibit a franchise agreement from restricting the franchisee’s 

ability to install renewable fuel infrastructure, convert existing infrastructure to renewable fuel use, advertise the availability of renewable fuel, or sell renewable fuel in any specified area of the 

marketing premises. Additionally, under the provision DOE, in consultation with the Department of Transportation (DOT), is required 

to report to Congress on the market penetration of FFVs and on 

the feasibility of requiring motor fuel retailers to install E85 compatible dispensers. 

DOE, in consultation with DOT, must conduct a study on the feasibility of the construction of dedicated ethanol pipelines and study 

and report to Congress on the adequacy of railroad infrastructure 

for the delivery of ethanol. EPA, in consultation with DOE and 

DOT, also must conduct a study of the feasibility of widespread use 

of ethanol blended gasoline with levels of ethanol greater that 10 

percent. 

For cellulosic ethanol production, EISA amends EPACT to increase the authorized amount of cellulosic ethanol production 

grants and establish criteria to promote geographical dispersion of 

grant recipients and feedstock diversity. It also requires DOT, in 

consultation with DOE, to engage in a public education campaign 

to make consumers aware of the availability of flexible-fuel vehicles 

and the locations where renewable fuels can be purchased. 

In another section, EISA modifies the procedures for obtaining a 

waiver under section 211(f)(4) of the Clean Air Act related to fuels 

and fuel additives. This section required the Administrator to take 

final action on a waiver application within 270 days of receiving 

the application. An application is not to be considered granted unless and until the Administrator took final action granting the 

waiver. 

The bill creates a grant program to support the domestic development and production of flexible-fuel vehicles and authorized $50 

million for cellulosic ethanol grants to 10 entities from 1890 land 

grant colleges, Historically Black Colleges or Universities, Tribal 

serving institutions or Hispanic serving institutions. 

EISA establishes an initiative to promote plug-in hybrid technologies as well as advance battery procurement. The Secretary of 

Energy is directed to establish a program to provide guarantees of 

loans for the construction of facilities for the manufacture of advanced vehicle batteries and battery systems that are developed 

and produced in the United States. EISA also amends Section 712 

of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16062) to expand that 

section’s application to components of hybrid batteries and vehicles, 

and gives priority to manufacturing facilities that have recently 

ceased or will soon cease operation. 

Under EISA, the Secretary of Energy is also directed to establish 

a program to make grants to owners of domestic motor vehicle 

manufacturing or production facilities for the production of plug-in 

hybrid electric motors or conversion modules to be used as electricity storage capacity for utilities. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
50 

Incentives for Federal and State fleets are established by amending section 301 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13211) 

to create incentives for the use of medium and heavy duty hybrid 

vehicles in Federal and State fleets. Section 508 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13258) is also amended to include electric drive in relevant provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. 

EISA establishes additional policies to improve the state data 

collection required by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) 

to support efficient energy markets. 

Legislative History 

The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held eight hearings prior to reporting Committee Prints for the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. 

On February 28, 2007, the subcommittee held an oversight hearing entitled, ‘‘A Review of the Administration’s Energy Proposal for 

the Transportation Sector.’’ 

On April 18, 2007, it held an oversight hearing entitled, ‘‘Alternative Transportation Fuels: An Overview.’’ 

On April 24, 2007, the subcommittee held an oversight hearing 

on the implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 loan guarantee Programs by the Department of Energy. 

The subcommittee also held two hearings on energy efficiency. 

On May 1, 2007, it held an oversight hearing entitled ‘‘Achieving— 

At Long Last—Appliance Efficiency Standards’’ and on May 3, 

2007, the Subcommittee held a hearing, ‘‘Facilitating the Transition to a Smart Electric Grid.’’ 

On May 8, 2007, there was an oversight hearing concerning alternative fuels entitled, ‘‘Alternative Fuels: Current Status, Proposals for New Standards, and Related Infrastructure Issues.’’ 

In May and June of 2007 the subcommittee held two days of legislative hearings to hear from stakeholders on discussion drafts of 

the energy bill. The first legislative hearing, held on May 24, 2007, 

consisted of witness testimony concerning the energy efficiency, 

smart electric grid, loan guarantees, and standby loans for coal-toliquids projects provisions of the drafts. On June 7, 2007, the Subcommittee held legislative hearings on the discussion drafts concerning alternative fuels, infrastructure, and vehicles. 

On June 20, 2007, the subcommittee met in open session to mark 

up the committee discussion drafts. A committee print concerning 

advanced battery and plug-in hybrid technology was reported to 

full committee, amended, by a voice vote. Another committee print, 

concerning enhanced EIA data collection, was forwarded to the full 

Committee, without amendment, by a voice vote. And yet another 

committee print regarding the promotion of renewable fuel infrastructure was forwarded to the full Committee, amended, by a rollcall vote: 17–14. 

On June 27 and 28, 2007, the full Committee met in open markup to consider six committee prints. On June 27, 2007, Committee 

Print #1, To promote greater energy efficiency, was ordered favorably reported, amended, by a rollcall vote: 27–18. Committee Print 

#2, To facilitate the transition to a smart electric grid, was ordered 

favorably reported, amended, by a voice vote. Committee Print #3, 

To clarify the amount of loans to be guaranteed under Title XVII 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
51 

of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, was ordered favorably reported 

without amendment, by a voice vote. 

On June 28, 2007, the committee met in open markup session to 

consider the remaining three committee prints. Committee Print 

#4, To promote the development of renewable fuels infrastructure, 

was ordered favorably reported, amended, by a rollcall vote: 33–21. 

Committee Print #5, To promote advanced plug-in hybrid vehicles 

and vehicle components, was ordered favorably reported, amended, 

by a voice vote. Committee Print #6, To enhance availability of critical energy information, was ordered favorably reported, amended, 

by a voice vote. 

After passage of the committee prints by the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the prints were introduced as six separate 

bills (HR 3236–HR 3241) and combined with the contributions of 

other committees into an omnibus energy bill, which initially 

passed the House on August 4, 2007 as H.R. 3221. Over the next 

several months the House and Senate worked to reconcile the differences between their respective versions of omnibus energy legislation. There were several policies contained in the Senate-passed 

version of the legislation that did not appear in the House bill but 

that were squarely in the jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce and on which the committee took the lead in negotiating on behalf of the House. The two most notable were revisions 

to Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and revisions to the 

Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). 

The Conference Committee negotiated a 40-percent increase in 

the fuel economy of motor vehicles, increasing standards to 35 mpg 

for passenger cars and light trucks combined. The compromise provided manufacturers with the flexibility to contribute significantly 

to the national objectives of increasing energy security and environmental protection, while preserving approximately 17,000 domestic 

assembly plant jobs in the United States. It also established specific numbers and targets, including new categories of vehicles, in 

a comprehensive approach to fuel economy. It required manufacturers to maintain a minimum fleet-wide average, distinguished between cars and trucks when establishing standards, and expanded 

incentives for the production of vehicles that run on biofuels such 

as ethanol or biodiesel. 

The Senate-passed version of the energy bill included an expanded RFS, a policy initially created in the Energy Policy Act of 

2005 which mandated a minimum amount of renewable fuel to be 

blended with conventional gasoline. During the negotiations between the House and Senate, the Committee was successful in 

keeping the authorization for the RFS in the Clean Air Act and its 

administration at the Environmental Protection Agency. The final 

negotiated version of the RFS significantly increased the percentage of transportation fuel that must come from renewable resources; created separate mandates for advanced biofuels; added 

provisions to discourage renewable fuel production from environmentally sensitive lands; and added the first specific greenhouse 

gas reduction requirement to the Clean Air Act. 

On December 6, 2007, the House voted to agree with amendments to the Senate amendments to H.R. 6 by a rollcall vote: 235– 

181. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
52 

On December 13, 2007, the Senate concurred in the House 

amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 6, with an amendment, by a rollcall vote: 86–8. 

On December 18, 2007, the House agreed to the Senate amendments to the House amendments to the Senate amendments by a 

rollcall vote: 314–100. 

H.R. 6 was presented to the President on December 18, 2007, 

and signed into law on December 19, 2007 (Public Law 110–140). 

CLEAN-DIESEL RETROFIT AUTHORIZATION

Public Law 110–255 (S. 2146, H.R. 3754) 

To authorize the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 

Agency to accept, as part of a settlement, diesel emission reduction 

Supplemental Environmental Projects, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 3754 authorized the Administrator of the Environmental 

Protection Agency to accept diesel emissions reduction Supplemental Environmental Projects as part of settling alleged environmental violations, provided that the projects: protect human health 

or the environment; are related to the underlying alleged violation; 

do not constitute activities that the defendant would otherwise be 

legally required to perform; and do not provide funds for the staff 

of the Agency or for the contractors to carry out the Agency’s internal operations. 

Legislative History 

The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held a hearing entitled, ‘‘H.R. 3754: Authorizing Supplemental Environmental 

Projects to Incent Reductions of Diesel Emissions,’’ on February 13, 

2008. The Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses: The Honorable Jim Costa, Representative of the 20th District of California; Mr. Tim Regan, Senior Vice President, Corning 

Incorporated; and, Mr. Conrad Schneider, Advocacy Director, Clean 

Air Task Force. 

On February 13, 2008, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 

Quality met in open markup session. H.R. 3754 was forwarded to 

the full Committee, without amendment, by a voice vote. 

On Thursday, March 13, 2008, the full Committee met in open 

markup session and H.R. 3754 was ordered reported to the House, 

without amendment, by a voice vote. 

On June 10, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3754 to the House (H. Rept. 110–705). 

On February 29, 2008, S. 2146, identical companion legislation to 

H.R. 3754, passed the Senate by unanimous consent. 

On March 3, 2008, S. 2146 was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On June 12, 2008, S. 2146, passed the House, as amended, under 

suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 406–0. 

On June 17, 2008, the Senate agreed to the House amendment 

to S. 2146 by unanimous consent, clearing the measure for the 

White House. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
53 

On June 24, 2008, S. 2146 was presented to the President and 

on June 30, 2008, signed into law (Public Law 110–255). 

TO PROHIBIT THE IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE

WASTE INTO THE UNITED STATES

(H.R. 5632) 

Summary 

H.R. 5632 would bar issuance by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission of any license for importation of low-level radioactive 

waste, as defined in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2111 

et seq.), into the United States. The bill provides exceptions for 

low-level waste entering under an existing license as of the date of 

enactment or low-level waste being returned to a United States facility from which it originated, and authorizes the President to 

waive the prohibition in instances where the President finds specific reasons in the national interest to provide such waiver. 

Legislative History 

On March 13, 2008, H.R. 5632 was introduced by Representative 

Gordon of Tennessee, with Representative Matheson of Utah and 

Representative Whitfield of Kentucky as cosponsors. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition 

to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker. That same day, the bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality. 

On Tuesday, May 20, 2008, a hearing was held in the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality. Witnesses included Margaret M. Doane, Director, Office of International Programs, Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Kent J. Bradford, Chairman, Utah 

Radiation Control Board; R. Steve Creamer, Chairman and Chief 

Executive Officer, EnergySolutions; and Gene Aloise, Director, Natural Resources and the Environment, U.S. Government Accountability Office. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 5632 during the 110th Congress. 

CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE EARLY DEPLOYMENT ACT

(H.R. 6258) 

To accelerate the development and early deployment of systems 

for the capture and storage of carbon dioxide emissions from fossil 

fuel electric generation facilities, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

The legislation would authorize distribution utilities of fossilbased electricity to hold a referendum on the question of establishing a Corporation which would assess a fee in order to establish 

a fund for carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies. If established, the Corporation would operate outside the federal government as a part of the Electric Power Research Institute and would 

not be subject to the annual budget or appropriations process. Once 

established, the new entity would be authorized to assess fees on 

consumers of fossil fuel based electricity. The fees would be set in 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
54 

accordance with the carbon dioxide content of each fossil fuel and 

would total between $1 billion and $1.1 billion annually for ten 

years. The funds would be spent on projects which demonstrate 

carbon capture and storage technologies. 

Legislative History 

On June 12, 2008, H.R. 6258 was introduced by Representative 

Boucher and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On June 13, 2008, H.R. 6258 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Energy and Air Quality. 

On July 10, 2008, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality 

held a legislative hearing on H.R. 6258. The subcommittee received 

testimony from representatives of the United Mine Workers of 

America, American Electric Power (AEP), the National Association 

of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), the Electric Power 

Research Institute (EPRI), the Natural Resources Defense Council 

(NRDC), and Carnegie Mellon University. 

CYBER-SECURITY DISCUSSION DRAFT

Summary 

Electricity generators and transmission facilities are increasingly 

managed by computers connected to the internet. The Idaho National Laboratories (INL) demonstrated that some electrical generators could be destroyed through remote cyber access by throwing 

generators out of phase. A Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

(FERC) survey of 30 utilities found that 23 had not adequately 

complied with a June 2007 advisory to mitigate vulnerabilities 

from cyber intrusions into control systems that can cause physical 

damage to generators and transmission equipment. The Defense 

Science Board issued a report which identified the vulnerability of 

defense bases and task critical assets to loss of electrical power 

from cyber security attacks. The Homeland Security Committee 

had held hearings reviewing this threat. Representatives of all Federal agencies agreed that the threat to the nation’s electric grid 

from unauthorized access via computer ‘‘hacking’’ is a major and 

urgent national security threat to which the industry may not be 

able to respond adequately using existing consensus-based authority. 

A discussion draft of a bill was negotiated by Committee staff 

that would provide FERC with emergency powers to order utilities 

to take specific measures to protect the grid operations, based upon 

the identified threat or upon a presidential finding of a cyber security emergency. 

Legislative History 

The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held a legislative 

hearing on September 11, 2008, which assessed threats to the bulk 

power system from cyber security attacks and reviewed the draft 

legislation. Witnesses included the FERC, Department of Energy 

(DOE), North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), 

Exelon-representing the Edison Electric Institute, the American 

Public Power Association and the National Rural Electric Cooperatives Association. Following that hearing, a classified Members’ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
55 

briefing was held on September 16, 2008, at which the Central Intelligence Agency, DOE, FERC, Department of Defense, Defense 

Science Board (staff), and INL detailed threats and vulnerabilities 

to the bulk power system from cyber and physical attacks. 

Congress recessed prior to completing work on this bill. 

CLIMATE CHANGE LEGISLATION DISCUSSION DRAFT

Summary 

The discussion draft of climate legislation would amend the 

Clean Air Act to establish an economy-wide cap-and-trade program 

to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. By putting a price on carbon 

emissions and spurring the development of new and efficient technologies, the discussion draft aims to lower heat-trapping gases 

and establish a low-carbon economy. The discussion draft cap-andtrade program covers approximately 87 percent of U.S. greenhouse 

gas emissions, and would reduce covered emissions to approximately six percent below 2005 levels by 2020, 44 percent below 

2005 levels by 2030, and 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050. 

Hydrofluorocarbons are covered separately from other gases by 

amending Title VI of the Clean Air Act. The discussion draft presents four options for allocating allowance value. 

Sources ‘‘covered’’ by the cap include power plants, producers and 

importers of petroleum and other fossil-based fuels, large industrial 

facilities, producers and importers of other bulk gases, natural gas 

local distribution companies, and geologic sequestration sites. The 

draft’s cap-and-trade system would help reduce costs by providing 

flexibility to emitters, creating incentives for sources to use lowcost compliance strategies, and encouraging technological innovation. Emission caps in the program’s early years are set to provide 

a reasonable transition into a carbon-constrained environment, 

which will also help contain costs. The draft’s energy efficiency programs also form an important component of limiting the cost of the 

overall program. 

Under the program, covered entities would be able to purchase 

EPA-approved domestic and international offset credits to meet a 

portion of their compliance obligation. All offset projects must meet 

strict quality criteria. Carbon market oversight responsibilities, including prevention of fraud and manipulation, would reside with 

the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. To avoid jobs and 

emissions moving overseas as a result of a mandatory U.S. climate 

change program, the discussion draft relies on various combinations of allocations to industry and border adjustments for carbonintensive products. 

The discussion draft contains numerous provisions to improve energy efficiency, including new loan programs and more stringent 

building code standards. The draft legislation also included provisions to spur the deployment of clean energy technologies, including carbon capture and sequestration systems, and wind and solar 

technologies. 

Legislative History 

The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held 13 hearings 

which contributed to the development of the draft: (1) ‘‘Climate 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
56 

Change: Are Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Human Activities 

Contributing to the Warming of the Planet?’’ held on March 7, 

2007, (2) ‘‘Climate Change and Energy Security: Perspectives from 

the Automobile Industry’’ held on March 14, 2007, (3) ‘‘Climate 

Change: State and Local Perspectives’’ held on March 15, 2007, (4) 

‘‘Climate Change: Perspectives of Utility CEOS’’ held on March 20, 

2007, (5) ‘‘Perspectives on Climate Change,’’ held on March 21, 

2007, (6) ‘‘Climate Change-International Issues, Engaging Developing Countries,’’ held on March 27, 2007, (7) ‘‘Climate Change: 

Lessons Learned from Cap-and-Trade Programs,’’ held on March 

29, 2007, (8) ‘‘Administration Perspectives on United Nations Climate Change Conference in Bali,’’ held on January 17, 2008, (9) 

‘‘Climate Change: Competitive Concerns and Prospects for Engaging Developing Countries,’’ held on March 5, 2008, (10) ‘‘Legislative 

Proposals to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: An Overview,’’ 

held on March, 19, 2008, (11) ‘‘Strengths and Weaknesses of Regulating Greenhouse Gas Emissions Using Existing Clean Air Act Authorities,’’ April 10, 2008, (12) ‘‘Climate Change: Costs of Inaction’’ 

held on June 26, 2008, (13) ‘‘Climate Benefits of Improved Building 

Energy Efficiency,’’ held on July 17, 2008. 

OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES

THE PIPELINE INSPECTION, PROTECTION, ENFORCEMENT, AND SAFETY

ACT OF 2006: IMPLEMENTATION REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF SAFETY

REASSESSMENT INTERVALS FOR NATURAL GAS PIPELINES

On March 12, 2008, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held an oversight hearing to review implementation of the Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006 

(the PIPES Act). This was the first oversight hearing conducted 

since the PIPES act was signed into law on December 29, 2006. 

The purpose of the hearing was to review the progress of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) in 

administering the new provisions of pipeline safety law; review the 

agency’s progress on meeting past deadlines from previous statutory requirements; and to review proposals to change the mandatory 7 year reinspection interval for natural gas pipelines. The subcommittee received testimony from PHMSA, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, the Pipeline Safety 

Trust, the American Gas Association, the Interstate Natural Gas 

Association of America, and Association of Oil Pipelines. 

THE RENEWABLE FUELS STANDARD: ISSUES, IMPLEMENTATION, AND

OPPORTUNITIES

On May 6, 2008, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality 

held an oversight hearing on the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS). 

The RFS was created by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and received a significant revision in 2007 as part of the Energy Independence and Security Act. The goal of the hearing was to gather 

testimony from the Environmental Protection Agency and various 

stakeholders concerning the implementation of the newly rewritten 

program. The subcommittee received testimony from the Honorable 

Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (SD), the EPA, the Natural Resources 

Defense Council, the Renewable Fuels Association, the National 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
57 

Petrochemical and Refiners Assocation, the Grocery Manufacturers 

of America, the National Corn Growers Assocation, the POET Corporation, KL Process Design Group LLC, and Oxfam America. 

NEXT STEPS TOWARD PERMANENT NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL

On July 15, 2008, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held an oversight hearing on the status of the Yucca Mountain 

high-level nuclear waste repository program. The Nuclear Waste 

Policy Act (NWPA) of 1982 and its amendments of 1987 established 

Yucca Mountain as the primary site of long-term nuclear waste disposal. In February of 2002, the President recommended to Congress that Yucca Mountain undergo development into a repository 

site and instructed the Department of Energy to proceed with construction licensing. On June 3, 2008, the Department of Energy 

submitted an application for such a license to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, meeting a promised deadline. 

The hearing was intended to review the further procedural 

steps required before a license can be issued, to understand the updated timing of the completion of the repository if a license is 

granted, and to review other issues that have arisen concerning the 

project. One was the funding that will be required for constructing 

the repository and its availability through the collections of a direct 

fee from electric ratepayers since 1982, now amounting to principal 

and interest putatively valued at about $30 billion, but treated as 

Federal revenue subject to separate appropriations. The current 

failure of the Federal government to meet its statutory responsibility to accept nuclear waste from plant operators, and the growing legal liability for that failure, was another topic of the hearing. 

As well, the hearing reviewed the question of whether a second repository should be planned or whether the statutory ceiling of 

70,000 tons of waste an amount likely to accumulate prior to the 

opening of the Yucca Mountain facility could be raised consistent 

with safety and engineering considerations. 

Testimony was offered by the Hon. Shelley Berkley of Nevada 

and by a panel of witnesses including: Mr. Edward F. Sproat, III, 

Director of the Office of Nuclear Waste Management of the Department of Energy; Mr. Robert J. Myers, Principal Deputy Assistant 

Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency; Mr. Michael F. 

Weber, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Dr. B. John Garrick, Chairman, 

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board; Mr. Marvin Fertel, Executive Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer, Nuclear Energy Institute; and Ms. Anne C. George, Commissioner, Connecticut Department of Public Utility Control. 

HEARINGS HELD

Addressing Climate Change: Views from Private Sector Panels.— 

Hearing on private sector views on addressing climate change. 

Hearing held February 13, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–4. 

A Review of the Administration’s Energy Proposal for the Transportation Sector.—Hearing on the review of the Administration’s 

Energy proposal for the Transportation sector. Hearing held February 28, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–9. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
58 

The Environmental Protection Agency Fiscal Year 2008 Budget 

Request.—Hearing on the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget request for fiscal year 2008. Hearing held March 8, 2007, jointly 

with the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–11. 

Carbon Capture and Sequestration.—Hearing on the overview of 

carbon capture and sequestration. Hearing held March 6, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–12. 

Climate Change: Are Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Human Activities Contributing to a Warming of the Planet?—Hearing on 

greenhouse gas emissions affecting the warming of the planet. 

Hearing held March 7, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–14. 

Climate Change and Energy Security: Perspectives from the Automobile Industry.—Hearing on the automobile industry’s perspective 

regarding climate change and energy security. Hearing held March 

14, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–19. 

Climate Change: State and Local Perspectives.—Hearing on state 

and local perspectives regarding climate change. Hearing held 

March 15, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–20. 

Climate Change: Perspectives of Utility CEOs.—Hearing on Utility CEOs’ perspectives on climate change. Hearing held March 20, 

2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–22. 

Perspectives on Climate Change.—Hearing on climate change 

with former Vice President Al Gore and Swedish academic Dr. 

Bjorn Lomborg. Hearing held March 21, 2007, jointly with the 

Committee on Science Subcommittee on Energy and Environment. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–23. 

Climate Change—International Issues, Engaging Developing 

Countries.—Hearing on international issues and developing countries regarding climate change. Hearing held March 27, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–26. 

Climate Change—Lessons Learned from the Existing Cap-andTrade Programs.—Hearing on lessons learned on climate change 

from existing cap-and-trade programs. Hearing held March 29, 

2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–28. 

Alternative Transportation and Fuels.—Hearing on alternative 

transportation and fuels. Hearing held April 28, 2007. PRINTED, 

Serial No. 110–31. 

Implementation of EPACT 2005 Loan Guarantee Programs by the 

Department of Energy.—Hearing on the Department of Energy’s 

implementation of EPACT 2005 Loan Guarantee Program. Hearing 

held April 24, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–32. 

Achieving—At Long Last—Appliance Efficiency Standards.— 

Hearing on achieving appliance efficiency standards. Hearing held 

May 1, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–36. 

Facilitating the Transition to a Smart Electric Grid.—Hearing on 

facilitating the transition to a smart electric grid. Hearing held 

May 3, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–41. 

Alternative Fuels: Current Status, Proposals for New Standards, 

and Related Infrastructure Issues.—Hearing on the current status, 

proposals for new standards, and related infrastructure issues regarding alternative fuels. Hearing held May 8, 2007. PRINTED, 

Serial No. 110–42. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
59 

Legislative Hearing on Discussion Drafts Concerning Energy Efficiency, Smart Electricity Grid, Energy Policy Act of 2005 Title XVII 

Loan Guarantees, and Standby Loans for Coal-to-Liquids 

Projects.—Legislative hearing on discussion drafts concerning energy efficiency, smart electricity grid, Energy Policy Act of 2005 

Title XVII Loan Guarantees, and standby loans for coal-to-liquids 

projects. Hearing held May 24, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–50. 

Legislative Hearing on Discussion Draft Concerning Alternative 

Fuels, Infrastructure and Vehicles.—Legislative hearing on a discussion draft regarding alternative fuels, infrastructure, and vehicles. Hearing held June 7, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–53. 

Administration Perspectives on United Nations Climate Change 

Conference in Bali.—Hearing on the Administration’s perspectives 

on United Nations Climate Change Conference in Bali. Hearing 

held January 17, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–80. 

H.R. 3754: Authorizing Supplemental Environmental Projects to 

Incent Reductions of Diesel Emissions.—Legislative hearing on H.R. 

3754 authorizing supplemental environmental projects to incent reductions of diesel emissions. Hearing held February 13, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–89. 

Climate Change: Competitiveness Concerns and Prospects for Engaging Developing Countries.—Hearing on competitiveness concerns with climate change regulation and prospects for engaging 

developing countries in climate change. Hearing held March 5, 

2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–97. 

The Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act 

of 2006: Implementation Review and Discussion of Safety Reassessment Intervals for Natural Gas Pipelines.—Hearing on the Pipeline 

Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006: Implementation Review and Discussion of Safety Reassessment Intervals 

for Natural Gas Pipelines. Hearing held March 12, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–101. 

Strengths and Weaknesses of Regulating Greenhouse Gas Emissions Using Existing Clean Air Act Authorities.—Hearing on the 

strengths and weaknesses of regulating greenhouse gas emissions 

using existing Clean Air Act authorities. Hearing held April 10, 

2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–105. 

The Renewable Fuels Standard: Issues, Implementation, and Opportunities.—Hearing on the issues, implementation, and opportunities surrounding the renewable fuels standard. Hearing held May 

6, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–113. 

H.R. 5632, A Bill to Prohibit the Importation of Certain LowLevel Radioactive Waste Into the United States.—Legislative hearing on H.R. 5632, a bill to prohibit the importation of certain lowlevel radioactive waste into the United States. Hearing held May 

20, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–119. 

Legislative Proposals to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: An 

Overview.—An overview hearing on legislative proposals to reduce 

greenhouse gas emissions. Hearing held June 19, 2008. PRINTED, 

Serial No. 110–130. 

Climate Change: Costs of Inaction.—Hearing on the costs of inaction regarding climate change. Hearing held June 26, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–133. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
60 

H.R. 6258, The Carbon Capture and Storage Early Deployment.— Legislative hearing on H.R. 6258, the carbon capture and storage 

early deployment. Hearing held July 10, 2008. PRINTED, Serial 

No. 110–134. 

Next Steps Toward Permanent Nuclear Waste Disposal.—Hearing 

on permanent nuclear waste disposal. Hearing held July 15, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–135. 

Climate Benefits of Improved Building Energy Efficiency.—Hearing on the climate benefits of improved building energy efficiency. 

Hearing held July 17, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–136. 

Protecting the Electric Grid from Cyber-Security Threats.—Hearing on protecting the electric grid from cyber-security threats. 

Hearing held September 11, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–145. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(61) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES

MERCURY EXPORT BAN ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–414 (S. 906, H.R. 1534) 

To prohibit the sale, distribution, or transfer of mercury, to prohibit the export of mercury, and to provide a long-term management and storage option for elemental mercury generated by private sources. 

Summary 

The Mercury Ban Export Act of 2008 prohibits the sale, distribution, and transfer of elemental mercury held by Federal agencies 

(except for its transfer between Federal agencies to facilitate storage) as of the date of enactment. The export of elemental mercury 

from the United States is banned beginning January 1, 2013. Any 

person residing in the United States is allowed to petition the Administrator for an exemption from the prohibition on export of elemental mercury. The Administrator may grant by rule, after notice 

and opportunity for comment, an exemption for a specified use at 

an identified foreign facility if each of the following findings is satisfied: 

(i) non-mercury alternatives for the specified use are not 

available in the country where the facility is located; 

(ii) there is no other source of elemental mercury available 

from domestic supplies (not including new mercury mines) in 

the country where the elemental mercury will be used; 

(iii) the country where the elemental mercury will be used 

certifies its support for the exemption; 

(iv) the export will be conducted in such a manner as to ensure the elemental mercury will be used at the identified facility and not otherwise diverted for other uses for any reason; 

(v) the elemental mercury will be handled and managed in 

a manner that will protect human health and the environment, 

taking into account local, regional, and global human health 

and environmental effects; and 

(vi) the export of elemental mercury for the specified use is 

consistent with international obligations of the United States 

intended to reduce global mercury supply, use, and pollution. 

The Administrator must also include in the exemption such 

terms and conditions as are necessary to minimize the export of 

elemental mercury and ensure that the conditions for granting the 

exemption will be fully met. No single exemption can exceed 3 

years in duration and 10 metric tons of elemental mercury. 

The Administrator may by order suspend or cancel an exemption 

in the case of a violation of the new Section 12(c) of the Toxic SubVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
62 

stances Control Act, a violation of the terms and conditions of an 

exemption, or the submission of false information. Violations of the 

statutory requirements or the terms and conditions of an exemption, or the submission of false information in connection therewith 

are a prohibited act under Section 15 of the Toxic Substances Control Act. Such violations shall be subject to penalties, injunctive relief, and citizen suits as provided in the Toxic Substances Control 

Act. 

The Secretary of Energy is required not later than January 1, 

2010, to designate a facility or facilities of the Department of Energy (except Oak Ridge, Tennessee) for the purpose of long-term 

management and storage, of elemental mercury generated within 

the United States. The designated facility is required to be operational not later than January 1, 2013, for the purpose of accepting 

custody of elemental mercury delivered to the facility. 

The Secretary is required after appropriate consultation with interested parties, to assess and collect a fee at the time of delivery 

to cover the pro rata cost of long-term management and storage of 

elemental mercury delivered to the facility. The amount of the fees 

is to be made publicly available not later than October 1, 2012, and 

may be adjusted annually. 

Costs covered by the fee are the costs to the Department of Energy of providing management and storage for the elemental mercury delivered to the facility, including facility operation and maintenance, security, monitoring, reporting, personnel, administration, 

inspections, training, fire suppression, closure, and other costs required for compliance with applicable law. Such costs shall not include costs associated with land acquisition or permitting of a designated facility under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 6901 et seq. (1976), or other applicable law. Building design 

and building construction costs shall only be included to the extent 

that the Secretary finds that the management and storage of elemental mercury, accepted under the program created by this section, cannot be accomplished without construction of a new building or buildings. 

The Secretary is required to report annually to the appropriate 

Committees of jurisdiction on all of the costs incurred in the previous fiscal year associated with the long-term management and 

storage of elemental mercury, including a separate accounting of 

the costs associated with activities taken under this section. 

Legislative History 

On March 15, 2007, H.R. 1534 was introduced by Representative 

Allen and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On 

March 16, 2007, H.R. 1534 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Environment and Hazardous Materials. 

On June 22, 2007, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials held a hearing on H.R. 1534. 

On August 2, 2007, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials met in open markup session and H.R. 1534 was 

forwarded to the full Committee, amended, by a voice vote. 

On October 30, 2007, the full Committee met in open markup 

session and H.R. 1534 was ordered favorably reported to the 

House, amended, by a rollcall vote: 45–2. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
63 

On November 13, 2007, the Committee reported H.R. 1534 to the 

House, amended (H. Rept. 110–444). That same day, H.R. 1534 

passed the House, as amended, under suspension of the rules by 

a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On November 14, 2007, H.R. 1534 was referred to the Senate 

Committee on Environment and Public Works. 

On May 13, 2008, the Senate Committee on Environment and 

Public Works held a hearing on H.R. 1534 and S. 906 (introduced 

on March 15, 2007, by Senator Barack Obama). 

On September 22, 2008, S. 906 was reported to the Senate, 

amended, by the Committee on Environment and Public Works (S. 

Rept. 110–477). 

On September 26, 2008, S. 906 passed the Senate, amended, by 

unanimous consent. 

On September 29, 2008, S. 906 passed the House under suspension of the rules, by a rollcall vote: 393–5, 6 voting present. This 

action cleared the measure for the White House. 

S. 906 was presented to the President on October 3, 2008, and 

signed on October 14, 2008 (Public Law 110–414). 

ENERGY INDEPENDENCE AND SECURITY ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–140 (H.R. 6, H.R. 453, H.R. 632, H.R. 1705, H.R. 

1721, H.R. 1933, H.R. 2635, H.R. 2701, H.R. 3221, H.R. 4773, S. 

103, S. 193, S. 357, S. 962, S. 987, S. 992, S. 1321, S. 1419, S. 

1656, S. 1657, S. 1771) 

(Environmental Provisions) 

Title V—Healthy High Performance Schools 

Summary 

Title V of H.R. 6 amends the Toxic Substances Control Act to authorize a grants award program to states for: technical assistance 

for EPA programs for schools to address environmental issues (including the Tools for Schools Program and the Healthy School Environmental Assessment Tool); and development and implementation of state school environmental health programs that include 

standards for school building design, construction and renovation; 

and identification of ongoing school environmental problems and 

recommended solutions to address those problems. 

This title directs the EPA Administrator to issue voluntary site 

selection guidelines that account for: the special vulnerability of 

children to hazardous substances or pollution exposures, modes of 

transportation available to students and staff, and the potential 

use of the school site as an emergency shelter. The title also instructs the EPA Administrator to issue voluntary guidelines for use 

by States in developing and implementing environmental health 

program for schools. The voluntary guidelines for the environmental health programs, among other considerations, will take into 

account environmental hazards that can be present in school facilities, including: lead, radon, asbestos, pollutant emissions, releases 

of elemental mercury; and the special vulnerability of children in 

low-income and minority communities to exposures from environmental hazards. This title authorizes appropriations of $1 million 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
64 

for fiscal year 2009, and $1.5 million for each of the fiscal years 

2010–2013. The EPA Administrator is required to publish and submit to Congress an annual report on all activities carried out under 

this title. 

Legislative History 

This provision was added to H.R. 6 as an amendment during 

Senate consideration on June 21, 2007. That same day, H.R. 6 

passed the Senate, amended, by a rollcall vote: 65–27. 

The Senate and House versions were negotiated to include an 

amended version of this environmental provision; differences in the 

House and Senate versions of H.R. 6 were resolved on December 

18, 2007. 

The President signed H.R. 6 on December 19, 2007 (Public Law 

110–140). 

INTERNATIONAL SOLID WASTE IMPORTATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT

OF 2005

(H.R. 518) 

To amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to authorize States to restrict receipt of foreign municipal solid waste and implement the 

Agreement Concerning the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous 

Waste between the United States and Canada, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 518 amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act to authorize 

States to enact laws or issue regulations or orders restricting the 

receipt and disposal of foreign municipal solid waste, as defined by 

this Act, within their borders until the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issues regulations implementing and enforcing the Agreement Concerning the 

Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Waste between the United 

States and Canada (Agreement). The bill declares that State actions authorized by this Act shall not be considered a burden on, 

or otherwise impede, interstate and foreign commerce. 

H.R. 518 requires the Administrator to: (1) perform the functions 

of the Designated Authority of the United States with respect to 

the importation and exportation of municipal solid waste under the 

Agreement; (2) implement and enforce the notice and consent and 

other provisions of the Agreement; and (3) issue final regulations 

on the Administrator’s responsibilities as Designated Authority of 

the United States. 

The legislation also requires the Administrator to give substantial weight to the views of affected States and local governments 

before consenting to the importation of foreign municipal solid 

waste into the United States under the Agreement, and to consider 

the impact of such importation on: (1) the continued public support 

for Federal and local recycling programs; (2) landfill capacities; (3) 

air emissions and road deterioration from increased vehicular traffic; and (4) homeland security, public health, and the environment. 

Finally, H.R. 518 makes it unlawful for any person to import, 

transport, or export municipal solid waste for final disposal or for 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
65 

incineration in violation of the Agreement and authorizes the Administrator to assess civil penalties for any past or current violations of this Act or to commence a civil action in the U.S. district 

court. 

Legislative History 

On January 17, 2007, H.R. 518 was introduced by Representative 

Dingell and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On February 2, 2007, H.R. 518 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Environment and Hazardous Materials. 

On March 20, 2007, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials met in open markup session and forwarded the 

bill to the full Committee by a voice vote. 

On March 22, 2007, the full Committee met in open markup session, and H.R. 518 was ordered favorably reported to the House by 

a voice vote. 

On March 29, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported HR. 518 to the House (H. Rept. 110–81). 

On April 24, 2007, the House considered H.R. 518 under suspension of the rules and passed the bill by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

H.R. 518 was received in the Senate, read twice and referred to 

the Committee on Environment and Public Works on April 25, 

2007. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 518 in the 110th Congress. 

SAFE DRINKING WATER FOR HEALTHY COMMUNITIES ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 1747) 

To amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to require a national primary drinking water regulation for perchlorate. 

Summary 

H.R. 1747 amends the Safe Drinking Water Act by waiving application of certain procedures in section 1412(b) of the Safe Drinking 

Water Act with respect to perchlorate and by requiring the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to promulgate a 

national drinking water standard for perchlorate. Specifically, H.R. 

1747 requires EPA to publish notice of a drinking water standard 

within 12 months after the enactment of this legislation and within 

18 months after publication of the proposed standard, and notice 

and public comment, promulgate a final national primary drinking 

water regulation for perchlorate. 

Legislative History 

On March 28, 2007, H.R. 1747 was introduced by Representative 

Solis and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On 

March 29, 2007, H.R. 1747 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Environment and Hazardous Materials. 

On April 25, 2007, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials conducted a legislative hearing to examine the 

Safe Drinking for Healthy Communities Act. The subcommittee received testimony from officials of the EPA, the Department of Defense, the Government Accountability Office, the Centers for DisVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
66 

ease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, 

and various private interests. 

On November 8, 2007, the Subcommittee on Environment and 

Hazardous Materials met in open markup session and forwarded 

the bill to full Committee, by a voice vote. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1747 in the 110th Congress. 

CHEMICAL FACILITIES SECURITY ACT OF 2008

(H.R. 5533) 

To revise and extend the chemical facility security program 

under Public Law 109–295, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 5533 strikes the subsection 550(b) of Public Law 109–295, 

which sunsets the chemical facility security program being conducted by the Department of Homeland Security in October 2009. 

The bill also continues the existing provisions of current law which 

require the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to 

establish risk-based performance standards for security of chemical 

facilities and require vulnerability assessments and the development and implementation of site security plans. H.R. 5533 also 

amends current law to provide that a state or political subdivision 

may adopt or enforce any regulation, requirement, or standard of 

performance with respect to chemical facility security that is more 

stringent than a regulation, requirement, or standard of performance issued under this title, or otherwise impair any right or jurisdiction of any State with respect to chemical facilities within that 

State. 

Legislative History 

On March 5, 2008, H.R. 5533 was introduced by Representative 

Wynn and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On 

March 6, 2008, H.R. 5533 was referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials. 

On June 12, 2008, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials held a hearing on H.R. 5533, the Chemical Facilities Act of 2008 and H.R. 5577, the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act of 2008. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 5533 or H.R. 5577 in the 

110th Congress. 

THE BRUCE VENTO BAN ASBESTOS AND PREVENT MESOTHELIOMA ACT

OF 2008

(H.R. 6903) 

To amend the Toxic Substances Control Act to reduce the health 

risks posed by asbestos-containing products, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 6903 amends the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to 

ban asbestos-containing products. Within two years of enactment, 

the legislation would statutorily prohibit the import, manufacture, 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
67 

processing or distribution in commerce of asbestos-containing products. H.R. 6903 provides limited exemptions that take into account 

public health considerations. The bill also establishes a public education program to increase awareness of asbestos-related diseases 

and the dangers posed by asbestos-containing products in homes 

and workplaces. 

Legislative History 

On February 28, 2008, the Subcommittee on Environment and 

Hazardous Materials conducted a legislative hearing on S. 742, the 

Ban Asbestos in America Act of 2007 (Senator Murray) and draft 

legislation to ban asbestos in products, referred to as the ‘‘Committee Print.’’ The subcommittee received testimony from officials 

of the EPA, United States Geological Survey, and public interest 

and private sector representatives. 

Representative Green introduced H.R. 6903 on September 15, 

2008, and it was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, the bill was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Environment and Hazardous Materials. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 6903 in the 110th Congress. 

THE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 1103) 

To codify Executive Order 12898, relating to environmental justice, to require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 

Agency to fully implement the recommendations of the Inspector 

General of the Agency and the Comptroller General of the United 

States, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 1103 codifies Executive Order 12898 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (Environmental Justice Executive Order, February 11, 1994) and makes modifications to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) environmental justice program based on recommendations by the Government Accountability Office and the 

EPA Inspector General. Specifically, the bill would direct EPA to 

conduct environmental justice reviews of its policies and to determine whether they may have a disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effect on minority or low-income 

populations. Additionally, the bill would require EPA to analyze 

whether new rules will create disproportionate human health or 

environmental impacts in minority and low-income communities. 

The bill also creates Congressional reporting requirements to provide for oversight of EPA’s implementation of the Environmental 

Justice Act. 

Legislative History 

On February 15, 2007, H.R. 1103 was introduced by Representative Solis. The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
68 

in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 

jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On February 16, 2007, H.R. 1103 was referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials. 

On October 4, 2007, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials conducted a legislative hearing to examine H.R. 

1103, ‘‘Environmental Justice Act of 2007,’’ and H.R. 1055, ‘‘Toxic 

Right-to-Know Protection Act.’’ The purpose of the hearing was to 

examine the distribution of environmental and human health hazards in low-income and minority communities, the federal government’s progress in implementing Executive Order 12898 and addressing such hazards, and EPA’s regulatory changes to the Toxics 

Release Reporting (TRI) program. The subcommittee received testimony from officials of the EPA, the Department of Defense, the 

Government Accountability Office, the Small Business Administration, and State and private organizations. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1747 in the 110th Congress. 

TOXIC RIGHT-TO-KNOW PROTECTION ACT

(H.R. 1055) 

To amend the Emergency Planning Community Right-to-Know 

Act to strike a provision relating to modifications in reporting frequency. 

Summary 

H.R. 1055 would re-establish the chemical reporting thresholds 

that were in place under the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) program prior to certain changes that were approved by the EPA Administrator in late 2006. The bill would amend Section 313 of the 

Emergency Planning Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) to 

prohibit the use of ‘‘Form A’’ Certification Statements for facilities 

using persistent bio-accumulative and toxic (PBT) chemicals, and 

would re-establish the chemical threshold for non-PBT chemicals at 

‘‘no greater than 500 pounds.’’ H.R. 1055 would also strike the provision in EPCRA that authorizes the EPA Administrator to change 

the reporting frequency of the TRI program. 

Legislative History 

On February 14, 2007, H.R. 1055 was introduced by Representative Pallone and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On February 15, 2007, H.R. 1055 was referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials. 

On October 4, 2007, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials conducted a legislative hearing to examine the 

‘‘Toxic Right-to-Know Protection Act,’’ and H.R. 1103, the ‘‘Environmental Justice Act of 2007.’’ The purpose of the hearing was to examine the distribution of environmental and human health hazards 

in low-income and minority communities, the federal government’s 

progress in implementing Executive Order 12898 and addressing 

such hazards, and EPA’s regulatory changes to the Toxics Release 

Reporting (TRI) program. The subcommittee received testimony 

from officials of the EPA, the Department of Defense, the GovernVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
69 

ment Accountability Office, the Small Business Administration, 

and State and private organizations. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1055 in the 110th Congress. 

OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES

THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY FISCAL YEAR 2008 BUDGET

REQUEST

On March 1, 2007, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials conducted the first of a two-part oversight hearing on the fiscal year 2008 budget for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA is one of only two agencies that actually faced 

decreases in the President’s budget for fiscal year 2008. The first 

hearing discussed the decline of the President’s EPA budget request over the last 10 years and the increasing concern with EPA’s 

ability to fulfill its programmatic mission with sufficient funding in 

several critical areas including Superfund, Brownfields, State and 

Local Air Quality Management Grants, the Safe Drinking Water 

Act Revolving Loan Fund, the Leaking Underground Storage Tank 

Program, among other issues. The subcommittee received testimony from the EPA Office of the Inspector General, the Environmental Council of the States, the environmental community, and 

the small business community. 

On March 8, 2007, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials and the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality 

held a joint oversight hearing to resume consideration of matters 

related to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Fiscal Year 

2008 Budget Request with the EPA Administrator. The second 

hearing discussed aspects of the Environmental Protection Agency 

fiscal year 2008 budget request. The subcommittee also examined 

issues relating to the EPA Inspector General’s independence and 

efforts to close Inspector General field offices and reduce the number of inspectors. In addition, this hearing discussed general oversight of EPA policies and programs including the status of the fine 

particulate implementation rule, the Clean Air Interstate Rule Act, 

Clean Air Mercury Rule, Climate Change, Superfund cleanups and 

Brownfields, among other issues. 

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE RELEASES AND REPORTING UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENT RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT OF 1980 (CERCLA) AND THE EMERGENCY PLANNING AND

COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT OF 1986 (EPCRA)

On September 24, 2008, the Subcommittee on Environment and 

Hazardous Materials conducted an oversight hearing that examined EPA’s December 28, 2007, proposed administrative reporting 

exemption for air releases of hazardous substances to the air from 

animal waste under CERCLA and EPCRA, as well as reviewed the 

operation of the Superfund program. The hearing focused on the 

impacts to public health and the environment from air releases of 

hazardous substances from animal waste at animal feeding operations. EPA testified that currently a facility has to report a release of a hazardous substance above its reportable quantity to the 

national Response Center under CERCLA section 103, and to local 

and State emergency coordinators under EPCRA section 304. EPA 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
70 

also testified that a response action to any notice to the national 

Response Center of a release of ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, or any 

other hazardous substance from animal farms was not likely. The 

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) testified about the adverse health effects of hydrogen sulfide and concluded that based on the air monitoring data collected at Excel 

Dairy in Minnesota, as well as the concentrations that were detected there, that the community exposures to hydrogen sulfide 

from air emissions at that facility posed a public health hazard to 

the residents living in its vicinity. USDA testified that GAO did not 

have enough information and that USDA has programs that assist 

farmers and ranchers to ensure better environmental management. 

The GAO testified on the findings of their recently released report. 

GAO found that EPA has not yet assessed the extent to which air 

and water pollution from CAFOs may be impairing human health 

and the environment because it lacks key data on the amount of 

pollutants that CAFOs are discharging and EPA lacks a clearly defined strategy for effectively regulating CAFOs. 

CARBON SEQUESTRATION: RISKS, OPPORTUNITIES, AND PROTECTION OF

DRINKING WATER

On July 24, 2008, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials conducted an oversight hearing on carbon capture 

and sequestration (CCS), the process of capturing carbon dioxide 

from industrial and energy-related sources before its release into 

the atmosphere, transporting it, and storing it in a secure location, 

such as an underground geologic formation. 

The purpose of this hearing was to examine EPA’s regulatory authority for underground carbon sequestration and assess the 

amount of geologic storage capacity and the opportunity to sequester carbon in the United States. Specifically, the subcommittee reviewed EPA’s proposed new federal requirements under the Safe 

Drinking Water Act (SDWA) for the underground injection of carbon dioxide for the purpose of long-term underground storage, or 

geologic sequestration. The proposed regulation, which was published in the Federal Register on July 25, 2008, was issued in order 

to ensure protection of underground sources of drinking water from 

injection-related activities, and proposes a series of technical and 

regulatory requirements that would apply to all eligible geologic sequestration activities. Additionally, this hearing examined the risks 

of carbon sequestration, as well as the impacts to the environment. 

The subcommittee received testimony from the Assistant Administrator of the U.S. EPA Office for Water, the Director of the Strategic Center for Coal and the U.S. Department of Energy’s National 

Energy Technology Lab, the Research Geologist for the Energy Resources Team at the U.S. Geological Survey, and a number of witnesses representing public interest and private sector organizations. 

HEARINGS HELD

Environmental Protection Agency Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Request.—Hearing on the Environmental Protection Agency’s fiscal 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
71 

year 2008 budget request. Hearing held March 1, 2007. PRINTED, 

Serial No. 110–11. 

Environmental Protection Agency Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Request.—Hearing on the Environmental Protection Agency’s fiscal 

year 2008 budget request. Hearing held March 8, 2007, jointly with 

the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality. PRINTED, Serial 

No. 110–11. 

Perchlorate: Health and Environmental Impacts of Unregulated 

Exposure.—Hearing on the health and environmental impacts of 

unregulated exposure to perchlorate. Hearing held April 25, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–35. 

H.R. 1524, the ‘‘Mercury Export Ban Act of 2007’’.—Hearing on 

H.R. 1524, the ‘‘Mercury Export Ban Act of 2007’’. Hearing held 

June 22, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–59. 

Environmental Justice and the Toxics Release Inventory Reporting Program: Communities Have a Right to Know.—Hearing on 

H.R. 1103, the Environmental Justice Act of 2007, and H.R. 1055, 

the Toxic Right-to-Know Protection Act. Hearing held October 4, 

2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–71. 

S. 742 and Draft Legislation to Ban Asbestos in Products.—Legislative hearing on S. 742 and draft legislation to ban asbestos in 

products. Hearing held February 28, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 

110–96. 

H.R. 5533, the Chemical Facilities Act of 2008, and H.R. 5577, 

the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act of 2008.—Legislative 

hearing on H.R. 5533, the Chemical Facilities Act of 2008, and H.R. 

5577, the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act of 2008. Hearing 

held June 12, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–127. 

Carbon Sequestration: Risks, Opportunities, and Protection of 

Drinking Water.—Hearing on the risks, opportunities, and protection of drinking water regarding carbon sequestration. Hearing 

held July 24, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–141. 

Hazardous Substance Releases and Reporting Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA).—Hearing on Hazardous 

Substance Releases and Reporting Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 

(CERCLA) and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-toKnow Act of 1986 (EPCRA). Hearing held September 24, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–151. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(73) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH

PUBLIC HEALTH

LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES

NATIONAL BREAST AND CERVICAL CANCER EARLY DETECTION

PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATIION ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–18 (H.R. 1132) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide waivers relating to grants for preventive health measures with respect to breast 

and cervical cancers. 

Summary 

H.R. 1132 reauthorizes the National Breast and Cervical Cancer 

Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) for five years and amends 

the Public Health Service Act to provide waivers relating to grants 

for preventive health measures with respect to breast and cervical 

cancers. 

Under current law, programs funded by NBCCEDP must spend 

at least 60 percent of the cooperative agreement funds awarded on 

screening, referral, and follow-up services. The remaining 40 percent of funds awarded may be allocated toward other infrastructure 

development activities, including public education, professional 

education, quality assurance, and surveillance and evaluation efforts. While the emphasis on service provision required by the 60/ 

40 split is appropriate for the vast majority of grantees, unique 

challenges exist in implementing the required 60/40 split for programs serving smaller populations. The cap on program activities 

that are not administrative, particularly outreach and client recruitment, has made it difficult to reach some eligible women, especially in rural States. 

This legislation would allow for a waiver of the 60/40 requirement for no more than five States. This legislation would require 

that programs requesting a waiver provide justification and documentation that the number of women who receive preventive 

health and early detection services will not be reduced. 

Legislative History 

On February 16, 2007, H.R. 1132 was introduced by Representative Baldwin and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On February 27, 2007, H.R. 1132 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On March 13, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and H.R. 1132 was forwarded to the Full Committee, as amended, by a voice vote. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
74 

On March 15, 2007, the full Committee held an open markup 

session and H.R. 1132 was ordered favorably reported to the 

House, as amended, by a voice vote. 

On March 27, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 1132 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–76). 

On March 27, 2007 H.R. 1132 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On March 29, 2007, H.R. 1132 passed the Senate without amendment by unanimous consent, clearing the measure for the White 

House. 

H.R. 1132 was presented to the President on April 19, 2007, and 

signed by the President on April 20, 2007 (Public Law 110–18). 

TRAUMA CARE SYSTEMS PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–23 (H.R. 727) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to add requirements regarding trauma care, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

Trauma care systems are vital to our Nation’s public health and 

emergency preparedness infrastructure. Strengthening title XII 

programs governing trauma care system planning and development 

will help to enhance disaster preparedness and reduce death and 

disability for those experiencing traumatic injury. 

H.R. 727 removes authorization for the National Clearinghouse 

on Trauma Care and Emergency Medical Services. This legislation 

allows the Secretary to make grants to public and private nonprofit 

entities to carry out demonstration projects to improve emergency 

medical services in rural areas by increasing communication and 

coordination with State trauma systems. It also revises the matching requirements for States to be eligible for grants to improve 

emergency medical services in rural areas. 

H.R. 727 prohibits the Secretary from making trauma care 

grants to a State unless the State’s emergency medical services 

plan coordinates planning for trauma systems with State disaster 

emergency planning and bioterrorism hospital preparedness planning. This legislation requires the Secretary to update the model 

plan for the designation of trauma centers and for triage, transfer, 

and transportation policies and directs the Secretary to enter into 

a contract with the Institute of Medicine or another appropriate entity to conduct a study on trauma care and trauma systems research. 

Legislative History 

On January 30, 2007, H.R. 727 was introduced by Representative 

Green and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

H.R. 727 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health on February 2, 2007. 

On March 13, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and H.R. 727 was forwarded to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
75 

On March 15, 2007, the Committee held an open markup session 

and H.R. 727 was ordered favorably reported to the House, as 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On March 27, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 727 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–77). 

On March 27, 2007, H.R. 727 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules, by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On March 29, 2007, H.R. 727 passed the Senate without amendment by unanimous consent, clearing the measure for the White 

House. 

H.R. 727 was presented to the President on April 24, 2007, and 

signed by the President on May 3, 2007 (Public Law 110–23). 

FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–85 (H.R. 3580, S. 1082, H.R. 1165, H.R. 1494, H.R. 

1561, H.R. 2589, H.R. 2592, H.R.2791, H.R. 2900) 

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to revise 

and extend the user-fee programs for prescription drugs and for 

medical devices, to enhance the postmarket authorities of the Food 

and Drug Administration with respect to the safety of drugs, and 

for other purposes. 

Summary 

Prescription Drug User Fee Amendments of 2007 

The Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA), originally enacted 

in 1992, provides an additional revenue source for the Food and 

Drug Administration to supplement appropriations from Congress. 

These resources are used to expedite review of drug and biologic 

product approval applications and subsequent drug safety monitoring. PDUFA requires pharmaceutical companies to pay application fees for each new product and supplements to existing products, annual manufacturing establishment fees, and annual product fees. PDUFA expired on September 30, 2007, prompting congressional action for its third reauthorization. 

Impetus for PDUFA peaked during the late 1980s, as frustration 

grew among industry, consumers, and Government over the length 

of time between submission of a product application to FDA and 

the agency’s final approval decision. Prior to PDUFA, FDA review 

of a new drug or a new biologic for sale in the United States took 

a median time of 29 months. Industry pressed for shorter review 

times in order to bring their drugs and biologics to market sooner 

and consumers argued for faster access to potentially life-saving 

products. FDA, citing a lack of sufficient appropriations from Congress, concluded that they needed extra resources to hire additional 

scientists to expedite the review process. Manufacturers agreed to 

the establishment of user fees that would be used to supplement, 

not replace, direct appropriations from Congress for FDA. 

The original 1992 law establishing user fees, Public Law 102– 

571, commonly referred to as PDUFA I, was reauthorized in 1997 

(PDUFA II) and 2002 (PDUFA III). Each reauthorization has built 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
76 

upon the foundation of PDUFA I by adding components for decreased review times and increased consumer safety. 

User fees are a substantial part of FDA’s budget. The FY2006 

program level for FDA’s human drugs program was approximately 

$517.5 million, of which 42.5 percent was from user fees. The median time between an application for a new drug or biologic license 

has decreased from 29 months in 1987 to less than 14 months in 

fiscal year 2003. HHS has concluded that user fees have resulted 

in significant increases in patient access to new drugs and biologics. 

Title I of H.R. 3580 reauthorizes the prescription drug user fee 

program through fiscal year (FY) 2012. Changes to the prescription 

drug user fee program fall into three major categories: enhancements to ensure sound financial footing for the human drug review 

program, enhancements for premarket review of human drug applications, and enhancements to modernize and transform the 

postmarket safety system. 

Title I includes the Administration’s request for an increase in the total annual user fees collected to $392.8 million for FY 2008, 

an $87.4 million increase over the current base. The increases in 

fees take into account inflation and increased resources needed to 

conduct certain activities. Title I also expands the amount and 

scope of fees devoted to postmarket safety, providing for an additional $225 million in user fees that will be collected over five 

years. These additional funds are intended to be used for drug safety activities and are intended to supplement and not supplant any 

other drug safety resources. There will be a dollar-for-dollar decrease in user fees collected for these additional drug safety activities for every dollar appropriated for the same purpose. 

Title I establishes a new program to assess, collect, and use fees 

for the voluntary review of prescription drug direct-to-consumer 

(DTC) television advertisements. This title also requires FDA to 

consult with other stakeholders such as consumer and patient advocates during the negotiations for PDUFA V. 

Medical Device User Fee Amendments of 2007 

The Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act 

(MDUFMA), originally enacted in 2002, provided an additional revenue source for the Food and Drug Administration to supplement 

appropriations from Congress. These user fees provide FDA with 

additional resources to review medical devices. MDUFMA amended 

the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act in three significant 

ways: (1) it established user fees for premarket review of devices; 

(2) it allowed establishment inspections to be conducted by accredited persons (third parties); and (3) it instituted new regulatory requirements for reprocessed single-use devices. MDUFMA expired 

on October 1, 2007, prompting congressional action for reauthorization. 

Unsafe medical devices can have serious consequences for consumers. Problems with the procedures and equipment for HIV and 

hepatitis C laboratory tests led to hundreds of incorrect test results 

in 2004. Defects in other types of medical devices, such as pacemakers, defibrillators, and coronary stents, have caused patient 

deaths. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
77 

In the years preceding enactment of MDUFMA, FDA’s medical 

device program suffered a long-term, significant loss of resources 

that undermined the program’s capacity and performance. Many 

reviews of premarket approval applications were delayed because 

necessary expertise was stretched thin or unavailable, and many 

guidance documents were out-of-date. 

FDA collects user fees that fund the device review process under 

the authority of MDUFMA. Over the period of FY2003 to FY2008, 

MDUFMA funding has increased at a much faster rate (220.1 percent) than FDA’s program-level device review budget (31.3 percent). MDUFMA fees comprised less than 7 percent of FDA’s program-level device review budget in FY2003, and estimates are that 

they will comprise more than 16 percent in FY2008. 

FDA and the medical device industry supported MDUFMA. It 

did not take long, however, before they realized that progress 

would be limited by financial shortfalls and uncertainties. 

MDUFMA outlined both the amount Congress was expected to appropriate to the program and the amount expected to be collected 

in user fees for each fiscal year. In practice, however, the user fee 

framework under MDUFMA created uncertainty for industry and 

FDA regarding the annual increase in fees and the amount of 

funds that would be collected by the Agency in any given year. The 

amount of fees collected in a given year was unpredictable because 

of fluctuations in the number of applications FDA received and the 

number of applications received for which fees may be reduced because of a small business exemption. 

In response to the growing problems with the user fee program, 

Congress enacted the Medical Device User Fee Stabilization Act of 

2005 (the Stabilization Act). This Act allowed for tolerances of up 

to 1 percent of the appropriations trigger for FYs 2005–2007; provided for predictable application fees by establishing fixed annual 

fees for FY2006 and FY2007; and expanded the definition of ‘small 

business’ for FY2006 and FY2007. The new law also limited section 

502(u) to reprocessed single-use devices and eliminated the granting by FDA of device-specific waivers. 

Title II of H.R. 3580 reauthorizes medical device user fees 

through FY 2012. Changes to the medical device program fall into 

two major categories: enhancements to ensure sound financial footing for the device review program, and enhancements to the process for premarket review of device applications. Medical device 

companies will pay 31 percent more in fees in 2008 and 8.5 percent 

more in each subsequent fiscal year through 2012. This will ensure 

fee increases over the next five years to cover anticipated costs related to rent, security, and statutorily mandated payroll and benefit increases. 

In an effort to add stability to this fee program, Title II includes 

two new types of fees, which are intended to generate about 50 percent of the total fee revenue. The new fees are an annual establishment registration fee and an annual fee for filing periodic reports 

for devices approved under a premarket approval application to 

FDA. This title authorizes $7,100,000 in appropriations in FY 2008 

and provides for increases each year until 2012 for additional 

postmarket safety activities. Title II also includes provisions to 

streamline the third-party inspection program. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
78 

Title II also requires FDA to consult with other stakeholders 

such as consumer and patient advocates during the negotiations for 

MDUFMA III. 

Pediatric Medical Device Safety and Improvement Act 

Pediatric medical devices are used to treat or diagnose diseases 

and conditions in patients from birth through age 21. Some products are designed specifically for children, while others are borrowed from adult applications or produced for more general use. 

Children have specific medical needs that must be considered 

when medical and surgical devices are prescribed. Devices that 

have not been studied for use in children may not accommodate the 

unique needs of children, such as allowing for expandable growth, 

and accommodating their active lifestyles and differing metabolism. 

FDA addressed premarket review of medical devices intended for 

pediatric patients by issuing a guidance in May 2004. In this guidance, FDA defined the age ranges for pediatric subpopulations, 

identified the types of information needed to provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of medical devices intended 

for use in the pediatric population, and described the protections 

that sponsors should consider for pediatric subjects involved in device clinical trials. 

An Institute of Medicine (IOM) report found that it was difficult 

to reliably identify post-market studies that considered pediatric 

issues or that more generally focused on children. The report recommended that FDA, NIH, Agency for Healthcare Research and 

Quality, and other research funding agencies and interested parties 

set priorities for research on unanswered questions about the safe 

use of devices for children. 

Title III of H.R. 3580 provides incentives to device manufacturers 

to create medical devices specifically designed to meet the needs of 

pediatric patients. It also gives FDA the authority to review these 

devices in a manner distinct from devices in general, and to require 

post-market studies to ensure the continued safety and effectiveness of pediatric devices. 

Title III modifies the existing humanitarian device exemption 

(HDE) for medical devices to allow manufacturers of HDE-approved 

devices specifically designed to meet a pediatric need to make a 

profit from the sale of such devices. 

Title III authorizes FDA to establish a mechanism to track the 

number and types of devices approved specifically for children or 

for conditions that occur in children. Title III also grants explicit 

authority to FDA’s Pediatric Advisory Committee to monitor the 

use of pediatric devices and to make recommendations for improving their availability and safety. 

Pediatric Research Equity Act of 2007; Best Pharmaceuticals for 

Children Act of 2007 

Approximately 75 percent of drugs and a large majority of devices used in pediatric medicine have not been appropriately tested 

for use in children. Clinicians, however, often prescribe them for 

children believing that the safety and effectiveness demonstrated 

with adults will apply to younger patients. Unfortunately, this offVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
79 

label prescribing can result in children receiving ineffective drugs 

or too much or too little of a potentially useful drug. 

The market for any individual drug’s pediatric indications is generally small, providing an economic disincentive for manufacturers 

to commit resources to pediatric testing. The result is that few 

marketed drugs have been tested for safety and effectiveness in 

children. In some tragic cases, children have died or suffered serious injury as a result of either taking drugs that are shown safe 

for use in adults or from a medical device that worked properly in 

adults, but had different results when used in children. A March 

2007 study, ‘‘Off-label Drug Use in Hospitalized Children,’’ published in the Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine, found that 

78.7 percent of pediatric patients discharged from the hospital during the time period of the study used at least one drug off-label. 

Prior to the enactment of the Pediatric Research Equity Act 

(PREA) and the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (BPCA), 

most therapies commonly used by children failed to provide instructions for pediatric use. Historically, approximately 80 percent 

of medication labels in the Physician’s Reference Directory did not 

have pediatric use information. At least 62 percent of drugs on the 

market were unstudied and labeled for pediatric use. 

PREA stated that a manufacturer submitting an application to 

market a new active ingredient, new indication, new dosage form, 

new dosing regimen, or new route of administration must at the 

same time submit a pediatric assessment. If the disease course and 

drug effects are sufficiently similar for adults and children, the 

HHS Secretary may allow extrapolation from adult study data as 

evidence of pediatric effectiveness. 

For products already on the market, PREA grants the HHS Secretary the authority to require the manufacturer of an approved 

drug or licensed biologic to submit a pediatric assessment in situations in which the absence of pediatric use information on the label 

could pose significant risks. 

BPCA renewed FDA’s authority to give an additional six month 

period of marketing exclusivity to a manufacturer in return for 

FDA-requested pediatric use studies and reports. Since pediatric 

exclusivity, as originally defined in the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act (FDAMA), did not apply to products no 

longer covered by patent (off-patent) or other marketing exclusivity 

agreements, and since patent holding manufacturers could decline 

to conduct FDA-requested studies, BPCA added provisions to encourage pediatric research in those products. For off-patent products, BPCA established an off-patent NIH research fund for these 

studies and authorized appropriations until the sunset on October 

1, 2007. BPCA also granted pediatric supplemental applications 

priority status to address the concern that pediatric exclusivity did 

not lead to quick changes in drug labels. 

Pediatric exclusivity has resulted in more than 132 completed 

studies leading to over 114 label changes incorporating new pediatric information. In a March 2007 report to Congress entitled ‘‘Pediatric Drug Research: Studies Conducted Under Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act,’’ the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) noted that these labeling changes were often made as 

a result of findings by the pediatric drug studies that children may 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
80 

have been exposed to ineffective drugs, ineffective dosing, overdosing, or previously unknown side effects. 

Title IV of H.R. 3580 reauthorizes FDA’s authority to require a 

manufacturer of a drug or biologic who submits an application to 

market a new active ingredient, new indication, new dosage form, 

new dosing regimen, or new route of administration to also submit 

a pediatric assessment. 

Title IV grants the Secretary of HHS the authority to require pediatric tests in appropriate circumstances through 2012. Provisions 

of current law that allow a deferral of pediatric tests for new products are strengthened. The standard for requiring tests for drugs 

currently being marketed is also strengthened. Requirements with 

respect to labeling drugs are strengthened to ensure that they reflect in a timely way the results of studies. 

Title V reauthorizes, for five years, FDA’s authority to grant an 

additional six months marketing exclusivity to a manufacturer of 

a drug in return for FDA-requested pediatric use studies and reports. Title V also includes provisions to encourage pediatric research for products that are off-patent or for products whose manufacturer declines to conduct FDA-related studies. 

Title V increases to 180 days the time limit that the Secretary 

has for deciding whether or not to grant exclusivity. This title also 

strengthens labeling requirements to ensure that labels reflect 

study results in a timely and consistent fashion. 

Titles VI–IX. Reagan-Udall Foundation; Conflicts of Interest; Clinical Trials Databases; Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies 

Following several high-profile drug safety cases in 2004, the GAO 

wrote a report in March 2006 entitled, ‘‘Drug Safety: Improvement 

Needed in FDA’s Postmarket Decision-Making and Oversight Process.’’ In its report, the GAO found that FDA lacked clear and effective processes for making decisions about, and providing management oversight of, postmarket drugs safety issues. 

FDA then commissioned the Institute of Medicine to write a report on drug safety. In its report, ‘‘The Future of Drug Safety: Promoting and Protecting the Health of the Public,’’ IOM raised several concerns: FDA and the pharmaceutical industry do not consistently demonstrate accountability and transparency to the public 

about safety concerns in a timely and effective fashion; the drug 

safety system is impaired by serious resource constraints that 

weaken the quality and quantity of the science; and an organizational structure in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research 

(CDER) is not functioning properly and being hindered by unclear, 

insufficient regulatory authority. 

Four titles in this bill address the concerns raised by the GAO 

and IOM reports: Title VI, Reagan-Udall Foundation; Title VII, 

Conflicts of Interest for FDA Advisory Committees; Title VIII, Clinical Trials Registry Database; and Title IX, Clinical Trials Results 

Database, and Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS). 

Title VI addresses the concern that, over the last decade, fewer 

new medical products have been submitted to the FDA for approval 

because the use of outmoded testing methods is resulting in a rising product failure rate during development. Newer technologies 

need new methods for their assessment. Allowing FDA to collaboVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
81 

rate with other researchers will contribute greatly to filling this 

void. 

Title VI creates the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the Food and 

Drug Administration. The purpose of the Foundation is to establish 

a private-public partnership to advance FDA’s Critical Path Initiative to modernize medical product development, accelerate innovation, and enhance product safety. Title VI sets forth the duties of 

the Foundation to include identifying unmet needs in the sciences 

of developing, manufacturing, and evaluating the safety and effectiveness of diagnostics, devices, biologics, and drugs. 

Title VII addresses concerns that advisory panels might be influenced by conflicts of interest. FDA relies heavily on the recommendations of its 30 advisory committees in its assessment of 

product safety and benefit. There has been concern that members 

of these committees may not be operating in the most judicious 

manner due to industry funding or other financial interests. It is 

important that more safeguards are put into place to ensure that 

advisory committee members are serving with integrity and with 

the best interest of the consumer in mind. 

Title VII requires all individuals under consideration for appointment to serve on an advisory committee to disclose to the Secretary 

all financial interests that would be affected by the advisory committee’s actions. The Secretary shall determine the aggregate percentage of waivers provided in fiscal year 2007. The Secretary will 

then be required to decrease the number of waivers by five percent 

for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012. Disclosure of waivers 

must be made public 15 or more days prior to the meeting of the 

advisory committee and must be posted on the Internet. 

Title VII enhances FDA’s outreach activities for identifying nonconflicted experts to participate on advisory committees and directs 

the Secretary to review guidance on conflict of interest waiver determinations with respect to advisory committees at least once 

every five years and update this guidance as necessary. 

Title VIII establishes a comprehensive, mandatory clinical trials 

registry database and clinical trials results database. This addresses concerns raised by the IOM’s report on drug safety in regard to 

the need for FDA to increase the availability of information to the 

public and to researchers for recruitment purposes and to communicate the risks and benefits of drugs. A uniform, centralized database and registry will help patients, providers, and researchers 

learn new information and make more informed healthcare decisions. 

Title VIII expands the existing publicly available clinical trials 

registry data bank in three phases. First, except for preliminary 

studies, all clinical trials on drugs, biologics, and devices would be 

required to provide trial registry information. Second, trials for approved products would be required to post basic results to the data 

bank. Third, the Secretary shall expand the database further by 

rulemaking to consider the inclusion of other data elements as well 

as trials of unapproved products. 

Title VIII also provides for civil monetary penalties for noncompliance. 

Title IX is the centerpiece of this bill’s attempt to enhance 

postmarket drug safety. A central aspect of this program is to auVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
82 

thorize FDA to require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy 

(REMS) in all appropriate cases. The IOM report highlights the 

need to extend drug safety consideration from premarket through 

postmarket approval. A number of other reports suggest that cultural issues within FDA and gaps in the agency’s authorities hamper the ability to take swift and effective action when problems 

arise. The REMS program will be enhanced by the establishment 

of a robust active surveillance program designed to see how drugs 

work in real world postmarket circumstances, which are often quite 

different than what is learned about a drug in the carefully controlled clinical trial setting. 

Title IX strengthens FDA’s postmarket drug safety authority and 

provides greater FDA transparency. Specifically, Title IX provides 

FDA with the authority to require labeling changes under appropriate circumstances and provides FDA with the authority to impose civil monetary penalties for certain violations of the Federal 

Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to drugs. Specifically, 

this title strengthens FDA’s ability to monitor and remedy false 

and misleading television advertising and provides an administrative procedure and CMPs for violations. 

Title IX requires the Secretary to issue guidance for the conduct 

of clinical trials with respect to antibiotic drugs. This title prohibits 

food to which drugs or biological products have been added and includes provisions to increase security of the drug supply. Title IX 

improves the citizen petition process and makes postmarket drug 

safety information transparent and more accessible to the public. 

This title also requires the Secretary to make action packages publicly available and creates a database of approved generic drugs. 

FOOD SAFETY; OTHER CONCERNS 

The safety of the Nation’s food supply was highlighted when 

adulterated wheat gluten imported from China and used for pet 

food sickened or killed a number of dogs and cats. Wheat gluten 

was later found in some hog, chicken, and fish feed. FDA announced in June 2007 that it was detaining all imports of certain 

types of farm-raised seafood from China until their shippers could 

confirm that they did not contain unapproved drug residues. 

In addition to the problems with adulteration of products from 

China, outbreaks of E. coli in spinach, Salmonella in peanut butter, 

and botulism in chili sauce here in the U.S. brought renewed attention to the risks posed by accidental food contamination. 

Title X requires the Secretary to establish processing and ingredient standards with respect to pet food and ingredient definitions. 

The Secretary is also required to update standards for pet food labeling that include nutritional and ingredient information. Title X 

requires the Secretary to establish an early warning and surveillance system to identify adulteration of the pet food supply and 

outbreaks of illness associated with pet food. 

Title X provides improved communication requirements during 

an ongoing recall of human or pet food including posting information regarding recalled products on FDA’s website in a consolidated, searchable form that is easily accessed and understood by 

the public. This title requires the Secretary to work with States in 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
83 

undertaking activities that assist in improving the safety of fresh 

and processed produce. 

Title X requires the Secretary to establish a Reportable Food 

Registry to which instances of reportable food may be submitted by 

FDA and requires the Secretary to issue an alert in certain instances. This title also requires the Secretary to immediately notify 

the Secretary of Homeland Security if the Secretary suspects such 

food may have been deliberately adulterated. 

Title XI requires the Secretary to establish and make publicly 

available, clear written policies to govern the timely clearance of 

articles written by FDA employees. Title XI provides an incentive, 

through a priority review voucher, to develop new drug, biologic, 

and device products to treat neglected or tropical diseases. 

Title XI provides reporting and study requirements for FDA regarding genetic test safety and quality. This title also provides incentives for the development of certain antibiotics and exclusivity 

for enantiomers. 

Legislative History 

On June 28, 2007, H.R. 2900 was introduced by Representative 

Dingell and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On July 11, 2007, H.R. 2900 was reported by the Committee on 

Energy and Commerce (H. Rept. 110–225) and considered in the 

House under suspension of the rules. H.R. 2900 passed the House 

by a rollcall vote: 403–16. On July 16, 2007, H.R. 2900 was received in the Senate. 

Further action was taken on a subsequent measure, H.R. 3580, 

introduced by Representative Dingell on September 19, 2007. It 

was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On September 19, 2007, H.R. 3580 passed the House under suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 405–7. 

On September 20, 2007, H.R. 3580 passed the Senate without 

amendment by unanimous consent, clearing the measure for the 

White House. 

On September 26, 2007, H.R. 3580 was presented to the President and signed by the President on September 27, 2007 (Public 

Law 110–85). 

CHARLIE W. NORWOOD LIVING ORGAN DONATION ACT

Public Law 110–144 (H.R. 710) 

To amend the National Organ Transplant Act to provide that 

criminal penalties do not apply to human organ paired donation, 

and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 710 amends the National Organ Transplant Act to provide 

that, for the purpose of provisions that prohibit the transfer of any 

human organ for use in human transplantation for valuable consideration, human organ paired donation does not involve such a 

transfer. It also creates a definition for ‘‘human organ paired donation.’’ In addition, the bill requires the Secretary of Health and 

Human Services to report to Congress on the progress made toward 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
84 

understanding the long-term health effects of living organ donation. 

Legislative History 

On January 29, 2007, H.R. 710 was introduced by Mr. Norwood 

and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On February 2, 2007, H.R. 710 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On March 6, 2007, H.R. 710 was considered in the House under 

suspension of the rules. The yeas and nays were demanded and 

further proceedings of the motion were postponed. 

On March 7, 2007, H.R. 710 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 422–0. 

On July 9, 2007, H.R. 710 passed the Senate, amended, by unanimous consent. 

On December 4, 2007 the House agreed to the Senate amendment with amendments pursuant to H. Res. 837. 

On December 6, 2007, the Senate agreed to the House amendment to the Senate amendment and the House amendment to the 

title of bill by unanimous consent and H.R. 710 was cleared for the 

White House. 

On December 11, 2007, H.R. 710 was presented to the President 

and was signed by the President on December 21, 2007 (Public Law 

110–144). 

TO AMEND TITLE 39, UNITED STATES CODE, TO EXTEND THE AUTHORITY OF THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE TO ISSUE A

SEMIPOSTAL TO RAISE FUNDS FOR BREAST CANCER RESEARCH

Public Law 110–150 (S. 597, H.R. 1236) 

Summary 

S. 597 amends title 39, United States Code, to extend the provisions authorizing the USPS to issue a special postage stamp to 

support breast cancer research to 2011. In addition, S. 597 also requires NIH to prepare reports on spending of the proceeds from 

sales of the breast cancer research stamp. 

Legislative History 

On February 28, 2007, H.R. 1236 was introduced by Representative Clay. It was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and 

Commerce, and Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 

provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On March 1, 2007, H.R. 1236 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On October 10, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health met in open 

markup session and forwarded H.R. 1236 to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On October 16, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

met in open markup session and H.R. 1236 was ordered reported, 

as amended by a voice vote. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
85 

On October 25, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

reported H.R. 1236 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–409, Part 

1). 

On October 30, 2007, H.R. 1236 passed the House, amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On November 1, 2007, H.R. 1236 was received in the Senate, 

read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 

and Governmental Affairs. 

On December 12, 2007, H.R. 1236 the Committee on Homeland 

Security and Governmental Affairs referred H.R. 1236 to the Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security. 

Further action was taken on S. 597, a related measure. 

On February 14, 2007, S. 597 was introduced by Senator Feinstein referred to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and 

Government Affairs. 

On November 7, 2007, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs reported S. 597 to the Senate (S. 

Rept. 110–222). 

On November 14, 2007, S. 597 passed the Senate, amended, by 

unanimous consent. On November 15, 2007, S. 597 was received in 

the House. 

On December 11, 2007, S. 597 passed the House, amended, 

under suspension of them rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On December 13, 2007, the Senate concurred in the House 

amendments by unanimous consent, clearing the measure for the 

White House. 

On December 19, 2007, S. 597 was presented to the President 

and on December 21, 2007, the President signed the measure (Public Law 110–150). 

TO RENAME THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH AND HUMAN

DEVELOPMENT AS THE EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

Public Law 110–154 (S. 2484) 

A bill to rename the National Institute of Child Health and 

Human Development as the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. 

Summary 

Since its establishment by 1962, the National Institute of Child 

Health and Human Development has achieved an outstanding 

record of achievement in advancing child health and human development, including significant efforts to: reduce dramatically the 

rates of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, infant mortality, and maternal HIV transmission; develop the Haemophilus Influenza B 

(Hib) vaccine, credited with nearly eliminating the incidence of 

mental retardation; and conduct intramural research, support extramural research, and train thousands of child health and human 

development researchers who have contributed greatly to dramatic 

gains in child health throughout the world. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
86 

Eunice Kennedy Shriver, a tireless advocate for children with 

special needs, was instrumental in proposing, passing, and enacting legislation to establish the National Institute of Child Health 

and Human Development (Public Law 87–838) on October 17, 

1962. 

S. 2484 amends the Public Health Service Act to rename the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development as the 

‘‘Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and 

Human Development.’’ 

Legislative History 

On December 13, 2007, S. 2484 was introduced by Senator 

Hatch, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed the 

Senate without amendment by unanimous consent. 

On December 17, 2007, S. 2484 was received in the House, considered and passed under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, 

two-thirds having voted in favor. This action cleared the measure 

for the White House. 

On December 19, 2007, S. 2484 was presented to the President 

and was signed by the President on December 21, 2007 (Public Law 

110–154). 

CHIMP HAVEN IS HOME ACT

Public Law 110–170 (S. 1916) 

A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to modify the program for the sanctuary system for surplus chimpanzees by terminating the authority for the removal of chimpanzees from the system for research purposes. 

Summary 

S. 1916 amends the Public Health Service Act to repeal provisions providing for the removal of surplus chimpanzees from a 

sanctuary facility and prohibits use of such chimpanzees for research except for noninvasive behavioral studies. 

Legislative History 

On August 1, 2007, S. 1916 was introduced by Senator Burr, and 

referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions. 

On December 12, 2007, S. 1916 was reported, amended, without 

written report by the Senate Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor, and Pensions. 

On December 13, 2007, S. 1916 passed the Senate, amended, by 

unanimous consent. 

On December 17, 2007, S. 1916 was received in the House and 

referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. That 

same day, S. 1916 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On December 19, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

was discharged from further consideration of the measure. S. 1916 

was considered in the House by unanimous consent and passed the 

House without objection. This action cleared S. 1916 for the White 

House. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
87 

On December 21, 2007, S. 1916 was presented to the President 

and signed by the President on December 26, 2007 (Public Law 

110–170). 

THE SAFETY OF SENIORS ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–202 (S. 845, H.R. 3701) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to direct the Secretary 

of Health and Human Services to intensify programs with respect 

to research and related activities concerning falls among older 

adults. 

Summary 

Falls represent a serious health risk for millions of older Americans. In the United States, one of every three persons age 65 or 

older falls each year. Falls are the leading cause of injury deaths 

and the most common cause of injuries and hospital admissions for 

trauma in older adults. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in 2002, more than 12,800 people aged 

65 and older died from fall-related injuries and more than 1.6 million seniors were treated in emergency departments for fall-related 

injuries. 

In addition to their effect on the quality of life of seniors and 

their families, falls also contribute to rising healthcare costs due to 

increased physician visits, emergency room use, and hospitalization. According to the CDC, the direct medical cost totaled $179 

million for fatal and $19 billion for nonfatal fall injuries in 2000. 

S. 845 directs HHS to oversee and support national and local 

education campaigns focusing on reducing falls and preventing repeat falls among older adults. It also amends the Public Health 

Service Act to authorize the Secretary of Health and Human Services to: (1) oversee and support a national education campaign focusing on reducing falls among older adults and preventing repeat 

falls; and (2) award grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements to 

design and carry out local education campaigns. 

S. 845 allows the Secretary to conduct and support research to: 

(1) improve the identification of older adults who have a high risk 

of falling; (2) improve data collection and analysis to identify fall 

risk and protective factors; (3) design, implement, and evaluate the 

most effective fall prevention interventions; (4) tailor effective 

strategies to reduce falls to specific populations of older adults; (5) 

maximize the dissemination of proven, effective fall prevention 

interventions; (6) improve the diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation of elderly fall victims and older adults at high risk for falls; 

and (7) assess the risks of falls occurring in various settings. 

S. 845 also authorizes the Secretary to: (1) conduct research concerning the barriers to the adoption of proven fall prevention interventions; (2) conduct research to develop, implement, and evaluate 

the most effective approaches to reduce falls among high-risk older 

adults living in communities and long-term care and assisted living 

facilities; (3) evaluate the effectiveness of community programs; (4) 

provide professional education for physicians and allied health professionals in fall prevention; (5) oversee and support specified demonstration and research projects; (6) award grants to design, impleVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
88 

ment, and evaluate fall prevention programs using proven intervention strategies and carry out a multistate demonstration 

project; (7) give priority in awarding grants under this Act to entities that explore the use of cost-sharing to ensure the institutional 

commitment of the recipients of such assistance to the funded 

projects; and (8) report to Congress on the effects of falls on health 

care costs, the potential for reducing falls, and the most effective 

strategies for reducing associated health care costs. 

Legislative History 

On September 27, 2007, H.R. 3701 was introduced by Representative Pallone and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H.R. 3701 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On March 11, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and forwarded H.R. 3701 to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On March 13, 2008, the full Committee met in an open markup 

session and H.R. 3701 was ordered reported, as amended, by a 

voice vote. 

On April 8, 2008, H.R. 3701 was reported to the House, amended, by the Committee on Energy and Commerce (H. Rept. 110– 

569). 

Further action was taken on S. 845, a related Senate measure, 

which was introduced on March 12, 2007, by Senator Enzi and referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and 

Pensions. 

On March 29, 2007, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor and Pensions reported S. 845, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute, to the Senate. 

On June 28, 2007, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor, and Pensions filed a written report on S. 845 (S. Rept. 110– 

110). 

On August 1, 2007, S. 845 passed the Senate, amended, by unanimous consent. 

On August 2, 2007, the bill was received in the House and referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. That 

same day, S. 845 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On April 8, 2008, S. 845 passed the House under suspension of 

the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. This action cleared the measure for the White House. 

On April 14, 2008, S. 845 was presented to the President. The 

President signed the measure on April 23, 2008 (Public Law 110– 

202). 

THE NEWBORN SCREENING SAVES LIVES ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–204 (S. 1858, H.R. 3825) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to establish grant programs to provide for education and outreach on newborn screening 

and coordinated follow-up care once newborn screening has been 

conducted, to reauthorize programs under part A of title XI of such 

Act, and for other purposes. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
89 

Summary 

Newborn screening provides early identification and follow-up for 

treatment of infants affected by certain genetic, metabolic, hormonal, and functional conditions for which there may be an effective treatment or intervention. If left untreated, these disorders can 

cause death, disability, mental retardation, and other serious conditions. Every year, more than 4 million infants are born and 

screened to detect conditions that could threaten their lives and 

long-term health, and an estimated 3,000 babies are identified and 

treated for such conditions. 

While newborns are regularly screened and treated for debilitating conditions in some States, in others screening may not be required and conditions may go undiagnosed and untreated. In 2004, 

the American College of Medical Genetics completed a report commissioned by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 

(HHS) recommending, at a minimum, that every baby born in the 

U.S. be screened for a core set of 29 treatable disorders regardless 

of the State in which he or she is born. At present, only 15 States 

and the District of Columbia require infants to be screened for all 

29 of the recommended disorders. An estimated 1,000 of the 5,000 

babies born every year in the United States with one of the 29 core 

conditions potentially go unscreened through newborn screening. 

S. 1858 will educate parents and healthcare providers about newborn screening, improve follow-up care for infants with an illness 

detected through newborn screening, and help States expand and 

improve their newborn screening programs, as well as provide for 

Federal guidelines on the conditions for which newborns in all 

States should be screened. 

S. 1858 amends the Public Health Service Act to authorize the 

Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting through the Administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration 

(HRSA), to award grants to eligible entities to: (1) provide screening, counseling, or health care services to newborns and children 

having or at risk for heritable disorders; (2) provide education and 

training in newborn screening and congenital, genetic, and metabolic disorders to health care professionals and newborn screening 

laboratory personnel; (3) develop and deliver educational programs 

about newborn screening, counseling, testing, follow-up, treatment, 

and specialty services to parents, families, and patient advocacy 

and support groups; and (4) establish, maintain, and operate a system to assess and coordinate treatment relating to congenital, genetic, and metabolic disorders. 

In addition, S. 1858 requires the Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children to make recommendations that include the heritable disorders for which all newborns 

should be screened and develop a model decision-matrix for newborn screening program expansion. 

S. 1858 requires the Secretary, acting through the Administrator, 

to establish a central clearinghouse for information on newborn 

screening and award grants for newborn screening educational programs and for a system to assess and coordinate treatment relating 

to congenital, genetic, and metabolic disorders. 

The bill also requires the HHS Secretary, through the Director 

of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), to proVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
90 

vide for: quality assurance for screening laboratories; populationbased pilot testing for evaluating new screening tools; and a national contingency plan for newborn screening in the event of a 

public health emergency. 

S. 1858 requires the HHS Secretary, through an Interagency 

Group, to: collect, analyze, and make available data on certain heritable disorders; and operate regional centers to conduct applied epidemiological research on interventions to prevent poor health outcomes from such disorders. The bill requires the HHS Secretary to 

establish the Hunter Kelly Newborn Screening Research Program. 

Legislative History 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 3825 was introduced by Representative Roybal-Allard and referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. On October 16, 2007, H.R. 3825 was referred to the 

Subcommittee on Health. 

On March 11, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and forwarded H.R. 3825 to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On March 13, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

met in an open markup session and H.R. 3825 was ordered favorably reported, as amended, by a voice vote. 

On April 8, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3825 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–570). 

Further action was taken on S. 1858, a related measure, which 

was introduced by Senator Dodd on July 23, 2007 and referred to 

the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. 

On December 5, 2007, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions reported S. 1858 to the Senate with an 

amendment in the nature of a substitute (a written report, S. Rept. 

110–280, was filed on April 8, 2008). 

On December 13, 2007, S. 1858 passed the Senate, amended, by 

unanimous consent. 

On December 17, 2007, S. 1858 was received in the House and 

referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same 

day, the measure was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On April 8, 2008, S. 1858 passed the House under suspension of 

the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. This action cleared the measure for the White House. 

On April 14, 2008, S. 1858 was presented to the President. The 

President signed the bill on April 24, 2008 (Public Law 110–204). 

TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–206 (S. 793, H.R. 1418) 

To provide for the expansion and improvement of traumatic 

brain injury programs. 

Summary 

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

(CDC), of the 1.5 million Americans who sustain a traumatic brain 

injury (TBI) each year, around 50,000 die and another 80,000 to 

90,000 experience long-term or lifelong disabilities as a result. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
91 

Traumatic brain injuries can result in disability and the need for 

help to perform daily living activities. 

TBI is different from other disabilities due to the severity of cognitive loss. Most rehabilitation programs are designed for people 

with physical disabilities, not cognitive disabilities that require 

special accommodations. Finding needed services is typically a 

logistical, financial, and psychological challenge for family members 

and other caregivers, because few coordinated systems of care exist 

for individuals with TBI. 

The passage of the Traumatic Brain Injury Act of 1996 has improved TBI service systems at the State level and has increased 

the overall visibility of TBI. More work, however, needs to be done 

at both the national and State levels to build an effective, durable 

service system that meets the needs of individuals with TBI. 

S. 793 requires the HHS Secretary, acting through the Director 

of the CDC, to conduct a study to: determine the incidence of TBI 

and prevalence of TBI related disability; report national trends in 

TBI; identify common therapeutic interventions that are used for 

the rehabilitation of individuals with such injuries; identify interventions and therapies that can prevent or remediate the development of secondary neurologic conditions related to TBI; and develop 

practice guidelines for such rehabilitation. 

In addition, S. 793 authorizes appropriations for fiscal years 2009 

through 2012 for NIH’s trauma research program; allows the Secretary, acting through the Administrator of HRSA, to make grants 

to States and American Indian consortia to improve access to rehabilitation and other services regarding TBI; and directs the Administrator to grant funds for training and technical assistance to protection and advocacy systems, if funds permit. 

S. 793 also revises the national program for TBI registries to include grants for State TBI surveillance systems and requires the 

Administrator and the Commissioner of the Administration on Developmental Disabilities to coordinate the collection of data regarding protection and advocacy services. 

S. 793 requires an interagency report within 18 months after the 

date of enactment to determine the incidence and prevalence of 

traumatic brain injury among those who were formerly in the military, to examine the extent to which care is coordinated, and to 

provide information about appropriate employment, housing, rehabilitation, and other services. 

Legislative History 

On March 8, 2007, H.R. 1418 was introduced by Representative 

Pascrell and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On March 9, 2007, H.R. 1418 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On March 11, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and forwarded H.R. 1418 to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On March 13, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

met in an open markup session and H.R. 1418 was ordered reported, as amended, by a voice vote. 

On April 8, 2008 the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 1418 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–567). 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
92 

Further action was taken on S. 793, a related measure introduced by Senator Hatch on March 7, 2007; it was referred to the 

Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. 

On August 1, 2007, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor and Pensions reported S. 793 to the Senate with an amendment in the nature of a substitute (S. Rept. 110–140). 

On December 11, 2007, S. 793 passed the Senate, amended, by 

unanimous consent. 

On December 12, 2007, S. 793 was received in the House and referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. That 

same day, the bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On April 8, 2008, the House then passed S. 793, amended, under 

suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 392–1. 

On April 10, 2008, the Senate agreed to the House amendment 

by unanimous consent, clearing the measure for the White House. 

On April 17, 2008, S. 793 was presented to the President. On 

April 28, 2008, S. 793 was signed by the President (Public Law 

110–206). 

GENETIC INFORMATION NONDISCRIMINATION ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–233 (H.R. 493) 

To prohibit discrimination on the basis of genetic information 

with respect to health insurance and employment. 

Summary 

Deciphering the sequence of the human genome and other advances in genetics have opened major new opportunities for medical progress. The information gleaned from the Human Genome 

Project will help, and is currently helping, scientists and clinicians 

to identify common genetic variations that contribute to disease. In 

many cases, the results of genetic testing may be used to guide 

clinical management of patients. For example, more frequent 

screening may be recommended for individuals at increased risk of 

certain diseases by virtue of their genetic make-up, such as 

colorectal and breast cancer. Decisions about course of treatment 

and dosing may also be guided by genetic testing. Many diseases, 

however, do not have any treatments. In these cases, the benefits 

of genetic testing lie largely in the information they provide an individual about his or her risk of future disease or current disease 

status. The value of genetic information in these cases is personal 

to individuals, who may choose to utilize this information to help 

guide medical and other life decisions for themselves and their 

families. This information can affect decisions about reproduction, 

the types or amount of health, life, or disability insurance to purchase, or career and education choices. 

These advances give rise to the potential misuse of genetic information to discriminate in health insurance and employment. Concerns about privacy and the use and misuse of genetic information 

need to be balanced with the potential of genetics and genetic technology to change how care is delivered and to personalize medical 

care and treatment of disease. 

A January 20, 1998, a joint report put forth by the Department 

of Labor, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
93 

the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), and the 

Department of Justice (DoJ), entitled, ‘Genetic Information and the 

Workplace,’ summarized the various studies on discrimination 

based on genetic information and argued for the enactment of Federal legislation. The joint report stated that, ‘genetic predisposition 

or conditions can lead to workplace discrimination, even in cases 

where workers are healthy and unlikely to develop disease or 

where the genetic condition has no effect on the ability to perform 

work.’ With these misconceptions so prevalent, employers may 

come to rely on genetic testing to ‘weed out’ those employees who 

carry genes associated with diseases. The joint report concluded 

that existing protections are minimal and called for the enactment 

of legislation which states that: 1) employers should not require or 

request that employees or potential employees take a genetic test 

or provide genetic information as a condition of employment or benefits; 2) employers should not use genetic information to discriminate against, limit, segregate, or classify employees; and 3) employers should not obtain or disclose genetic information about employees or potential employees under most circumstances. 

The joint report acknowledged that genetic testing has the 

unique ability to detect and prevent health disorders, but pointed 

out that this information can be misused to discriminate against or 

stigmatize individuals seeking health insurance. It is feared that a 

health insurance company might wrongly view the presence of a 

gene mutation to mean that the person would definitely contract 

the disease with which that gene is associated and improperly deny 

that person insurance coverage. The report cited a 1996 survey of 

individuals at risk of developing a genetic condition and parents of 

children with specific genetic conditions. This report identified 

more than 200 cases of genetic discrimination among the 917 people who responded. The cases involved discrimination by insurance 

companies, employers, and other organizations that use genetic information. Another survey of genetic counselors, primary care physicians, and patients, identified 550 people who had been denied 

employment or insurance based on their genetic predisposition to 

an illness. In addition, because an individual’s genetic information 

has implications for his or her family members and future generations, misuse of genetic information could have inter-generational 

effects that are far broader than any individual incident of misuse. 

Furthermore, the joint report warned that many Americans are reluctant to take advantage of new breakthroughs in genetic testing 

for fear that the results will not be used to improve their health, 

but rather to deny them jobs or health insurance. 

The appropriate use of genetic information offers enormous opportunities to save lives and prevent the onset of disease. However, 

the medical progress made possible by genetic research is dependent on the willingness of study volunteers and patients to undergo 

genetic testing. Such consent may be difficult to obtain today. 

Fears about the possible misuse or unauthorized disclosure of genetic information appear to adversely impact the desire of individuals to participate in genetic research. Such fears also extend to 

clinical practice, discouraging both patients and providers from taking full advantage of genetic tests and technologies. There is substantial reluctance among at-risk populations to undergo genetic 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
94 

testing—even when that testing may allow patients to take steps 

to lower their risks of contracting a disease. For example, only 43 

percent of those at risk for hereditary colon cancer participated in 

a genetic testing program. Later studies found that 39 percent of 

those who declined testing cited fears about the potential effect of 

test results on their health insurance coverage as the primary reason for their refusal. Although other factors contribute to the decision not to get tested, fear of genetic discrimination appears to be 

a primary reason that many people forgo getting genetic tests. 

To fill the void created by the absence of clear protections at the 

Federal level, many States have enacted laws that seek to prohibit 

genetic discrimination in health insurance and employment. To 

date, 34 States, and the District of Columbia, have passed laws on 

genetic discrimination in employment and 48 have passed laws on 

genetic discrimination in health insurance. Among the States that 

prohibit discrimination in the issuing of health insurance, many 

cover only the group health insurance market and exclude individual health insurance policies, while others do the reverse. Many 

States exclude family medical histories from their definition of genetic information or include only the results of tests that are performed with the announced intention of detecting genetic 

mutations. 

Regardless of the technical aspects of any particular State law, 

there is necessarily a significant gap in any State’s ability to deter 

genetic discrimination in health insurance. Congress delegated to 

the States the authority to regulate most aspects of insurance 

through enacting the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945. However, 

employer-purchased plans were exempted from State regulation by 

the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. Under 

ERISA, no State may regulate the type of health insurance plans 

typically provided to employees as part of their employment benefits. Only the Congress can therefore enact a truly comprehensive 

law prohibiting genetic discrimination in all areas of health insurance. Federal genetic nondiscrimination legislation addresses the 

need for national comprehensive protections. 

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) amends 

the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the 

Public Health Service Act (PHSA), and the Internal Revenue Code 

to prohibit a group health plan from adjusting premium or contribution amounts for a group on the basis of genetic information. 

It amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act (SSA) 

to prohibit an issuer of a Medicare supplemental policy, on the 

basis of genetic information, from: (1) denying or conditioning the 

issuance or effectiveness of the policy, including the imposition of 

any exclusion of benefits based on a preexisting condition; or (2) 

discriminating in the pricing of the policy, including the adjustment of premium rates. 

It also prohibits an issuer of a Medicare supplemental policy 

from: (1) requesting or requiring an individual or a family member 

to undergo a genetic test; or (2) requesting, requiring, or purchasing genetic information for underwriting purposes or for any 

individual prior to enrollment. Further, it requires the Secretary of 

Health and Human Services to revise Health Insurance Portability 

and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) privacy regulations to: (1) 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
95 

treat genetic information as health information; and (2) prohibit 

the use or disclosure by a group health plan, health insurance coverage, or Medicare supplemental policy of genetic information 

about an individual for underwriting purposes. 

The Act also amends the PHSA to prohibit: (1) a health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage in the individual 

market from establishing eligibility rules for enrollment based on 

genetic information; (2) discrimination on the basis of genetic information for health insurance offered in the individual market in the 

same manner as such discrimination is prohibited for group coverage; and (3) the imposition by a health insurance issuer offering 

health insurance coverage in the individual market of a preexisting 

condition exclusion on the basis of genetic information. 

GINA also prohibits a group health plan from requesting or requiring an individual or family member of an individual from undergoing a genetic test or purchasing genetic information. Further, 

it prohibits an employer, employment agency, labor organization, or 

joint labor-management committee from discriminating against an 

employee, individual, or member because of genetic information. 

Further, it prohibits an employer, employment agency, labor organization, or joint labor-management committee from limiting, segregating, or classifying employees, individuals, or members because 

of genetic information in any way that would deprive or tend to deprive such individuals of employment opportunities or otherwise 

adversely affect their status as employees. 

Legislative History 

On January 16, 2007, H.R. 493 was introduced by Representative 

Slaughter. It was referred to the Committee on Education and 

Labor, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On February 2, 2007, H.R. 493 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On March 5, 2007, H.R. 493 was reported to the House, amended, by the Committee on Education and Labor (H. Rept. 110–28, 

Part 1); and the Committees on Energy and Commerce and Ways 

and Means were each granted an extension for further consideration of the legislation ending not later than March 23, 2007. 

On March 13, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and forwarded H.R. 493 to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On March 22, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

met in open markup session and began consideration of H.R. 493. 

On March 23, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce continued consideration of H.R. 493 in an open markup session and 

H.R. 493 was ordered favorably reported to the House, amended, 

by a voice vote. The House Committees on Energy and Commerce 

and Ways and Means were each granted an extension for further 

consideration of the legislation ending not later than March 26, 

2007. 

On March 26, 2007, H.R. 493 was reported to the House, as 

amended, by the Committee on Ways and Means (H. Rept. 110–28, 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
96 

Part 2); and the Committee on Energy and Commerce was granted 

an extension for further consideration ending not later than March 

29, 2007. 

On March 29, 2007, H.R. 493 was reported to the House, amended, by the Committee on Energy and Commerce (H. Rept. 110–28, 

Part 3). 

On April 19, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce filed 

a supplemental report on the bill (H. Rept. 110–28, Part 4). 

On April 25, 2007, H.R. 493 passed the House, amended, under 

suspension of the rules, by a rollcall vote: 420–3. 

On April 24, 2008, H.R. 493 passed the Senate, amended, by a 

rollcall vote: 95–0. 

On April 28, 2008, the Senate requests return of papers with respect to H.R. 493 by Unanimous Consent. On April 29, 2008, papers were returned to the Senate and message on Senate action 

was sent to the House. 

On May 1, 2008, the House agreed to the Senate amendment by 

a rollcall vote: 414–1, clearing H.R. 493 for the White House. 

On May 1, 2008, H. Con. Res. 340, making technical changes to 

the enrollment of H.R. 493, passed the House by a voice vote and 

passed the Senate by unanimous consent. 

H.R. 493 was presented to the President on May 19, 2008, and 

was signed by the President on May 21, 2008 (Public Law 110– 

233). 

FOOD, CONSERVATION, AND ENERGY ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–234 (H.R. 2419) 

Public Law 110–246 (H.R. 6124) 

(Health Provisions) 

To provide for the continuation of agricultural programs through 

fiscal year 2012, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 2419 authorizes the Secretary to award grants to eligible 

entities located in the Delta region for the development of health 

care services; health education programs; health care job training 

programs; and expansion of public health-related facilities to address longstanding and unmet health needs of the region. It also 

reauthorizes research grants under the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 that address health issues that 

affect food-producing animals, food safety, and the environment. 

Further, H.R. 2419 extends the human nutrition initiative, the 

health promotion program, and the animal health and disease research program to 2012. 

H.R. 2419 also requires establishments that produce food to notify the Secretary if they believe, or have reason to believe, that an 

adulterated or misbranded meat or meat food product received by 

or originating from the establishment has entered into commerce. 

Each establishment must also prepare and maintain current procedures for the recall of all meat or meat food products produced and 

shipped by the establishment; document each reassessment of the 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
97 

process control plans of the establishment; and upon request, make 

the procedures and reassessed process control plans available to inspectors. 

Legislative History 

On May 22, 2007, H.R. 2419 was introduced by Representative 

Peterson. It was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in 

addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for a period to be 

subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On July 19, 2007, the Committee on Agriculture met in an open 

markup session and H.R. 2419 was ordered reported, amended, by 

a voice vote. 

On July 23, 2007, H.R. 2419 was reported to the House, amended, by the Committee on Agriculture (H. Rept. 110–256, Part 1). 

The Committee on Foreign Affairs was discharged from further 

consideration of the measure. 

On July 26, 2007, the House began consideration of H.R. 2419 

under the provisions of H. Res. 574. 

On July 27, 2007, H.R. 2419 passed the House, amended, by a 

rollcall vote: 231–191. 

On September 4, 2007, H.R. 2419 was received in the Senate, 

read the first time and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar 

under Read the First Time. 

On September 5, 2007, H.R. 2419 was read the second time and 

placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, Calendar No. 339. 

On November 6, 2007, H.R. 2419 was considered by the Senate 

and a motion by Mr. Reid to commit to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry with instructions to report back 

forthwith, with the following amendment (SA 3512) was made in 

the Senate. 

On December 14, 2007, H.R. 2419 passed the Senate, amended, 

by a rollcall vote: 79–14. The Senate insisted on its amendment 

and requested a conference. 

On February 2, 2008, the Senate appointed conferees: Senators 

Harkin, Leahy, Conrad, Baucus, Lincoln, Stabenow, Chambliss, 

Lugar, Cochran, Roberts, and Grassley. 

On April 9, 2008, the House disagreed with the Senate amendment, and agreed to a conference by a voice vote. The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

for consideration of sections 6012, 6023, 6024, 6028, 6029, 9004, 

9005, and 9017 of the House bill and sections 6006, 6012, 6110– 

6112, 6202, 6302, 7044, 7049, 7307, 7507, 9001, 11060, 11072, 

11087, and 11101–11103 of the Senate amendment, and modifications committed to conference: Representatives Dingell, Pallone, 

Barton. 

On May 13, 2008, the conference report was filed in the House 

(H. Rept. 110–627). 

On May 14, 2008, the House agreed to the conference report by 

a rollcall vote: 318–106. 

On May 15, 2008, the Senate agreed to the conference report by 

a rollcall vote: 81–15. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
98 

On May 20, 2008, H.R. 2419 was presented to the President. 

On May 21, 2008, H.R. 2419 was vetoed by the President. That 

same day, H.R. 2419 passed the House over the Presidential veto 

by a rollcall vote: 316–108, two-thirds having voted in the affirmative. 

On May 22, 2008, H.R. 2419 passed the Senate over veto by a 

rollcall vote: 82–13, two-thirds having voted in the affirmative. 

H.R. 2419 became law (Public Law 110–234). 

The House and Senate passed H.R. 2419 over veto, enacting 14 

of 15 titles into law. The trade title (Title III) was inadvertently excluded from the enrolled bill. To remedy the situation, both chambers re-passed the farm bill conference agreement (including the 

trade title) as H.R. 6124, again over veto. H.R. 6124, in section 4, 

repeals Public Law 110–234 (H.R. 2419) and amendments made by 

it, effective on the date of that Act’s enactment. 

On May 22, 2008, H.R. 6124 was introduced and referred to the 

Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

That same day, H.R. 6124 passed the House under suspension of 

the rules by a rollcall vote: 306–110. H.R. 6124 was received by the 

Senate, read twice, and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar 

under General Orders, Calendar No. 753. 

On June 5, 2008, the Senate passed H.R. 6124 by a rollcall vote: 

77–15. 

On June 16, 2008, H.R. 6124 was presented to the President. 

On June 18, 2008, H.R. 6124 was vetoed by the President. The 

Chair laid before the House the veto message from the President. 

H.R. 6124 passed the House over the veto by a rollcall vote: 317– 

109, two-thirds having voted in the affirmative. The veto message 

was received by the Senate. H.R. 6124 passed the Senate over the 

veto by a rollcall vote: 80–14, two-thirds having voted in the affirmative. H.R. 6124 became law (Public Law 110–246). 

TO MAKE TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS REGARDING THE NEWBORN

SCREENING SAVES LIVES ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–237 (H.R. 5919) 

To make technical corrections regarding the Newborn Screening 

Saves Lives Act of 2007. 

Summary 

H.R. 5919 amends the Public Health Service Act to make technical corrections to the Newborn Screening Saves Lives Act of 

2007. It revises the authorizations of appropriations from FY2008– 

FY2012 to FY2009–FY2013. 

Legislative History 

On April 29, 2008, H.R. 5919 was introduced by Representative 

Roybal-Allard and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On April 30, 2008, H.R. 5919 was considered under suspension 

of the rules and passed the House by a voice vote. 

On May 2, 2008, H.R. 5919 passed the Senate, without amendment, by unanimous consent, clearing the measure for the White 

House. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
99 

On May 19, 2008, H.R. 5919 was presented to the President and 

signed by the President on May 27, 2008 (Public Law 110–237). 

CAROLINE PRYCE WALKER CONQUER CHILDHOOD CANCER ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–285 (H.R. 1553) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to advance medical research and treatments into pediatric cancers, ensure patients and 

families have access to information regarding pediatric cancers and 

current treatments for such cancers, establish a national childhood 

cancer registry, and promote public awareness of pediatric cancer. 

Summary 

Between infancy and 15 years of age, cancer is the leading cause 

of death by disease among U.S. children. In 2007, approximately 

10,400 new cases of pediatric cancer were diagnosed in children 

ages 0 to 14 years. While the incidence of invasive cancer in children has increased slightly over the past 30 years, mortality has 

declined dramatically for many childhood cancers. The combined 5- 

year survival rate for all childhood cancers has improved from less 

than 50 percent before the 1970s to nearly 80 percent today, and 

the 10-year survival rate is greater than 75 percent. 

Despite these advances, treatments for some childhood cancers, 

including brain tumors and neuroblastoma, are inadequate. Twothirds of children who are successfully treated experience serious 

and long-term effects from treatment. Negative effects resulting 

from current pediatric cancer therapies indicate a need to strengthen Federal support for activities leading to an enhanced understanding of childhood cancers and treatments that are less toxic 

and more effective. 

H.R. 1553 requires the HHS Secretary, in collaboration with the 

Director of the National Institutes of Health and other Federal 

agencies to continue to enhance, expand, and intensify pediatric 

cancer research and other activities related to pediatric cancer. 

In addition, H.R. 1553 allows the HHS Secretary to award grants 

to childhood cancer professional and direct service organizations for 

the expansion and widespread implementation of activities that 

provide available information on treatment protocols; activities that 

provide available information on the late effects of pediatric cancer 

treatment; and direct resource services. 

H.R. 1553 requires the HHS Secretary, acting through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to award a 

grant to enhance and expand infrastructure to track the epidemiology of pediatric cancer for a comprehensive nationwide registry of 

actual occurrences of pediatric cancer. 

Legislative History 

On March 15, 2007, H.R. 1553 was introduced by Representative 

Pryce and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On 

March 16, 2007, H.R. 1553 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On April 23, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and forwarded H.R. 1553 to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
100 

On May 7, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 

in an open markup session and H.R. 1553 was ordered favorably 

reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On June 10, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 1553 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–706). 

On June 12, 2008, H.R. 1553 passed the House, amended, under 

suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 416–0. 

On July 16, 2008, H.R. 1553 passed the Senate, without amendment, by unanimous consent and was cleared for the White House. 

On July 25, 2008, H.R. 1553 was presented to the President and 

signed by the President on July 29, 2008 (Public Law 110–285). 

TOM LANTOS AND HENRY J. HYDE UNITED STATES GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AGAINST HIV/AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008

Public Law No: 110–293 (H.R. 5501) 

To authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to 

provide assistance to foreign countries to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

Title I amends the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, 

Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 Act to revise the provisions 

of the President’s comprehensive five-year global strategy to combat HIV/AIDS. These revisions include commissioning a study by 

the Institute of Medicine to assess progress and outcomes of U.S. 

global HIV/AIDS programs; publishing a best practices report; and 

providing for oversight of the program. 

Title I expands the Coordinator’s of United States Government 

Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally duties, including establishment of an interagency working group on HIV/AIDS, and coordination of overall U.S. HIV/AIDS policy and programs with host 

countries and other relevant bilateral and multilateral aid agencies. Title II authorizes FY2009–FY2013 appropriations for U.S. 

contributions to tuberculosis vaccine development programs; the 

Vaccine Fund; the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative; the Malaria Vaccine Initiative of the Program for Appropriate Technologies in Health (PATH); and the U.S. contribution to the Global 

Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. 

Title II directs the office of AIDS Research, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention to conduct microbicide research and development of methods to prevent HIV transmission. 

Title II also authorizes USAID to strengthen the capacity of developing countries to introduce new and safe vaccines; and improve 

implementation of, clinical trials and impact studies. 

Title III revises and expands the scope of HIV/AIDS prevention 

activities, including spreading activities to countries in Central 

Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America; and integrating food security and nutrition activities into HIV/AIDS prevention activities. 

Title III authorizes the President, through USAID, to provide increased resources to the World Health Organization (WHO) and 

the Stop Tuberculosis Partnership to improve the capacity of counVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
101 

tries with high tuberculosis rates and other affected countries to 

implement the Stop TB Strategy and specific strategies related to 

drug resistant tuberculosis. 

Title III also authorizes the President to make a U.S. contribution to the Roll Back Malaria Partnership and WHO to improve the 

capacity of countries with high rates of malaria and other affected 

countries to implement comprehensive malaria control programs. 

Further, it directs the President to establish a five-year strategy to 

combat global malaria. 

Title III revises requirements of the five-year strategy to combat 

HIV/AIDS as it pertains to mother-to-child transmission, care and 

treatment of family members, and care for children orphaned by 

HIV/AIDS. 

Title IV directs the Coordinator to: (1) provide balanced funding 

for prevention activities for sexual transmission of HIV/AIDS; (2) 

ensure that abstinence, delay of sexual debut, monogamy, fidelity 

and partner reduction programs are implemented and funded in 

each host country’s strategy; and (3) establish an HIV sexual transmission prevention strategy governing funding to prevent the sexual transmission of HIV in any host country with a generalized epidemic. 

It also requires that for FY2009–FY2013 more than half of appropriations for bilateral global HIV/AIDS assistance shall be expended for: (1) antiretroviral treatment; (2) clinical monitoring of 

HIV-seropositive people not in need of antiretroviral treatment; (3) 

care for associated opportunistic infections; (4) nutrition and food 

support for people living with HIV/AIDS; and (5) other essential 

medical care for people living with HIV/AIDS. 

Title V directs the Secretary of State to increase by $1 the fee 

for processing machine readable nonimmigrant visas and machine 

readable combined border crossing identification cards and nonimmigrant visas. 

Title VI establishes the Emergency Fund for Indian Safety and 

Health and authorizes appropriations for that fund. It also directs 

the Attorney General, the Secretary of the Interior, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with Indian 

tribes, to establish an emergency plan that addresses law enforcement, water, and health care needs of Indian tribes for every year 

from FY2010–FY2019. 

Legislative History 

On February 27, 2008, H.R. 5501 was introduced by Representative Berman. It was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 

and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of 

the committee concerned. 

On March 10, 2008, the Committee on Foreign Affairs reported 

H.R. 5501 to the House (H. Rept. 110–546, Part 1). The Committee 

on Financial Services was discharged from further consideration of 

the measure. 

On March 10, 2008, the Committee on Foreign Affairs filed a 

supplemental report on the bill (H. Rept. 110–546, Part 2). 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
102 

On April 2, 2008, H.R. 5501 was considered under the provisions 

of H. Res. 1065 and passed the House, amended, by a rollcall vote: 

308–116. 

On April 3, 2008, H.R. 5501 was received in the Senate, read 

twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. 

On July 16, 2008, the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations 

was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 5501 by unanimous consent. 

On July 16, 2008, H.R. 5501 passed the Senate, amended, by a 

rollcall vote: 80–16. 

On July 24, 2008, the House agreed to the Senate amendment 

by a rollcall vote: 303–115, clearing the measure for the White 

House. 

On July 25, 2008, H.R. 5501 was presented to the President and 

H.R. 5501 was signed by the President on July 30, 2008 (Public 

Law 110–293). 

ANIMAL DRUG USER FEE AMENDMENTS OF 2008

Public Law 110–316 (H.R. 6432, H.R. 6433) 

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to revise 

and extend the animal drug user fee program, to establish a program of fees relating to generic new animal drugs, to make certain 

technical corrections to the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

ADUFA II 

The Animal Drug User Fee Act of 2003 (ADUFA) establishes the 

animal drug user fee program. The program provides an additional 

revenue source for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to 

supplement appropriations from Congress for the purpose of expediting the review of animal drug applications. Before ADUFA was 

enacted, there were reports from FDA detailing inadequate resources for review, growing workloads, and low quality applications 

submitted by the industry. These problems combined were responsible for slowing down the animal drug approval process to an unacceptable rate. 

In response to these problems, ADUFA was enacted. The program requires that manufacturers of new animal drugs pay application fees for each new product, annual manufacturing establishment fees, annual product fees, and sponsor fees in an effort to expedite the animal drug review process. FDA sets performance 

goals, mutually agreed upon by FDA and the regulated industry. 

The fees are used to meet the performance goals. Fees currently 

represent about 13 percent of the agency’s budget for animal drug 

review and for 60 full-time equivalent employees. 

There is general agreement that ADUFA has been successful in 

eliminating the review backlog and has improved the timeliness 

and predictability of reviews. ADUFA expired on October 1, 2008, 

prompting congressional action for its reauthorization. 

Title I of H.R. 6432 reauthorizes ADUFA (ADUFA II) from FY 

09 to FY 13 with increases of total fee revenues for application and 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
103 

supplement fees, product fees, establishment fees, and sponsor fees. 

Title I requires the Secretary to report to Congress and make publicly available information on: progress toward the goal of expediting the animal drug development process and the review of animal drug applications; and implementation of the authority for and 

use of animal drug fees. 

Title I also requires the sponsor of any new animal drug that 

contains an antimicrobial active ingredient to annually report to 

the Secretary on the amount of each antimicrobial active ingredient 

in the drug that is sold or distributed for use in food-producing animals, including information on any distributor-labeled product. It 

also authorizes the Secretary to share such information with the 

Antimicrobial Resistance Task Force. 

AGDUFA 

In Congressional testimony in June 2008, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reported that in fiscal year 2007, the average 

review time for generic animal drug submissions was 570 days and 

that there was a backlog of 446 of these submissions, almost double 

the number in fiscal year (FY) 2000. 

In order to alleviate this backlog, a user fee for generic animal 

drug submissions from FY 09 to FY 13 is proposed. Using ADUFA 

as a model, Title II (Animal Generic Drug User Fee Act) of H.R. 

6432 would provide funding for increased review of generic animal 

drug submissions, for training and development of staff members, 

and for refining business processes and developing policies to allow 

more efficient review of generic animal drug submissions. 

Under the Animal Generic Drug User Fee Act (AGDUFA) userfee proposal, FDA would agree to meet review performance goals 

to improve the timeliness and predictability of the animal generic 

drug review process. These performance goals are intended to 

achieve progressive yearly improvements, shortening the time for 

FDA to review and act on submissions with each fiscal year. By the 

fifth and final year of the proposed user fees, FDA would agree to 

review and act on 90 percent of the sentinel submission types within specified timeframes. 

The AGDUFA proposal has many similarities to the proposal for 

ADUFA II, such as comparable fee triggers, fee-setting requirements, workload adjustments, and reporting requirements. The 

major differences are that AGDUFA does not allow FDA to collect 

establishment fees, and FDA may only waive or reduce fees if the 

drug is intended for a minor use or minor species indication. Also, 

similar to the ADUFA II proposal, the AGDUFA proposal has fixed 

annual increases instead of the inflation adjuster used for the original ADUFA. 

Legislative History 

On July 8, 2008, H.R. 6433 was introduced by Representative 

Pallone and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On July 9, 2008, H.R. 6433 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On July 9, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and forwarded H.R. 6433 to the full Committee by 

voice vote. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
104 

On July 16, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 

in an open markup session and H.R. 6433 was ordered favorably 

reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On July 30, 2008, H.R. 6433 was reported to the House, amended 

(H. Rept. 110–805). 

No further action was taken on H.R. 6433 in the 110th Congress. 

On July 8, 2008, H.R. 6432 was introduced by Representative 

Pallone and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On July 9, 2008, H.R. 6432 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On July 9, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and forwarded H.R. 6432 to the full Committee by 

a voice vote. 

On July 16, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 

in an open markup session and H.R. 6432 was ordered favorably 

reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On July 30, 2008, H.R. 6432 was reported to the House, amended 

(H. Rept. 110–804). 

On July 30, 2008, H.R. 6432 passed the House, amended, under 

suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in 

favor. 

On August 1, 2008, H.R. 6432 passed the Senate without amendment by unanimous consent and was cleared for the White House. 

On August 6, 2008, H.R. 6432 was presented to the President 

and signed by the President on August 14, 2008 (Public Law 110– 

316). 

ADA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–325 (S. 3406, H.R. 3195) 

Summary 

S. 3406 amends the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 

(ADA) to redefine the term ‘‘disability’’ and sets forth rules of construction regarding the definition of ‘‘disability.’’ S. 3406 also clarifies the prohibition of employment discrimination against a qualified individual on the basis of disability. 

Legislative History 

On July 26, 2007, H.R. 3195 was introduced by Representative 

Hoyer. It was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor, 

and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, Transportation 

and Infrastructure, and Energy and Commerce, for a period to be 

subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On June 23, 2008, H.R. 3195 was reported to the House, amended, by the Committee on Education and Labor (H. Rept. 110–730, 

Part 1). That same day, the bill was reported to the House, amended, by the Committee on the Judiciary (H. Rept. 110–730, Part 2). 

The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 

Transportation and Infrastructure were each discharged from further consideration of H.R. 3195. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
105 

On June 25, 2008, H.R. 3195 was considered under the provisions of H. Res. 1299 and passed the House, as amended, by a rollcall vote: 402–17. 

On June 26, 2008, H.R. 3195 was received in the Senate and 

read the first time. H.R. 3195 was placed on the Senate Legislative 

Calendar under Read the First Time. 

On June 27, 2008, H.R. 3195 was read the second time and 

placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. 

Further action was taken on S. 3406, a related measure introduced by Senator Harkin on July 31, 2008. 

On September 11, 2008, S. 3406 passed the Senate, without 

amendment, by unanimous consent. 

On September 15, 2008, S. 3406 was received by the House and 

held at the desk. 

On September 17, 2008, S. 3406 was considered under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a voice vote, two-thirds 

having voted in favor. This action cleared the measure for the 

White House. 

On September 23, 2008, S. 1760 was presented to the President 

and it was signed by the President on September 25, 2008 (Public 

Law 110–325). 

HEALTHY START REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–339 (S. 1760) 

A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to the 

Healthy Start Initiative. 

Summary 

The Healthy Start Initiative was implemented to eliminate disparities in perinatal and women’s health by enhancing a community’s service system and infrastructure, and a State’s infrastructure. Healthy Start directs resources and interventions to improve 

access to, utilization, and full participation of comprehensive 

perinatal and women’s health services for high-risk women and infants. In FY 2007, 102 projects were awarded to new and existing 

projects. 

S. 1760 amends the Public Health Service Act (PHSA) to require 

the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to consider certain criteria in making grants under the Healthy Start Initiative, 

including: factors that contribute to infant mortality, such as low 

birth weight; and the extent to which applicants for grants facilitate a community-based approach to the delivery of services and a 

comprehensive approach to women’s health care to improve 

perinatal outcomes. 

In addition, the legislation states that the Secretary is not prevented from awarding grants for special projects that are intended 

to address significant disparities in perinatal health indicators in 

communities along the United States-Mexico border, or in Alaska 

or Hawaii. S. 1760 also reauthorizes appropriations for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2013 for the Healthy Start Initiative. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
106 

Legislative History 

On July 10, 2007, S. 1760 was introduced by Senator Brown and 

referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions. 

On April 29, 2008, S. 1760 was reported to the Senate by the 

Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

without written report, and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, Calendar No. 723. 

On April 30, 2008, S. 1760 passed the Senate, amended, by unanimous consent. 

On May 1, 2008, S. 1760 was received by the House and referred 

the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. On May 5, 2008, 

S. 1760 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On September 17, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in an open markup session and S. 1760 was ordered favorably reported by a voice vote. 

On September 23, 2008, S. 1760 was considered under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a voice vote, two-thirds 

having voted in favor. This action cleared S. 1760 for the White 

House. 

On September 26, 2008, S. 1760 was presented to the President 

and it was signed by the President on October 3, 2008 (Public Law 

110–339). 

DRUG ENDANGERED CHILDREN ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–345 (H.R. 1199) 

To extend the grant program for drug-endangered children. 

Summary 

H.R. 1199 amends the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 to extend the grant program for drug-endangered children through FY2009 and authorizes appropriations 

for FY2008 to FY2009. 

Legislative History 

On February 27, 2007, H.R. 1199 was introduced by Representative Cardoza. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for 

a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each 

case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On February 28, 2007, H.R. 1199 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On September 24, 2007, H.R. 1199 was reported to the House by 

the Committee on the Judiciary (H. Rept. 110–341, Part 1). The 

Committee on Energy and Commerce was discharged from further 

consideration of the measure. 

On September 24, 2007, H.R. 1199 was considered under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a rollcall vote: 389–4. 

On September 25, 2007, H.R. 1199 was received in the Senate 

and read twice and referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
107 

On September 24, 2008, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary 

was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1199 by unanimous consent. That same day, H.R. 1199 passed the Senate without amendment by unanimous consent, clearing the measure for 

the White House. 

H.R. 1199 was presented to the President on September 26, 

2008, and signed by the President on October 7, 2008 (Public Law 

110–345). 

THE BREAST CANCER AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–354 (H.R. 1157) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to authorize the Director 

of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences to make 

grants for the development and operation of research centers regarding environmental factors that may be related to the etiology 

of breast cancer. 

Summary 

Breast cancer is the second most common type of cancer among 

women in the United States. In the United States, a woman’s lifetime risk of breast cancer increased steadily and dramatically over 

the course of the 20th century. Today, a woman’s lifetime risk of 

breast cancer is one in eight. 

With respect to environmental effects on breast cancer, research 

has varied widely. Some studies have linked alcohol consumption 

to an increased risk of the most common type of breast cancer. 

Other studies have suggested that infants exposed to butyl benzyl 

phthalate (BBP), a chemical additive used in pipes, vinyl floor tiles, 

carpet-backing, and other household items may affect mammary 

gland development and perhaps increase the susceptibility to 

breast cancer. Researchers have also found that bisphenol A, a 

chemical found in some plastic food and drink packaging, including 

baby bottles, may be tied to early puberty and prostate and breast 

cancer. Other research has shown that hormone replacement therapy may increase breast cancer risk. Breast cancer is a complex 

disease that occurs in an environmentally complex world. While it 

is generally believed that environmental factors play some role in 

the development of breast cancer, the full extent of that role is not 

yet understood. 

Currently, there are several sources of Federal funding for research on the links between breast cancer and the environment. 

The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) 

and NCI have partnered to support a network of research centers 

in which multidisciplinary teams of scientists, clinicians, and 

breast cancer advocates work collaboratively on a unique set of scientific questions. In addition, the Department of Defense (DOD) 

has a federally-funded Breast Cancer Research Program (BCRP). 

Since its inception in 1992, the BCRP has funded research targeted 

toward the program’s vision to eradicate breast cancer. 

In addition to studying environmental impacts, the recently completed Human Genome Project is providing an entirely new avenue 

of research opportunities to better understand why some women 

are more likely to develop breast cancer than others. UnderVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
108 

standing the relevance of genetic markers and potential predisposition to developing breast cancer are also critically important areas 

of cancer research that need to be further explored. The Cancer Genome Atlas project is one of several genomic research programs 

that could help to identify how environmental factors may or may 

not impact the development of breast cancer. 

H.R. 1157 requires the HHS Secretary to establish the ‘‘Interagency Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Coordinating 

Committee’’ to coordinate all efforts within HHS and other Federal 

agencies that relate to breast cancer. 

In addition, H.R. 1157 establishes the duties of the Coordinating 

Committee to include developing: a comprehensive strategy to advise Federal agencies in the solicitation of proposals for collaborative, multidisciplinary research; a summary of advances in breast 

cancer research supported or conducted by Federal agencies; recommendations to ensure that the activities of NIH and other Federal agencies are free of unnecessary duplication; recommendations 

regarding public participation in decisions relating to breast cancer 

research to increase the involvement of patient advocacy and community organizations representing broad geographical areas; and 

recommendations for expanding partnerships between public and 

private entities to expand collaborative, cross-cutting research. 

Legislative History 

On February 16, 2007, H.R. 1157 was introduced by Representative Lowey and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On February 27, 2007, H.R. 1157 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On May 21, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing 

on H.R. 1157. The purpose of the hearing was to explore grants 

and other methods for encouraging greater research into breast 

cancer and its connection to the environment. 

On September 23, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in an open markup session and H.R. 1157 was ordered 

reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 25, 2008, H.R. 1157 was reported to the House, 

amended (H. Rept. 110–889). 

On September 25, 2008, H.R 1157 was considered under suspension of the rules and passed the House, as amended, by a voice 

vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On September 27, 2008, H.R. 1157 passed the Senate, without 

amendment, by unanimous consent, clearing the measure for the 

White House. 

On September 30, 2008, H.R. 1157 was presented to the President and signed by the President on October 8, 2008 (Public Law 

110–354). 

HEALTH CARE SAFETY NET ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–355 (H.R. 1343, S. 901, H.R. 1646, H.R. 5544, H.R. 

870, H.R. 2915, H.R. 4230) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide additional authorizations of appropriations for the health centers program under 

section 330 of such Act, and for other purposes. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
109 

Summary 

Health centers are an important component of the healthcare 

safety net for vulnerable populations, including Medicaid beneficiaries, people who are uninsured, and others who may have difficulty obtaining access to health care. For more than 40 years, 

community health centers have provided comprehensive, culturally 

competent, quality primary healthcare services—including preventive, diagnostic, treatment, emergency services, and referrals to 

specialty care—to medically underserved communities and vulnerable populations without access to such services. Where medically 

necessary, community health centers also provide enabling services, such as transportation and translation that help patients gain 

access to care. Patients are charged for services based on their ability to pay, on a sliding-fee scale. 

Recruitment and retention of adequate numbers of qualified 

workers are major concerns for many healthcare providers today. 

In addition to concerns about the overall supply of healthcare professionals, the distribution of available providers is an ongoing public health concern. Many Americans live in areas—including isolated rural areas or inner city neighborhoods—that lack a sufficient 

number of healthcare providers. Approximately 50 million people 

live in communities without access to primary health care. 

The National Health Service Corps (NHSC) is one safety net program that directly places primary care physicians and other health 

professionals in these medically needy areas. The NHSC offers 

scholarships and educational loans for healthcare professionals 

who, in turn, agree to serve in communities that have a shortage 

of healthcare providers. Since its establishment in 1970, the NHSC 

has placed nearly 27,000 health professionals in communities that 

report chronic shortages of health professionals. Currently, more 

than 4,000 clinicians and healthcare professionals provide primary 

care to nearly 4 million people nationwide. 

H.R. 1343 reauthorizes programs under Section 330 of the Public 

Health Service Act to authorize appropriations for health centers to 

meet the healthcare needs of medically underserved populations 

from FY 2008–FY 2012. 

H.R. 1343 requires the Comptroller General to study the economic costs and benefits of school-based health centers and their 

impact on the health of students, including an analysis of: (1) the 

impact that federal funding could have on the operation of such 

centers; (2) any cost savings to other federal programs derived from 

providing health services in such centers; and (3) the impact of 

such centers in rural or underserved areas. 

H.R. 1343 also directs the Comptroller General to study: (1) integrated health system models for the delivery of health care services 

to medically underserved and uninsured populations; and (2) the 

implications of extending Federal Tort Claims Act coverage to 

health care professionals who volunteer to furnish care to patients 

of health centers. 

Further, H.R. 1343 requires the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services, acting through the Administrator of the Health Resources 

and Services Administration (HRSA), to submit a report to the relevant congressional committees that describes efforts to expand 

and accelerate quality improvement activities in community health 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
110 

centers. It also requires the Administrator to establish a mechanism for the dissemination of initiatives, best practices, and other 

information that may assist health care quality improvement efforts in community health centers. 

Finally, H.R. 1343 reauthorizes appropriations for FY2008– 

FY2012 for: (1) the National Health Service Corps program; and (2) 

the National Health Service Corps Scholarship Program and National Health Service Corps Loan Repayment Program. 

Legislative History 

On March 6, 2007, H.R. 1343 was introduced by Representative 

Green and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On March 7, 2007, H.R. 1343 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On December 4, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing on H.R. 1343. The purpose of the hearing was to explore the 

need for the expansion of community health centers and continuation of the National Health Service Corps. 

On April 23, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and H.R. 1343 was forwarded to the full Committee, amended, by a voice vote. 

On May 7, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 

in an open markup session and H.R. 1343 was ordered favorably 

reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On June 4, 2008, H.R. 1343 was reported to the House, amended, 

(H. Rept. 110–680). 

On June 4, 2008, H.R. 1343 was considered under suspension of 

the rules and passed the House, as amended, by a rollcall vote: 

393–24. 

On June 5, 2008, H.R. 1343 was received in the Senate, read 

twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor 

and Pensions. 

On September 24, 2008, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1343 by unanimous consent. That same day, H.R. 

1343 passed the Senate, amended, by unanimous consent. 

On September 25, 2008, the House considered the Senate amendment under suspension of the rules and agreed to the Senate 

amendment by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. This 

action cleared H.R. 1343 for the White House. 

On September 30, 2008, H.R. 1343 was presented to the President. It was then signed by the President on October 8, 2008 (Public Law 110–355). 

PAUL D. WELLSTONE MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE, 

RESEARCH, AND EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 2008

Public Law 110–361 (H.R. 5265) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for research 

with respect to various forms of muscular dystrophy, including 

Becker, congenital, distal, Duchenne, Emery-Dreifuss 

facioscapulohumeral, limb-girdle, myotonic, and oculopharyngeal, 

muscular dystrophies. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
111 

Summary 

The muscular dystrophies (MD) are a group of more than 30 genetic diseases characterized by progressive weakness and degeneration of the skeletal muscles that control movement. The disorders 

differ in terms of the distribution and extent of muscle weakness, 

age of onset, rate of progression, and pattern of inheritance. 

Duchenne MD is the most common form of MD and primarily affects boys. It is caused by the absence of dystrophin, a protein involved in maintaining the integrity of muscle. Onset is between 3 

and 5 years and the disorder progresses rapidly. Most boys are unable to walk by age 12, and later need a respirator to breathe. 

There is no specific treatment to stop or reverse any form of MD. 

The prognosis for people with MD varies according to the type 

and progression of the disorder. Some cases may be mild and 

progress very slowly over a normal lifespan, while others produce 

severe muscle weakness, functional disability, and loss of the ability to walk. Some children with MD die in infancy while others live 

into adulthood with only moderate disability. 

The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke 

(NINDS), part of the NIH, supports a broad program of research 

studies on MD. The goals of these studies are to understand MD 

and to develop techniques to diagnose, treat, prevent, and ultimately cure the disorder. 

H.R. 5265 amends the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize 

programs at NIH and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for research on various forms of muscular dystrophy. 

Further, it designates the Muscular Dystrophy (MD) Centers of Excellence as the Paul D. Wellstone Muscular Dystrophy Cooperative 

Research Centers. It also allows the interagency coordinating committee for muscular dystrophy to give special consideration to enhancing the clinical research infrastructure required to test emerging therapies for the various forms of muscular dystrophy. 

H.R. 5265 allows the HHS Secretary to ensure that any data on 

patients that is collected as part of the Muscular Dystrophy Surveillance, Tracking, and Research Network (MD STARnet) be regularly updated to reflect changes in patient condition over time. In 

addition, H.R. 5265 requires the CDC Director to report to the appropriate congressional committees on MD STARnet and data collection and may provide prospective health outcome data on the 

health and survival of people with muscular dystrophy. 

H.R. 5265 also allows the CDC Director, in carrying out a program to provide information and education on muscular dystrophy 

to health professionals and the general public, to partner with leaders in the muscular dystrophy patient community and widely disseminate the Duchenne-Becker muscular dystrophy (DBMD) care 

considerations. 

Legislative History 

On February 7, 2008, H.R. 5265 was introduced by Representative Engel and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H.R. 5265 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
112 

On September 17, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in an open markup session and H.R. 5265 was ordered 

favorably reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 23, 2008, H.R. 5265 was considered under suspension of the rules. On September 24, 2008 H.R. 5265 passed the 

House, as amended, by a rollcall vote: 418–2. 

On September 26, 2008, H.R. 5265 passed the Senate, amended, 

by unanimous consent. 

On September 27, 2008, the House agreed to the Senate amendment to H.R. 5265 by unanimous consent, clearing the measure for 

the White House. 

On September 30, 2008, H.R. 5265 was presented to the President and was signed by the President on October 8, 2008 (Public 

Law 110–361). 

ALS REGISTRY ACT

Public Law 110–373 (H.R. 2295, S. 1382) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for the establishment of an Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Registry. 

Summary 

A single national patient registry that collects and stores information on the prevalence and incidence of ALS does not exist in 

the United States today. The establishment of a national registry 

will help identify the incidence and prevalence of ALS and other 

related motor neuron disorders in the United States as well as the 

etiology of the diseases. The patient registry would collect data that 

is urgently needed for ALS research, disease management, and the 

development of standards of care in order to significantly enhance 

the Nation’s efforts to find a treatment and cure for ALS and other 

related motor neuron disorders. 

S. 5 would provide for the creation and maintenance of a single 

nationwide ALS Registry at the Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC). The registry would collect key data and information as determined by a newly created Federal Advisory Committee 

on the National ALS Registry. The ALS Registry Act would build 

upon Fiscal Year 2006 and Fiscal Year 2007 congressional appropriations of $887,000, in each of those years, which directed CDC 

to evaluate the science to guide the creation of a national ALS Registry. Currently, there are three pilot projects being conducted at 

Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; the South Carolina Office of Research 

and Statistics; and Emory University. 

Legislative History 

On May 14, 2007, H.R. 2295 was introduced by Representative 

Engel and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

That same day, the bill was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On July 19, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and H.R. 2295 was forwarded to the full Committee, amended, by a voice vote. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
113 

On September 27, 2007, the Committee held an open markup 

session and H.R. 2295 was ordered favorably reported to the 

House, as amended, by a voice vote. 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 2295 was reported to the House, 

amended (H. Rept. 110–379). 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 2295 was considered under suspension 

of the rules and, on October 16, 2007, passed the House, as amended, by a rollcall vote: 411–3. 

On October 17, 2007, H.R. 2295 was received in the Senate. 

On October 30, 2007, H.R. 2295 was read the first time and 

placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under read the first 

time. 

Further action was taken on S. 1382, a related measure. 

On May 14, 2007, S. 1382 was introduced by Senator Reid and 

referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and 

Pensions. 

On December 4, 2007, S. 1382 was reported by the Committee 

on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions with an amendment in 

the nature of a substitute and placed on the Senate Legislative 

Calendar. 

On September 23, 2008, S. 1382 passed the Senate, amended, by 

unanimous consent. 

On September 24, 2008, S. 1382 was received in the House and 

held at the desk. 

On September 25, 2008, S. 1382 was considered under suspension of the rules. Objection was heard regarding the presence of a 

quorum; further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On September 26, 2008, S. 1382 was considered as unfinished 

business and passed the House by a rollcall vote: 415–0. 

On October 8, 2008, S. 1382 was signed by the President (Public 

Law 110–373). 

PRENATALLY AND POSTNATALLY DIAGNOSED CONDITIONS AWARENESS

ACT

Public Law 110–374 (S. 1810, H.R. 3112) 

A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to increase the 

provision of scientifically sound information and support services to 

patients receiving a positive test diagnosis for Down syndrome or 

other prenatally and postnatally diagnosed conditions. 

Summary 

Pregnant women receiving a prenatal disease or condition diagnosis, such as Down syndrome, spina bifida, cystic fibrosis, and 

other congenital conditions, do not have consistent access to sufficient, up-to-date information and support services. Down syndrome, 

the most commonly identified cause of mental retardation, occurs 

in about 1 in 800 births. In addition, studies have indicated that 

the data necessary to understand, monitor, and provide health care 

for prenatally diagnosed conditions is not currently readily available. 

S. 1810 aims to ensure that patients receiving a positive test diagnosis for Down syndrome or other prenatally diagnosed conditions have timely access to scientifically sound information and 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
114 

adequate support services. Additionally, this legislation strives to 

increase the knowledge base surrounding prenatally diagnosed conditions by granting HHS the resources and authority to more accurately monitor trends. 

S. 1810 amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to authorize and oversee certain activities relating to Down syndrome or other prenatally or 

postnatally diagnosed conditions. S. 1810 includes among such activities the awarding of grants, contracts or cooperative agreements 

to eligible entities to: collect, synthesize, and disseminate current 

evidence-based information relating to such conditions; and coordinate the provision of, and access to, new or existing supportive 

services for patients receiving a positive diagnosis for such conditions. 

The bill requires the Secretary to place an emphasis on funding 

partnerships between health care professional groups and disability 

advocacy organizations in distributing funds. S. 1810 also requires 

a grantee under this Act to make available to health care providers 

of parents who receive a prenatal or postnatal diagnosis: up-todate, evidence-based, written information concerning the range of 

outcomes for individuals living with the diagnosed condition; and 

contact information regarding support services. S. 1810 also requires the information provided to be culturally and linguistically 

appropriate and to be approved by the Secretary. 

This legislation also requires the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to report to Congress concerning the effectiveness of current health care and family support programs serving as resources 

for the families of children with disabilities. 

Legislative History 

On July 19, 2007, H.R. 3112 was introduced by Representative 

Sensenbrenner and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H.R. 3112 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On April 23, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and H.R. 3112 was forwarded to the full Committee, amended, by a voice vote. 

Further action was taken on S. 1810, a related measure, which 

was introduced by Senator Brownback on July 18, 2007, and referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions. 

On April 21, 2008, S. 1810 was reported by the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions with an amendment in the nature of a substitute, without written report. 

On September 23, 2008, S. 1810 passed the Senate, amended, by 

unanimous consent. 

On September 24, 2008, S. 1810 was received in the House and 

referred the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On September 25, 2008, S. 1810 was considered under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a voice vote, two-thirds 

having voted in favor. This action cleared the measure for the 

White House. 

On September 29, 2008, S. 1810 was presented to the President 

who signed the bill on October 8, 2008 (Public Law 110–374). 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
115 

THE POISON CENTER SUPPORT, ENHANCEMENT, AND AWARENESS ACT

OF 2008

Public Law 110–377 (H.R. 5669, S. 2932) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize the poison center national toll-free number, national media campaign, and 

grant program to provide assistance for poison prevention, sustain 

the funding of poison centers, and enhance the public health of people of the United States. 

Summary 

Unintentional poisoning is a significant problem, ranking second 

only to motor vehicle crashes as a cause of unintentional injury and 

death in 2005. The economic cost is also considerable as poisonings 

led to $26 billion in medical expenses in 2000. 

While it is widely recognized that unintentional exposure to hazardous household substances occurs among preschool-aged children, it is less well known that poisoning affects people across their 

lifespan. For instance, unintentional drug overdose and suicide 

deaths are more likely to occur among adolescents and young 

adults, while the elderly are at high risk for poisoning because of 

the possibility of mixing medications or taking the wrong dosage. 

Poison control centers respond to calls dealing with all of these 

issues. 

The Poison Control Center Enhancement and Awareness Act was 

originally enacted in 2000 and amended in 2003 to stabilize poison 

control center operations. While centers supported by the Act were 

intended to provide an emergency safety net, they did not always 

ensure consistent, effective, and efficient delivery of poison prevention and control services to the U.S. population. 

A 2004 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report revealed some of the 

problems with the current network of poison control centers. One 

of the key recommendations in this report was that Congress provides sufficient funding to support the Poison Prevention and Control System with its national network of regional poison control 

centers. 

H.R. 5669 reauthorizes a grant program that allows the HHS 

Secretary to make grants to certified poison centers for evaluating 

best practices for poison prevention, developing patient management guidelines, improving national toxics-exposure surveillance, 

enhancing technological capabilities of those in the field of poison 

control, fostering enhanced public health utilization of national poison data, expanding toxicologic expertise, and improving the capacity of poison centers. 

In addition, H.R. 5669 reauthorizes a poison centers national 

toll-free number and provides for the maintenance of such a number, including appropriate authorizations. It also reauthorizes a nationwide media campaign to educate the public and healthcare providers about poison prevention and the availability of poison center 

resources, including advertising of the nationwide toll-free number. 

Legislative History 

On April 1, 2008, H.R. 5669 was introduced by Representative 

Towns and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
116 

On April 2, 2008, H.R. 5669 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On April 23, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and H.R. 5669 was forwarded to the full Committee by a voice vote. 

On May 7, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 

in an open markup session and H.R. 5669 was ordered reported by 

a voice vote. 

On June 4, 2008, H.R. 5669 was reported to the House by the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce (H. Rept. 110–682). That 

same day, H.R. 5669 was considered under suspension of the rules 

and passed the House by a rollcall vote: 405–10. 

On June 5, 2008, H.R. 5669 was received in the Senate, read 

twice and referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor, and Pensions. 

Further action was taken on S. 2932, a related measure. It was 

introduced in the Senate on April 29, 2008, by Senator Murray, 

and referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions. 

On September 23, 2008, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions was discharged from further consideration of the legislation. 

On September 23, 2008, S. 2932 passed the Senate, amended, by 

unanimous consent. 

On September 26, 2008, S. 2932 was considered under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a rollcall vote: 403–6. 

On September 29, 2008, S. 2932 was presented to the President. 

It was signed by the President on October 8, 2008 (Public Law 

110–377). 

COMPREHENSIVE TUBERCULOSIS ELIMINATION ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–392 (H.R. 1532) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to making 

progress toward the goal of eliminating tuberculosis, and for other 

purposes. 

Summary 

Tuberculosis (TB), a chronic bacterial infection, continues to be 

a worldwide problem. Nearly 2 billion people, including 10 to 15 

million in the United States, are infected and approximately 8 million new cases and 1.6 million tuberculosis deaths are reported 

globally each year. Tuberculosis causes more deaths than any other 

infectious disease caused by a single microorganism. 

An emerging public health concern is the increase in the number 

of cases of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, a form of the disease 

that is resistant to several of the standard therapeutic drugs. Recently, there has also been an increase in the number of cases of 

extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis, which is resistant to four or 

more standard drugs. 

The high global burden of disease, coupled with continued problems of drug-resistant strains and a failure to develop better tools 

for TB control, threaten our ability to eliminate TB in the U.S. and 

hamper efforts to control TB globally as the decreasing trend in the 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
117 

annual case rate has slowed from an annual average decline of 6.6 

percent for 1993 through 2002 to an annual average decline of 3.1 

percent for 2003 through 2006. 

A May 2000 Institute for Medicine (IOM) report entitled ‘Ending 

Neglect: The Elimination of Tuberculosis in the U.S.’ stated that 

proper funding, the organization of prevention and control activities, and the research and development of new tools could eliminate 

tuberculosis as a public health problem in the U.S. As a result, research aimed at the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of all 

forms of tuberculosis and the care of infected individuals continues 

to be of interest to Congress. 

H.R. 1532 reauthorizes and amends the PHSA’s existing ‘‘Preventive Health Services Regarding Tuberculosis’’ program. This legislation amends the duties and comprehensive plan of the existing 

TB Advisory Council; creates a new Federal Tuberculosis Task 

Force; requires the HHS Secretary to prepare and submit a report 

to Congress, which evaluates and provides recommendations on 

changes needed to Federal and State public health authorities to 

address current disease containment challenges; authorizes appropriations from FY 09 to FY 13; and states that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director may expand, intensify, and coordinate research and development and related activities with respect 

to TB, including activities toward the goal of eliminating the disease. 

Legislative History 

On March 15, 2007, H.R. 1532 was introduced by Representative 

Green and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On March 16, 2007, H.R. 1532 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On September 17, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in an open markup session and H.R. 1532 was ordered 

favorably reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 23, 2008, H.R. 1532 was reported to the House, 

amended (H. Rept. 110–873). 

On September 23, 2008, H.R. 1532 was considered under suspension of the rules and on September 24, 2008, passed the House, as 

amended, by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On September 25, 2008, H.R. 1532 was received in the Senate 

and read twice. 

On September 27, 2008, H.R. 1532 passed the Senate, without 

amendment, by unanimous consent and was cleared for the White 

House. 

On October 3, 2008, H.R. 1532 was presented to the President 

and was signed by the President on October 13, 2008 (Public Law 

110–392). 

STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES GIFT OF LIFE MEDAL ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–413 (H.R. 7198, H.R. 6950) 

To establish the Stephanie Tubbs Jones Gift of Life Medal for 

organ donors and the family of organ donors. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
118 

Summary 

H.R. 6950 makes any organ donor, or the family of any organ 

donor, eligible for a Stephanie Tubbs Jones Gift of Life Medal. In 

addition, H.R. 6950 requires the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services to direct the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) to establish an application procedure, determine eligibility, and arrange for the presentation of medals. H.R. 6950 authorizes the OPTN to collect funds to offset expenditures relating 

to the issuance of medals and requires the Secretary of the Treasury to design the Stephanie Tubbs Jones Gift of Life Medals using 

certain specifications. 

Legislative History 

On September 18, 2008, H.R. 6950 was introduced by Representative Stark. It was referred to the Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be 

subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On September 23, 2008, H.R. 6950 was considered under suspension of the rules. On September 25, 2008, H.R. 6950 was considered 

as unfinished business and passed the House by a rollcall vote: 

420–1. 

On September 26, 2008, H.R. 6950 was received in the Senate. 

Further action was taken on H.R. 7198, a related measure, which 

was introduced on September 28, 2008, by Representative Stark. It 

was referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be 

subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On September 29, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Financial Services were each discharged from further consideration of H.R. 7198. The House then 

passed H.R. 7198 by unanimous consent. 

On September 30, 2008, H.R. 7198 was received in the Senate. 

On October 1, 2008, H.R. 7198 passed the Senate, without 

amendment, by unanimous consent, clearing it for the White 

House. 

On October 6, 2008, H.R. 7198 was presented to the President 

who signed the measure on October 14, 2008 (Public Law 110–413). 

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009

Public Law 110–417 (S. 3001, H.R. 5658) 

(Health Provisions) 

To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2009 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and 

for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe 

military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
119 

Summary 

S. 3001 provides for a consistent education loan repayment authority for health professionals in regular components and Selected 

Reserve. It also provides for the extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for health care professionals. Further, S. 3001 

provides accession and retention bonuses for the recruitment and 

retention of officers in critically short wartime health professions. 

S. 3001 provides a one year prohibition of increases on certain 

health care costs and for transitional health care for certain members of the armed forces. The Secretary of Defense is also required 

to conduct a military health risk management demonstration 

project on the use of preventive health services. S. 3001 directs the 

Secretary to establish a task force on the prevention of suicide by 

members of the Armed Forces. 

Legislative History 

On March 31, 2008, H.R. 5658 was introduced by Representative 

Skelton and referred to the Committee on Armed Services. 

On April 25, 2008, H.R. 5658 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Military Personnel; the Subcommittee on Readiness; the Subcommittee on Seapower and Expeditionary Forces; the Subcommittee on Air and Land Forces; the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities; and the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces. 

On May 7, 2008, the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, the 

Subcommittee on Air and Land Forces and the Subcommittee on 

Strategic Forces met in an open markup session and forwarded 

H.R. 5658 to the full Committee by a voice vote. 

On May 8, 2007, the Subcommittee on Readiness met in an open 

markup session and forwarded H.R. 5658 to the full Committee, as 

amended, by a voice vote. The Subcommittee on Seapower and Expeditionary Forces met in an open markup session and forwarded 

H.R. 5658 to the full Committee, as amended, by a voice vote. The 

Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities met in an open markup session and forwarded H.R. 5658 to 

the full Committee by a voice vote. 

On May 14, 2008, the Committee on Armed Services met in an 

open markup session and H.R. 5658 was ordered reported, as 

amended, by a rollcall vote: 61–0. 

On May 16, 2008, the Committee on Armed Services reported 

H.R. 5658 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–652). 

On May 20, 2008, a supplemental report was filed by the Committee on Armed Services (H. Rept. 110–652, Part 2). 

On May 21, 2008, H.R. 5658 was considered under the provisions 

of rule H. Res. 1213 and Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union rises leaving H.R. 5658 as unfinished business. 

On May 22, 2008, H.R. 5658 passed the House, amended, by a 

rollcall vote: 384–23. 

On June 3, 2008, H.R. 5658 was received in the Senate, read 

twice and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, Calendar No. 758. 

Further action was taken on S. 3001, a related measure. 

On September 17, 2008, S. 3001 passed the Senate, amended, by 

a rollcall vote: 88–8. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
120 

On September 18, 2008, S. 3001 was received in the House. 

On September 24, 2008, S. 3001 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 392—39. 

On September 27, 2008, the Senate agreed to the House amendment by unanimous consent and S. 3001 was cleared for the White 

House. 

On October 6, 2008, S. 3001 was presented to the President; and 

the measure was signed by the President on October 14, 2008 (Public Law 110–417). 

METHAMPHETAMINE PRODUCTION PREVENTION ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–415 (S. 1276) 

To facilitate the creation of methamphetamine precursor electronic logbook systems, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

The Combat Methamphetamine Act requires pharmacies to keep 

logbooks recording each purchase of a methamphetamine precursor 

drug product. Current law permits pharmacies to keep these 

logbooks either in written or electronic form. Numerous states are 

trying to promote increased usage of electronic logbook systems because when pharmacies keep their logbook information electronically, it makes it much easier to identify people who go from pharmacy to pharmacy to buy methamphetamine precursors in amounts 

that exceed the legal limit. 

S. 1276 makes technical changes to the provisions in the federal 

Combat Methamphetamine Act to reduce unnecessary costs for 

pharmacies to use an electronic logbook system. 

Legislative History 

On May 3, 2007, S. 1276 was introduced by Senator Durbin and 

referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. 

On September 15, 2008, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary 

reported S. 1276 with an amendment in the nature of a substitute 

and an amendment to the title. 

On September 25, 2008, S. 1276 passed the Senate, as amended, 

by unanimous consent. 

On September 25, 2008, S. 1276 was received in the House and 

referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in 

addition the House Committee on the Judiciary. 

On September 29, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on the Judiciary were each discharged 

from further consideration of S. 1276. The bill was then considered 

in the House by unanimous consent and agreed to without objection. This action cleared S. 1276 for the White House. 

On October 3, 2008, S. 1276 was presented to the President. The 

President signed the legislation on October 14, 2008 (Public Law 

110–415). 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
121 

RYAN HAIGHT ONLINE PHARMACY CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–425 (H.R. 6353) 

To amend the Controlled Substances Act to address online pharmacies. 

Summary 

According to the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), nearly 7 million Americans are abusing prescription drugs, more than the numbers who are abusing cocaine, heroin, hallucinogens, Ecstasy, and 

inhalants, combined. The number of individuals abusing prescription drugs has increased 80 percent in the last 6 years. Prescription pain relievers have replaced marijuana and cocaine as new 

drug users’ drug of choice. Nearly 1 in 10 high school seniors admits to abusing powerful prescription painkillers. A shocking 40 

percent of teenagers and an almost equal number of their parents 

think abusing prescription painkillers is safer than abusing ‘street’ 

drugs. 

Prescription pain relievers appear to be among the drugs most 

heavily dispensed by certain Internet pharmacies through prescriptions that are issued based on online questionnaires. This practice 

has been abused by rogue pharmacy sites that dispense large quantities of addictive substances to customers seeking access to prescription painkillers, leading to instances of addiction, overdose, 

and death. As of July 2004, DEA investigations had discovered 14 

deaths or overdoses and 15 persons who have entered rehabilitation or sustained injuries from drugs obtained over the Internet. 

In an effort to address concerns about the purchase of controlled 

substances through online pharmacies, H.R. 6353 defines a ‘valid 

prescription’ as a prescription that is issued for a legitimate purpose by a practitioner who has conducted at least one in-person 

medical evaluation of the patient. 

H.R. 6353 imposes registration and reporting requirements on 

online pharmacies. H.R. 6353 requires an online pharmacy that delivers, dispenses controlled substances to: (1) display on its Internet 

homepage a statement that it complies with the requirements of 

this Act; (2) comply with State laws for the licensure of pharmacies 

in each State in which it operates or sells controlled substances; (3) 

post on its Internet homepage specified information, including the 

name, address, and telephone number of the pharmacy, the qualifications of its pharmacist-in-charge, and a certification of its registration under this Act; and (4) notify the Attorney General and 

applicable State boards of pharmacy at least 30 days prior to offering to sell, deliver, distribute, or dispense controlled substances 

over the Internet. 

H.R. 6353 increases criminal penalties involving controlled substances in Schedules II, IV, and V of the Controlled Substances 

Act. H.R. 6353 also authorizes States to apply for injunctions or obtain damages and other civil remedies against online pharmacies 

that are deemed a threat to State residents. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
122 

Legislative History 

On June 24, 2008, H.R. 6353 was introduced by Representative 

Stupak. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

On September 17, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in an open markup session and H.R. 6353 was ordered 

favorably reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 23, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 6353 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110– 

869). The Committee on Judiciary was discharged from further consideration of the measure. That same day, H.R. 6353 was considered under suspension of the rules and passed the House, as 

amended, by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On September 25, 2008, H.R. 6353 was received in the Senate. 

On September 30, 2008, H.R. 6353 passed the Senate without 

amendment by unanimous consent, clearing the measure for the 

White House. 

On October 6, 2008, H.R. 6353 was presented to the President. 

On October 15, 2008, the President signed the bill (Public Law 

110–425). 

STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES ORGAN TRANSPLANT AUTHORIZATION ACT OF

2008

Public Law 110–426 (H.R. 6469) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to authorize increased 

Federal funding for the Organ Procurement and Transplantation 

Network. 

Summary 

H.R. 6469 strikes the current authorization amount of $2 million 

for the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) 

and increases the authorization to $7 million. It also requires that 

the Executive Director of the OPTN submit to Congress a report 

on the progress of the program. 

Legislative History 

On July 10, 2008, H.R. 6469 was introduced by Representative 

DeGette and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On September 17, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in an open markup session and H.R. 6469 was ordered 

favorably reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 23, 2008, H.R. 6469 was considered by the House 

under suspension of the rules. On September 25, 2008, H.R. 6469 

passed the House, as amended, by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On September 26, 2008, H.R 6469 was received in the Senate 

and read twice. 

On October 2, 2008, H.R. 6469 passed the Senate, amended, by 

unanimous consent. 

On October 3, 2008, the House agreed to the Senate amendment 

without objection and H.R. 6469 was cleared for the White House. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
123 

H.R. 6469 was presented to the President on October 9, 2008, 

and signed by the President on October 15, 2008 (Public Law 110– 

426). 

WILLIAM WILBERFORCE TRAFFICKING VICTIMS PROTECTION

REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–457 (H.R. 7311, H.R. 3887) 

(Health Provisions) 

To authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2008 through 2011 

for the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, to enhance 

measures to combat trafficking in persons, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

Title I of H.R. 3887 directs the President to carry out programs 

to prevent and deter trafficking in persons and authorizes funds for 

FY2008–FY2011 for this purpose. This deterrence includes providing anti-trafficking assistance to foreign countries for investigations of individuals and entities involved in sexual exploitation. 

Title I also directs the President to establish performance goals 

and indicators for anti-trafficking programs; and requires the establishment of an integrated database relating to trafficking 

trends. 

Title II directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to 

provide interim assistance to children who have been trafficking 

victims. It also authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services and the Attorney General to establish an assistance program for U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents who are victims of severe forms of trafficking; and make grants to states, Indian tribes, local government, and nonprofit victims’ service organizations to develop and expand victim service programs. 

Title II requires that the Attorney General and the Secretary of 

Health and Human Services report to the appropriate congressional committees identifying any service gap between foreign and 

U.S. citizen victims of severe forms of trafficking and victims of sex 

trafficking. 

Title III authorizes appropriations through FY 2011 to a number 

of federal agencies, including the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services and the Attorney General for assistance to trafficking victims in the United States. 

Title IV prohibits funds for specified military and related areas 

from being made available to the government of a country identified by the Secretary of State as having governmental armed forces 

or government supported armed groups that recruit or use child 

soldiers. 

Legislative History 

On October 18, 2007, H.R. 3887 was introduced by Representative Lantos. It was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 

and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, and Energy 

and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 

Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 

within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
124 

On October 22, 2007, H.R. 3887 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On November 6, 2007, the Committee on Foreign Affairs reported 

H.R. 3887 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–430, Part 1). The 

Committee on Energy and Commerce was discharged from further 

consideration of H.R. 3887; and the Committee on the Judiciary 

was granted an extension for further consideration ending not later 

than November 9, 2007. 

On November 9, 2007, the Committee on the Judiciary was 

granted an extension for further consideration ending not later 

than November 20, 2007. 

On November 20, 2007, the Committee on the Judiciary was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 3887. 

On December 4, 2007, H.R. 3887 was considered under suspension of the rules and passed the House, as amended, by a rollcall 

vote: 405–2. 

On December 5, 2007, H.R. 3887 was received in the Senate, 

read twice and referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. 

Further action was taken on H.R. 7311, a related measure, which 

was introduced on December 9, 2008, by Representative Howard 

Berman. The bill was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 

and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and 

the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 

Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 

within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On December 10, 2008, the Committees on Foreign Affairs, Energy and Commerce, and the Judiciary were each discharged from 

further consideration of the measure by unanimous consent; and 

the bill passed the House with no objection the same day. 

On December 10, 2008, H.R. 7311 was received in the Senate, 

considered, and passed without amendment by unanimous consent, 

clearing it for White House action. 

On December 23, 2008, H.R. 7311 was signed by the President 

(Public Law 110–457). 

STEM CELL RESEARCH ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 3, S. 5) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for human 

embryonic stem cell research. 

Summary 

Stem cell research has the potential to affect the lives of millions 

of people in the United States and around the world. Stem cells 

provide the opportunity to study the growth and differentiation of 

individual cells into tissues. Understanding these processes could 

provide insights into the causes of birth defects, genetic abnormalities, and other disease states. Stem cells could be used to produce 

large amounts of one cell type to test new drugs for effectiveness 

and chemicals for toxicity. Stem cells might be transplanted into 

the body to treat disease or injury. The damaging side effects of 

medical treatments might be repaired with stem cell treatment. 

S. 5 amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct and support reVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
125 

search that utilizes human embryonic stem cells, regardless of the 

date on which the stem cells were derived from a human embryo, 

provided such embryos meet ethical requirements: the stem cells 

were derived from human embryos donated from in vitro fertilization clinics for the purpose of fertility treatment and were in excess 

of the needs of the individuals seeking such treatment; the embryos 

would never be implanted in a woman and would otherwise be discarded; and such individuals donate the embryos with written informed consent and receive no financial or other inducements. In 

addition, the bill requires the Secretary to issue final guidelines to 

carry out this Act within 60 days and submit annual reports on activities and research conducted under this Act. 

Legislative History 

On January 5, 2007, H.R. 3 was introduced by Representative 

DeGette and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On January 11, 2007, H.R. 3 was considered in the House pursuant to H. Res. 6. Mr. Burgess moved to recommit with instructions 

to Energy and Commerce. The instructions contained in the motion 

seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an 

amendment inserting provisions preventing federal support for 

human cloning. The motion to recommit failed by a rollcall vote: 

189–238. H.R. 3 then passed the House by a rollcall vote: 253–174. 

On January 12, 2007, H.R. 3 was placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. 

Further action was taken on S. 5, a related measure, which was 

introduced on January 4, 2007, by Senator Reid. 

On April 11, 2007, S. 5 was considered in the Senate and passed 

by a rollcall vote: 63–34. 

On April 16, 2007, S. 5 was received in the House and held at 

the desk. 

On June 7, 2007, S. 5 was considered in the House according to 

the provisions of H. Res. 464. S. 5 then passed the House by a rollcall vote: 247–163. 

On June 12, 2007, S. 5 was presented to the President and on 

June 20, 2007, the President vetoed the bill. 

No further action was taken on this bill in the 110th Congress. 

MELANIE BLOCKER-STOKES POSTPARTUM DEPRESSION RESEARCH AND

CARE ACT

(H.R. 20) 

To provide for research on, and services for individuals with, 

postpartum depression and psychosis. 

Summary 

Postpartum depression is recognized as a unique and serious 

complication of childbirth. Its insidious onset and chronic course 

complicates 10 to 15 percent of all deliveries and a staggering 26 

to 32 percent of all adolescent deliveries. The majority of patients 

suffer from this illness for more than 6 months and, if untreated, 

25 percent of patients are still depressed a year later. Women with 

postpartum depression may feel restless, anxious, sad, or depressed. They may have feelings of guilt, decreased energy and moVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
126 

tivation, and a sense of worthlessness. They may also have sleep 

difficulties and undergo unexplained weight loss or gain. 

H.R. 20 encourages the Secretary of Health and Human Services 

(HHS), the Director of the National Institute of Mental Health 

(NIMH), and the Director of the National Institutes of Health 

(NIH) to coordinate activities and continue aggressive work with 

respect to postpartum depression and postpartum psychosis. In addition, the Director of NIMH is encouraged to continue supporting 

research on understanding the causes of postpartum depressions 

and finding a cure through activities such as basic research concerning the etiology and causes of the conditions; epidemiological 

studies to address the frequency and natural history of the conditions and the differences among racial and ethnic groups with respect to the conditions; development of improved screening and diagnostic techniques; clinical research for the development and evaluation of new treatments; and, information and education programs for healthcare professionals and the public. 

H.R. 20 also directs the Secretary of HHS to make grants to provide for projects for the establishment, operation, and coordination 

of effective and cost-efficient systems for the delivery of essential 

services to individuals with postpartum depression or postpartum 

psychosis. Recipients of these grants must be either a public or 

nonprofit private entity. 

Legislative History 

On January 4, 2007, H.R. 20 was introduced by Representative 

Rush and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On 

February 2, 2007, H.R. 20 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On May 1, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing on 

H.R. 20. The purpose of the hearing was to explore the need for 

more research on postpartum depression and psychosis. 

On July 19, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and H.R. 20 was forwarded to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 27, 2007, the Committee held an open markup 

session and H.R. 20 was ordered reported, as amended, by a voice 

vote. 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 20 was reported to the House, as 

amended (H. Rept. 110–375). 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 20 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 382–3. 

On October 16, 2007, H.R. 20 was received in the Senate, read 

twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 20 in the 110th Congress. 

STROKE TREATMENT AND ONGOING PREVENTION ACT

(H.R. 477) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to strengthen education, 

prevention, and treatment programs relating to stroke, and for 

other purposes. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
127 

Summary 

Stroke is the third leading cause of death in America and a 

major contributor to long-term disability. The American Heart Association estimates that Americans will pay approximately $62.7 

billion in 2007 for stroke-related medical costs and disability. 

H.R. 477 authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Health 

and Human Services to engage in activities designed to increase 

knowledge and awareness of stroke prevention and treatment. This 

legislation would require the Secretary to conduct educational campaigns, maintain a national stroke registry, and establish an information clearinghouse related to stroke. For these purposes, the bill 

would authorize the appropriation of $5 million for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2012. 

H.R. 477 would authorize the Secretary to make grants to public 

and nonprofit entities for the purpose of planning, developing, and 

enhancing approved residency training programs and other professional training for appropriate health professions in emergency 

medicine, including emergency medical services professionals, to 

improve stroke and traumatic injury prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation. For these purposes, the bill would authorize the appropriation of $4 million for each of the fiscal years 2008 

through 2012. 

In addition, H.R. 477 would authorize the Secretary to make 

grants to States and other public and private entities to develop 

medical professional training programs and telehealth networks 

that seek to coordinate stroke care and improve patient outcomes. 

For these purposes, the bill would authorize the appropriation of 

$10 million for fiscal year 2008, $13 million for fiscal year 2009, 

$15 million for fiscal year 2010, $8 million for fiscal year 2011, and 

$4 million for fiscal year 2012. 

Legislative History 

On January 16, 2007, H.R. 477 was introduced by Representative 

Capps and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

H.R. 477 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health on February 

2, 2007. 

On March 13, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and H.R. 477 was forwarded to the full Committee 

by a voice vote. 

On March 15, 2007, the full Committee met in an open markup 

session and H.R. 477 was ordered favorably reported, amended, by 

a voice vote. 

On March 27, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 477 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–75). 

On March 27, 2007, H.R. 477 was considered in the House under 

suspension of the rules and passed the House, as amended, by a 

voice vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

On March 28, 2007, H.R. 477 was received in the Senate, read 

twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 477 in the 110th Congress. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
128 

VISION CARE FOR KIDS ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 507) 

To establish a grant program to provide vision care to children, 

and for other purposes. 

Summary 

Vision problems can occur at any point during a lifetime, but 

tend to be particularly damaging to school age children because developmental struggles may result in physical, emotional, and social 

consequences. In addition to the psychological costs, the economic 

costs for people with impaired vision are very high. It is estimated 

that the lifetime costs for all people with vision impairment who 

were born in 2000 will total $2.5 billion. For these reasons, Healthy 

Vision 2010 recommends that all children receive a vision-screening exam from their healthcare provider before they reach the age 

of five. 

H.R. 507 allows the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 

acting through the Director of CDC, to award matching grants to 

States to: provide comprehensive eye examinations by a licensed 

optometrist or ophthalmologist for children identified by a licensed 

health care provider or vision screener, with priority given to children under age nine; provide treatment or services to correct vision 

problems of such children; and develop and disseminate educational materials to parents, teachers, and health care practitioners regarding how to recognize signs of visual impairment in 

children. 

Legislative History 

On January 17, 2007, H.R. 507 was introduced by Representative 

Green and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On February 2, 2007, H.R. 507 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On July 19, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and H.R. 507 was forwarded to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 27, 2007, the full Committee held an open markup 

session and H.R. 507 was ordered favorably reported to the House, 

as amended, by a voice vote. 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 507 was reported to the House, 

amended (H. Rept. 110–376). 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 507 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On October 16, 2007, H.R. 507 was received in the Senate, read 

twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 507 in the 110th Congress. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
129 

NATIVE AMERICAN METHAMPHETAMINE ENFORCEMENT AND

TREATMENT ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 545) 

To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 

1968 to clarify that territories and Indian tribes are eligible to receive grants for confronting the use of methamphetamine. 

Summary 

Methamphetamine abuse is a significant burden on rural communities and tribal communities. The Indian Health Service (IHS) 

reports that over 30 percent of Alaska Native and American Indian 

youth have experimented with methamphetamine and that 1.9 percent of Alaska Natives and American Indians over the age of 12 are 

currently using it. According to the Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC), the rate of use among Alaska natives and American Indians is almost three times higher than the national rate for 

whites and four times higher than the rate for Hispanics and 

Latinos. 

Over the past 30 years, Congress has passed legislation designed 

to address the problem of illicit methamphetamine abuse and its 

production, culminating in the passage of the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005, enacted as Title VII of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005. 

H.R. 545 would make U.S. territories and Indian tribes eligible 

to apply for Department of Justice grants to combat the abuse of 

methamphetamine authorized under the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005, namely the Hot Spots program and 

the Drug-Endangered Children Grant program. Under current law, 

only States may apply for these grants. 

Legislative History 

On January 17, 2007, H.R. 545 was introduced by Representative 

Udall. It was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in 

addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period 

to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of 

the committee concerned. 

On February 2, 2007, H.R. 545 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On March 8, 2007, the Committee on Judiciary reported H.R. 545 

to the House (H. Rept. 110–35, Part 1); and the Committee on Energy and Commerce was granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than April 20, 2007. 

On March 13, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and H.R. 545 was forwarded to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On March 15, 2007, the full Committee held an open markup 

session and H.R. 545 was ordered favorably reported, as amended, 

by a voice vote. 

On March 21, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 545 to the House, amended, (H. Rept. 110–35, Part 2). 

On March 22, 2007, H.R. 545 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 423–0. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
130 

On March 23, 2007, H.R. 545 was received by the Senate, read 

the first time and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under 

Read the First Time. 

On March 26, 2007, H.R. 545 was read the second time and 

placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, 

Calendar No. 85. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 545 in the 110th Congress. 

DEXTROMETHORPHAN DISTRIBUTION ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 970) 

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect 

to the distribution of the drug dextromethorphan, and for other 

purposes. 

Summary 

Dextromethorphan (DXM) is abused by individuals of all ages, 

but its abuse by teenagers and young adults is of particular concern. Abuse of combination DXM products causes health complications such as increased blood pressure, delayed liver damage, and 

central nervous system and cardiovascular toxicity. The use of high 

doses of DXM in combination with alcohol or other drugs is particularly dangerous and deaths have been reported. 

H.R. 970 amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to 

deem to be adulterated any unfinished dextromethorphan that is 

possessed, received, or distributed in violation of this Act. It would 

also prohibit a person from: possessing or receiving unfinished 

dextromethorphan unless the person is registered with the Secretary of Health and Human Services as a producer of a drug or 

device, or distributing unfinished dextromethorphan to any person 

other than a registered person. 

Legislative History 

On February 8, 2007, H.R. 970 was introduced by Representative 

Upton and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On February 9, 2007, H.R. 970 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On September 27, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 970. 

On September 27, 2007, the Committee held an open markup 

session and H.R. 970 was ordered favorably reported, amended, by 

a voice vote. 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 970 was reported to the House, 

amended (H. Rept. 110–377). 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 970 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On October 16, 2007, H.R. 970 was received in the Senate, read 

twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 970 in the 110th Congress. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
131 

HEART DISEASE EDUCATION, ANALYSIS RESERCH, AND TREATMENT

FOR WOMEN ACT

(H.R. 1014) 

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the 

Public Health Service Act to improve the prevention, diagnosis, and 

treatment of heart disease, stroke, and other cardiovascular diseases in women. 

Summary 

Heart disease and other forms of cardiovascular disease are the 

leading cause of death in the United States and a major cause of 

disability. Although heart disease is sometimes thought of as a 

‘man’s disease,’ one in three American women die of heart disease 

and other cardiovascular diseases, making it the leading cause of 

death for both women and men in the United States. Recent studies attribute these statistics in part to disparities in preventive 

care and treatment for cardiovascular disease between women and 

men. In particular, there is a pervasive lack of awareness among 

women about cardiovascular health and the risks of heart disease. 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) administers the Well-Integrated Screening and Evaluation for Women 

Across the Nation (WISEWOMAN) program. WISEWOMAN began 

as a demonstration program authorized in 1993 by Congress. The 

program is available to low-income women aged 40 to 64 who are 

enrolled in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. WISEWOMAN successfully screens low-income and 

uninsured women for heart disease, stroke, and other forms of cardiovascular disease through blood pressure and blood cholesterol 

testing. Up to this point, however, the available funding has limited the program to 21 projects in only 20 States. 

H.R. 1014 amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and 

the Public Health Service Act to improve the prevention, diagnosis, 

and treatment of heart disease, stroke, and other cardiovascular 

diseases in women by instituting new clinical reporting requirements and authorizing research and public health activities. Specifically, it authorizes the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to educate health care professionals and older women 

about unique aspects of care in the prevention, diagnosis, and 

treatment of women with heart disease and stroke. It also authorizes the expansion of the WISEWOMAN program. 

Further, H.R. 1014 authorizes the Secretary of HHS to deny an 

application for approval or place a clinical hold on an investigation, 

as appropriate, of a new drug, investigational new drug, biologic, 

device, or investigational device if the application fails to meet current reporting requirements concerning the stratification of data by 

gender, age, and race. 

Legislative History 

On February 13, 2007, H.R. 1014 was introduced by Representative Capps and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On February 14, 2007, H.R. 1014 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
132 

On May 1, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing on 

H.R. 1014. The purpose of the hearing was to explore the need for 

greater awareness and funding for combating heart disease in 

women. 

On September 17, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce held an open markup session and H.R. 1014 was ordered favorably reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 23, 2008, the House considered H.R. 1014 under 

suspension of the rules. Objection was heard regarding the presence of a quorum; further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On September 25, 2008, the House considered H.R. 1014 as unfinished business. The House passed the bill, as amended, by a rollcall vote: 414–4. 

On September 26, 2008, H.R. 1014 was received in the Senate. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1014 in the 110th Congress. 

FAMILY SMOKING PREVENTION AND TOBACCO CONTROL ACT

(H.R. 1108) 

To protect the public health by providing the Food and Drug Administration with certain authority to regulate tobacco products. 

Summary 

The prevalence of tobacco use and its toll on human lives has 

long been a public health concern. The Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 21 percent of U.S. adults (approximately 45.1 million people) are cigarette smokers. Current 

trends suggest that the annual rate of cessation among smokers remains fairly low, that the decline in the initiation rate may have 

slowed, and that overall adult prevalence may be flattening out at 

around 20 percent. 

In addition to the prevalence of tobacco use in the adult population, CDC estimates that 23 percent of U.S. high school students 

are cigarette smokers. Almost 80 percent of new users of tobacco 

products began when they were under the minimum legal age to 

purchase them. The use of tobacco products by the Nation’s children is a pediatric disease of considerable proportions that results 

in new generations of tobacco-dependent children. Every day, approximately 4,000 youth try a cigarette for the first time, and another 1,000 will become new, regular daily smokers. One-third of 

these youth will eventually die prematurely as a result. Tobacco 

advertising and marketing contribute significantly to the use of tobacco products by children and adolescents, who are more influenced by tobacco marketing than adults, and are exposed to substantial and unavoidable advertising that leads to favorable attitudes about tobacco use. 

Cigarette smoking is the leading preventable cause of death in 

the United States. It is responsible for about 1 in 5 deaths annually, or about 438,000 deaths per year according to CDC. According 

to the Institute of Medicine, smoking-related deaths account for 

more deaths than AIDS, alcohol, cocaine, heroin, homicide, suicide, 

motor vehicle crashes, and fires combined. Smoking harms nearly 

every organ of the body, causing many diseases and reducing the 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
133 

health of smokers in general. Cancer, the second leading cause of 

death, was among the first diseases causally linked to smoking. Approximately 8.6 million Americans suffer from chronic illnesses related to smoking. Smoking also increases the prevalence of cardiovascular and respiratory disease. Smokeless tobacco use has also 

negatively affected the health of many Americans. According to the 

National Cancer Institute, smokeless tobacco contains 28 carcinogens and consumers of smokeless tobacco products increase their 

risk for certain cancers, including oral cancer. 

In addition to the lives lost to tobacco, the financial losses 

amount to billions of dollars. CDC estimates that cigarette smoking 

costs more than $167.5 billion annually, based on lost productivity 

($92 billion) and healthcare expenditures ($75.5 billion). 

The current lack of Government regulation has allowed the tobacco industry to design new products or modify existing ones in 

ways that increase their appeal to children and that contribute to 

the risk and incidence of disease. Flavors and product modification 

not only make the products more appealing to youth, but often result in exposure to additional carcinogens and other toxic constituents. The manipulation of nicotine and other chemical levels increases addictiveness and harm. 

H.R. 1108 amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA) to grant the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the authority to regulate tobacco products. It allows the Secretary to restrict the sale and distribution of tobacco products, including advertising and promotion, if the Secretary determines that such regulation would be appropriate for the protection of the public health. 

The legislation also allows the Secretary to take specified actions, 

including public notification and recall, against unreasonably 

harmful products. 

H.R. 1108 requires the Secretary to establish tobacco product 

standards to protect the public health, but prohibits the Secretary 

from banning a class of tobacco products, such as all cigarettes, or 

reducing the nicotine level to zero. The legislation sets forth standards for the sale of modified-risk tobacco products and prohibits 

cigarettes from containing, as a characterizing flavor, any artificial 

or natural flavor (other than tobacco or menthol). 

Further, H.R. 1108 sets forth provisions regarding: (1) judicial review, (2) coordination with the Federal Trade Commission, (3) Congressional review of regulations, and (4) State and local authority. 

The legislation also requires the Secretary to establish a Tobacco 

Products Scientific Advisory Committee. 

Finally, H.R. 1108 amends the Federal Cigarette Labeling and 

Advertising Act to change cigarette warning label and advertising 

requirements. In addition, the legislation amends the Comprehensive Smokeless Tobacco Health Education Act of 1986 to change 

smokeless tobacco warning label and advertising requirements. 

Legislative History 

On February 15, 2007, H.R. 1108 was introduced by Representative Waxman and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On February 16, 2007, H.R. 1108 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
134 

On October 3, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing 

on H.R. 1108. The purpose of the hearing was to explore ways to 

regulate tobacco to reduce its harm to health. 

On March 6, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and began consideration of H.R. 1108. On March 

11, 2008, the Subcommittee met in an open markup session and 

forwarded H.R. 1108 to the full Committee, amended, by a rollcall 

vote: 18–9. 

On April 2, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met 

in an open markup session and H.R. 1108 was ordered favorably 

reported, amended, by a rollcall vote: 38–12. 

On July 17, 2008, H.R. 1108 was reported to the House, amended, by the Committee on Energy and Commerce (H. Rept. 110– 

762). 

On July 30, 2008, H.R. 1108 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 326–102. 

On July 31, 2008, H.R. 1108 was received in the Senate, and, on 

August 1, 2008, the bill was referred to the Senate Committee on 

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1108 in the 110th Congress. 

EARLY HEARING DETECTION AND INTERVENTION ACT OF 2008

H.R. 1198 

To amend the Public Health Service Act regarding early detection, diagnosis, and treatment of hearing loss. 

Summary 

Each year in the United States, more than 12,000 babies are 

born with hearing loss. Studies have shown that children who have 

hearing loss can have delays in speech, language, and cognitive development. H.R. 1198 reauthorizes the Early Hearing Detection 

and Intervention (EHDI) program within the U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services (HHS). The original legislation directed Federal agencies to work with States to develop newborn infant hearing screening and early intervention programs. 

When the EHDI program was first implemented, 44 percent of 

newborns were screened for hearing loss. Today, more than 93 percent of all newborns are screened, and each year there are thousands of infants with hearing loss who benefit from early identification. Despite the success of the EHDI program, much work remains 

to be done. Many infants do not receive timely follow-up and referrals due to shortages in properly trained healthcare providers, limited access to early intervention programs, and poor EHDI program 

integration with existing public healthcare systems. 

H.R. 1198 amends the Public Health Service Act (PHSA) to require that the HHS Secretary, acting through the Administrator of 

the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) assist in 

the recruitment, retention, education, and training of qualified personnel and healthcare providers; award grants/cooperative agreements to ensure prompt evaluation and diagnosis of children referred from screening programs and provide the appropriate educational, audiological, and medical interventions for children identified with hearing loss; assist in establishing and fostering familyVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00142 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
135 

to-family support mechanisms; assist in the development of efficient models to ensure that children who are identified with hearing loss through screening are not lost to follow-up by a qualified 

healthcare provider; and assist in ensuring an adequate supply of 

qualified personnel to meet the screening, evaluation, and early 

needs of children. 

In addition, H.R. 1198 requires the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to establish a postdoctoral fellowship program to foster research and development in the area of early hearing detection and intervention. 

H.R. 1198 also amends the definition of ‘‘early intervention’’ to 

require that families be given the opportunity to obtain the full 

range of early intervention services, educational and program 

placements, and other options for their child from highly qualified 

providers. 

Legislative History 

On February 27, 2007, H.R. 1198 was introduced by Representative Capps and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On February 28, 2007, H.R. 1198 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On March 11, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and forwarded the bill, amended, to the full Committee, by a voice vote. 

On March 13, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

met in an open markup session and H.R. 1198 was ordered favorably reported, as amended, by a voice vote. 

On April 8, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 1198 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–565). 

On April 8, 2008, H.R. 1198 passed the House, amended, under 

suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in 

favor. 

On April 9, 2008, H.R. 1198 was received in the Senate, read 

twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1198 in the 110th Congress. 

CYTOLOGY PROFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2008

H.R. 1237 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide revised standards for quality assurance in screening and evaluation of 

gynecologic cytology preparations, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

In 2005, the Federal Government launched a program to begin 

proficiency testing of pathologists and other laboratory professionals who perform Pap tests. The program was designed, however, using regulations written in 1992 to implement the Clinical 

Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA). In the 13 

years between the regulation and the program’s start, significant 

advancements in the science and practice of Pap tests have been 

made. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
136 

H.R. 1237 recognizes the deficiencies in the current program and 

would modernize the program’s approach so that diagnostic skills 

can be adequately assessed and improved through mandated educational testing that reflects complex and state-of-the-art practice. 

H.R. 1237 amends the Public Health Service Act to require the 

Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to revise national 

quality assurance standards to assure consistent performance by 

laboratories of valid and reliable cytology services. These include 

requirements that each clinical laboratory ensure that all individuals involved in screening and interpreting cytological preparations 

participate annually in an approved continuing medical education 

(CME) program in gynecologic cytology that provides each participant with gynecologic cytological preparations designed to improve 

locator, recognition, and interpretive skills; and maintain a record 

of program results. 

H.R. 1237 requires that the CME program be approved by the 

Accrediting Council for Continuing Medical Education or the American Academy of Continuing Medical Education. It also requires the 

Secretary to terminate individual proficiency testing that was in effect before enactment of this Act. In addition, H.R. 1237 requires 

that the laboratory director utilize CME testing results, along with 

other CLIA standards, to evaluate the skills of a pathologist or 

cytotech in interpreting Pap tests and, if necessary, take corrective 

action to address performance issues. H.R. 1237 requires that laboratory directors share CME results with the laboratory’s accrediting organization so that these results are used in monitoring Pap 

test quality and taken into account during the biannual inspection 

and accreditation of laboratories required under CLIA. 

Legislative History 

On February 28, 2007, H.R. 1237 was introduced by Representative Gordon and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On March 1, 2007, H.R. 1237 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On March 11, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and forwarded H.R. 1237 to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On March 13, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

met in an open markup session and H.R. 1237 was ordered favorably reported, as amended, by a voice vote. 

On April 8, 2008, H.R. 1237 was reported to the House, amended 

(H. Rept. 110–566). That same day, H.R. 1237 passed the House, 

as amended, under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, twothirds having voted in favor. 

On April 9, 2008, H.R. 1237 was received in the Senate, read 

twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1237 in the 110th Congress. 

ARTHRITIS PREVENTION, CONTROL, AND CURE ACT OF 2008

H.R. 1283 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for arthritis 

research and public health, and for other purposes. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
137 

Summary 

Forty-six million Americans report that a doctor told them they 

have arthritis or other rheumatic conditions. Arthritis is the most 

common cause of disability in the United States, limiting the activities of nearly 19 million adults. Arthritis is not merely limited to 

adults, though. A new CDC study estimates that 294,000 U.S. children under age 18 (or 1 in 250 children) have been diagnosed with 

arthritis or another rheumatologic condition. 

H.R. 1283 amends the Public Health Service Act to allow the 

HHS Secretary to develop and implement a National Arthritis Action Plan. As part of the plan, the HHS Secretary may conduct, 

support, and promote the coordination of arthritis and other rheumatic diseases research acting through the CDC Director. The bill 

allows the Secretary to award grants to support research related to 

the prevention and management of arthritis. H.R. 1283 allows the 

HHS Secretary to coordinate a national education and outreach 

program on arthritis and other rheumatic diseases. The legislation 

states that the Secretary may award grants to States to provide 

support for comprehensive arthritis control and prevention programs. 

H.R. 1283 states the Secretary, in coordination with the Director 

of the National Institutes of Health, may expand and intensify programs of the National Institutes of Health with respect to research 

and related activities concerning various forms of juvenile arthritis 

and related conditions. This legislation allows the Secretary, acting 

through the CDC Director, to award grants to support juvenile arthritis data collection and to support the development of a national 

juvenile arthritis population-based database. 

In addition, H.R. 1283 requires the Secretary to promote and 

support pediatric rheumatology training, including by requiring the 

Secretary to establish a loan repayment program; increasing the 

number and size of institutional training grants awarded to institutions to support pediatric rheumatology training; an expansion of 

public-private partnerships to encourage academic institutions, private sector entities, and health agencies to promote educational 

training and fellowship opportunities for pediatric rheumatologists; 

and requiring the Secretary to submit an annual report on the loan 

repayment program. 

Legislative History 

On March 1, 2007, H.R. 1283 was introduced by Representative 

Eshoo and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On March 5, 2007, H.R. 1283 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On September 27, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1283. 

On September 27, 2008, H.R. 1283 passed the House by unanimous consent, and was received in the Senate the same day. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1283 in the 110th Congress. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
138 

INDIAN HEALTH CARE IMPROVEMENT ACT AMENDMENTS OF 2007

(H.R. 1328, S. 1200) 

To amend the Indian Health Care Improvement Act to revise and 

extend that Act. 

Summary 

The United States has a longstanding trust responsibility to provide healthcare services to American Indians and Alaskan Natives 

and bears a duty to American Indians and Alaskan Natives due to 

its unique relationship founded on history, sovereignty, and culture. The Indian Health Care Improvement Act (IHCIA) (PL 94– 

437), is considered to be the cornerstone legal authority for the provision of health care to American Indians and Alaskan Natives. 

IHCIA declared that elevating the health status of the Indian population to a level at parity with the general U.S. population was 

this Nation’s policy and public health interest. 

IHCIA expired on September 30, 2000, and was extended 

through 2001 in anticipation that Congress would consider the reauthorization proposals pending in Congress. Authorization for 

IHCIA programs ended in fiscal year (FY) 2001. 

Since 2001, Congress has held hearings on the reauthorization 

proposals, but legislative proposals to reauthorize the Act have 

failed. As a result, IHCIA authorized programs have remained substantially the same since their creation in 1976. As a result of the 

failure to reauthorize IHCIA, the quality of health care for American Indians has stagnated and health disparities persist. 

This legislation would amend the IHCIA to: (1) raise the health 

status of Indians by 2010 to at least the levels set forth in the goals 

of Health People 2010 or successor objectives; and (2) allow Indians, to the greatest extent possible, to set their own healthcare priorities and establish goals that reflect their unmet needs. In addition, H.R. 1328 would amend the Social Security Act (SSA) title 

XVIII (Medicare), SSA title XIX (Medicaid), and SSA XXI (State 

Children’s Health Insurance Program [SCHIP]) to conform to this 

Act and would facilitate enrollment of American Indians and Alaskan Natives in these programs, and payment of American Indian 

and Alaskan Natives providers by these programs. 

Legislative History 

On March 6, 2007, H.R. 1328 was introduced by Representative 

Pallone. It was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, 

and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and 

Ways and Means. 

On June 7, 2007, H.R. 1328 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. That same day, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the 

measure for the purpose of determining additional resources necessary for the Indian tribes. 

On November 7, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health met in an 

open markup session forwarded H.R. 1328 to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On April 4, 2008, the Committee on Natural Resources reported 

H.R. 1328 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–564, Part 1). The 

Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Ways 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
139 

and Means were each granted extensions to consider the legislation 

ending no later than June 6, 2008. 

On June 6, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce and 

the Committee on Ways and Means were each discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1328. H.R. 1328 was then placed on the 

Union Calendar. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1328 in the 110th Congress. 

S. 1200, a related measure, was introduced on April 24, 2007, by 

Senator Dorgan and referred to the Senate Committee on Indian 

Affairs. 

On October 16, 2007, S. 1200 was reported to the Senate (S. 

Rept. 110–197) and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar. 

On February 26, 2008, S. 1200 passed the Senate, amended, by 

a rollcall vote: 83–10. 

On February 28, 2008, S. 1200 was received in the House and 

referred to the Committee on Natural Resources and in addition, 

the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on 

Ways and Means. 

No further action was taken on S. 1200 in the 110th Congress. 

STOP TUBERCULOSIS (TB) NOW ACT OF 2007

H.R. 1567 

To amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to provide increased assistance for the prevention, treatment, and control of tuberculosis, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 1567 amends the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to require 

the President to furnish assistance for tuberculosis (TB) prevention, treatment, and elimination. In addition, H.R. 1567 gives priority to activities described in the Stop TB Strategy (as defined by 

this Act) and authorizes the President, acting through the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development 

(USAID), to provide increased resources to the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Stop Tuberculosis Partnership to improve 

the capacity of countries with high TB rates and other affected 

countries to implement the Stop TB Strategy and specific strategies 

related to addressing drug resistant tuberculosis. H.R. 1567 authorizes FY2008–FY2009 appropriations for the President to carry 

activities to combat tuberculosis and set-asides from such amounts 

for global tuberculosis activities by the Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention (CDC). 

Legislative History 

On March 19, 2007, H.R. 1576 was introduced by Representative 

Engel. It was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in 

addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period 

to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of 

the committee concerned. 

On March 20, 2007, H.R. 1567 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
140 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 1567 was reported to the House, 

amended, by the Committee on Foreign Affairs (H. Rept. 110–381, 

Part 1). The Committee on Energy and Commerce was discharged 

from further consideration of the measure. 

On November 5, 2007, H.R. 1567 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On November 6, 2007, H.R. 1567 was received in the Senate, 

read twice, and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under 

General Orders, Calendar No. 472. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1567 in the 110th Congress. 

TORTURE VICTIMS RELIEF REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2007

H.R. 1678 

To amend the Torture Victims Relief Act of 1998 to authorize appropriations to provide assistance for domestic and foreign programs and centers for the treatment of victims of torture, and for 

other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 1678 amends the Torture Victims Relief Act of 1998 to authorize appropriations for FY2008–FY2009 to the Department of 

Health and Human Services (HHS) to provide grants to programs 

in the United States to cover the costs of services provided by domestic treatment centers in the rehabilitation of victims of torture, 

social and legal services, and research and training of health care 

providers outside of treatment centers. The appropriations also 

cover grants to treatment centers and programs in foreign countries that carry out projects and activities specifically designed to 

treat victims of torture, and the United Nations Voluntary Fund 

for Victims of Torture. 

Legislative History 

On March 26, 2007, H.R. 1678 was introduced by Representative 

Smith. It was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in 

addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period 

to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of 

the committee concerned. 

On March, 27, 2007, H.R. 1678 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On April 20, 2007, H.R. 1678 was reported to the House by the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs (H. Rept. 110–103). The Committee 

on Energy and Commerce was discharged from further consideration of the measure. 

On April 25, 2007, H.R. 1678 passed the House under suspension 

of the rules by a rollcall vote: 418–7. 

On April 26, 2007, H.R. 1678 was received in the Senate, read 

twice and referred to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. 

On October 9, 2007, H.R. 1678 was reported to the Senate without amendment (S. Rept. 110–194). H.R. 1678 was placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, Calendar No. 416. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1678 in the 110th Congress. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
141 

CHRISTOPHER AND DANA REEVE PARALYSIS ACT

(H.R. 1727) 

To enhance and further research into paralysis and to improve 

rehabilitation and the quality of life for persons living with paralysis and other physical disabilities, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

It is estimated that a quarter of a million Americans are currently living with spinal cord injuries and approximately 4 to 5 million Americans are living with paralysis of the extremities. There 

are an estimated 10,000 to 12,000 spinal cord injuries every year 

in the United States. 

H.R. 1727 states that the Director of the National Institutes of 

Health (NIH) may develop mechanisms to coordinate the paralysis 

research and rehabilitation activities of the Institutes and Centers 

of NIH in order to further advance such activities and avoid duplication of activities. H.R. 1727 permits the Director of NIH to make 

awards of grants to public or private entities to pay all or part of 

the cost of planning, establishing, improving, and providing basic 

operating support for consortia in paralysis research and requires 

that the Director shall designate each consortium, funded through 

such grants, as a Christopher and Dana Reeve Paralysis Research 

Consortium. This legislation permits the Secretary of Health and 

Human Services (HHS) to study the health challenges associated 

with paralysis and other physical disabilities and carry out projects 

and interventions to improve the quality of life and long-term 

health status of individuals with such conditions. H.R. 1727 permits the Secretary to award grants for activities related to paralysis, including to: (1) establish paralysis registries, and (2) disseminate information to the public. 

Legislative History 

On March 28, 2007, H.R. 1727 was introduced by Representative 

Baldwin and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On March 29, 2007, H.R. 1727 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On September 27, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1727. 

On September 27, 2007, the Committee met in an open markup 

session and H.R. 1727 was ordered favorably reported, amended, by 

a voice vote. 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 1727 was reported to the House, 

amended (H. Rept. 110–378). 

On October 15, 2007, H.R. 1727 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On October 16, 2007, H.R. 1727 was received in the Senate, read 

twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1727 in the 110th Congress. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
142 

FOOD ALLERGY AND ANAPHALAXIS MANAGEMENT ACT OF 2008

H.R. 2063 

To direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with the Secretary of Education, to develop a voluntary 

policy for managing the risk of food allergy and anaphylaxis in 

schools. 

Summary 

Each year, millions of Americans have allergic reactions to food. 

Although most food allergies cause relatively mild and minor symptoms, some food allergies can cause severe, even life-threatening, 

reactions. Following ingestion of food allergens, a person with food 

allergies may experience a severe, life-threatening allergic reaction 

called anaphylaxis. This can lead to a number of symptoms, including tingling sensation in the mouth; swelling of the tongue and 

throat; difficulty breathing; hives; vomiting; abdominal cramps; diarrhea; drop in blood pressure; loss of consciousness; and death. 

There is no cure for food allergies. Strict avoidance of food allergens—and early recognition and management of allergic reactions 

to food—are important measures to prevent serious health consequences since food allergies can be life threatening. The risk of 

an allergic student’s accidental exposure to foods can be reduced in 

the school setting if schools work with students, parents, and physicians to minimize risks and provide a safe educational environment for food-allergic students. 

H.R. 2063 directs the Secretary of HHS, in consultation with the 

Secretary of Education, to develop a voluntary risk-management 

policy for food allergy and anaphylaxis in schools and to make such 

policy available to local educational agencies and other interested 

parties. It directs that such policy address: a parental obligation to 

provide the school with information regarding a student’s food allergy and risk of anaphylaxis; creation of an individual healthcare 

plan tailored to each student with a documented risk for anaphylaxis; communication strategies between schools and emergency 

medical services; strategies to reduce the risk of exposure in classrooms and common areas; food allergy management training of 

school personnel; and authorization and training of school personnel to administer epinephrine if the school nurse is not immediately available. 

H.R. 2063 also specifies that State law is not preempted, either 

by the Act or by such policy, including any State law regarding 

self-administered medication for students at risk of anaphylaxis. 

Legislative History 

On April 26, 2007, H.R. 2063 was introduced by Representative 

Lowey. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 

and in addition to the Committee on Education and Labor, for a 

period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case 

for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction 

of the committee concerned. 

On April 30, 2007, H.R. 2063 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
143 

On March 11, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and forwarded H.R. 2063 to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On March 13, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

met in an open markup session and H.R. 2063 was ordered favorably reported, as amended, by a voice vote. 

On April 8, 2008, H.R. 2063 was reported to the House, amended, by the Committee on Energy and Commerce (H. Rept. 110–571, 

Part 1). The Committee on Education and Labor was discharged 

from further consideration of the measure. 

On April 8, 2008, H.R. 2063 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On April 9, 2008, H.R. 2063 was received in the Senate, read 

twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 2063 in the 110th Congress. 

WAKEFIELD ACT

(H.R. 2464) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide a means for 

continued improvement in emergency medical services for children. 

Summary 

Although Early Emergency Medical Services (EMS) systems and 

hospital emergency departments are widely assumed to be equally 

capable of caring for children and adults, in fact, in many EMS systems, children’s needs have been overlooked as services were developed for adult trauma and cardiac patients. 

H.R. 2464 reauthorizes the Emergency Medical Services for Children (EMSC) program within the U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS). The EMSC program began in 1984 and is 

designed to ensure state-of-the-art emergency medical care for ill or 

injured children and adolescents. It covers the entire spectrum of 

emergency medical care. The EMSC program provides grants to 

States to improve existing EMS systems and to schools of medicine 

to develop and evaluate improved procedures and protocols for 

treating children. 

Since its establishment more than 20 years ago, the EMSC program has driven major improvements in emergency care for children. Injury-related deaths among children have dropped by 40 

percent over that period. Enormous strides have been made in 

areas such as ensuring that all ambulances carry appropriate pediatric equipment and supplies, establishing transfer protocols to assure that severely injured children are sent to the facilities best 

able to care for them, and collecting and analyzing data on pediatric emergency care to inform future efforts towards improvement. 

Although much progress has been achieved, more remains to be 

done. H.R. 2464 amends the PHSA to extend by one year the 

length of time for which a grant may be awarded under the EMSC 

program. In addition, H.R. 2464 requires that the HHS Secretary 

support emergency medical services for children by supporting 

projects that: develop and present scientific evidence; promote exVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00151 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
144 

isting innovative technologies appropriate for the care of children; 

and provide information on health outcomes, effectiveness, and 

cost-effectiveness. H.R. 2464 directs that such projects strive to enhance the pediatric capability of emergency medical service systems; and be coordinated with all research, evaluations, and 

awards undertaken by the Federal Government related to emergency medical services for children. 

Legislative History 

On May 23, 2007, H.R. 2464 was introduced by Representative 

Matheson and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On May 23, 2007, H.R. 2464 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On March 11, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and forwarded H.R. 2464 to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On March 13, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

met in an open markup session and H.R. 2464 was ordered favorably reported, as amended, by a voice vote. 

On April 8, 2008, H.R. 2464 was reported to the House (H. Rept. 

110–568) and placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 350. 

On April 8, 2008, H.R. 2464 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 390–1. 

On April 9, 2008, H.R. 2464 was received in the Senate, read 

twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 2464 in the 110th Congress. 

PHYSICIAN WORKFORCE ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2008

H.R. 2583 

To amend title VII of the Public Health Service Act to establish 

a loan program for eligible hospitals to establish residency training 

programs. 

Summary 

Recent trends in the physician workforce demonstrate that the 

growth in the physician workforce is not keeping pace with general 

population growth. Certain areas of practice, including primary 

care and pediatrics, are expected to have more critical shortages in 

the future. In 2006, the American College of Physicians released a 

report entitled ‘The Impending Collapse of Primary Care Medicine 

and Its Implications for the State of the Nation’s Health Care.’ According to that report, as the demand has grown for primary care 

due to growth in the number of people with chronic diseases and 

long-term care needs of an aging population, there has been a decline in the number of medical students and training opportunities 

for primary care. This problem will only be further exacerbated by 

the decline of the physician workforce in years to come. 

Residency training programs are an integral way to attract physicians, particularly in hard-to-serve areas such as rural areas. In 

the 16th report of the Council of Graduate Medical Education, entitled, ‘Physician Workforce Policy Guidelines for the United States, 

2000–2020,’ the Council recommended that the number of physiVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00152 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
145 

cians entering residency training each year should be increased to 

27,000 by 2015 to meet projected demand of medical services. The 

Council recommends a multifaceted approach to achieve this increase, and one important part of that plan is to facilitate a modest 

increase in medical education and training capacity over the next 

decade. 

H. R. 2583 amends the Public Health Service Act to establish a 

loan program for public or non-profit hospitals to establish residency training programs in allopathic and osteopathic medicine, 

with a preference for hospitals located in rural areas. The list of 

eligible professions includes family medicine, internal medicine, obstetrics or gynecology, behavioral or mental health, and pediatrics. 

H.R. 2583 establishes the date to commence repayment as 18 

months, the repayment period as 24 months, and loan limits of 

$250,000. In addition, H.R. 2583 allows the Secretary to collect interest together with any other penalties on defaulted loans and authorizes appropriations for this program from FY09 to FY13. 

Legislative History 

On June 6, 2007, H.R. 2583 was introduced by Representative. 

Burgess and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

That same day, the measure was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On September 17, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in an open markup session and H.R. 2583 was ordered 

favorably reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 23, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 2583 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110– 

872). 

On September 23, 2008, H.R. 2583 passed the House, as amended, under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On September 25, 2008, H.R. 2583 was received in the Senate. 

On October 2, 2008, H.R. 2583 was read twice and referred to the 

Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 2583 in the 110th Congress. 

NATIONAL PAIN CARE POLICY ACT OF 2007

H.R. 2994 

To amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to pain 

care. 

Summary 

Pain is the most common reason Americans access the health 

care system and is a leading cause of disability and major contributor to health care costs. The National Center for Health Statistics 

estimates that 76.2 million, or one in every four Americans, have 

suffered from pain that lasts longer than 24 hours and millions 

more suffer from acute pain. Most painful conditions can be relieved with proper treatment, and providing adequate pain management is a crucial component of improving and maintaining quality of life for patients, survivors, and their loved ones. People in 

pain, however, often face significant barriers that can prevent propVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00153 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
146 

er assessment, diagnosis, treatment, and management of their 

pain. Left untreated, pain can decrease the quality of life and affect 

every aspect of daily living, including work, sleep, and social relations. 

H.R. 2994 requires the HHS Secretary to enter into an agreement with the IOM of the National Academies to convene a Conference on Pain and write a report summarizing the conclusions of 

the Conference. The purpose of the Conference shall be to increase 

the recognition of pain as a significant public health problem in the 

United States; evaluate the adequacy of assessment, diagnosis, 

treatment, and management of acute and chronic pain in the general population; identify racial, ethnic, gender, age, and other demographic groups that may be disproportionately affected by inadequacies in the system; identify barriers to appropriate pain care; 

and establish an agenda for action in both the public and private 

sectors that will reduce such barriers and significantly improve the 

state of pain care research, education, and clinical care in the 

United States. 

This legislation encourages the NIH Director, through the Pain 

Consortium, to aggressively expand research on the causes of and 

potential treatments for pain. In addition, the bill requires the Pain 

Consortium, or another entity the Director deems appropriate, to 

provide recommendations on pain research initiatives that could be 

funded through the Common Fund. 

H.R. 2994 also creates an Interagency Coordinating Committee 

charged with identifying critical gaps in pain research. It also provides authorization for a grant program to provide education and 

training to health care professionals in pain care. Finally, H.R. 

2994 requires that the Secretary establish and implement a national pain care education outreach and awareness campaign. The 

Secretary shall then prepare and submit a report to Congress evaluating the effectiveness of the public awareness campaign in educating the general public. 

Legislative History 

On July 11, 2007, H.R. 2994 was introduced by Representative 

Capps and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

That same day, H.R. 2994 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On September 17, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in an open markup session and H.R. 2994 was ordered 

favorably reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 23, 2008, H.R. 2994 was reported to the House, 

amended (H. Rept. 110–871). 

On September 24, 2008, H.R. 2994 passed the House, as amended, under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On September 25, 2008, H.R. 2994 was received in the Senate. 

On October 2, 2008, H.R. 2994 was read twice and referred to the 

Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 2994 in the 110th Congress. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
147 

THE TOM LANTOS PULMONARY HYPERTENSION RESEARCH AND

EDUCATION ACT OF 2008

H.R. 6568 

To direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to encourage research and carry out an educational campaign with respect 

to pulmonary hypertension, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is increased pressure in the pulmonary arteries. These arteries carry blood from the heart to the 

lungs to pick up oxygen. PH causes symptoms such as shortness 

of breath during routine activity, tiredness, chest pain, and a racing heartbeat. As the disease worsens, its symptoms may limit all 

physical activity. PH has no cure, but research for new treatments 

is ongoing. The earlier PH is treated, the easier it is to control. 

H.R. 6568 includes a sense of Congress that the Secretary of 

Health and Human Services, acting through the Director of the National Institutes of Health and the Director of the National Heart, 

Lung, and Blood Institute should continue aggressive work on pulmonary hypertension. H.R. 6568 requires that NIH’s biennial report to Congress include information on the status of pulmonary 

hypertension research at NIH. 

H.R. 6568 also requires the HHS Secretary, acting through the 

Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 

to carry out an educational campaign to increase public awareness 

of pulmonary hypertension. The bill also requires the HHS Secretary, acting through the Administrator of the Health Resources 

and Services Administration and the CDC Director, to carry out an 

educational campaign to increase awareness of pulmonary hypertension among health care providers. 

Finally, H.R. 6568 requires the Comptroller General of the 

United States to conduct a study on the coverage standards that 

apply to patients with pulmonary hypertension and submit a description of the study’s findings to the Congress by September 30, 

2009. 

Legislative History 

On July 22, 2008, H.R. 6568 was introduced by Representative 

Brady. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 

and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period 

to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of 

the committee concerned. 

On September 23, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in an open markup session and H.R. 6568 was ordered 

favorably reported by a voice vote. 

On September 25, 2008, H.R. 6568 passed the House, as amended, under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On September 26, H.R. 6568 was received in the Senate. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 6568 in the 110th Congress. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
148 

METH FREE FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES ACT

H.R. 6901 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for the establishment of a drug-free workplace information clearinghouse, to 

support residential methamphetamine treatment programs for 

pregnant and parenting women, to improve the prevention and 

treatment of methamphetamine addiction, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

Methamphetamine is a powerful and addictive central nervous 

system stimulant used to treat a limited number of medical conditions, including narcolepsy, attention deficit disorder/attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADD/ADHD), and obesity. Methamphetamine use can cause convulsions, stroke, cardiac arrhythmia, and 

hyperthermia. Chronic use can lead to irreversible brain and heart 

damage, psychotic behavior including paranoid ideation, visual and 

auditory hallucinations, and rages and violence. 

According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration (SAMHSA), illicit methamphetamine production 

and use are longstanding and severe problems throughout the 

country, and there are indications that abuse may be spreading. 

The National Institute of Justice states that methamphetamine use 

has spread to every State. 

Over the past 30 years, Congress has passed legislation designed 

to address the problem of illicit methamphetamine abuse and its 

production in clandestine labs, including legislation to regulate 

methamphetamine precursor chemicals, enhanced penalties for 

drug trafficking, and increased funding for methamphetamine-specific law enforcement programs. Recent congressional concern 

about the spreading use of methamphetamine fueled much of the 

legislative debate during the 109th Congress, culminating in the 

passage of the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005. 

H.R. 6901 amends the Public Health Service Act to improve prevention and treatment programs for methamphetamine addition. 

Further, the legislation: requires the Center for Substance Abuse 

Treatment Director to collaborate with professionals in the addiction field and health care providers on recognizing the signs of 

methamphetamine addiction and recognizing vulnerable populations for purposes of preventing and treating such addiction; expands the residential substance abuse treatment grant program to 

provide to pregnant and postpartum women access to substance 

abuse treatment; requires the HHS Secretary to expand, intensify, 

and coordinate efforts to provide treatment for methamphetamine 

addiction to pregnant and parenting women. 

In addition, H.R. 6901 gives priority in awarding grants under 

this Act to any entity that agrees to use the award for programs 

serving an area that: is a rural area, an area with a shortage of 

mental health professionals, or an area with a shortage of familybased substance abuse treatment options; and has high rates of addiction to methamphetamine or other drugs. 

H.R. 6901 also requires the Clearinghouse Director to provide information and educational materials to employers and employees 

about drug testing policies and programs; and expands grants for 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
149 

the prevention of methamphetamine and inhalant abuse and addiction to public and nonprofit entities who seek to develop studentdriven, adult-supervised methamphetamine awareness projects. 

Legislative History 

On September 15, 2008, H.R. 6901 was introduced by Representative Hooley and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On September 17, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in an open markup session and H.R. 6901 was ordered 

favorably reported by a voice vote. 

On September 23, 2008, H.R. 6901 was considered under suspension of the rules and on September 25, 2008, H.R. 6901 passed the 

House by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in favor thereof. 

On September 26, 2008, H.R. 6901 was received in the Senate. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 6901 in the 110th Congress. 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF NATIONAL BLACK HIV/AIDS

AWARENESS DAY

(H. Con. Res. 35) 

Supporting the goals and ideals of National Black HIV/AIDS 

Awareness Day 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 35 supports the goals and ideals of National Black 

HIV/AIDS Awareness Day as February 7 and recognizes the seventh anniversary of this commemoration. It also supports full and 

equitable funding for the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Modernization Act of 2006 and applauds the codification of the Minority 

AIDS Initiative within the reauthorization of the Ryan White 

CARE Act. 

Legislative History 

On January 18, 2007, H. Con. Res. 35 was introduced by Representative Lee and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On February 2, 2007, H. Con. Res. 35 was referred to the 

Subcommittee on Health. 

On February 5, 2007, H. Con. Res. 35 passed the House, as 

amended, under suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 396–0. 

On February 6, 2007, H. Con. Res. 35 was received in the Senate 

and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 35 in the 110th 

Congress. 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF AMERICAN HEART MONTH

(H. Con. Res. 52) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 52 supports the goals and ideals of American Heart 

Month during February. It also recognizes and reaffirms our Nation’s commitment to fighting heart disease by promoting awareness about its causes, risks, and prevention and by promoting new 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
150 

education programs, supporting research, and expanding access to 

medical treatment. 

Legislative History 

On January 31, 2007, H. Con. Res. 52 was introduced by Representative Millender-McDonald and referred to the Committee on 

Energy and Commerce. On February 2, 2007, H. Con. Res. 52 was 

referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On February 27, 2007, H. Con. Res. 52 was considered in the 

House under suspension of the rules. The yeas and nays were ordered and further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On February 28, 2007, H. Con. Res. 52 was considered as unfinished business and passed the House by rollcall vote: 412–0. 

On March 1, 2007, H. Con. Res. 52 was received in the Senate 

and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 52 in the 110th 

Congress. 

EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING THE NEED FOR

ADDITIONAL RESEARCH INTO THE CHRONIC NEUROLOGICAL CONDITION HYDROCEPHALUS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

(H. Con. Res. 74) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 74 commends the Director of the National Institutes 

of Health (NIH) for working with leading scientists and researchers 

to organize the first-ever NIH conference on hydrocephalus (a neurological condition characterized by the abnormal buildup of cerebrospinal fluids in the ventricles of the brain). It also urges the Director to continue the current collaboration with respect to hydrocephalus among national research institutes. 

Legislative History 

On February 16, 2007, H. Con. Res. 74 was introduced by Representative Mike Thompson and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On February 27, 2007, H. Con. Res. 74 was 

referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On February 27, 2007, H. Con. Res. 74 passed the House under 

suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in 

favor. 

On February 28, 2007, H. Con. Res. 74 was received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 74 in the 110th 

Congress. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
151 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF A LONG-TERM CARE

AWARENESS WEEK

(H. Con. Res. 133) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 133 supports the goals and ideals of a Long-Term 

Care Awareness Week from November 4th to November 10th. It 

also encourages the Secretary of Health and Human Services to 

continue working to educate people in the United States about 

long-term care. 

Legislative History 

On April 26, 2007, H. Con. Res. 133 was introduced by Representative Herseth Sandlin and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On April 30, 2007, H. Con. Res. 133 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On October 15, 2007, H. Con. Res. 133 passed the House under 

suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in 

favor. 

On October 16, 2007, H. Con. Res. 133 was received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 133 in the 110th 

Congress. 

EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE CONGRESS THAT THERE SHOULD BE

ESTABLISHED A BEBE MOORE CAMPBELL NATIONAL MINORITY MENTAL HEALTH AWARENESS MONTH TO ENHANCE PUBLIC AWARENESS

OF MENTAL ILLNESS, ESPECIALLY WITHIN MINORITY COMMUNITIES

(H. Con. Res. 134) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 134 expresses the sense of Congress that July is an 

appropriate month to designate Bebe Moore Campbell National Minority Mental Health Awareness Month to enhance public awareness of mental illness and mental illness among minorities. It also 

states there is an important need for improved access to care, 

treatment, and services for those diagnosed with severe and persistent mental health disorders. 

Legislative History 

On April 30, 2007, H. Con. Res. 134 was introduced by Representative Wynn and referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. On April 30, 2007, H. Con. Res. 134 was referred to the 

Subcommittee on Health. 

On May 19, 2008, H. Con. Res. 134 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules. Objection was heard regarding the 

presence of a quorum; further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On May 21, 2008, H. Con. Res. 134 was considered as unfinished 

business and passed the House, as amended, by a voice vote, twothirds having voted in favor. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
152 

On June 2, 2008, H. Con. Res. 134 was received in the Senate 

and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 134 in the 110th 

Congress. 

EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS IN SUPPORT OF FURTHER RESEARCH AND ACTIVITIES TO INCREASE PUBLIC AWARENESS, PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION, DIAGNOSIS, AND TREATMENT OF DANDY-WALKER SYNDROME AND HYDROCEPHALUS

(H. Con. Res. 163) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 163 expresses the sense of Congress that the Director of the National Institutes of Health should continue the current 

collaboration of agencies with respect to Dandy-Walker syndrome. 

It also urges further research into the epidemiology, diagnosis, 

pathophysiology, disease burden, and improved treatment of 

Dandy-Walker syndrome and hydrocephalus. Finally, it calls for 

greater public awareness and professional education regarding 

Dandy-Walker syndrome. 

Legislative History 

On May 24, 2007, H. Con. Res. 163 was introduced by Representative Wilson and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On May 24, 2007, H. Con. Res. 163 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On June 24, 2008, H. Con. Res. 163 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules. Objection was heard regarding the 

presence of a quorum; further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On June 26, 2008, H. Con. Res. 163 was considered as unfinished 

business and passed the House, as amended, by a voice vote, twothirds having voted in favor. 

On June 27, 2008, H. Con. Res. 163 was received in the Senate 

and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions. 

On September 22, 2008, the Senate agreed to H. Con. Res. 163 

by unanimous consent. 

RECOGNIZING THE NEED TO PURSUE RESEARCH INTO THE CAUSES, A

TREATMENT, AND AN EVENTUAL CURE FOR IDIOPATHIC PULMONARY

FIBROSIS, SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF NATIONAL IDIO- PATHIC PULMONARY FIBROSIS AWARENESS WEEK, AND FOR OTHER

PURPOSES

(H. Con. Res. 182) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 182 recognizes the need to pursue research into the 

causes, a treatment, and an eventual cure for idiopathic pulmonary 

fibrosis. It also supports the work of advocates and organizations 

in educating, supporting, and providing hope for individuals who 

suffer from idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Finally, it supports the 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
153 

goals and ideals of a National Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis 

Awareness Week. 

Legislative History 

On July 12, 2007, H. Con. Res. 182 was introduced by Representative Deal and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H. Con. Res. 182 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On October 15, 2007, H. Con. Res. 182 was considered in the 

House under suspension of the rules. The yeas and nays were demanded and further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On October 16, 2007, H. Con. Res. 182 was considered as unfinished business and passed the House by a rollcall vote: 414–0. 

On October 17, 2007, H. Con. Res. 182 was received in the Senate, considered, and agreed to by unanimous consent. 

SUPPORTING THE OBSERVANCE OF BREAST CANCER AWARENESS

MONTH, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

(H. Con. Res. 230) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 230 supports the observance of Breast Cancer 

Awareness Month in order to provide a special opportunity to offer 

education on the importance of monthly breast self-examinations 

and annual mammograms. It also commends breast cancer survivors and the efforts of professionals and community organizations 

that work to combat breast cancer. 

Legislative History 

On October 10, 2007, H. Con. Res. 230 was introduced by Representative Brown-Waite and referred to the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce. That same day, H. Con. Res. 230 was referred to 

the Subcommittee on Health. 

On October 29, 2007, H. Con. Res. 230 passed the House under 

suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in 

favor. 

On October 30, 2007, H. Con. Res. 230 was received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 230 in the 110th 

Congress. 

EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR THE DESIGNATION OF AUGUST 2008 AS NATIONAL HEAT STROKE AWARENESS MONTH TO RAISE AWARENESS

AND ENCOURAGE PREVENTION OF HEAT STROKE

(H. Con. Res. 296) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 296 supports the designation of August 2008 as National Heat Stroke Awareness Month to provide an opportunity to 

educate the people of the United States about heat stroke. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
154 

Legislative History 

On February 13, 2008, H. Con. Res. 296 was introduced by Representative Boozman and referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. That same day, H. Con. Res. 296 was referred to the 

Subcommittee on Health. 

On July 30, 2008, H. Con. Res. 296 passed the House, as amended, under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On August 1, 2008, H. Con. Res. 296 was received in the Senate 

and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions. 

On September 22, 2008, H. Con. Res. 296 passed the Senate by 

unanimous consent. 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF NATIONAL CYSTIC FIBROSIS

AWARENESS MONTH

(H. Con. Res. 299) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 299 honors the goals and ideals of National Cystic 

Fibrosis Awareness Month during May. It also promotes public 

awareness and understanding of cystic fibrosis. Finally, it urges 

support for research to find a cure for cystic fibrosis by fostering 

enhanced research programs and expanded public-private partnerships. 

Legislative History 

On February 14, 2008, H. Con. Res. 299 was introduced by Representative Markey and referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. That same day, H. Con. Res. 299 was referred to the 

Subcommittee on Health. 

On July 15, 2008, H. Con. Res. 299 passed the House, as amended under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On July 16, 2008, H. Con. Res. 299 was received in the Senate 

and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 230 in the 110th 

Congress. 

SUPPORTING THE OBSERVANCE OF COLORECTAL CANCER AWARENESS

MONTH, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

(H. Con. Res. 302) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 302 supports the observance of Colorectal Cancer 

Awareness Month during March in order to provide a special opportunity to offer education on the importance of early detection 

and screening. It also encourages organizations and health care 

practitioners to earn a blue star by supporting early identification 

and removal of pre-cancerous polyps. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
155 

Legislative History 

On February 25, 2008, H. Con. Res. 302 was introduced by Representative Granger and referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. That same day, H. Con. Res. 302 was referred to the 

Subcommittee on Health. 

On March 31, 2008, H. Con. Res. 302 passed the House under 

suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 371–0. 

On April 1, 2008, H. Con. Res. 302 was received in the Senate 

and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 302 in the 110th 

Congress. 

EXPRESSING CONGRESSIONAL SUPPORT FOR THE GOALS AND IDEALS

OF NATIONAL HEALTH CARE DECISIONS DAY

(H. Con. Res. 323) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 323 supports the goals and ideals of National 

Health Care Decision Day on April 16, 2008. It also encourages 

those 18 years of age and older to prepare advance directives. 

Legislative History 

On April 8, 2008, H. Con. Res. 323 was introduced by Representative Gingrey and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On April 9, 2008, H. Con. Res. 323 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On April 22, 2008, H. Con. Res. 323 passed the House under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in 

favor. 

On April 23, 2008, H. Con. Res. 323 was received in the Senate 

and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders—Calendar No. 713. 

No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 323 in the 110th 

Congress. 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF NATIONAL WOMEN’S HEALTH

WEEK, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

(H. Con. Res. 331) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 331 supports the goals and ideals of National Women’s Health Week from May 11 through May 17. It also recognizes 

the importance of federally funded programs that provide research 

and collect data on common diseases in women. 

Legislative History 

On April 17, 2008, H. Con. Res. 331 was introduced by Representative Hinchey and referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. That same day, H. Con. Res. 331 was referred to the 

Subcommittee on Health. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
156 

On May 14, 2008, H. Con. Res. 331 passed the House under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in 

favor. 

On May 19, 2008, H. Con. Res. 331 was received in the Senate 

and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 331 in the 110th 

Congress. 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF NATIONAL SUDDEN CARDIAC

ARREST AWARENESS MONTH

(H. Con. Res. 393) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 393 supports the goals and ideals of ‘‘National Sudden Cardiac Arrest Awareness Month’’ during October. It also supports efforts to educate people about sudden cardiac arrest and to 

raise awareness about the risk of sudden cardiac arrest, identifying 

warning signs, and the need to seek medical attention in a timely 

manner. 

Legislative History 

On July 22, 2008, H. Con. Res. 393 was introduced by Representative Pickering and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H. Con. Res. 393 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On September 23, 2008, H. Con. Res. 393 was considered in the 

House under suspension of the rules. Objection was heard regarding the presence of a quorum; further proceedings on the motion 

were postponed. 

On September 25, 2008, H. Con. Res. 393 was considered as unfinished business and passed the House by a voice vote, two-thirds 

having voted in favor. 

On September 26, 2008, H. Con. Res. 393 was received in the 

Senate. 

On October 2, 2008, H. Con. Res. 393 was referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. 

No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 393 in the 110th 

Congress. 

RECOGNIZING THE 10TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF

THE MINORITY AIDS INITIATIVE

(H. Con. Res. 426) 

Summary 

H. Con. Res. 426 recognizes and commemorates the 10th anniversary of the establishment of the Minority AIDS Initiative. It 

also supports the continuing efforts of the Minority AIDS Initiative 

to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS and urges effective, compassionate 

treatment and care to individuals affected by HIV/AIDS. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
157 

Legislative History 

On September 24, 2008, H. Con. Res. 426 was introduced by Representative Waters and referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. 

On September 27, 2008, H. Con. Res. 426 was considered in the 

House under unanimous consent. Mr. Pallone offered two amendments to make sundry and clarifying changes to the resolution. The 

amendments and then the resolutions were agreed to without objection. 

On September 29, 2008, H. Con. Res. 426 was received in the 

Senate. 

On October 2, 2008, H. Con. Res. 426 passed the Senate by unanimous consent. 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF NATIONAL EOSINOPHIL

AWARENESS WEEK, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

(H. Res. 296) 

Summary 

H. Res. 296 supports the goals and ideals of National Eosinophil 

Awareness Week and its designation as the third week in May. It 

also encourages health care providers and the American Partnership for Eosinophilic Disorders to increase education and awareness regarding eosinophilic disorders. 

Legislative History 

On April 16, 2007, H. Res. 296 was introduced by Representative 

Larson and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On May 15, 2007, H. Res. 296 passed the House under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WITH

RESPECT TO LUNG CANCER AS A PUBLIC HEALTH PRIORITY AND THE

RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE LUNG CANCER PROGRESS REVIEW

GROUP OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE

(H. Res. 335) 

Summary 

H. Res. 335 recognizes lung cancer as a public health priority 

and the importance of taking steps toward reducing the lung cancer mortality rate by at least half by 2015. It also acknowledges the 

importance of the recommendations of the Lung Cancer Progress 

Review Group of the National Cancer Institute. 

Legislative History 

On April 24, 2007, H. Res. 335 was introduced by Representative 

Capps and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On April 25, 2007, H. Res. 335 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On November 13, 2007, H. Res. 335 passed the House, as amended, under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
158 

EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THAT

THERE SHOULD BE AN INCREASED COMMITMENT SUPPORTING THE

DEVELOPMENT OF INNOVATIVE ADVANCED IMAGING TECHNOLOGIES

FOR PROSTATE CANCER DETECTION AND TREATMENT

(H. Res. 353) 

Summary 

H. Res. 353 expresses the sense of the House of Representatives 

that there should be increased support for research and development of advanced imaging technologies for prostate cancer detection and treatment. 

Legislative History 

On May 1, 2007, H. Res. 353 was introduced by Representative 

Cummings and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H. Res. 353 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On June 24, 2008, H. Res. 353 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules. Objections was heard regarding the 

presence of a quorum; further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On June 26, 2008, H. Res. 353 was considered as unfinished 

business and passed the House, as amended, by a voice vote, twothirds having voted in favor. 

On July 9, 2008, Representative Hill asked unanimous consent 

that H. Res. 353, which was adopted by the House on June 26, 

2008, be considered to have been adopted with the corrected text 

that was placed at the desk, and that the resolution be re-engrossed in that corrected form. This motion was agreed to without 

objection. 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF NATIONAL OSTEOPOROSIS

AWARENESS AND PREVENTION MONTH

(H. Res. 369) 

Summary 

H. Res. 369 supports the goals and ideals of National 

Osteoporosis Awareness and Prevention Month during May. It also 

urges the people of the United States to observe appropriate programs and activities with respect to osteoporosis. 

Legislative History 

On May 3, 2007, H. Res. 369 was introduced by Representative 

Berkley and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

That same day, H. Res. 369 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On May 19, 2008, H. Res. 369 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules. Objection was heard regarding the 

presence of a quorum; further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On May 21, 2008, H. Res. 369 was considered as unfinished business and passed the House, as amended, by a voice vote, two-thirds 

having voted in favor. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
159 

EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THAT

THERE SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED A NATIONAL CANCER RESEARCH

MONTH, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

(H. Res. 448) 

Summary 

H. Res. 448 expresses the sense that the U.S. House of Representatives should establish May as the National Cancer Research 

Month. It also recognizes the American Association of Cancer for 

its invaluable contributions to preventing and curing cancer. 

Legislative History 

On May 24, 2007, H. Res. 448 was introduced by Representative 

Matheson and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H. Res. 448 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On October 15, 2007, H. Res. 448 passed the House under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in 

favor. 

SUPPORTING EFFORTS TO INCREASE CHILDHOOD CANCER AWARENESS, 

TREATMENT, AND RESEARCH

(H. Res. 470) 

Summary 

H. Res. 470 resolves that Congress should support public and private sector efforts to promote awareness about the incidence of cancer among children, the signs and symptoms of cancer in children, 

treatment options, and long-term follow-up. It also states that Congress should support increased public and private investment in 

childhood cancer research to improve prevention, diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation, post-treatment monitoring, and long-term survival. 

Legislative History 

On June 7, 2007, H. Res. 470 was introduced by Representative 

Pryce and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

That same day, H. Res. 470 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Health. 

On September 25, 2007, H. Res. 470 passed the House under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in 

favor. 

EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WITH

RESPECT TO DIAMOND-BLACKFAN ANEMIA

(H. Res. 524) 

Summary 

H. Res. 524 recognizes that the identification of DiamondBlackfan Anemia (‘‘DBA’’) may identify implications of cancer predisposition and serve as an important model for understanding 

human development and the molecular basis for certain birth deVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00167 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
160 

fects. It also encourages research efforts to further understand 

ribosomal protein deficiencies in rare inherited diseases and to advance the treatment options available to those with DBA. 

Legislative History 

On June 27, 2007, H. Res. 524 was introduced by Representative 

McCarthy and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H. Res. 524 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On October 15, 2007, H. Res. 524 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF CHILDREN’S HEALTH MONTH

(H. Res. 760) 

Summary 

H. Res. 760 supports the goals and ideals of Children’s Health 

Month during October. It also recognizes and reaffirms our Nation’s commitment to providing access to health care, ensuring preventative care, seeking cures for debilitating diseases and chronic 

conditions, and promoting healthy living habits for America’s children. 

Legislative History 

On October 18, 2007, H. Res. 760 was introduced by Representative Castor and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On November 8, 2007, H. Res. 760 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On November 13, 2007, H. Res. 760 passed the House, as amended, under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

RECOGNIZING THE NEED TO PURSUE RESEARCH INTO THE CAUSES, A

TREATMENT, AND AN EVENTUAL CURE FOR PRIMARY LATERAL SCLEROSIS, SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF PRIMARY LATERAL

SCLEROSIS AWARENESS MONTH, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

(H. Res. 896) 

Summary 

H. Res. 896 recognizes the need to continue research into the 

causes, treatment, and an eventual cure for primary lateral sclerosis. It also supports the designation of February 2009 as an appropriate time to recognize ‘‘Primary Lateral Sclerosis Awareness 

Month.’’ 

Legislative History 

On December 19, 2007, H. Res. 896 was introduced by Representative Baca and referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. That same day, H. Res. 896 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
161 

On July 30, 2008, H. Res. 896 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF AMERICAN HEART MONTH

AND NATIONAL WEAR RED DAY

(H. Res. 972) 

Summary 

H. Res. 972 supports the goals and ideals of ‘‘American Heart 

Month’’ and ‘‘National Wear Red Day.’’ It also recognizes and reaffirms our commitment to fighting heart disease and stroke by promoting awareness about its causes, risks, and prevention, supporting research, and expanding access to medical treatment. 

Legislative History 

On February 12, 2008, H. Res. 972 was introduced by Representative Capps and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H. Res. 972 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On February 13, 2008, H. Res. 972 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules. The yeas and nays were demanded 

and further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On February 14, 2008, H. Res. 972 was considered as unfinished 

business and passed the House by a rollcall vote: 389–0. 

RECOGNIZING MARCH 6, 2008, AS THE FIRST-EVER WORLD GLAUCOMA

DAY, ESTABLISHED TO INCREASE AWARENESS OF GLAUCOMA, WHICH

IS THE SECOND LEADING CAUSE OF PREVENTABLE BLINDNESS IN

THE UNITED STATES AND WORLDWIDE

(H. Res. 981) 

Summary 

H. Res. 981 recognizes the first-ever World Glaucoma Day as 

March 6, 2008. It also supports the efforts of the National Eye Institute within the National Institutes of Health to continue research on the causes of glaucoma, including genetic and environmental risk factors, glaucoma prevention, the relationships between damage to the optic nerve and loss of vision, societal and individual impacts, diagnostics, and treatment to save and potentially restore sight. 

Legislative History 

On February 13, 2008, H. Res. 981 was introduced by Representative Baldwin and referred to the House Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. That same day, H. Res. 981 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On April 22, 2008, H. Res. 981 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 387–0. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
162 

DESIGNATING THE MONTH OF MARCH 2008 AS MRSA AWARENESS

MONTH

(H. Res. 988) 

Summary 

H. Res. 988 recognizes the importance of reducing the transmission of infections in hospitals and ensuring appropriate use and 

utilization of antibiotics to meet patient and public health needs. 

It also recognizes the importance of raising awareness of MRSA 

and methods of preventing MRSA infections. 

Legislative History 

On February 14, 2008, H. Res. 988 was introduced by Representative Matheson and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H. Res. 988 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On September 23, 2008, H. Res. 988 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules. Objection was heard regarding the 

presence of a quorum; further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On September 25, 2008, H. Res. 988 was considered as unfinished business and passed the House, as amended, by a voice vote, 

two-thirds having voted in favor. 

REDUCING MATERNAL MORTALITY BOTH AT HOME AND ABROAD

(H. Res. 1022) 

Summary 

H. Res. 1022 affirms the House of Representatives’ commitment 

to promoting maternal health and child survival both at home and 

abroad through greater international investment and participation. 

It also recognizes maternal health and child survival as fundamental to the well-being of families and societies, and to global development and prosperity. 

Legislative History 

On February 5, 2008, H. Res. 1022 was introduced by Representative Capps and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H. Res. 1022 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On May 19, 2008, H. Res. 1022 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules. Objection was heard regarding the 

presence of a quorum; further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On May 21, 2008, H. Res. 1022 was considered as unfinished 

business and passed the House, as amended, by a voice vote, twothirds having voted in favor. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
163 

SUPPORTING THE WE DON’T SERVE TEENS CAMPAIGN

(H. Res. 1042) 

Summary 

H. Res. 1042 supports the goals and ideals of campaigns working 

to prevent underage drinking of alcoholic beverages, such as the 

We don’t Serve Teens Campaign. 

Legislative History 

On March 12, 2008, H. Res. 1042 was introduced by Representative Bono Mack and referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. That same day, H. Res. 1042 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On September 23, 2008, H. Res. 1042 passed the House, as 

amended, under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds 

having voted in favor. 

RECOGNIZING NATIONAL NURSES WEEK ON MAY 6 THROUGH MAY 12, 

2008

(H. Res. 1086) 

Summary 

H. Res. 1086 recognizes the significant contributions of nurses to 

the health care system of the United States. It also supports the 

goals and ideals of National Nurses Week from May 6 to May 12. 

Legislative History 

On April 8, 2008, H. Res. 1086 was introduced by Representative 

Bernice Johnson and referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. On April 9, 2008, H. Res. 1086 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On May 6, 2008, H. Res. 1086 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules. Objection was heard regarding the 

presence of a quorum; further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On May 8, 2008, H. Res. 1086 was considered as unfinished business and passed the House by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted 

in favor. 

EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR THE DESIGNATION OF APRIL 2008 AS NATIONAL AUTISM AWARENESS MONTH AND SUPPORTING EFFORTS TO

DEVOTE NEW RESOURCES TO RESEARCH INTO THE CAUSES AND

TREATMENT OF AUTISM AND TO IMPROVE TRAINING AND SUPPORT

FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH AUTISM AND THOSE WHO CARE FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH AUTISM

(H. Res. 1106) 

Summary 

H. Res. 1106 expresses support for the designation of April as 

‘National Autism Awareness Month’. It also supports the goal of 

devoting new resources to researching the root causes of autism, 

identifying the best methods of early intervention and treatment, 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
164 

expanding programs for individuals with autism across their lifespans, and promoting understanding of the special needs of people 

with autism. 

Legislative History 

On April 14, 2008, H. Res. 1106 was introduced by Representative Reichert and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On April 15, 2008, H. Res. 1106 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On May 19, 2008, H. Res. 1106 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules. Objection was heard regarding the 

presence of a quorum; further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On May 21, 2008, H. Res. 1106 was considered as unfinished 

business and passed the House by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THAT

THERE SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED A NATIONAL BRAIN TUMOR AWARENESS MONTH, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

(H. Res. 1124) 

Summary 

H. Res. 1124 expresses the sense of the House of Representatives 

that May should be National Brain Tumor Awareness Month. It 

also applauds the actions of those who strive to combat and raise 

public awareness of brain tumors and brain cancer. 

Legislative History 

On April 22, 2008, H. Res. 1124 was introduced by Representative Schakowsky and referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. That same day, H. Res. 1124 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On May 19, 2008, H. Res. 1124 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules. Objection was heard regarding the 

presence of a quorum; further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On May 21, 2008, H. Res. 1124 was considered as unfinished 

business and passed the House, as amended, by a voice vote, twothirds having voted in favor. 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF MENTAL HEALTH MONTH

(H. Res. 1134) 

Summary 

H. Res. 1134 supports the goals and ideals of Mental Health 

Month as May 2008 in order to emphasize scientific facts and findings regarding mental health and to remove the stigma associated 

therewith. It also supports the findings of the President’s Commission on Mental Health that the Nation’s failure to prioritize mental 

health is a national tragedy. Further, it encourages all organizations and health practitioners to use Mental Health Month as an 

opportunity to promote mental well-being and awareness, ensure 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
165 

access to appropriate services, and support overall quality of life for 

those with mental illness. 

Legislative History 

On April 23, 2008, H. Res. 1134 was introduced by Representative Napolitano and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H. Res. 1134 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On May 14, 2008, H. Res. 1134 was considered in the House 

under suspension of the rules. Objection was heard regarding the 

presence of a quorum; further proceedings on the motion were postponed. 

On May 14, 2008, H. Res. 1134 was considered as unfinished 

business and passed the House by a rollcall vote: 421–0. 

SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF TAY-SACHS AWARENESS

MONTH

(H. Res. 1333) 

Summary 

H. Res. 1333 supports the goals and ideals of Tay-Sachs Awareness Month and encourages and supports education and research 

efforts with respect to Tay-Sachs disease. 

Legislative History 

On July 10, 2008, H. Res. 1333 was introduced by Representative 

Arcuri and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On September 25, 2008, H. Res. 1333 passed the House, as 

amended, under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds 

having voted in favor. 

RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE HOUSE THAT THERE

SHOULD BE AN INCREASED PUBLIC AND PRIVATE COMMITMENT

PRIORITIZING PREVENTION AND PUBLIC HEALTH FOR ALL PEOPLE IN

THE UNITED STATES

(H. Res. 1381) 

Summary 

H. Res. 1381 recognizes that in order to reduce the disease burden and health care costs associated with preventable disease and 

injury, it is imperative that this Nation strengthen its public 

health system to encourage all persons in the United States to obtain the proper information and educational resources they need to 

make healthier choices and live healthier lives; and protect all people in this country from health threats beyond their control, such 

as bioterrorism, natural disasters, infectious disease outbreaks, and 

environmental hazards. It also encourages the creation of public 

health strategies in the public and private sectors to improve the 

health of all people in the United States regardless of race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status. Finally, it supports public and private partnerships focusing on the prevention of disease and injury, 

and encourages community-based programs to support healthy lifeVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00173 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
166 

styles, including those that promote proper nutrition and increased 

access to physical activity. 

Legislative History 

On July 29, 2008, H. Res. 1381 was introduced by Representative 

Roybal-Allard and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. That same day, H. Res. 1381 was referred to the Subcommittee on Health. 

On September 23, 2008, H. Res. 1381 passed the House, as 

amended, under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds 

having voted in favor. 

EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR DESIGNATION OF THE MONTH OF OCTOBER

AS AMERICAN PHARMACISTS MONTH AND EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF

THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THAT ALL PEOPLE IN THE UNITED

STATES SHOULD JOIN IN CELEBRATING OUR NATION’S PHARMACISTS

FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE HEALTH AND WELL-BEING OF

OUR CITIZENS

(H. Res. 1437) 

Summary 

H. Res. 1437 supports the designation of ‘American Pharmacists 

Month’ with the theme ‘Know Your Medicine/Know Your Pharmacist’, encouraging people in the United States to identify a pharmacist as their own, to introduce themselves to that pharmacist, 

and to open a dialogue by asking questions. 

Legislative History 

On September 15, 2008, H. Res. 1437 was introduced by Representative Berry and referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce. 

On September 27, 2008, H. Res. 1437 was considered by unanimous consent and agreed to without objection. 

OVERSIGHT OR INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES

PDUFA Reauthorization 

On April 17, 2007, the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing 

on the reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act. With 

PDUFA set to expire September 30, 2007, swift Congressional action was needed to prevent personnel disruptions at the FDA. The 

Subcommittee met to review FDA’s and interest groups’ proposals 

for PDUFA reauthorization. 

Biosimilar Policy 

On May 2, 2007, the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing entitled, ‘‘Assessing the Impact of a Safe and Equitable Biosimilar 

policy in the United States.’’ The hearing addressed regulatory, 

safety, and intellectual property concerns associated with the development and approval of generic biologic drugs. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
167 

Drug Safety 

On May 9, 2007, the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing to 

address the safety of our Nation’s drug supply and the ability of 

the FDA to adequately ensure the safety of our Nation’s drugs. 

MDUFMA Reauthorization 

On May 16, 2007, the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing 

on the reauthorization of the Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act. With MDUFMA authorization set to expire on September 30, 2007 FDA and other private interest groups testified on 

proposed changes to the MDUFMA program. 

9/11 Health Effects 

On September 18, 2007, the Subcommittee held an oversight 

hearing entitled, ‘‘Answering the Call: Medical Monitoring and 

Treatment of 9/11 Health Effects.’’ Following the September 11th 

attacks on the World Trade Center, Federal funds were allocated 

for the creation of the WTC health programs to treat those exposed 

to health hazards as a result of the attack. The hearing examined 

concerns GAO raised regarding access and services and GAO’s suggestion for more Federal funding for the program. 

STEM CELL SCIENCE

On May 8, 2008 the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on 

stem cell science and Federal policy. The hearing examined the 

current Federal policy limiting Federal funding for human and embryonic stem cell research to existing stem cell lines where the life 

and death decision has already been made. 

NIH Reform 

On September 9, 2008 the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on the implementation of the NIH Reform Act of 2006. Dr. 

Elias Zerhouni, then director of the National Institutes of Health, 

submitted testimony providing an update on how the Act has been 

implemented at the Institutes. 

HEALTH FINANCE

LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES

Public Law 110–54 (H.R. 2429, H.R. 3007, S. 1767, S. 1768) 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide an exception to the 60-day limit on Medicare reciprocal billing arrangements between two physicians during the period in which one of 

the physicians is ordered to active duty as a member of a reserve 

component of the Armed Forces. 

Summary 

H.R. 2429 amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security 

Act to create an exception to the 60-day limit on Medicare reciprocal billing arrangements in the case of arrangements between 

two physicians over a longer continuous period during all of which 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
168 

one of them is ordered to active duty as a member of a reserve component of the armed forces. This exception is applied to medical 

services provided before January 1, 2008. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 2429 was introduced on May 22, 2007 by Representative 

Mike Thompson. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

On May 23, 2007, H.R. 2429 passed the House under suspension 

of the rules by a rollcall vote: 422–0, and 1 present. 

On May 24, 2007, it was referred to the Senate Committee on Finance. On July 24, 2007, the Senate Committee on Finance was 

discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2429 by unanimous 

consent. That same day, the bill passed the Senate without amendment by unanimous consent, clearing it for the White House. 

H.R. 2429 was presented to the President on July 27, 2007, and 

signed by the President on August 3, 2007 (Public Law 110–54). 

PROTECTING THE MEDICAID SAFETY NET ACT OF 2008

PUBLIC LAW 110–252 (H.R. 2642, H.R. 5613) 

Summary 

H.R. 5613 would place a moratorium until March 2009 on seven 

Medicaid regulations issued by the Department of Health and 

Human Services. This would allow time for Congress to fully examine their merit. This legislation would delay the implementation of 

the following regulations: rehabilitation services, targeted case 

management (TCM), school-based transportation and outreach, provider taxes, hospital outpatient (OPD), graduate medical education 

(GME), and intergovernmental transfer (IGT). According to the 

Congressional Budget Office, these regulations would together reduce Federal Medicaid funding to States for vital programs and 

services by nearly $20 billion over the next five years. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 5613 was introduced on March 13, 2008, by Representative 

Dingell and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On March 14, 2008, the measure was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On April 3, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing on 

H.R. 5613. 

On April 9, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and H.R. 5613 was forwarded to the full Committee, amended, by a voice vote. 

On April 16, 2008, the full Committee met in an open markup 

session and H.R. 5613 was ordered favorably reported, amended, by 

a rollcall vote: 46—0. On April 22, 2008, the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce reported H.R. 5613 to the House, amended (H. 

Rept. 110–600). 

On April 23, 2008, H.R. 5613 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 349–62. 

On April 28, 2008, the bill was placed on the Senate Legislative 

Calendar under General Orders. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
169 

The provisions of H.R. 5613 were included in H.R. 2642, the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2008, which became Public Law 

110–252 on June 30, 2008. 

MICHELLE’S LAW

Public Law 110–381 (H.R. 2851, S. 400) 

Summary 

H.R. 2851 amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act 

of 1974 (ERISA), the Public Health Service Act, and the Internal 

Revenue Code to prohibit a group health plan from terminating 

coverage of a dependent child due to a medically necessary leave 

of absence from a postsecondary education institution or any other 

change in enrollment at that institution that commences while 

such child is suffering from a severe illness or injury and causes 

such child to lose full-time student status before that earlier of: (1) 

one year after the first day of the medically necessary leave of absence; or (2) the date on which such coverage would otherwise terminate under the terms of the plan. This bill would require certification by the child’s attending physician, and would apply these requirements to coverage offered in the individual market. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 2851 was introduced on June 25, 2007, by Representative 

Hodes. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 

and in addition to the Committees on Education and Labor, and 

Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by 

the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as 

fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On June 25, 2007, H.R. 2851 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On July 9, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and H.R. 2851 forwarded to the full Committee, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On July 16, 2008, the full Committee met in an open markup 

session and H.R. 2851 was ordered favorably reported, amended, by 

a rollcall vote: 40—0. On July 30, 2008, the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce reported H.R. 2851 to the House, amended (H. 

Rept. 110–806, Part 1). 

On July 30, 2008, the Committee on Education and Labor and 

the Committee on Ways and Means were each discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2851. The bill then passed the House, as 

amended, under suspension of the rules, by a voice vote, two-thirds 

having voted in favor. 

On July 31, 2008, H.R. 2851 was received in the Senate and referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions. 

On September 25, 2008, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2851 by unanimous consent. That same day, H.R. 

2851 passed the Senate without amendment by unanimous consent, clearing it for the White House. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
170 

H.R. 2851 was presented to the President on September 30, 

2008, and signed by the President on October 9, 2008 (Public Law 

110–381). 

MEDICARE IMPROVEMENTS FOR PATIENTS AND PROVIDERS ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–275 (H.R. 6331, H.R. 748, H.R. 6212, H.R. 6252, 

S. 45, S. 450, S. 1310, S. 2408, S. 3095, S. 3101, S. 3144) 

Summary 

H.R. 6331 prevents a 10 percent payment reduction for physicians in Medicare, enhances Medicare preventive and mental 

health benefits, improves and extends programs for low-income 

Medicare beneficiaries, and extends expiring provisions for rural 

and other providers. Key provisions of H.R. 6331 include: providing 

a 2 percent quality reporting bonus for doctors who report on quality measures through 2010; providing financial incentives to providers to encourage the use of electronic prescribing technology; extending and improving low-income assistance programs for Medicare beneficiaries whose income is below $14,040; increasing the 

amount of assets that low-income beneficiaries can have and still 

qualify for financial help; and adding new preventive benefits to 

the Medicare program as well as reducing beneficiary out of pocket 

costs for mental health care. 

H.R. 6331 will require Medicare Advantage plans to pay pharmacies promptly (within 14 days), and to update the prices they 

will reimburse for prescription medicines at least weekly. The bill 

also delays the new Medicaid payment rule which changes Medicaid’s payment limits for pharmacies to be based on the Average 

Manufacturer Price (AMP). The rule would be delayed through 

September 2009. This legislation takes modest steps to reduce 

Medicare payments to private plans which are being paid more 

than 100 percent of the cost to treat a beneficiary in fee-for-service 

Medicare by phasing out the Indirect Medical Education (IME) 

double-payment, eliminating the stabilization fund for Medicare 

Advantage regional preferred provider organizations, and ensuring 

Private Fee-for-Service (PFFS) plans comply with quality requirements that other Medicare Advantage plans must meet. 

The bill protects access to care in rural America by extending 

and building upon expiring provisions. H.R. 6331 will improve payments for sole community hospitals, critical access hospitals, and 

ambulances, as well as extend expiring provisions that preserve 

payment enhancements for rural physicians and hospitals that run 

clinical laboratories. Access to Medicare Advantage is retained by 

ensuring private-fee-for-service plans in rural areas can continue to 

operate if there are fewer than two network plan options. 

H.R. 6331 makes a number of other modest changes to Medicare 

payments, including: protecting access to therapy services by extending the exceptions process to the limits on therapy visits for 

beneficiaries in nursing homes; and postponing the Durable Medical Equipment (DME) competitive bidding program and repealing 

the clinical laboratory competitive bidding program. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
171 

Legislative History 

H.R. 6331 was introduced on June 20, 2008, by Representative 

Rangel. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for 

a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each 

case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On June 24, 2008, H.R. 6331 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules by a rollcall vote: 355–59. 

On July 9, 2008, the Senate passed H.R. 6331 without amendment by unanimous consent. 

H.R. 6331 was presented to the President on July 10, 2008, and 

vetoed by the President on July 15, 2008. 

On July 15, 2008, H.R. 6331 passed the House over veto by a 

rollcall vote: 383 41. That same day, H.R. 6331 passed the Senate 

over veto by a rollcall vote: 70–26. 

H.R. 6331 became Public Law 110–275 on July 15, 2008. 

PAUL WELLSTONE AND PETE DOMENICI MENTAL HEALTH PARITY AND

ADDICTION EQUITY ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–343, Title V, Subtitle B 

(H.R. 6983, H.R. 1424, S. 558) 

Summary 

This bill permanently reauthorizes and expands the Mental 

Health Parity Act of 1996 to provide for equity in the coverage of 

mental health and substance use disorders compared to medical 

and surgical disorders. The legislation ensures that group health 

plans do not charge higher co-payments, coinsurance, deductibles, 

and impose maximum out-of-pocket limits and lower day and visit 

limits on mental health and addiction care than for medical and 

surgical benefits. The Department of Health and Human Services, 

the Department of Labor, and the Internal Revenue Service may 

penalize health plans for discriminatory practices under the bill. 

The mental health parity requirements apply to group health plans 

with 51 or more employees, but do not apply to health coverage in 

the individual insurance market. If the requirements in this bill result in increased actual total costs of coverage that exceed 2 percent during the first plan year or 1 percent in subsequent years, 

the plan may choose to be exempt from the equity requirements for 

the following plan year. The bill would establish a federal floor but 

permits states to go further to protect their citizens. H.R. 6983 

would not supersede any State law that provides consumer protections, benefits, rights, or remedies stronger than those in this bill. 

Plans will be required to make information about criteria used for 

medical necessity determinations and reasons for denials relating 

to mental health and addiction treatment available. 

The Internal Revenue Service may impose a tax of $100 per day 

per beneficiary on employers or insurers who do not comply with 

the equity requirements of this bill. The Department of Health and 

Human Services and Department of Labor can also enforce the provisions of this bill. Aggrieved individuals may bring a civil action 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
172 

to obtain covered benefits. The bill requires GAO to analyze and report on the specific rates, patterns, and trends in coverage and exclusion of specific mental health and substance use disorder diagnoses by health plans and health insurance. H.R. 6983 is effective 

in the first health plan year that begins on or after January 1, 

2009. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 6983 was introduced on September 22, 2008, by Representative Kennedy. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Education and 

Labor, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On September 23, 2008, H.R. 6983 passed the House, as amended, under suspension of the rules, by a rollcall vote: 376–47. 

H.R. 6983 was received in the Senate on September 23, 2008. 

For further action on H.R. 6983, see H.R. 1424, the ‘‘Emergency 

Economic Stabilization Act of 2008,’’ which became Public Law 

110–343. 

TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CORRECTION IN THE PAUL WELLSTONE AND

PETE DOMENICI MENTAL HEALTH PARITY AND ADDICTION EQUITY

ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–460 (S. 3712) 

Summary 

This legislation amends subtitle B of title V of division C of Public Law 343 by striking ‘‘January 1, 2009’’ and inserting ‘‘January 

1, 2010’’. 

Legislative History 

On November 20, 2008, Senator Edward M. Kennedy introduced 

S. 3712. That same day, the Senate passed S. 3712 without amendment by unanimous consent. 

On December 9, 2008, S. 3712 was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Education and Labor, and Ways and Means, for a period 

to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of 

the committee concerned. 

On December 10, 2008, the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Education and Labor, and Ways and Means were each discharged from further consideration of the bill. That same day, the 

House passed S. 3712 with no objection, clearing it for White House 

action. 

On December 23, 2008, the President signed S. 3712 (Public Law 

110–460). 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
173 

MEDICARE, MEDICAID, AND SCHIP EXTENSION ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–173 (S. 2499) 

To amend titles XVIII, XIX, and XXI of the Social Security Act 

to extend provisions under the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP 

programs, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

S. 2499 amends titles XVIII, XIX, and XXI of the Social Security 

Act to extend provisions under the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP 

programs. Extended Medicare programs include: an incentive payment program for physician scarcity areas; the floor on work geographic adjustment; treatment of certain physician pathology services; the exceptions process for therapy caps; the payment rule for 

brachytherapy; reasonable costs payments for certain clinical diagnostic laboratory tests in rural areas; the authority of specialized 

Medicare Advantage plans for special needs individuals; access to 

Medicare reasonable cost contract plans; a provision that permits 

physicians in the armed services to engage in substitute billing arrangements for longer than 60 days when they are ordered to active duty; and provisions that have allowed certain hospitals to be 

eligible for wage index reclassification. S. 2499 will remove $1.5 billion from the stabilization fund for Medicare Advantage regional 

preferred provider organizations in 2012. It will also require the 

submission of data by group health plans and liability insurers to 

the Secretary of Health and Human Services that is necessary to 

appropriately identify individuals for whom Medicare is the secondary payor. 

CMS will be required to adjust its Average Sales Price (ASP) calculation to use volume-weighted ASPs based on actual sales volume. Some other improvements to the Medicare program include: 

establishing an appropriate reimbursement rate for generic inhalation drugs; reimbursing certain diabetes laboratory tests that are 

approved for home use at the same rate as other glycated hemoglobin tests; providing regulatory relief to ensure continued access 

to current long-term care hospital services; imposing a limited moratorium on the development of new long-term care facilities; requiring the Secretary to conduct a study on long-term care hospital facility and patient criteria; requiring the Secretary to study beneficiary access to inpatient rehabilitation services and care; and permanently freezing the inpatient rehabilitation services compliance 

threshold at 60%. S. 2499 will also provide $15 million to State 

Health Insurance Assistance Programs and $5 million for Area 

Agencies on Aging and Aging Disability Resource Centers for beneficiary outreach and assistance. 

Title II of S. 2499 includes Medicaid and SCHIP provisions. Extended programs in this section include: the qualifying individual 

(QI) program; transitional medical assistance (TMA); abstinence 

education programs; Medicaid disproportionate share hospitals 

(DSH); and SCHIP funding through March 31, 2009. This legislation would also impose a six-month delay on implementation of proposed administrative regulations relating to school-based services 

and rehabilitation services. An additional $10 million would be proVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00181 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
174 

vided to improve data collection on the uninsured by the Census 

Bureau. 

Title III of this legislation would extend the Special Diabetes 

Program to fund type 1 diabetes research and type 2 treatment and 

prevention programs for Native Americans and Alaska Natives. 

This title would also clarify the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission’s status as an agency of Congress. 

Legislative History 

S. 2499 was introduced in the Senate on December 18, 2007, by 

Senator Baucus. The bill was read twice, considered, read the third 

time, and passed without amendment by unanimous consent. 

On December 19, 2007, S. 2499 passed the House under suspension of the rules and by a rollcall vote: 411–3. 

The bill was presented to the President on December 27, 2007, 

and signed by the President on December 29, 2007 (Public Law 

110–173). 

QI PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–379 (S. 3560, H.R. 7077, S. 3549) 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to provide additional funds for the qualifying individual (QI) program, and for 

other purposes. 

Summary 

S. 3560 amends title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Act, 

as amended by the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008, to provide supplemental funding for the qualifying individual (QI) program. This legislation requires a state to 

have in operation an eligibility determination system which provides for data matching through the Public Assistance Reporting 

Information System (PARIS), including matching with medical assistance programs operated by other states. It also amends the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to make sponsors of certain 

antibiotic drugs eligible for a three-year or a five-year market exclusivity if a marketing application is submitted for an antibiotic 

drug that: (1) was approved by the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services before November 21, 1997; or (2) was the subject of one 

or more applications received by the Secretary before November 21, 

1997, none of which was approved. The bill would authorize the 

use of Medicaid integrity program funds for transportation and 

travel expenses for attendees at education, training, or consultative 

activities, and it would increase FY2014 funding for the Medicare 

Improvement Fund. 

Legislative History 

S. 3560 was introduced on September 24, 2008, by Senator Baucus and referred to the Senate Committee on Finance. 

On September 25, 2008, the Senate Finance Committee was discharged from further consideration of S. 3560 by unanimous consent. The Senate then passed S. 3560 without amendment by unanimous consent. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
175 

On September 25, 2008, S. 3560 was received in the House and 

referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On September 27, 2008, the bill was re-referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways 

and Means, by unanimous consent. 

On September 27, 2008, S. 3560 passed the House under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in favor. 

This action cleared the measure for the White House. 

The bill was presented to the President on September 29, 2008, 

and signed by the President on October 8, 2008 (Public Law 110– 

379). 

MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICE NEGOTIATION ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 4, S. 3) 

To amend Part D of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate 

lower prescription drug prices for covered Part D drugs on behalf 

of Medicare beneficiaries. 

Summary 

H.R. 4 would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate with pharmaceutical manufacturers the prices 

that may be charged to prescription drug plan sponsors and Medicare Advantage organizations for covered part D drugs for part D 

eligible individuals enrolled under a prescription drug plan or 

under a Medicare Advantage prescription drug (MA–PD) plan. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 4 was introduced in the House on January 5, 2007, by Representative Dingell. It was referred to the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and 

Means. 

On January 12, 2007, H.R. 4 passed the House by a rollcall vote: 

255–170. 

The bill was received in the Senate and referred to the Senate 

Committee on Finance. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 4 in the 110th Congress. 

BREAST CANCER PATIENT PROTECTION ACT OF 2008

(H.R. 758, H.R. 119, S. 459) 

To require that health plans provide coverage for a minimum 

hospital stay for mastectomies, lumpectomies, and lymph node dissection for the treatment of breast cancer and coverage for secondary consultations. 

Summary 

H.R. 758 requires health insurers to cover minimum lengths of 

stay for patients undergoing procedures to treat and diagnose 

breast cancer and also provides for secondary consultations. This 

bill would prevent insurers from forcing women to leave the hospital before it is medically safe to do so and would help assure that 

women have access to the most medically appropriate treatment. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
176 

Insurers would be required to pay for hospital stays of at least 48 

hours in the case of mastectomies and lumpectomies and 24 hours 

in the case of lymph node dissection for the treatment of breast 

cancer. Insurers would also be required to provide for secondary 

consultations in the event of either a positive or a negative test to 

confirm or refute that initial diagnosis. To guarantee that patients 

understand their rights under this bill, it would also require that 

insurers provide notice of these requirements to patients. The bill, 

as reported, would also create an independent review process for 

consumers in the individual health insurance market in the event 

of non-renewal, discontinuation, or rescission of a health insurance 

policy. Insurers would be required to continue coverage under such 

policy until completion of the independent review. 

Legislative History 

H. R. 758 was introduced in the House on January 31, 2007, by 

Representative DeLauro. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways 

and Means, and the Committee on Education and Labor. 

On February 2, 2007, H.R. 758 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. On May 21, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health held a 

hearing on H.R. 758. 

On September 17, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in an open markup session and H.R. 758 was ordered 

favorably reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On September 23, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 758 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–868, 

Part 1). The Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee 

on Education and Labor were each discharged from further consideration of H.R. 758. 

On September 25, 2008, H.R. 758 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules, by a rollcall vote: 421–2. 

The bill was received in the Senate on September 25, 2008, but 

no further action was taken in the 110th Congress. 

CHILDREN’S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF

2007

(H.R 976, H.R. 3162, H.R. 3963, S. 1893) 

To amend title XXI of the Social Security Act to extend and improve the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 976 reauthorizes the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. This legislation invests an additional $35 billion over five 

years to strengthen SCHIP’s financing, increases the number of 

low-income children with health insurance coverage, and improves 

the quality of healthcare children receive. This legislation will provide health coverage to millions of low-income children who are 

currently uninsured. Quality dental coverage will be provided to all 

enrolled children as well. H.R. 976 will ensure that states offer 

mental health services on par with medical and surgical benefits 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
177 

covered under SCHIP. Medically necessary benefits for low-income 

children will also be protected. 

H.R. 976 will provide coverage to pregnant women as a new state 

option. It also preserves the option to cover them through a state 

waiver or through regulation. States would be prohibited from 

granting any new waivers to cover parents in the SCHIP program, 

but States that have already received waivers to cover low-income 

parents will be allowed to transition parents into a separate block 

grant. The federal match for services to parents covered through 

SCHIP will be reduced. This legislation retains the current law 

prohibition of waivers to allow coverage of childless adults. Currently covered childless adults will transition off SCHIP. For States 

that have received CHIP waivers to cover childless adults, the 

agreement terminates those waivers after a one-year period, provides temporary Medicaid funding for already-enrolled adults, and 

allows States to apply for a Medicaid waiver for coverage. 

Under the financing structure, States will receive state-based allotments that are responsive to state demographic and national 

spending trends and allow additional up-front funding for States 

planning improvements. States that face a funding shortfall and 

meet enrollment goals will receive an adjustment payment to ensure that no child who is eligible for Medicaid or SCHIP is denied 

coverage or placed on a waiting list. The formula also sets in place 

new overall caps on federal funding to ensure the program’s expenditures do not exceed the amounts authorized. 

H.R. 976 replaces the flawed CMS August 17th letter to states. 

In place of the CMS letter, this legislation gives states time and 

assistance in developing and implementing best practices to address crowd out. The agreement also puts the lowest income children first in line by phasing in a new requirement for coverage of 

low-income children as a condition of receiving SCHIP funding for 

coverage of children above 300 percent of the poverty level. The bill 

also provides $100 million in grants for new outreach activities to 

States, local governments, schools, community-based organizations, 

safety-net providers, and others. A new quality child health initiative is established to develop and implement quality measures and 

improve state reporting of quality data. H.R. 976 will expand on 

current premium assistance options for states, as the bill allows 

States to offer a premium assistance subsidy for qualified, cost-effective employer-sponsored coverage to children eligible for SCHIP. 

It also changes the federal rules governing employer-sponsored insurance to make it easier for States and employers to offer premium assistance programs. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 976 was introduced in the House on February 9, 2007, by 

Representative Rangel. As passed in the House, H.R. 976 was the 

Small Business Tax Relief Act of 2007. 

During Senate consideration of H.R. 976, text similar to S. 1893, 

the ‘‘Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 

2007,’’ was substituted in H.R. 976. 

On August 2, 2007, H.R. 976 passed the Senate, amended, by a 

rollcall vote: 68–31. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
178 

On September 25, 2007, the House agreed to the Senate amendment to H.R. 976, with amendments, by a rollcall vote: 265–159, 

and 1 present. 

On September 27, 2007, the Senate agreed to the House amendments to the Senate amendments by a rollcall vote: 67–29, clearing 

the measure for the White House. 

H.R. 976 was presented to the President on October 2, 2007, and 

vetoed on October 3, 2007. 

The veto was sustained in the House on October 18, 2007, when 

the House failed to override the veto of H.R. 976 by a rollcall vote: 

273–156, two-thirds failing to vote in the affirmative. 

PROTECTING CHILDREN’S HEALTH IN SCHOOLS ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 1017, S. 578) 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to improve requirements under the Medicaid Program for items and services furnished in or through an educational program or setting to children, 

including children with developmental, physical, or mental health 

needs, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 1017 ensures access to school-based health care for children, 

including children with special needs through Medicaid. This legislation includes related administrative and transportation costs and 

health care provided through Medicaid managed care organizations. H.R. 1017 also directs the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services and the Secretary of Education, acting jointly, to develop 

and implement a uniform methodology for claims under this Act. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 1017 was introduced on February 13, 2007, by Representative Dingell and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1017 in the 110th Congress. 

HIPAA RECREATIONAL INJURY TECHNICAL CORRECTION ACT

(H.R. 1076, S. 616) 

To promote health care coverage parity for individuals participating in legal recreational activities or legal transportation activities. 

Summary 

H.R. 1076 amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act 

of 1974 (ERISA), the Public Health Service Act, and the Internal 

Revenue Code to require any limitations and restrictions on benefits be explicit and clear, require that they be disclosed to the sponsor of the group health plan in advance of the point of sale to the 

group health plan, and require that the issuer of the health insurance coverage make available to participants and beneficiaries in 

an easily understandable manner a description of the limitations 

and restrictions upon their enrollment. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
179 

Legislative History 

On February 15, 2007, H.R. 1076 was referred to the Committee 

on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on 

Ways and Means, and Education and Labor, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

For further action on H.R. 1076 in the 110th Congress, see H.R. 

6908. 

EMERGENCY ECONOMIC STABILIZATION ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 1424, S. 558) 

To amend section 712 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, section 2705 of the Public Health Service Act, and 

section 9812 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require equity 

in the provision of mental health and substance-related disorder 

benefits under group health plans as compared to coverage of physical conditions. 

Summary 

As first introduced in the House, H.R. 1424 was the Paul 

Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007. As introduced in the House, this bill permanently reauthorizes and expands the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996 to provide for equity 

in the coverage of mental health and substance use disorders compared to medical and surgical disorders. The legislation ensures 

that group health plans do not charge higher co-payments, coinsurance, deductibles, and impose maximum out-of-pocket limits and 

lower day and visit limits on mental health and addiction care than 

for medical and surgical benefits. The Department of Health and 

Human Services, the Department of Labor, and the Internal Revenue Service may penalize health plans for discriminatory practices 

under the bill and individuals may bring a private right of action 

to receive covered benefits. 

This bill excludes employers with 50 or less employees from the 

requirements, does not constrain a plan’s ability to require medical 

necessity or apply other types of medical management on the benefits, and permits employers and plans to be exempted from the parity requirements if an actuary finds that claims costs would be increased by 2 percent or more as a result of implementing parity in 

the first year or 1 percent or more in subsequent years. This bill 

does apply to the individual market. Enforcement of the bill’s provisions is through the Internal Revenue Code, where an employer 

can be penalized for violations of the law’s requirements. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 1424 was introduced in the House on March 9, 2007, by 

Representative Kennedy. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Labor, and the Committee on Ways and Means. 

On March 12, 2007, H.R. 1424 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. On June 15, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health held a 

hearing on H.R. 1424. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
180 

On October 10, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health met in an 

open markup session and H.R. 1424 was forwarded to the full Committee, amended, by a voice vote. 

On October 15, 2007, the Committee on Education and Labor reported H.R. 1424 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–374, Part 

1). 

On October 15, 2007, the Committee on Ways and Means reported H.R. 1424 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–374, Part 

2). 

On October 16, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

met in an open markup session and H.R. 1424 was ordered favorably reported, as amended, by a rollcall vote: 32–13. 

On March 4, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 1424 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–374, Part 

3). 

On March 5, 2008, H.R. 1424 passed the House, amended, by a 

rollcall vote: 268–148. 

On March 6, 2008, H.R. 1424 was received in the Senate and 

placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. 

The Senate amended H.R. 1424 and used this bill as a vehicle 

for the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. For further 

action on H.R. 1424, see H.R. 6983, the ‘‘Paul Wellstone and Pete 

Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008’’ 

would be included in the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 

2008. 

CHILDREN’S HEALTH FIRST ACT

(H.R. 1535, S. 895) 

To amend titles XIX and XXI of the Social Security Act to ensure 

that every child in the United States has access to affordable, quality health insurance coverage, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 1535 amends title XXI (State Children’s Health Insurance 

Program or SCHIP) of the Social Security Act to grant States the 

option to expand coverage of children whose family income is any 

percentage up to 400 percent of the poverty-line. The bill authorizes States to offer purchase of coverage for uncovered children 

under SCHIP who are not otherwise eligible for assistance under 

SCHIP or Medicaid. It also provides subsidies for employmentbased coverage of children eligible for SCHIP or Medicaid and requires coverage of early and periodic screening, diagnostic, and 

treatment services, including dental services, federally-qualified 

health services, and rural health clinic services. 

H.R. 1535 establishes the Medicaid-SCHIP Payment Advisory 

Commission. The bill also provides for an increase in the federal 

medical assistance percentage (FMAP) for medical assistance for 

children in States that expand coverage of children. State options 

are outlined for additional coverage expansions, including older 

children under Medicaid, targeted low-income pregnant women 

under SCHIP, and legal immigrants under both programs. New 

base SCHIP allotments are established that are responsive to increases in health care costs and enrollment expansions. H.R. 1535 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
181 

provides for a two-year initial availability of SCHIP allotments, 

and for redistribution of unused allotments to address State funding shortfalls. It prescribes a special rule for school-based outreach 

and enrollment activities. States are given the option to require 

certain individuals to present satisfactory documentary evidence of 

citizenship or nationality for Medicaid eligibility. States are also 

given the option to provide for ‘‘express lane’’ and simplified determinations of a child’s financial eligibility for Medicaid or SCHIP. 

The Secretary of Health and Human Services is directed to develop and disseminate a model process for the coordination of Medicaid and SCHIP enrollment and coverage of children who frequently change their state of residency or are temporarily outside 

such state. State Medicaid plans are required to apply outreach 

procedures to all pregnant women and children. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 1535 was introduced in the House on March 15, 2007, by 

Representative Dingell and referred to the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce. No further action was taken on H.R. 1535 in the 

110th Congress. 

CHILDREN’S DENTAL HEALTH IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 1781, S. 739) 

To provide disadvantaged children with access to primary dental 

care services. 

Summary 

H.R. 1781 amends title V (Maternal and Child Health Services) 

of the Social Security Act to: (1) direct the Secretary of Health and 

Human Services to award grants to states to improve dental services to children enrolled in Medicaid or the State Children’s Health 

Insurance Program (SCHIP); (2) include dental services as a basic 

service under SCHIP; and (3) allow states to provide wrap-around 

coverage under SCHIP for dental services to privately-insured children. The bill also amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to revise Graduate Medical Education (GME) payments 

for dental residency programs. The Public Health Service Act is 

amended to require the Secretary, acting through the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), to establish a grant 

program to expand the availability of primary dental care services 

in dental health professional shortage areas or medically underserved areas. 

The Secretary of HHS would be required to establish demonstration projects to increase access to dental services for children in underserved areas. The Secretary would also be directed to establish: 

(1) an oral health initiative to reduce disparities in oral health; and 

(2) Chief Dental Officers for Medicaid and SCHIP, HRSA, and the 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). H.R. 1781 requires the Director of the CDC to collect data on dental, 

craniofacial, and oral health and requires the Secretary of HHS to 

identify populations at high risk for early childhood caries (tooth 

decay) and to develop prevention programs. The eligibility requirements are revised for the school-based dental sealant program to 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
182 

include Indian tribes. The bill also directs the Secretary, acting 

through the Director of the CDC, to award grants to states and Indian tribes to improve their basic capacity to improve the oral 

health of children and their families. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 1781 was introduced in the House on March 29, 2007, by 

Representative Dingell. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways 

and Means. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 1781 in the 110th Congress. 

MEDICARE FOR ALL ACT

(H.R. 2034, S. 1218) 

To provide quality, affordable healthcare for all Americans. 

Summary 

H.R. 2034 amends the Social Security Act to provide that all 

Americans will be entitled to Medicare benefits. Each enrollee can 

maintain the coverage they have today or choose to enroll in Medicare. Enrollees are free to choose their own doctor and private 

health plan and benefits are similar to or no less than the health 

benefits coverage under the FEHBP (Federal Employees Health 

Benefits Program). The bill also establishes the Medicare for All 

Trust Fund. H.R. 2034 amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose: (1) on the income of every enrolled individual a tax equal to 

1.7% of wages received in excess of $25,000; (2) on every employer 

an excise tax equal to 7% of the wages paid to each enrolled employee; and (3) on the self-employment income of every enrolled individual, a tax equal to the applicable percentage of the self-employment income for such taxable year in excess of $25,000. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 2034 was introduced in the House on April 25, 2007, by 

Representative Dingell. It was referred to the Committee on Ways 

and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 2034 in the 110th Congress. 

CHILDREN’S HEALTH AND MEDICARE PROTECTION ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 3162, H.R. 976, H.R. 3963, S. 1893) 

To amend titles XVIII, XIX, and XXI of the Social Security Act 

to extend and improve the children’s health insurance program, to 

improve beneficiary protections under the Medicare, Medicaid, and 

CHIP programs, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

This bill reauthorizes the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) that was created as part of the Balanced Budget Act 

of 1997. This legislation invests an additional $35 billion over five 

years to ensure that States have predictable funding streams for 

the SCHIP program, increase the number of low-income children 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
183 

with health insurance coverage, and improve the quality of health 

care children receive. States that adopt a menu of outreach ‘‘best 

practices’’ and successfully reach previously-uninsured children 

would be eligible for a ‘‘performance bonus.’’ The menu of ‘‘best 

practices’’ includes enrollment in a plan for a full year, providing 

children care while their applications are being completed if it is 

presumed that the child will be found eligible, less burdensome renewals, flexibility in determination of assets, elimination of in-person interviews, express lane service, and use of a joint application 

of Medicaid and SCHIP. In order to be eligible for the ‘‘performance 

bonus’’, States must implement five out of seven of these best practices. States would be allowed to cover pregnant women and older 

children, as well as legal immigrant children and legal immigrant 

pregnant women, who otherwise meet the requirements for coverage under CHIP. 

H.R. 3162 would provide children with a benefits package that 

includes coverage of dental care and mental health services. States 

would have the flexibility to provide children’s coverage through 

whatever delivery arrangement works best, whether through an 

HMO, PPO, or other arrangement. To further ensure that coverage 

meets children’s needs, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) could approve ‘‘alternate’’ benefits packages if those 

packages met or exceeded existing benchmark coverage. 

This legislation also focuses on improving quality. The Secretary 

of HHS would be required to develop a pediatric health quality program that evaluates and improves the quality of pediatric care on 

clinical and programmatic levels. The Secretary would work with 

pediatric providers, children’s advocates, and other experts on children’s health care to develop child-centered quality measures. A 

new, independent Commission, the Children’s Access, Payment and 

Equality Commission (CAPE), would advise Congress on important 

issues regarding children’s health care. This Commission would be 

charged with monitoring access to care and services, and the adequacy of provider payments under both SCHIP and Medicaid. The 

Commission would also examine issues of health disparities and 

underserved areas. 

Community health centers (CHCs) and rural health centers 

(RHCs) are important as the primary source of care for millions of 

children. Children covered under SCHIP would have guaranteed 

access, just like children covered under Medicaid, and CHCs and 

RHCs would receive adequate payments. The current ability of 

States to cover services in school clinics would be clarified, and 

CAPE would specifically monitor the status of safety net providers. 

H.R. 3162 also invests in improvements for Medicare beneficiaries. The bill provides Medicare with the authority to use the 

recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Health Services Task 

Force to add new preventive health benefits without Congressional 

approval. It also waives cost sharing for preventive benefits and 

provides for mental health parity. The CHAMP Act expands and 

improves the Low Income Subsidy (LIS) program for drugs and the 

Medicare Savings Programs (MSP), which help ensure affordable 

health care for seniors and people with disabilities with lower incomes. It does this by expanding income eligibility, improving assets tests, enhancing outreach and education for the LIS and MSP, 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
184 

and eliminating the Part D late enrollment penalty for LIS eligible 

individuals. In an effort to reduce health disparities, H.R. 3162 

would collect data necessary to better track and address racial and 

ethnic disparities in the Medicare program. Consumer protections 

would be strengthened as well under this legislation. Beneficiaries 

would be allowed to change drug plans if their drug plan formulary 

changes during the year, Part D plans would be required to cover 

all drugs in six important therapeutic classes of drugs, and the prohibition on coverage of benzodiazepines would be eliminated. 

The CHAMP Act would stabilize physician reimbursement by 

eliminating the impending 2008 and 2009 fee cuts and putting in 

place a positive 0.5 percent update in both years. Parameters are 

established for fixing the physician fee system by prioritizing primary care. The bill also initiates a nationwide demonstration 

project to test the practice of providing a medical home for patients 

in which their personal physician is paid to coordinate their care. 

The CHAMP Act includes provisions relating to Medicare Advantage, such as a payment adjustment to plans to bring closer in line 

with fee-for-service payments in Medicare, enrollment limitations, 

and a repeal of the regional PPO stabilization fund created in the 

MMA to provide incentive payments to certain types of private 

plans. This legislation also protects beneficiaries by developing a 

Federal/State system to regulate private plan marketing and other 

activities and providing more information about plan spending on 

health care services. Private plans would be prohibited from charging higher cost-sharing than FFS Medicare. All private plans, including private fee-for-service plans, would be required to report 

quality data to CMS in order to measure the quality of care. Also, 

dual Medicare-Medicaid special needs plans (SNPs) and Institutional SNPs would be reauthorized for three years with new requirements to assure that they are enrolling their target populations. 

In terms of rural health improvements, H.R. 3162 would preserve payment enhancements for rural Medicare fee-for-service providers. Taking into account recommendations from the non-partisan Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, the bill refines payments for a variety of institutional providers covered under Medicare Part A including skilled nursing facilities, rehabilitation facilities, long-term care hospitals, cancer hospitals and rural and small 

urban hospitals. Part B improvements include: continuing the therapy cap exceptions process and planning for an improved payment 

system; improving coverage for speech-language pathologists, nurse 

midwives, marriage and family therapists, and mental health counselors; and assuring access to clinical social workers for beneficiaries in nursing homes. This legislation would end the ability of 

physicians to refer patients to hospitals in which they have ownership. The bill would also reduce the rental period for oxygen equipment and eliminate the first month purchase of wheelchairs. The 

ESRD payment system is modernized, quality programs are put in 

place, and patient-education services for pre-dialysis beneficiaries 

are provided. 

Other Medicare provisions include establishing a comparative effectiveness program to provide information that doctors and patients need to choose the best treatments, leading to better health 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
185 

outcomes and value nationwide. The Medicare agency is required 

to design a program to require adoption of an interoperable open 

source health information technology system for all Medicare providers. The CHAMP Act would also eliminate a provision from the 

Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act 

designed to reduce Medicare spending. 

Medicaid provisions include: maintaining access to school-based 

services and rehabilitation services for children with severe disabilities; extending for two years the Transitional Medical Assistance 

program (TMA); providing States a new option to offer family planning services to women; protecting beneficiaries who currently receive adult day health care from having that care terminated; increasing Medicaid resources for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Territories; and increasing the rebate provided from drug manufacturers 

to the Medicaid program by 5 percent. As a source of revenue, a new $0.45 Federal tax would be levied 

on tobacco products and fuel excise taxes would be exempt for ambulance fuel. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 3162 was introduced on July 24, 2007, by Representative 

Dingell. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for 

a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each 

case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On July 24, 2007, H.R. 3162 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On July 26 and July 27, 2007, the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce met in open markup sessions to consider H.R. 3162. 

On August 1, 2007, the Committee on Ways and Means reported 

H.R. 3162 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–284, Part 1). 

On August 1, 2007, H.R. 3162 was considered in the House according to the provisions of H. Res. 594. That same day, H.R. 3162 

passed the House, amended, by a rollcall vote: 225–204. 

On September 4, 2007, H.R. 3162 was received in the Senate and 

placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. 

For further action on H.R. 3162, see H.R. 976, which was vetoed 

by the President on October 3, 2007. 

CHILDREN’S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF

2007

(H.R. 3963, H.R. 976) 

Summary 

H.R. 3963 reauthorizes the Children’s Health Insurance Program, investing an additional $35 billion over five years to 

strengthen SCHIP’s financing, increase health insurance coverage 

for low-income children, and improve the quality of health care 

children receive. An additional 100,000 of the lowest-income children would be covered under this proposal compared to H.R. 976. 

Also, the effective date of the moratorium on school-based care for 

the disabled and rehabilitation services are extended from May 24, 

2008 to January 1, 2010. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
186 

This legislation provides incentives to find and enroll uninsured 

children and permits States to only receive Federal funding for 

children covered in CHIP with family incomes up to $51,510 (300% 

of the Federal poverty level for a family of 3). States would receive 

performance bonus payments for finding and enrolling the lowest 

income uninsured children. The bill further minimizes the substitution of employer-sponsored coverage with CHIP coverage. All 

States are required to submit plans and implement recommended 

best practices for helping kids already covered stay in employersponsored coverage and States are encouraged to use CHIP dollars 

to subsidize employer-sponsored health insurance for children as 

an option. 

H.R. 3963 will ensure that SCHIP money is used to cover children. Coverage of childless adults is phased out after one year. 

This legislation will clarify and strengthen SCHIP as a program for 

U.S. Citizens. It will also clarify the role of the Social Security Administration (SSA) in verifying citizenship for purposes of Medicaid 

and CHIP eligibility. SSA will verify the name, social security number, and place of birth of enrollees and applicants. This will assist 

States in identifying potential non-citizens and permit States to follow-up. States will not receive Federal funding for payments made 

to non-citizens. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 3963 was introduced on October 24, 2007, by Representative 

Dingell. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, 

Oversight and Government Reform, House Administration, and 

Education and Labor for a period to be subsequently determined by 

the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as 

fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. 

On October 25, 2007, H.R. 3963 passed the House by a rollcall 

vote: 265–142. On November 1, 2007, the bill passed the Senate 

without amendment by a rollcall vote: 64–30. 

It was presented to the President on November 30, 2007, and vetoed by the President on November 12, 2007. 

On January 23, 2008, the House failed to override the President’s 

veto by a rollcall vote: 260–152, two-thirds failing to vote in the affirmative. 

MEDICAID FEDERAL MEDICAL ASSISTANCE PERCENTAGE

(H.R. 5268, S. 2620) 

To provide for a temporary increase of the Federal medical assistance percentage under the Medicaid Program, and for other 

purposes. 

Summary 

Section one of H.R. 5268 provides a temporary increase of the 

Federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP) under the Medicaid 

program by 2.95 percentage points for 5 quarters, the last 2 quarters of fiscal year 2008 and the first 3 quarters of fiscal year 2009 

(April 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009). This legislation will provide 

an analogous temporary increase of the Medicaid FMAP by 5.90 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
187 

percent for the territories. States are protected against a decline in 

their Medicaid FMAP for the last 2 quarters of fiscal year 2008 and 

the first 3 quarters of fiscal year 2009 (April 1, 2008, through June 

30, 2009). States are also required to maintain their Medicaid eligibility at current levels in order to receive the 2.95 percentage point 

temporary increase, and States are required to adjust payments by 

localities and counties to the State share to account for additional 

Federal funding. 

Section two of H.R. 5268 exempts extraordinary employer pension contributions from the calculation of personal income for the 

purposes of establishing a State’s Federal medical assistance percentage, and no State shall have its Medicaid FMAP reduced as a 

result of this section. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 5268 was introduced in the House on February 7, 2008, by 

Representative Pallone and referred to the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce. No further action was taken on H.R. 5268 in the 

110th Congress. 

An FMAP provision similar to H.R. 5268 was placed into H.R. 

7110, the ‘‘Job Creation and Unemployment Relief Act of 2008.’’ 

PROTECTING CHILDREN’S HEALTH COVERAGE ACT OF 2008

(H.R. 5998) 

To nullify any effectiveness of the August 17, 2007, State health 

official letter issued by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. 

Summary 

On August 17, 2008, the Bush Administration issued a letter to 

State Medicaid and SCHIP directors outlining new guidance to ‘‘ensure that extension of eligibility to children at these higher effective income levels [above 250 percent of the federal poverty level 

or $44,000 for a family of three] do not interfere with the effective 

and efficient provision of child health assistance coordinated with 

other sources of health benefits coverage to the core SCHIP population of uninsured targeted low income children.’’ (CMS, Guidance 

by Center for Medicaid State Operations SHO #07–001, August 17, 

2007). This letter, commonly referred to as the ‘‘August 17th directive,’’ requires States to meet certain conditions in order to cover 

children in families with annual incomes above $44,000 for a family of three (250 percent of the Federal poverty level for a family 

of three). H.R. 5998 would nullify the August 17th directive and 

subsequent guidance based on that letter. It would also ensure that 

States that had planned to expand coverage and whose applications 

were denied or scaled back as a result of the August 17th directive, 

could now obtain a new, expedited determination on their initiative 

from CMS within 30 days of the enactment of the Act. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 5998 was introduced on May 5, 2008, and referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

No further action on H.R. 5998 was taken in the 110th Congress. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
188 

PROTECTING RECORDS, OPTIMIZING TREATMENT, AND EASING COMMU- NICATION THROUGH HEALTHCARE TECHNOLOGY ACT OF 2008

PRO(TECH)T ACT OF 2008

(H.R. 6357) 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to promote the adoption 

of health information technology, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

H.R. 6357 amends the Public Health Service Act (PHSA) to promote the adoption of health information technology. This legislation would establish the Office of the National Coordinator for 

Health Information Technology (ONCHIT). The National Coordinator would be responsible for a number of duties including the development standards that would allow for the electronic exchange 

and use of health information. The PHSA would be amended to authorize the National Coordinator to award competitive grants for: 

(1) the purchase of electronic medical records; and (2) the implementation of regional or local health information plans. 

H.R. 6357 would establish an HIT Policy Committee to make policy recommendations to the National Coordinator relating to the 

implementation of a nationwide health information technology infrastructure that is private and secure. An HIT Standards Committee would be established as well. This Committee would be responsible for making recommendations to the National Coordinator 

on standards, implementation specifications, and certification criteria for the electronic exchange and use of health information. 

The Secretary of Health and Human Services would be given the 

authority to award grants for demonstration projects to develop 

academic curricula integrating qualified health information technology in the clinical education of health professionals. The Director of the National Institute for Standards and Technology would 

be required to: (1) test standards and specifications under this Act 

in order to assure their efficient implementation and use; and (2) 

assist institutions of higher education in establishing multidisciplinary Centers for Health Care Information Enterprise Integration. H.R. 6357 also directs the National High-Performance Computing Program to coordinate federal research and development 

programs related to the development and deployment of health information technology. 

This legislation would also improve and expand current federal 

privacy protections. Among these requires, the bill would require 

notification of individuals whose unencrypted protected health information has been accessed or acquired as a result of a breach. It 

would require that all entities that work with providers and insurers in performing functions for them meet all federal privacy laws. 

The bill requires providers to gain consent from an individual before their information is disclosed to others for performing 

healthcare operations. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 6357 was introduced in the House on June 24, 2008, by 

Representative Dingell. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Science 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
189 

and Technology, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 

of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 

concerned. 

On June 24, 2008, H.R. 6357 was referred to the Subcommittee 

on Health. 

On June 25, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health met in an open 

markup session and forwarded H.R. 6357 to the full Committee by 

a voice vote. 

On July 27, 2008, the full Committee met in an open markup 

session and H.R. 6357 was ordered favorably reported, amended, by 

a voice vote. 

On September 11, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 6357 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110– 

837, Part 1). That same day, the Committee on Science and Technology was discharged from further consideration of the measure. 

On October 3, 2008, the Committee on Ways and Means was 

granted an extension for further consideration ending not later 

than January 3, 2009. 

No further action was taken on H.R. 6357 in the 110th Congress. 

HEALTH INSURANCE RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS CLARIFICATION

ACT OF 2008

(H.R. 6908, H.R. 1076) 

To require that limitations and restrictions on coverage under 

group health plans be timely disclosed to group health plan sponsors and timely communicated to participants and beneficiaries 

under such plans in a form that is easily understandable. 

Summary 

On February 15, 2007, Congressman Michael Burgess (R–TX) 

and Congressman Bart Stupak (D–MI) introduced H.R. 1076, the 

‘‘HIPAA Recreational Injury Technical Correction Act,’’ which had 

122 cosponsors. Congressman Burgess and Stupak subsequently introduced related legislation, H.R. 6908, the ‘‘Health Insurance Restrictions and Limitations Clarification Act of 2008,’’ which would 

require any limitations and restrictions on benefits be explicit and 

clear; that they be disclosed to the sponsor of the group health plan 

in advance of the point of sale to the group health plan; and that 

the issuer of the health insurance coverage make available to participants and beneficiaries in an easily understandable manner a 

description of the limitations and restrictions upon their enrollment. 

Legislative History 

H.R. 6908 was introduced in the House on September 16, 2008, 

by Representative Burgess. It was referred to the Committee on 

Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Education and Labor, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 

of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 

concerned. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
190 

On September 17, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in an open markup session and H.R. 6908 was ordered 

favorably reported by a voice vote. 

On September 23, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 6908 to the House (H. Rept. 110–870, Part 1). 

The Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee on Education and Labor were each discharged from further consideration 

of the measure. 

On September 23, 2008, H.R. 6908 passed the House, as amended, under suspension of the rules by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 

On September 25, 2008, the bill was received in the Senate, but 

no further action was taken in the 110th Congress. 

HEALTH FINANCE

OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES

COVERING THE UNINSURED THROUGH THE EYES OF A CHILD (DAY 1)

On February 14, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health held the first 

of two oversight hearings that provided a look at the problem of 

uninsured children in the United States. This hearing provided an 

overview of the characteristics of uninsured children, where are 

they located, whether they have access to affordable insurance, and 

the benefits insurance offers for improvement in health outcomes. 

The subcommittee received testimony from the Congressional Research Service, an associate professor from the Department of 

Health Policy at the George Washington School of Public Health 

and Health Services, a senior policy analyst from the Center for 

Health Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation, and several community leaders. 

COVERING THE UNINSURED THROUGH THE EYES OF A CHILD (DAY 2)

On March 1, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health held the second 

of two oversight hearings that provided a look at the problem of 

uninsured children in the United States. This hearing focused specifically on the State Children’s Health Insurance Program 

(SCHIP) and improvements that Congress should consider when 

the program is reauthorized this year. The subcommittee received 

testimony from the Director of Health Care at the Government Accountability Office, a New Jersey State Senator, the president of 

the American Academy of Pediatrics, the director of Florida’s Children’s Health Services, and the medical director of a children’s hospital. 

EXPLORING OPTIONS FOR IMPROVING THE MEDICARE PHYSICIAN

PAYMENT SYSTEM

On March 6, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health held an oversight hearing to provide an overview of recommendations from the 

Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) related to physician payment under Medicare, challenges in ensuring adequacy of 

physician payments, and beneficiary concerns with respect to the 

physician payment system. The hearing included two panels of witnesses. On the first panel, the subcommittee received testimony 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
191 

from the Chairman of MedPAC. On the second panel, the subcommittee heard from the Director of Health Care at the Government Accountability Office, a professor of medicine at Dartmouth 

University, and a Member of AARP. 

INSURING BRIGHT FUTURES: INSURING ACCESS TO DENTAL CARE AND

PROVIDING A HEALTHY START FOR CHILDREN

On March 27, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health held an oversight hearing to explore the importance of dental coverage for children and access to dental care in the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) and Medicaid. The hearing also examined the importance of early health care interventions for children 

in ensuring children have an early, healthy start, including mental 

health coverage. The subcommittee hearing was prompted by the 

death of two children—a 12-year-old boy in Maryland and a sixyear-old boy in Mississippi—who died as a result of delayed dental 

care. The subcommittee received testimony from two panels of witnesses. Witnesses included the Executive Director of the National 

Governor’s Association, the President of the American Dental Association, the Dental Director of the State of Mississippi, and other 

children’s health advocates. 

MEDICARE PROGRAM EFFICIENCY AND INTEGRITY

On April 18, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health held an oversight hearing to explore different ways in which the Medicare program could operate more efficiently. The hearing also investigated 

issues related to fraud, waste, and abuse within the Medicare program. The subcommittee received testimony from the Medicare 

Payment Advisory Commission, the Centers on Medicare and Medicaid Services, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

and the Department of Justice. 

LIVING WITHOUT HEALTH INSURANCE: WHY EVERY AMERICAN NEEDS

COVERAGE

On April 25, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health held an oversight hearing to explore the current status of those who lack health 

insurance in the United States: who the uninsured are, what it 

means for individuals and families to be uninsured, and the impact 

on communities, employers, and the country as a whole to have a 

large population of uninsured persons. The subcommittee received 

testimony from former Senator Thomas A. Daschle, the International President of the American Federation of State, County, 

and Municipal Employees, the Secretary of Health from the State 

of Vermont, a representative from the Chamber of Commerce, and 

a number of other health care providers and advocates. 

MEDICARE SAVINGS PROGRAMS AND LOW INCOME SUBSIDY: KEEPING

MEDICARE’S PROMISE FOR SENIORS AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

On May 15, 2007, the Subcommittee on Health held an oversight 

hearing to review the two low-income assistance programs that 

provide assistance with Medicare premiums, deductibles, and costsharing for low-income Medicare beneficiaries: Medicare Savings 

Programs (MSP) and the Low Income Subsidy program (LIS). The 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
192 

subcommittee received testimony from the Medicare Rights Center, 

the American Health Care Association, AARP, Health and Disability Advocates, a dual-eligible beneficiary, and the Social Security Administration’s Regional Commissioner from the New York 

region. 

HELPING FAMILIES WITH NEEDED CARE: MEDICAID’S CRITICAL ROLE

FOR AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES

On January 16, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health held an oversight hearing to explore Medicaid’s coverage for people with disabilities, including children with disabilities, the frail elderly, those 

with physical disabilities, as well as persons with mental illness 

and intellectual impairments. The subcommittee received testimony from a number of advocates for the disability community. 

COVERING UNINSURED KIDS: MISSED OPPORTUNITIES FOR MOVING

FORWARD

On January 29, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health held an oversight hearing that examined the role that Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program play in providing insurance coverage for children and how recent efforts may have improved or detracted from the ability of families to secure affordable coverage for 

their uninsured children. The subcommittee heard testimony from 

two panels of witnesses. The first panel included the Congressional 

Research Service, Georgetown University’s Health Policy Institute, 

First Focus, the mother of an SCHIP beneficiary, and the Director 

of the Schroeder Center for Healthcare Policy at the College of William and Mary. The second panel consisted of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the Deputy Commissioner of the New 

Jersey Department of Human Services, and the President and CEO 

of the New Hampshire Healthy Kids Corporation. 

COVERING UNINSURED KIDS: REVERSING PROGRESS ALREADY MADE

On February 26, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health held an oversight hearing that explored the effect of the August 17th directive 

issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) 

on State efforts to cover the uninsured, the State Children’s Health 

Insurance Program (SCHIP), the effect of recent CMS regulations 

on State Medicaid and SCHIP programs, and the effect that the 

economic downturn is having on State budgets and enrollment in 

health programs. The subcommittee received testimony from one 

panel of five governors representing the States of Ohio, Massachusetts, Washington, Mississippi, and Georgia. 

STATE FISCAL RELIEF: PROTECTING HEALTH COVERAGE IN AND

ECONOMIC DOWNTURN

On July 22, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health held an oversight 

hearing that examined the fiscal situation that States are currently 

facing, the effect of the economic downturn on Medicaid programs, 

and the effect that increased Federal support for Medicaid would 

have on economic recovery. The subcommittee received testimony 

from the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services, 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
193 

the American Enterprise Institute, and the Center for Health 

Transformation. 

AMERICA’S NEED FOR HEALTH REFORM

On September 18, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health held an 

oversight hearing to explore the current status of healthcare coverage in the United States: the successes, the failures and the 

problems that need to be addressed. The hearing specifically examined the role of employer-sponsored coverage, the individual insurance market, the role of public programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, State’s 

perspectives on healthcare coverage, the uninsured, and the underinsured. The subcommittee received testimony from the Governor 

of New Jersey, the Center for American Progress, the Georgetown 

University Health Policy Institute, the Commonwealth Fund, the 

Center for Health Transformation, and several witnesses that represented the business sector. 

TREATMENTS FOR AN AILING ECONOMY: PROTECTING HEALTHCARE

COVERAGE AND INVESTING IN BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH

On November 13, 2008, the Subcommittee on Health held an 

oversight hearing to examine the current fiscal situation facing 

States, the effect of the economic downturn on the healthcare coverage of individuals, the impact on the Medicaid program, and the 

effect that increased Federal support would have on economic recovery. The hearing also explored the positive economic role that 

the National Institutes of Health (NIH) plays in communities 

across America and how increased funding for the NIH would stimulate growth and lead to the creation of jobs across the country. 

The subcommittee received testimony from two panels of witnesses. 

The first panel consisted of the Governor of Arizona, a Senior Fellow from the Center for American Progress, the American Enterprise Institute, the CEO of 48Hour Print, and a Medicaid beneficiary. The second panel included the Acting Director of the NIH, 

the Executive Director of Families USA, the CEO of GlycoMimetics, 

Inc, and the Director of the New Jersey Center for Biomaterials. 

HEARINGS HELD

Covering the Uninsured Through the Eyes of a Child (Day 1).— 

Oversight hearing on covering uninsured children. Hearing held 

February 14, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–6. 

Covering the Uninsured Through the Eyes of a Child (Day 2).— 

Oversight hearing on covering uninsured children. Hearing held 

March 1, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–6. 

Exploring Options for Improving the Medicare Physician Payment 

System.—Oversight hearing on Exploring Options for Improving 

the Medicare Physician Payment System. Hearing held March 6, 

2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–13. 

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2000.—Hearing on the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. Hearing 

held March 8, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–15. H.R. 493. 

Insuring Bright Futures: Improving Access to Dental Care and 

Providing a Healthy Start for Children.—Oversight hearing on InVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:18 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00201 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
194 

suring Bright Futures: Improving Access to Dental Care and Providing a Healthy Start for Children. Hearing held March 27, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–25. 

Reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act.—Hearing 

on the Reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act. 

Hearing held April 17, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–29. 

Medicare Program Efficiency and Integrity.—Oversight hearing 

on Medicare Program Efficiency and Integrity. Hearing held April 

18, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–30. 

Living without Health Insurance: Why Every American Needs 

Coverage.—Oversight hearing on Living without Health Insurance. 

Hearing held April 25, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–34. 

The Heart Disease Education, Analysis Research, and Treatment 

for Women Act.—Hearing on the Heart Disease Education, Analysis 

Research, and Treatment for Women Act. Hearing held May 1, 

2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–37. H.R. 1014. 

The Melanie Blocker-Stokes Postpartum Depression Research and 

Health Care Act.—Hearing on The Melanie Blocker-Stokes 

Postpartum Depression Research and Health Care Act. Hearing 

held May 1, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–38. H.R. 20. 

Assessing the Impact of a Safe and Equitable Biosimilar Policy 

in the United States.—Oversight hearing on biosimilar policy in the 

United States. Hearing held May 2, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 

110–40. 

Assessing the Safety of Our Nation’s Drug Supply.—Oversight 

hearing on assessing the safety of our Nation’s drug supply in response to recent drug safety concerns. Hearing held May 9, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–43. 

Medicare Savings Programs and Low Income Subsidy: Keeping 

Medicare’s Promise for Seniors and People with Disabilities.—Oversight hearing on Medicare Savings Programs and Low Income Subsidy: Keeping Medicare’s Promise for Seniors and People with Disabilities. Hearing held May 15, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110– 

45. 

Reauthorization of the Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act.—Oversight hearing on Reauthorization of the Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act. Hearing held May 16, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–47. 

Programs Affecting Safety and Innovation in Pediatric Therapies.—Oversight hearing on programs affecting safety and innovation in pediatric therapies. Hearing held May 22, 2007. PRINTED, 

Serial No. 110–49. 

The Indian Health Care Improvement Act Amendments of 2007.— 

Hearing on the Indian Health Care Improvement Act Amendments 

of 2007. Hearing held June 7, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–54. 

H.R. 1328. 

Discussion Drafts Concerning Prescription Drug User Fee Act Reauthorization, Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act Reauthorization, Drug Safety, and Certain Pediatric Pharmaceutical 

and Device Legislation.—Hearing on draft legislation concerning 

the Prescription Drug User Fee Act Reauthorization, Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act Reauthorization, Drug Safety, 

and Certain Pediatric Pharmaceutical and Device Legislation. 

Hearing held June 12, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–55. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
195 

H.R. 1424, the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007.—Hearing on H.R. 1424, the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007. Hearing held June 15, 

2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–57. 

Answering the Call: Medical Monitoring and Treatment of 9/11 

Health Effects.—Oversight hearing on medical monitoring and 

treatment of health effects stemming from the 9/11 attacks. Hearing held September 18, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–64. 

The Food and Drug Import Safety Act.—Hearing on The Food 

and Drug Import Safety Act. Hearing held September 26, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–60. H.R. 3610. 

Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.—Hearing 

on the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. Hearing held October 3, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–69. H.R. 1108. 

H.R. 1343, Health Centers Renewal Act of 2007; H.R. 2915, National Health Service Corps Scholarship and Loan Repayment Programs Reauthorization Act of 2007; and H.R. 4230, School-Based 

Health Clinic Act of 2007.—Hearing on the Health Centers Renewal Act of 2007, National Health Service Corps Scholarship and 

Loan Repayment Programs Reauthorization Act of 2007 and 

School-Based Health Clinic Act of 2007. Hearing held December 4, 

2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–76. H.R. 1343, H.R. 2915, H.R. 

4230. 

Helping Families with Needed Care: Medicaid’s Critical Role for 

Americans with Disabilities.—Oversight hearing on Helping Families with Needed Care: Medicaid’s Critical Role for Americans with 

Disabilities. Hearing held January 16, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 

110–79. 

Veterinary Public Health Workforce Expansion Act of 2007.— 

Hearing on the Veterinary Public Health Workforce Expansion Act 

of 2007. Hearing held January 23, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 

110–81. H.R. 1232. 

Covering Uninsured Kids: Missed Opportunities for Moving Forward.—Oversight hearing on Covering Uninsured Kids: Missed Opportunities for Moving Forward. Hearing held January 29, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–85. 

Covering Uninsured Kids: Reversing Progress Already Made.— 

Oversight hearing on Covering Uninsured Kids: Reversing Progress 

Already Made. Hearing held February 26, 2008. PRINTED, Serial 

No. 110–91. 

H.R. 5613, Protecting the Medicaid Safety Net Act of 2008.— 

Hearing on H.R. 5613, Protecting the Medicaid Safety Net Act of 

2008. Hearing held April 3, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–104. 

Discussion Draft of the ‘Food and Drug Administration 

Globalization Act’ Legislation: Food Provisions.—Hearing on draft 

legislation concerning food provisions of the ‘Food and Drug Administration Globalization Act’. Hearing held April 24, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–108. 

Discussion Draft of the ‘Food and Drug Administration 

Globalization Act’ Legislation: Drug Safety.—Hearing on draft legislation concerning drug safety provisions of the ‘Food and Drug 

Administration Globalization Act’. Hearing held May 1, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–111. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
196 

Stem Cell Science: The Foundation for Future Cures.—Oversight 

hearing on stem cell science and Federal policy. Hearing held May 

8, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–115. 

Discussion Draft of the ‘Food and Drug Administration 

Globalization Act’ Legislation: Device and Cosmetic Safety Provisions.—Hearing on draft legislation concerning device and cosmetic 

safety provisions of the ‘Food and Drug Administration 

Globalization Act’. Hearing held May 14, 2008. PRINTED, Serial 

No. 110–117. 

H.R. 5998, Protecting Children’s Health Coverage Act of 2008.— 

Hearing on H.R. 5998, Protecting Children’s Health Coverage Act 

of 2008. Hearing held May 15, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110– 

118. 

Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act of 2007, and 

Breast Cancer Patient Protection Act of 2007.—Hearing on the 

Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act of 2007 and the 

Breast Cancer Patient Protection Act of 2007. Hearing held May 

21, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–121. H.R. 1157, H.R. 758. 

Discussion Draft of Health Information Technology and Privacy 

Legislation.—Hearing on the Discussion Draft of Health Information Technology and Privacy Legislation. Hearing held June 4, 

2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–122. 

Committee Prints on Administration Legislative Proposals on the 

Animal Drug User Fee Act Amendments of 2008 and the Animal 

Generic Drug User Fee Act of 2008.—Hearing on Committee Prints 

on Administration Legislative Proposals on the Animal Drug User 

Fee Act Amendments of 2008 and the Animal Generic Drug User 

Fee Act of 2008. Hearing held June 5, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 

110–123. 

Health Equity and Accountability Act of 2007.—Hearing on the 

Health Equity and Accountability Act of 2007. Hearing held June 

24, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–132. H.R. 3014. 

State Fiscal Relief: Protecting Health Coverage in an Economic 

Downturn.—Oversight hearing on State Fiscal Relief: Protecting 

Health Coverage in an Economic Downturn. Hearing held July 22, 

2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–139. 

James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2008.— 

Hearing on the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act 

of 2008. Hearing held July 31, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110– 

143. H.R. 6594. 

NIH Reform Act of 2006: Progress, Challenges, and Next Steps.— 

Oversight hearing on the implementation of the NIH Reform Act 

of 2006. Hearing held September 9, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 

110–144. 

America’s Need for Health Reform.—Oversight hearing on America’s Need for Health Reform. Hearing held September 18, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial Number 110–150. 

Treatments for an Ailing Economy: Protecting Health Care Coverage and Investing in Biomedical Research Steps.—Oversight 

hearing on Treatments for an Ailing Economy: Protecting Health 

Care Coverage and Investing in Biomedical Research. Hearing held 

November 13, 2008. PRINTED, Serial Number 110–153. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(197) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS

INTRODUCTION

During the 110th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and 

Investigations conducted major inquiries with respect to virtually 

all Federal agencies within the Committee’s jurisdiction, including 

the Departments of Commerce, Energy, Health and Human Services, the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institutes of 

Health, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the Consumer Product Safety 

Commission (CPSC), and the Federal Communications Commission 

(FCC). 

This oversight has exposed improper and illegal governmental 

and corporate activities, fraud, waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars, strengthened our national security and defence against terrorists, improved health care and environmental protection and generally enhanced the lives of American families and consumers in 

these trying economic times. These investigations also provided the 

basis for a number of major legislative initiatives of the Committee 

and will form the foundation for additional legislative actions in 

the next Congress. 

HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING 

TO HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE 

HEARINGS

POST KATRINA HEALTH CARE: CONTINUING CONCERNS AND IMMEDIATE

NEEDS IN THE NEW ORLEANS REGION

Hurricane Katrina, which made landfall near the Louisiana-Mississippi border on the morning of August 29, 2005, and the subsequent flooding caused by the failure of the New Orleans levee system resulted in one of the largest natural disasters to hit the 

United States. The physical and economic aftermath of the storm 

shattered the region’s healthcare infrastructure. Thousands of physicians, mental health providers, nurses, dentists, optometrists, lab 

technicians, and other health professionals were displaced by the 

storm, and hospitals, clinics, dialysis facilities, nursing homes, and 

other healthcare facilities were damaged, with many forced to 

close. The devastation of New Orleans’ healthcare system was especially profound for the region’s large number of low-income and uninsured, many of whom depended heavily on Charity Hospital, one 

of the nation’s oldest health facilities dedicated to treating the poor 

and disadvantaged. The closure of ‘‘Big Charity,’’ along with the 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
198 

Veterans Medical Center in downtown New Orleans, also meant 

the loss of the State’s flagship teaching hospital and the only Level 

I trauma center in the Gulf Coast region. 

The Committee focused significant efforts during this Congress 

on stabilizing and restoring the New Orleans healthcare system, 

recognizing that the availability of healthcare services and 

healthcare-related jobs, and the restoration of access for the uninsured as well as the insured, were essential to the region’s longterm recovery. Committee staff spent the week of February 12, 

2007, in the New Orleans region. Staff found, among other things, 

middle class residents who had lost their jobs and health insurance 

lining up overnight to receive primary care from volunteers, emergency rooms routinely exceeding capacity, and virtually every other 

healthcare sector struggling, fractured, or broken. Stakeholders 

also appeared to be at an impasse over the best approach to the 

role of a re-built public teaching hospital in the context of developing proposals for a statewide restructuring of Louisiana’s 

healthcare financing system. 

At a March 13, 2007, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearing, entitled ‘‘Post Katrina Health Care: Continuing Concerns and Immediate Needs in the New Orleans Region,’’ public 

and private healthcare providers, as well as health policy experts, 

were asked to identify steps that could be taken immediately by 

Government officials and/or the Congress to restore access to care 

and quickly stabilize delivery systems. In response, Health and 

Human Services (HHS) Secretary Leavitt granted funding to public 

and private clinics, and grants to support retention and recruitment of medical providers in an effort to expand access to medical 

services in the region. 

POST KATRINA HEALTH CARE: PROGRESS AND CONTINUING

CONCERNS—PART II

After a follow-up field investigation to examine progress and assess issues that had become more serious in the intervening 

months, the Subcommittee held another hearing on August 1, 2007. 

The loss of Big Charity, which had served as the principal training 

ground for the area’s doctors and allied health professionals, and 

the lack of flexible federal payment rules, was jeopardizing medical 

residency program accreditations and imposing substantial funding 

and administrative burdens on other medical schools in the State. 

In addition, the five acute care hospitals remaining in the area 

were reporting unsustainable operating losses due largely to extraordinary temporary nurse staffing costs, utility and insurance 

expenses, and costs for recruiting and retaining doctors and hospital staff. Moreover, plans for the building of a new academic medical center to replace Big Charity continued to be delayed, while 

uncertainty had arisen as to whether the Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) would rebuild its hospital within the city limits, as 

part of the planned downtown medical corridor. 

In response to issues spotlighted at the hearing, HHS began considering ways to reconfigure graduate medical education payment 

systems so that physician and nurse training programs dislocated 

by the storm could continue. In November following the hearing, 

the VA entered into an agreement with the City of New Orleans 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
199 

to begin construction of a new VA hospital. In addition, plans for 

restructuring federal financing of health care for the uninsured became focused on a regional pilot program as a preliminary to statewide restructuring. 

With respect to the five hospitals’ request for targeted federal assistance, the Committee also asked the Government Accountability 

Office (GAO) and the Inspector General of HHS (OIG) to evaluate 

the requests and the risks to the community resulting from potential reductions in access to acute care. On July 17, 2008, GAO provided the Committee with an in-depth report using three models of 

financial impact analysis. The Report is entitled ‘‘Hurricane 

Katrina: Trends in the Operating Results of Five Hospitals in New 

Orleans before and after Hurricane Katrina.’’ OIG also issued a series of reports, between May and September 2008, providing independent review of the revenue and expense information the five 

hospitals had submitted to the Committee, related audits of the 

hospitals’ Medicare wage index data, and a profitability analysis of 

the hospitals comparing them with peer providers. 

As a result of this investigation and these hearings: 

• HHS released $100 million in Deficit Reduction Act healthcare 

monies to establish and maintain primary care clinics throughout 

the metropolitan area over the next 3 years, and issued grants to 

support retention and recruitment of medical providers to expand 

access to medical services in the region. 

• In November 2007, HHS began work on revisions to its Medicare graduate medical education rules to address community disaster situations involving the loss of a major teaching hospital. 

• The VA entered into an agreement with the City of New Orleans to begin construction of a new hospital, as plans developed for 

creation of a new medical district in downtown New Orleans that 

would include a new VA Hospital and a new public teaching hospital. The co-location of the two hospitals will facilitate the sharing 

of support services and other resources. • The Health Resources and Services Administration provided 

technical assistance to providers in areas ravaged by the Hurricane 

to increase healthcare access for underserved communities. • In September 2008, Congress approved, and the President signed, legislation appropriating $600 million in Social Services 

Block Grant monies that will be available to the State of Louisiana 

for assistance with stabilization of its healthcare system. The Congressional relief package provides flexible funding to States impacted by natural disasters in 2008, as well as States such as Louisiana still struggling to recover from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. 

PREDATORY SALES PRACTICES IN MEDICARE ADVANTAGE

On Tuesday, June 26, 2007, the Subcommittee heard testimony 

from victims of Medicare Advantage (MA) marketing abuses by 

sales agents, as well as industry representatives, State regulators, 

and the Director of the MA program at the Centers for Medicare 

and Medicaid Services. As a result of the investigation and hearings: 

• CMS imposed a marketing moratorium on seven insurance 

companies associated with some of the more egregious sales practices targeting seniors. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
200 

• In September 2007, CMS issued the first monetary penalties 

against MA plans for marketing abuses. 

• On October 1, 2007, as a result of the Chairman’s request, 

CMS made public the corrective action plans it had imposed on 

various MA plans. 

• In fall 2007, CMS launched a ‘‘secret shopper’’ program to ensure that plans were complying with CMS’ marketing guidelines. 

On May 20, 2008, the majority staff issued a staff report on additional problems with the design, oversight, and administration of 

MA plans. Two months later, on July 15, 2008, Congress overrode 

the President’s veto of H.R. 6331, the ‘‘Medicare Improvements for 

Patients and Providers Act of 2008.’’ This legislation addresses 

problems identified by the Subcommittee and prohibits MA and 

prescription drug plans and their sales agents from selling their 

products via door-to-door sales; cold calling; cross selling nonhealth-related products; offering meals of any sort; and conducting 

sales activities of any kind at educational events or in healthcare 

settings. The bill also calls for limits on commissions and gifts, and 

mandates that agents be licensed and appointed as required under 

State law and receive annual training on Medicare and the specific 

MA and Part D plans they sell. The legislation also addresses some 

of the serious problems highlighted in the Majority Staff Report by, 

for instance, imposing quality improvement programs on MA private-fee-for-service plans and Special Needs Plans. 

The Committee will continue to monitor CMS’ enforcement of the 

new provisions, as well as plan provider misconduct, particularly 

during open enrollment periods, and related abuses such as cherry 

picking of enrollees, discriminatory benefit administration, and the 

adequacy of information about plan options for beneficiaries. 

NASPER: WHY HAS THE NATIONAL ALL SCHEDULES PRESCRIPTION

ELECTRONIC REPORTING ACT NOT BEEN IMPLEMENTED?

On October 24, 2007, the Subcommittee heard testimony that the 

number of deaths caused by drug overdoses of prescription opioids 

such as oxycodone, methadone, and morphine in the United States 

now outnumbers deaths caused by heroin or crack cocaine. Our 

hearing focused on the failure of the Administration to address prescription drug abuse effectively by funding the ‘‘National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting Act of 2005’’ (NASPER), 

Public Law 109 60, a new program at HHS passed by Congress and 

signed into law by the President in 2005 that establishes uniform 

standards for State-run prescription drug monitoring programs 

through a program. The Administration has funded a similar but 

more narrowly tailored grant program through the Department of 

Justice, and has struggled to encourage State participation and to 

foster interoperability among States with existing programs, resulting in a patchwork. 

The Subcommittee’s oversight efforts prompted the Department 

of Justice (DOJ) to impose new grant guidelines requiring interoperability, and to consider ways to encourage State prescription 

monitoring programs to more fully engage healthcare providers, 

health researchers, and public health administrators in the battle 

against prescription drug abuse. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
201 

INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES

MEDICARE ADVANTAGE SALES FRAUD AND ABUSE

The Committee continues to examine predatory and fraudulent 

sales practices associated with Medicare Advantage plans, particularly plans marketed to vulnerable disabled and senior Medicare 

beneficiaries whose low income levels qualify them for Medicaid assistance. The Committee examined allegations in October 2008 that 

independent sales agents for Health Net, Inc., an insurance company that offers private Medicare health care and prescription drug 

plans, appeared to have engaged in serious marketing abuses in 

connection with its Medicare Special Needs Plan. The allegations 

concerned ‘‘robo-calls’’ (auto-dialed telemarketing calls) made to 

homes that in certain instances connected the recipient to a sales 

agent who provided misleading information about network restrictions, enrollment deadlines, and other important issues. In addition, we received evidence that sales agents for the company had 

enrolled low-income, non-English speaking beneficiaries in plans 

that, because of misinformation about network restrictions, ended 

up exposing the beneficiaries to medical expenses they could not 

pay. The investigation revealed gaps in CMS’ enforcement and 

oversight capabilities with respect to plans, as well as misinformation among the Medicare Advantage industry regarding telemarketing, do-not-call lists, and consumer privacy laws, and indications that agents for other plans have engaged, or may be engaging, in similar exploitive conduct. 

HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING 

TO DRUG SAFETY 

HEARINGS

ADEQUACY OF FDA EFFORTS TO ASSURE THE SAFETY OF THE DRUG

SUPPLY—PART I

On February 13, 2007, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held the first in a series of hearings examining whether the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is fulfilling its mandate to protect the American people from drugs whose risks outweigh their benefits. This hearing focused on a case study involving 

the antibiotic Ketek. 

The Subcommittee’s investigation revealed that serious irregularities were found during a monitoring visit at the study site of Dr. 

Kirkland-Campbell, one of the clinical investigators in a major 

Ketek clinical trial. Dr. Kirkland-Campbell eventually pled guilty 

to fraud in conducting her part of this study, and served a 4-year 

sentence in Federal prison. FDA found other serious violations of 

good clinical practices and study protocols at four of ten sites inspected, and ultimately decided that the study should not be relied 

upon. Despite the discredited trial study and over the objections of 

FDA reviewers and investigators, FDA managers approved the 

drug. It was only after Subcommittee investigators began looking 

into serious adverse events associated with Ketek, including liver 

failures that resulted in 13 deaths, did FDA change the labeling 

and add a ‘‘black box’’ warning for its use. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
202 

As a result of our investigation, on February 12, 2007, the day 

before the hearing, FDA announced revisions to the Ketek label 

that removed two indications for sinusitis and bronchitis, as had 

been recommended by a principle witness at the hearing (a former 

FDA reviewer assigned to Ketek). 

ADEQUACY OF FDA EFFORTS TO ASSURE THE SAFETY OF THE DRUG

SUPPLY—PART II

At the March 22, 2007, hearing, Dr. von Eschenbach, FDA Commissioner, testified concerning many of the issues raised at the earlier drug safety hearing as well as about FDA’s ‘‘New Drug Safety 

Initiatives.’’ Three additional witnesses testified regarding recent 

assessments of FDA’s drug safety system including a GAO Report, 

entitled ‘‘Drug Safety: Improvement Needed in FDA’s Post-market 

Decision-making and Oversight Process’’; an Institute of Medicine 

Report, entitled ‘‘The Future of Drug Safety: Promoting and Protecting the Health of the Public’’; and an article published in the 

Archives of Internal Medicine, entitled ‘‘Drug Safety: A Proposal for 

Sweeping Changes’’. These witnesses each presented comprehensive critiques of FDA’s drug safety operations along with specific 

recommendations for reform. 

As a result of our investigation, on October 24, 2007, FDA released a 12-page ‘‘warning letter’’ to Sanofi-Aventis concluding that 

Aventis did not adhere to applicable statutory and regulatory requirements governing clinical trials. The warning letter further 

stated that the company was aware that data it presented to FDA 

was compromised. The letter required Aventis to address the numerous deficiencies listed in the letter and inform FDA of all corrective action taken by Aventis to address the identified deficiencies. 

FDA FOREIGN DRUG INSPECTION PROGRAM: A SYSTEM AT RISK

On November 1, 2007, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a hearing that examined the ability of the Food 

and Drug Administration to adequately monitor the safety and efficacy of drugs imported from overseas. The Subcommittee’s investigation revealed that during the last decade the Government Accountability Office, Congress, and FDA have all recognized serious 

shortcomings with FDA’s foreign inspection program. Despite an 

increase in the volume of imported drug products, resources dedicated to the foreign drug inspection program have declined. It also 

highlighted an anomaly in current law and practice at the FDA 

that raises serious concerns about the safety and efficacy of many 

drugs imported into the United States. Current law requires that 

FDA conduct follow-up inspections for domestic firms every two 

years. However, the law is silent on foreign firms even though foreign firms are producing large quantities of drugs used by U.S. consumers. Some foreign firms producing drugs for U.S. market have 

not been inspected for durations of 12 years or more. 

As a result of our investigation and hearing: 

• FDA has committed to establishing offices beyond U.S. borders, 

in China, India, Latin America, Europe, and eventually, in the 

Middle East. The FDA office in China is already being established. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
203 

FDA is currently engaged in opening offices in India, Europe, and 

Latin America. • FDA is currently reviewing its resources for this critical area. 

It is expected that additional resources will be sought during the 

next administration to begin closing the gap for foreign inspections 

of foreign firms that manufacture and ship drug products to the 

U.S. Additionally, partly because of this investigation, FDA is continuing to review its current IT capabilities regarding the foreign 

drug inspection program. FDA’s existing IT platform is incapable 

of allowing the agency to adequately track foreign firms shipping 

drug products into the U.S. Because of this, FDA has also had significant difficulty in prioritizing foreign inspections. FDA efforts to 

improve its information technology (IT) capabilities should allow 

for enhancements in the foreign inspection program which should 

result in improving the safety of imported drugs. • Finally, FDA has begun a new pilot program with partners in 

the European Union and Australia wherein they will jointly plan, 

allocate, and conduct certain inspections of facilities in developing 

countries that manufacture the starting materials for many of the 

drugs Americans take. If this program is successful, it could be expanded to include other types of drug manufacturing facilities. By 

leveraging the resources of each agency and sharing vital information, the number of foreign facilities in FDA’s inspection data base 

will expand while allowing FDA to target its resources on products 

believed to present the highest risk to U.S. consumers. 

SCIENCE AND MISSION AT RISK: FDA’S SELF-ASSESSMENT

As a companion to our investigation into FDA’s ability to properly protect our Nation’s drug and food supply from overseas imports, on January 29, 2008, the Subcommittee held a hearing to receive key testimony from the Food and Drug Administration’s 

Science Board. In December 2006, FDA Commissioner Dr. Andrew 

von Eschenbach requested that the Science Board, which is the advisory board to the Commissioner, form a subcommittee to assess 

whether ‘‘science and technology’’ at the agency is capable of supporting existing and future regulatory operations. Their assessments were compiled in a report entitled, ‘‘FDA Science and Mission at Risk: Report of the Subcommittee on Science and Technology.’’ The Science Board report raised concerns about several aspects of FDA’s mission and current capability and it suggested the 

agency’s overall mission of protecting the public’s health was at 

risk. 

At this hearing, the Subcommittee received testimony from members of the Science Board regarding their findings, which confirmed 

the work of the Subcommittee’s investigation that there were serious scientific, operational, resource and technology problems confronting FDA that the current Administration had ignored to the 

Nation’s peril. Also testifying at the hearing were the Government 

Accountability Office and the Congressional Research Service who 

testified regarding recently conducted evaluations and audits of 

FDA public health and safety programs. Finally, FDA Commissioner von Eschenbach attempted to respond to the challenges facing FDA, particularly those raised by the Science Board Report, 

and how some of these challenges should be addressed. Because the 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
204 

Commissioner had not had time to formally respond to the Science 

Board report, the Subcommittee received an assurance from the 

Commissioner to return to more fully explain the FDA’s strategy 

to overcome its shortcomings. 

KETEK CLINICAL STUDY FRAUD: WHAT DID AVENTIS KNOW?

On Tuesday, February 12, 2008, the Subcommittee on Oversight 

and Investigations held a hearing focused on the role of Ketek’s 

sponsor, Aventis (currently Sanofi-Aventis), in failing to monitor 

adequately a pivotal clinical trial, ultimately rejected by FDA, as 

fraudulent. Four witnesses, including an industry insider and three 

FDA criminal investigators, testified that Aventis was well aware 

that it was submitting faulty and probably fraudulent data to FDA 

in connection with the Ketek approval. 

As a result of our investigation and hearing: 

• The FDA finally disqualified one of the main culprits in the 

scandal. Dr. Kirkman-Campbell was one of the principal investigators hired by Sanofi-Aventis to participate in the Ketek clinical 

trial which was later found to be fraudulent. On May 8, 2008, FDA 

issued a Notice of Disqualification to Receive Investigational New 

Drugs to Dr. Kirkman-Campbell—three years after she was convicted of fraud in connection with the Ketek clinical trial. 

• Provisions in the current food and drug bill being considered 

as a consequence of this hearing include: 1) providing FDA criminal 

investigators with subpoena power; 2) tightening the existing prohibitions against clinical trial fraud and 3) whistleblower protections for food and drug industry employees. 

FDA’S FOREIGN DRUG INSPECTION PROGRAM: WEAKNESSES PLACE

AMERICANS AT RISK

On April 22, 2008, the Subcommittee held another hearing to examine deficiencies in the Food and Drug Administration’s resources 

and strategies to improve drug inspection with particular emphasis 

on its foreign drug inspection program. This hearing stemmed partly from a previous commitment made by the FDA Commissioner at 

a prior hearing to return within 60 days to the Committee to address the concerns reported by FDA’s Science Advisory Board, the 

Government Accountability Office, and the Subcommittee. Indeed, 

at this hearing, the Subcommittee heard testimony from the FDA 

Commissioner regarding how the agency plans to address the multitude of weaknesses evident in FDA’s effort to protect Americans 

from unsafe drugs made abroad. The hearing also sought views 

from a host of outside experts regarding FDA’s efforts to regulate 

foreign-made drug products and what changes are necessary to enhance this program. The hearing produced a significant record of 

shortcomings that became the basis of legislative proposals to reform the FDA. 

THE HEPARIN DISASTER: CHINESE COUNTERFEITS AND AMERICAN

FAILURES

On April 29, 2008, the Subcommittee held another in a series of 

hearings examining FDA’s drug approval process and its ability to 

protect Americans from unsafe drugs. This hearing focused on the 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
205 

circumstances surrounding the catastrophe caused by the contamination of the drug heparin. Testifying at this hearing were the two 

companies, Baxter International and Scientific Protein Laboratories, whose products brought the contaminated heparin into the 

United States, as well as an expert on the use of heparin and its 

manufacture, and related blood thinners. Additionally, FDA testified regarding its actions leading up to the contamination outbreak 

and after the outbreak was discovered. Finally, the Subcommittee 

also heard from Committee staff regarding its investigation of the 

outbreak and from family members of victims who died after being 

treated with heparin. 

The FDA made a number of significant changes in their policies 

and procedures to address the shortcoming identified by the series 

of Subcommittee investigations and hearings on drug safety. They 

included: 

• In May 2008, FDA finally admitted that it needed additional 

resources to accomplish its mission and requested resources from 

Congress. FDA has also committed to hiring more people and improving its information technology systems 

• In May 2008, FDA announced its Sentinel Initiative—The Sentinel network will enable the FDA to query the electronic databases 

of other Federal agencies and large healthcare systems (including 

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, health maintenance 

organizations, and insurance companies) and virtually learn from 

millions of patients’ experiences if problems are occurring with 

FDA-regulated drugs or medical devices. 

• FDA has recently begun quarterly reports that list certain 

drugs that are being evaluated by FDA for potential safety issues 

because of high numbers of reported side effects and/or adverse 

events. 

• FDA has expanded its service of posting recalls, market withdrawals, and safety alerts regarding potentially unsafe products on 

the market. 

• On September 15, 2008, the drug company Pfizer launched a 

Web site detailing medication safety, including ‘‘sections written for 

patients and for health professionals, with plain-English explanations, engaging graphics and clips of video hosts discussing important points. It has a prominent link to information about how 

to report a drug side effect to MedWatch, the Food and Drug Administration reporting program.’’ 

INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES

VYTORIN AND THE ENHANCE AND SEAS STUDIES

On December 11, 2007, the Committee began its investigation 

which is still ongoing into the drug Vytorin, an anti-cholesterol 

drug manufactured and marketed jointly by Merck and ScheringPlough. A clinical trial for the drug, called ENHANCE, was completed in April 2006, but as of December 2007, the companies had 

not yet released its results. Although Vytorin was approved by the 

FDA for its ability to lower cholesterol in the blood, there were no 

studies demonstrating that it could reduce cholesterol build-up in 

the arteries, or reduce heart attacks, strokes, or deaths. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
206 

There was considerable speculation in the scientific community 

that the ENHANCE study was being suppressed because its results 

were unfavorable. After our letters were sent, the companies hastily released the results of the ENHANCE trial in a press conference in January 2008. The results showed that Vytorin failed to 

reduce cholesterol build-up in arteries. 

The Subcommittee’s investigation revealed that ad hoc scientific 

panels were created to influence the interpretation of the ENHANCE trial, that Schering-Plough corporate officials may have 

sold stock in the company prior to the release of the trial results, 

and that another trial, called SEAS, found an increased risk of cancer in patients taking Vytorin, and that again, scientific consultants may have been commissioned to influence the interpretation 

of these study results. Our investigation into the Vytorin trials also 

led to our inquiry into advertising by the companies that appeared 

to be misleading. As discussed later, we included Vytorin’s ‘‘Food 

and Family’’ television advertisements in our direct-to-consumer ad 

investigation and hearing. 

In response to our investigation of Vytorin, the following actions 

have already been taken that generally improved public health and 

safety: • The ENHANCE trial results were made public nearly 2 years 

after completion of the study, so that physicians and patients could 

have the proper information required to make clinical decisions. 

• FDA determined that the Vytorin ads were not fully informative and required changes in the ads. 

• Merck and Schering-Plough removed all Vytorin ads from 

broadcast television. 

• Drug companies are less willing to suppress clinical trial results. 

HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO FOOD

SAFETY

HEARINGS

DIMINISHED CAPACITY: CAN THE FDA ASSURE THE SAFETY AND

SECURITY OF THE NATION’S FOOD SUPPLY?—PART I

On April 24, 2007, the Subcommittee held its first hearing regarding the safety and security of the Nation’s food supply. The 

purpose of this hearing was to examine the issue of food safety as 

it pertained to foods for both human and animal consumption. At 

this hearing, the Subcommittee attempted to access the extent and 

magnitude of foodborne contamination outbreaks and whether the 

FDA could adequately ensure the safety of food consumed in this 

country. 

In particular, this hearing focused on recent food contamination 

outbreaks involving spinach, lettuce, peanut butter, as well as melamine-tainted wheat gluten in pet food. The hearing featured witnesses who had experienced illnesses resulting from food poisoning. 

In addition, an expert from GAO provided an overview of high-risk 

issues related to food safety, and a veterinarian testified about the 

extent of pet illnesses and deaths caused by the episode of contaminated pet food. Finally, testimony was heard from officials of four 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
207 

companies that produced contaminated food products and pet foods. 

At the conclusion of this hearing, it was readily apparent to the 

Subcommittee that FDA, at present, was unable to protect the safety of the Nation’s food supply. The Subcommittee concluded that 

further investigation into the matter would be necessary and future 

hearings would be held on the subject. 

DIMINISHED CAPACITY: CAN THE FDA ASSURE THE SAFETY AND

SECURITY OF OUR NATION’S FOOD SUPPLY?—PART II

The second food safety hearing on July 17, 2007, consisted of 

three panels of witnesses, and focused on the adequacy of FDA’s efforts to protect Americans from unsafe food and the effect that a 

proposed Office of Regulatory Affairs (ORA) reorganization would 

have on FDA’s ability to carry out its mandate to assure food safety. 

On the first panel, Committee staff testified regarding findings 

made during its food safety investigation. Committee staff found 

that FDA had failed to adequately respond to increased imports of 

foreign food products, FDA lacked sufficient resources and authority to ensure food safety, and the proposed reorganization plan, 

which would close seven field laboratories, change FDA’s structure, 

and centralize decision making in Washington, would exacerbate 

the current food safety situation. Finally, Committee staff found 

that FDA’s current regulatory approach that relied on voluntary 

guidelines appeared inadequate in responding to the changing food 

industry. 

The second panel featured the testimony of seven individuals. 

The first two witnesses testified how FDA’s current resources and 

policies cripple the agency’s mission to protect Americans from unsafe food and drugs. The remaining witnesses on the panel were 

FDA employees who testified that the ORA reorganization and closing of field laboratories would severely impair FDA’s ability to ensure food safety. The last panel was comprised of four officials from 

FDA headquarters who presented testimony and answered questions about the agency’s ability to protect Americans from unsafe 

food. 

After this hearing, FDA canceled its plan to reorganize its Office 

of Regulatory Affairs after FDA failed to provide any justification 

for doing so. Among other things, the reorganization plan called for 

closing 7 of 13 FDA field laboratories. Today, those laboratories remain open. Since this hearing, FDA has canceled its plans to reorganize its Office of Regulatory Affairs. 

DIMINISHED CAPACITY: CAN THE FDA ASSURE THE SAFETY AND

SECURITY OF OUR NATION’S FOOD SUPPLY?—PART III

The third food safety hearing on October 11, 2007, focused on the 

safety of food imported into the United States and the adequacy of 

the efforts of both FDA and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to ensure the safety of unsafe, imported food. 

Committee staff testified regarding its examination of food safety 

issues, including the Committee staff’s trip to China. While in 

China, Committee staff found that the Chinese food supply chain 

does not meet international standards and the Chinese government 

appeared determine to avoid embarrassing food safety outbreaks in 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
208 

export markets due to the damaging and potentially lasting effects 

this would have on its brand. Most importantly, however, Committee staff concluded that the lack of meaningful internal regulation of farming and food processing in China, the advanced development of the counterfeiting industry, and the willingness of some 

entrepreneurs in both China and the United States to smuggle 

foodstuffs that do not meet quality standards, necessitated a much 

more rigorous program of inspection and laboratory testing in 

China and at U.S. ports of entry than the FDA had been willing 

or able to do. 

On the second panel, a Congressional Research Service analyst 

testified regarding the methods employed by Japan and Hong Kong 

to ensure the safety of food imports from China, and an executive 

of an American company in China testified about quality control 

measures that his company employs to assure food safety in its 

Chinese facilities. FDA and United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) officials appeared on the last panel and testified 

about their agencies’ efforts to ensure the safety of imported food. 

After this hearing, in November 2007, the Administration released an ‘‘Action Plan for Import Safety: A Roadmap for Continual 

Improvement,’’ which outlined how the United States could improve the safety of all imported products. On the same day, FDA 

unveiled its ‘‘Food Protection Plan: An Integrated Strategy for Protecting the Nation’s Food Supply.’’ This plan addressed both food 

safety and food defense for domestic and imported products. Many 

of the Committee’s recommendations on how the United States 

could improve the safety of food appeared in the plans. 

DIMINISHED CAPACITY: CAN THE FDA ASSURE THE SAFETY AND

SECURITY OF OUR NATION’S FOOD SUPPLY?—PART IV

The final food safety hearing in the first session was held on November 13, 2007, and focused on decisions by FDA and USDA to 

allow meat and seafood to be packaged in a modified atmosphere 

containing carbon monoxide. In particular, this hearing examined 

potential consumer deception and food safety issues with meat and 

seafood packaged in an atmosphere containing carbon monoxide 

and deficiencies in FDA’s ‘‘Generally Recognized As Safe’’ (GRAS) 

determination process Majority staff began this investigation in 

February 2006 by sending a letter to FDA requesting information 

about the agency’s ‘‘Generally Recognized As Safe’’ (GRAS) determinations. Representatives Dingell and Stupak also wrote to HHS 

Secretary Michael O. Leavitt requesting that he ‘‘rescind its GRAS 

determinations regarding the use of carbon monoxide to color meat 

and fish until such time as notice and comment rulemaking can determine whether such practices, under existing conditions of refrigeration and labeling and existing consumer practices, are safe for 

American consumers.’’ 

At this hearing, representatives from FDA and USDA discussed 

their agency’s decisions to allow meat and seafood to be packaged 

in a modified atmosphere containing carbon monoxide. Subcommittee Members also heard testimony from representatives of 

consumer organizations concerned with food safety who discussed 

consumer deception issues surrounding carbon monoxide atmosphere packaged products. Finally, the chief executive officers of 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
209 

companies testified about the use of carbon monoxide in the packaging of their products. 

Prior to this hearing, Safeway, Inc., Giant Food, LLC, Stop & 

Shop Supermarket Company, and Tyson Foods, Inc., announced 

they would cease the sale of meat packaged in a modified atmosphere containing carbon monoxide Target Corporation decided to 

continue selling such meat, but said it would label those products 

to alert consumers of its practice. 

CONTAMINATED FOOD: PRIVATE SECTOR ACCOUNTABILITY

The next food safety hearing was held on February 26, 2008, and 

focused on companies that have produced dangerous, contaminated 

food and examined how factors within the private sector, including 

the effects of lax regulation, contribute to outbreaks of foodborne 

illnesses. This hearing also explored how the private sector can 

prevent future food contamination outbreaks. 

This hearing examined recent food contamination episodes including Salmonella tainted peanut butter and pot pies, botulism in 

canned food products, produce contamination outbreaks, and the 

largest beef recall in history. Chief executives from five companies 

who produced some of these products testified at the hearing. Also 

testifying at this hearing was a food safety attorney and expert 

who testified regarding his many experiences dealing with companies who have produced food contamination outbreaks, the Executive Director of the Southern Shrimp Alliance who testified regarding the safety of imported seafood, and, finally, a representative 

from the Humane Society of the United States who testified regarding deficiencies in the regulation of the meat industry. 

REGULATORY FAILURE: MUST AMERICA LIVE WITH UNSAFE FOOD?

This hearing held on March 12, 2008, focused on unanswered 

questions from the Subcommittee’s February 26, 2008, food safety 

hearing. During the February 26, 2008, hearing, a wide range of 

private sector firms testified regarding potential solutions to remedy the problem of contamination in their food products. This hearing gave the primary regulators of the country’s food supply, FDA 

and USDA, the opportunity to supply the Committee with the 

changes that they have implemented in an attempt to cope with 

the problem of pathogens in the Nation’s food supply. 

This hearing also featured the testimony of the Mr. Steven 

Mendall, President of the Hallmark/Westland Meat Company, who 

testified regarding the circumstances surrounding his firm’s record 

recall of more than 143 million pounds of ground beef. Because of 

Mr. Mendell was unwilling to appear before the Subcommittee voluntarily, the Subcommittee held a business meeting on March 5, 

2008, and unanimously voted to authorize the issuance of a subpoena for Mr. Mendell to compel his testimony at this hearing. 

Finally, this hearing also examined the use of food irradiation as 

a step to increase the safety of the Nation’s food supply and why 

FDA had not acted on several petitions seeking its approval for use 

on certain foods for more than eight years. 

After this hearing, in August 2008, FDA finally approved the use 

of irradiation on fresh iceberg lettuce and fresh spinach. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
210 

AMERICAN LIVES STILL AT RISK: WHEN WILL FDA’S FOOD PROTECTION

PLAN BE FULLY FUNDED AND IMPLEMENTED?

The eighth food safety hearing held by the Subcommittee during 

the 110th Congress was held on June 12, 2008. At this hearing, the 

Subcommittee received key testimony from the Food and Drug Administration regarding how the agency is addressing its many 

weaknesses in protecting the Nation’s food supply. The hearing focused largely on what progress FDA has made in implementing the 

‘‘Food Protection Plan,’’ which was issued by the Administration in 

late 2007, and what resources the agency believes are needed to 

achieve key milestones associated with this effort. The Subcommittee also attempted to understand what and when additional 

legislative tools and budgetary resources are needed to best accomplish this effort. Finally, the Subcommittee also sought the views 

from various outside experts regarding FDA’s efforts to safeguard 

the Nation’s food supply and what additional efforts are necessary 

to enhance FDA’s food safety program. 

THE RECENT SALMONELLA OUTBREAK: LESSONS LEARNED AND

CONSEQUENCES TO INDUSTRY AND PUBLIC HEALTH

On July 31, 2008, the Subcommittee held its ninth hearing regarding the safety and security of the Nation’s food supply. This 

hearing examined the events surrounding the recent Salmonella 

Saint Paul outbreak. The hearing focused on the efforts of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and FDA to identify the 

cause of the national Salmonella outbreak. 

The hearing also examined a portion of the Bioterrorism Act of 

2002, which required FDA to establish procedures to trace and 

track food commodities and maintain accurate chain-of-custody 

records, to assess whether additional alterations to the Bioterrorism Act are required. Further, the hearing looked at proposals 

developed by States and certain grower industries to establish 

traceability systems. Finally, the hearing allowed Members to consider what changes might be necessary to ensure that regulators 

are prepared to respond rapidly to future outbreaks. 

INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES

NATIONAL FOOD SAFETY SURVEY OF CORPORATE FOOD PRODUCERS

In May, the Committee sent letters to 51 of the largest food processing firms in an effort to determine the source and extent of 

threats to the safety of the Nation’s food supply. The letter of inquiry asked each company about their history of recalls, food safety 

alerts, and all instances of know microbiological or chemical contamination of their products since 2000. The responses are being 

currently compiled and analyzed to identify food safety issues that 

need to be addressed in the future. 

The survey was conducted to comprehend important issues relating to safety of the nation’s food supply. The companies were asked 

to provide the following pertinent information: (1) A list of recalls 

(microbial, chemical or physical) and the type of recalls that were 

done, (2) Internal test results of microbial contamination with 

foodborne pathogens of domestic and imported foods, and actions 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
211 

taken to address the contamination, (3) Internal test results pertaining to chemical contamination with hazardous chemical agents 

of domestic and imported foods, and actions taken to address the 

contamination, and (4) Compliance with FDA or USDA site inspections. The Staff is currently analyzing the results and plans to release them in early 2009. 

INFANT FORMULA AND BISPHENOL A

On January 17, 2008, the Committee began an investigation 

which is still continuing into the use of the chemical Bisphenol A 

(BPA) in the lining of infant formula cans. The investigation has 

revealed that: 

• BPA is a commonly used chemical that hardens plastic; its use 

as a liner in aluminum cans serves to protect the cans contents 

from the can metal and exposure to outside air. 

• BPA also has estrogen hormone-like properties and has been 

linked to developmental defects. BPA in the lining of infant formula cans may result in the chemical leaching into the formula 

itself, thereby exposing infants and children to the chemical. 

• Our letter to the major manufacturers of liquid infant formula 

revealed that BPA is used nearly universally in infant formula can 

linings and that manufacturers were not properly testing for its 

presence in the formula. We also discovered that FDA based its determination of BPA’s safety on a few industry-funded studies, and 

ignored the totality of the science on BPA, which shows a significant risk when exposed to low level of the chemical. 

This investigation has also obtained a number of important accomplishments. In response to it: 

• The FDA created a study group to reassess their position on 

BPA, and the FDA Science Board assailed a draft of the study 

group, stating that the document ignored the vast majority of studies related to BPA. 

• The major manufacturers of liquid infant formula in the 

United States have agreed to find and use alternatives to BPA in 

their can linings. 

• Major retailers such as Wal-Mart have begun to phase out 

products that contain BPA. 

• The FDA’s BPA study group is rewriting its draft reassessment 

of BPA and awaiting ongoing studies into the safety of BPA.FDA 

has created a study group to reassess their position on BPA. 

ACTIONS OF PRIVATE LABORATORIES THAT TEST FOOD UNDER IMPORT

ALERT

Under FDA’s Import Alert rules, private laboratories are responsible for analyzing the most dangerous imported food products entering this country. Products under Import Alert are only allowed 

to enter the country after a private laboratory has determined they 

are safe. The Subcommittee’s food safety investigation uncovered 

problems with this system. In an effort to determine the amount 

of contaminated food that is entering this country because of flaws 

in this system, the Subcommittee requested information from 11 

private laboratories that test food under Import Alert. An extensive 

amount of information about violative samples was received from 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
212 

each laboratory and was still being analyzed at the end of the 

110th Congress. 

USE OF ARTIFICIAL FOOD COLORINGS

In late 2008, the Subcommittee staff began an inquiry into the 

use of artificial food colorings since their use has been shown to act 

as neurotoxin and cause hyperactivity in some children. Many multinational food companies use these artificial food colorings in foods 

marketed to children in the United States, but sell the identical 

product in Europe using only natural food colorings (which have 

not been linked to adverse health effects in children). Examples include Mars M&Ms and Skittles, Kellogg’s’ Pop-Tarts, Pepsi’s 

Gatorade, Nestle Quick, and McDonald’s strawberry sundaes. 

There is no European regulation that requires only natural food 

coloring, but the threat of regulation has prompted the companies 

to change their ingredients in Europe. The Staff are currently planning to send letters to various food companies to collect further information about their products and ask them why they continue to 

market products with artificial dyes in the United States. 

INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO OVERSIGHT OF THE FOOD

AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

FDA COMPENSATION PRACTICES

On April 12, 2007, the Committee began its investigation into 

compensation practices at FDA. On that same day, the Committee 

sent a letter to FDA inquiring about FDA’s use of Title 42 compensation, as well as FDA’s use of retention bonuses, locality bonuses, and performance or other salary enhancements or awards. 

On April 12, 2007, the Subcommittee also sent a second letter to 

FDA inquiring about any abuses of compensation for time set aside 

for religious observances. An additional request for records relating 

to religious compensation was sent to FDA on August 13, 2007. On 

September 5, 2007, the matters relating to compensation practices 

at FDA were referred to the HHS Inspector General. The next day, 

the Committee asked GAO for assistance in examining the compensation practices for all agencies under the jurisdiction of the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce. Additional requests for information relating to the compensation practices at FDA were made 

on September 17, 2007, and April 28, 2008. Responses from those 

requests are currently under review by the Subcommittee staff 

with assistance from the HHS Inspector General. 

FDA CONTRACTING

On April 21, 2008, the Committee sent a letter to FDA Commissioner von Eschenbach expressing concern that FDA might be 

needlessly wasting critical agency resources when hiring outside 

public relations firms. In that letter, the Committee requested that 

FDA supply it with records relating to any such contract and all 

communications between the agency and outside public relations 

firms. 

On August 21, 2008, FDA responded to the letter and provided 

some of the records requested. Although the response was woefully 

inadequate, the Committee did learn of an existing sole source conVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00220 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
213 

tract between FDA and Alaska Newspapers, Inc. (ANI), in which 

Qorvis Communications served as a subcontractor. After reviewing 

the documents, the Committee leaders decided to investigate FDA’s 

actions surrounding this contract. 

On October 2, 2008, the Committee sent a letter to Michael O. 

Leavitt, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, which outlined the Committee’s concerns regarding the 

contract and requested additional records pertaining to the contract. On that same day, the Committee also sent letters to Qorvis 

Communications, LLC, Calista Corporation, and Red Team Consulting, LLC, requesting information about the circumstances leading up to the contracting decision. The Committee reviewed all information provided by the three companies and HHS. 

On November 17, 2008, the Committee wrote to FDA requesting 

additional information on the agency’s sole source contract with 

Alaska Newspapers, in which Qorvis served as a subcontractor. 

The letter asked FDA to make key staff available for interview. 

Ultimately, the contract was suspended by FDA and the Inspector General conducted an independent review. The Subcommittee 

is currently planning additional interviews and records requests to 

pursue this inquiry into the next Congress. 

HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO ENERGY

AND THE ENVIRONMENT

HEARINGS

2006 PRUDHOE BAY SHUTDOWN: WILL RECENT REGULATORY CHANGES

AND BP MANAGEMENT REFORMS PREVENT FUTURE FAILURES?

On May 16, 2007, the Subcommittee conducted a hearing examining the shutdown of the Prudhoe Bay field, why the spill occurred, and how British Petroleum (BP) intended to change its operating culture, which may have contributed to the failure of key 

pipelines. The Committee’s investigation uncovered an accepted 

worker environment where severe cost-cutting on the North Slope 

(and possibly U.S.-wide) drove many key management decisions in 

the Prudhoe Bay field. 

The investigation and hearing also uncovered evidence that BP 

workers were often forced to forego safety measures to save money 

and ultimately increase BP’s profits. E-mails discovered in this investigation referred to stopping or reducing a range of important 

activities that are critical to maintaining a safe field in order to reduce spending. These included the reduction of the use of critical 

chemicals and agents designed to stop or mitigate corrosion such 

as biocides or corrosion inhibitors that are injected into key piping 

systems. Other key corrosion inspection programs including smart 

pigging and maintenance pigging, examining corrosion under the 

insulation that covers (and thus hides) the pipe, and digging up 

key road crossings where corrosion can be a significant problem— 

were also affected by this cost-cutting program. 

The Subcommittee’s investigation resulted in BP making major 

changes to their work culture on the North Slope, and the assurance that BP would completely overhaul many of the critical pipeVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00221 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
214 

lines responsible for delivering oil product ultimately to U.S. consumers. 

GASOLINE PRICES, OIL COMPANY PROFITS AND THE AMERICAN

CONSUMER

On May 22, 2007, the Subcommittee held a hearing to examine 

the factors underlying the recent sharp rise in gasoline prices, the 

effects of such increases, and the role of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in addressing this problem. The hearing included 

testimony from State and Federal regulators with direct experience 

with this issue. The Subcommittee also received testimony from 

public interest groups and an energy economist. Several of the largest oil companies and refiners were invited to testify, but declined 

the opportunity. 

The Subcommittee’s investigation showed that: 

• The sharp rise in gasoline prices imposes a very substantial 

cost burden on the average American consumer. By increasing the 

cost of transportation, rising gasoline prices affect the cost of goods 

and services throughout the economy and can even cause recession. 

GAO has estimated that each additional 10 cents per gallon of gasoline adds $14 billion to Americans’ annual gasoline bill. • During the recent waves of mergers and acquisitions in the oil 

industry, including the combination of some of the largest and most 

profitable companies in the world, there has been little response 

from Government regulators. At the Federal level, the FTC has the 

primary responsibility for merger reviews for the oil industry, for 

monitoring gasoline prices, and for investigating possible antitrust 

violations under the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act. The FTC 

did not object to any of the major oil company mergers and acquisitions of the past 10 years. • No Federal law specifically addresses price gouging. Although 

the Energy Policy Act of 2005 did require the FTC to investigate 

whether the price of gasoline is being ‘‘artificially manipulated by 

reducing refinery capacity or by any other form of market manipulation or price gouging practices,’’ the statute did not provide a 

remedy for price gouging. In May 2006, the FTC released its report, finding generally that sellers behaved competitively and that 

price increases in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina were the result of increased costs, although there were limited instances of 

price gouging. 

The Subcommittee’s investigation and hearing created a record 

in support of Subcommittee Chairman Stupak’s bill, H.R. 1252, the 

Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act, which passed the House on 

May 23, 2007. 

ENERGY SPECULATION: IS GREATER REGULATION NECESSARY TO STOP

PRICE MANIPULATION?—PARTS I & II

On December 12, 2007 and June 23, 2008, the Subcommittee 

held hearings to assess whether excessive speculation in futures 

markets was responsible for driving up energy prices, and also examined whether excess speculation could be blamed for the doubling of crude oil prices. 

The Subcommittee’s investigation examined major loopholes in 

futures market regulation that contributed to a price bubble in oil 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
215 

markets. These were the ‘‘Enron Loophole’’, which allows speculators to avoid regulatory oversight by trading energy commodity 

futures on unregulated over-the-counter markets and the ‘‘London 

Loophole’’, which allows foreign boards of trade, such as ICE Futures Europe, to offer energy futures contracts for commodities 

with a U.S. delivery point on electronic terminals in the U.S., but 

operate free from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

(CFTC) market integrity rules. 

Natural gas and heating oil buyers testified that speculators can 

use these loopholes to manipulate market prices. They pointed to 

reports about the hedge fund, Amaranth, which evaded market 

oversight by shifting its natural gas holdings from the CFTC-regulated NYMEX to the unregulated ICE market. The hearings released voice recordings of traders discussing strategies to squeeze 

prices and disguise their efforts at price manipulation. 

In addition, the Subcommittee probed whether the CFTC was attempting to undermine authority provided to the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission to police and punish price manipulation in 

physical and financial markets for natural gas and electricity. 

These laws were enacted in 2005 after it was revealed that Enron 

had intentionally manipulated energy supplies and prices as part 

of the California energy crisis. 

These hearings created a record that assisted Congress in the enactment of a number of key legislative initiatives in the 110th Congress. These included: 

• The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110 

246), which was enacted on June 18, 2008, partially closed the 

Enron Loophole, by requiring that certain high volume futures contracts which trade on exempt electronic trading facilities be subject 

to CFTC regulation. This includes speculative position limits and 

large trader reporting; however, these reforms do not close the foreign board of trade loophole. • The House of Representatives passed the Commodity Markets 

Transparency and Accountability Act of 2008 (H.R. 6604) on September 18, 2008. This bill closed the Swaps Loophole, narrowed the 

‘‘London Loophole’’, provided transparency in the unregulated OTC 

markets and empowered the CFTC to intervene in the unregulated 

derivatives markets. The Senate did not take up this bill in the 

110th Congress. • The FY09 Energy and Water Appropriations Act provided the 

Energy Information Administration with funding and direction to 

monitor activities futures markets, in addition to monitoring and 

reporting data on physical energy markets. 

SELLING THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY’S DEPLETED URANIUM

STOCKPILE: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES

An April 3, 2008, Subcommittee held a hearing to assess whether 

the Department of Energy (DOE) has a plan to generate income for 

the U.S. treasury by selling part of its depleted uranium stockpile 

to utilities or uranium enrichment companies. Between 2000 and 

2008, uranium prices jumped tenfold, from about $21/kg to $200/ 

kg. This price increase has transformed DOE’s depleted uranium 

tails (tails) inventory from an environmental liability into a potential $7.6 billion asset, according to GAO. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
216 

The hearing found that DOE lacked a concrete strategy to capitalize on the value of the tails, and explored whether DOE needed 

additional legal authority to auction or barter the depleted uranium. In addition to auctioning the tails ‘‘as is’’ to utilities, DOE 

could enter into a sole source contract with the United States Enrichment Corporation, currently the sole operator of a domestic 

uranium enrichment plan, to enrich the tails. Alternatively, DOE 

could ship the tails overseas to France or Russia for enrichment 

where there is excess capacity. GAO found that the Atomic Energy 

Act must be amended to provide DOE additional legal authority to 

auction the tails. The Committee is currently developing legislation 

directing DOE how to optimize returns to taxpayers from its depleted uranium tails inventory. 

POISONED PATRIOTS: CONTAMINATED DRINKING WATER AT CAMP

LEJEUNE

On June 12, 2007, the Subcommittee held a hearing to examine 

issues arising from the past contamination of drinking water at 

U.S. Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune. The hearing included testimony from former Marine Corps residents of Camp Lejeune who, 

along with their families, drank, cooked with, and bathed in the 

contaminated water. The Subcommittee also received testimony 

from Government agencies that are responsible for dealing with the 

contamination, assessing the adverse health effects, and investigating allegations of criminal violations of Federal law, including 

the Marine Corps, the Department of the Navy, the Agency for 

Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), the Environmental Protection Agency, and GAO. As a result of this hearing, 

a provision was inserted into the Defense Authorization Act for 

2008 (Public Law 110–181) requiring the Navy to notify all current 

and former Marines who might have been affected by the drinking 

water contamination at Camp Lejeune. 

The Subcommittee’s investigation revealed that: 

• Drinking water contamination by trichloroethylene (TCE) at 

Camp Lejeune began much earlier and continued longer than was 

originally believed, extending from at least 1957 to 1987. • The TCE contamination at Camp Lejeune far exceeded the 

Navy Department’s own drinking water standards that existed at 

the time, as well as EPA’s current drinking water standard. • The Navy has received 850 claims for injuries or death caused 

by this contaminated drinking water, yet has acted on none of 

them. 

• The Defense Department has never attempted to personally 

notify all of the Marines and their families who were exposed to 

the contamination. 

This was the first of a series of hearings the Subcommittee plans 

to hold on environmental problems at Department of Defense 

(DOD) facilities. The Subcommittee intends to issue a comprehensive staff report on this investigation in 2009. 

SCIENCE UNDER SIEGE: SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY AT THE

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

On September 18, 2008, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a hearing to examine scientific integrity at the 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
217 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. As part of this inquiry, the 

Subcommittee examined allegations of political and commercial interference with EPA scientists and science-based decision making 

at the Agency; the ‘‘streamlining’’ of the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) to make it much more difficult for EPA to publish scientific analysis on the human health risks of chemicals; the 

EPA’s removal of Dr. Deborah Rice at the request of the chemical 

industry from a scientific peer review panel on the flame retardant 

chemical decabromobiphenyl ether (Deca); and the EPA’s adoption 

of a since-discredited test method for toxaphene at the Hercules 

Superfund site near Brunswick, Georgia. 

Witnesses testifying at the hearing included GAO, the Union of 

Concerned Scientists, Dr. Deborah Rice (chief toxicologist for the 

State of Maine), two environmental groups, the chemical industry, 

and EPA. 

The Subcommittee’s investigation revealed that: 

• EPA’s new, ‘‘streamlined’’ IRIS process has all but halted new 

or updated entries to the IRIS database on the health effects of 

toxic chemicals. The slowdown in IRIS entries and updates is tied 

to the intervention of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

in the IRIS review and approval process. It appears that any IRIS 

listing that is the least bit controversial will take from 6 to 8 years 

to be completed under this new process. • EPA’s new IRIS process allows OMB to conduct IRIS evaluations in secret. Under this system, OMB, rather than EPA, manages the process and receives secret comments from polluting agencies, such as DOD and DOE. Under the new process, OMB, not 

EPA, controls the IRIS process and what goes into the final evaluations. • A survey conducted by the Union of Concerned Scientists 

showed that political interference with EPA scientists was frequent 

and pervasive. Hundreds of EPA scientists complained of political 

interference in their scientific work. Moreover, interference comes 

from inside the Agency, from other agencies, from the White 

House, and from the private sector via political appointees. 

• At the request of the chemical industry, EPA removed Dr. 

Deborah Rice from an EPA peer-review panel on the human health 

effects of Deca. EPA told Dr. Rice that she was being removed due 

to a ‘‘conflict of interest’’ because she had provided to the Maine 

legislature in her capacity as the State toxicologist her opinion that 

there are safer chemicals than Deca available for use as flame 

retardants. EPA’s decision to remove her is unjustifiable, since 

there is no conflict of interest in a State employee testifying before 

the State legislature on a subject on which she is expert. 

• EPA tested for toxaphene contamination using the wrong test 

and searching for the wrong toxins, despite being told by the Army 

Corps of Engineers, ATSDR, and the EPA Inspector General that 

it was using the wrong test and testing for the wrong toxins. Moreover, EPA based its testing decision on an unsupported scientific 

paper published in a journal biased in favor of the chemical industry. 

We anticipate that this may be the first of a series of hearings 

on the role of scientific integrity in Government regulation and in 

the private sector. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
218 

INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES

SUPPRESSION OF THE CDC’S GREAT LAKES REPORT

The Subcommittee conducted an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the CDC’s decision to block the release of 

a study conducted by its own scientists entitled, ‘‘Public Health Implications of Hazardous Substances in the Twenty-Six U.S. Great 

Lakes Areas of Concern’’ (referred to as the ‘‘Great Lakes Report’’). 

The Committee also investigated allegations that the lead scientist 

who conducted the study was being retaliated against by the CDC 

because of the findings reached in the Great Lakes study, and for 

revealing the human health risks created by formaldehyde in the 

FEMA trailers provided to Katrina victims. 

As a result of the Subcommittee’s investigation, the CDC agreed 

to finally publish the report and not to take adverse personnel actions against the lead scientist involved. In addition, the CDC revised the Great Lakes Report and sent it to the Institute of Medicine at the National Academies of Science for an independent review. 

ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

We are examining whether Federal agencies that are supposed 

to police the polluters and protect consumer interests are doing an 

adequate job of enforcement. An investigation is underway into a 

plea agreement between British Petroleum and DOJ regarding a 

refinery explosion that killed 15 and injured 170 in Texas. The key 

question is whether the plea agreements are inadequate to deter 

this kind of misconduct in the future. 

HEALTH RISKS AT ATSUGI NAVAL AIR FACILITY IN JAPAN

We have initiated an investigation of the Department of the 

Navy’s failure to protect its own service men and women, as well 

as their dependent families, from pollution caused by a hazardous 

waste incinerator at the Atsugi Naval Air Facility in Japan. The 

Committee is also examining the Navy’s refusal to provide medical 

treatment to those injured by the incinerator, including dependent 

families. 

HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO

COMMERCE, TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION

HEARINGS

DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER ADVERTISING: MARKETING, EDUCATION, OR

DECEPTION?

On May 8, 2008, the Subcommittee held a hearing to examine 

the potentially misleading and deceptive tactics used in direct-toconsumer (DTC) advertisements (ads) for prescription pharmaceutical products. The hearing examined three specific television 

advertisements: ads for Lipitor featuring Mr. Robert Jarvik, ‘‘Food 

and Family’’ ads for Vytorin, and ‘‘cancer fatigue’’ or ‘‘quality of 

life’’ ads for the cancer drug, Procrit. 

The Subcommittee’s investigation revealed that: 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
219 

The United States is only one of two countries that allow DTC 

ads. • Research has shown that DTC advertising may result in advertised drugs being prescribed when a similar, less-expensive drug 

may have been just as appropriate. • Every $1 spent on DTC advertising results in up to a $6 in- crease in sales, and one study demonstrated that every $1,000 

spent in DTC advertisements resulted in 24 new prescriptions. 

The investigation and hearing accomplished the following: 

• The Jarvik Lipitor ads and the Vytorin ads were taken off the 

air. • PhRMA (Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of 

America) has revised their DTC guidelines and adopted many of 

the Committee’s recommendations. 

As part of this investigation, the Subcommittee initiated numerous Committee letters questioning the safety of a class of cancer 

drugs known as Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents (ESAs). Subcommittee staff attended several FDA Advisory Committee meetings in connection with these drugs where the abusive marketing 

practices of these drugs which were addressed at the DTC hearing 

were raised. It is apparent that the Subcommittee’s oversight attributed to a number of drastic changes in usage and marketing of 

this specific class of drugs: 

—On July 30, 2007, CMS issued a National Coverage Decision 

(NCD) which greatly restricted reimbursement for use of the drug. 

—On November 8, 2007, FDA strengthened the boxed warnings 

and announced other label changes for ESAs, which included a 

warning concerning risk of mortality and tumor growth. 

—On September 11, 2008, Amgen, the manufacturer of one of the 

ESA cancer drugs, announced that it would discontinue certain of 

its abusive marketing practices (called ‘‘bundling’’ which involved 

rebates for purchasing quantities of another Amgen drug), which 

have been criticized for encouraging overuse of the drug. 

IN THE HANDS OF STRANGERS: ARE NURSING HOME SAFEGUARDS

WORKING?

In response to a wave of acquisitions of large, publicly held nursing home chains by private equity firms and the development of 

new and opaque investment models, the Subcommittee launched an 

investigation into the effect of new ownership structures. The Subcommittee’s investigation revealed that CMS’s and the States’ ability to identify and track nursing home owners and investors is severely limited, and that the current inspection systems, intended to 

protect residents from abuse and neglect, are ill-adapted to deal 

with chain ownership and systemic weaknesses. 

On May 15, 2008, the Subcommittee held its first hearing in 31 

years on nursing home resident protection issues. The CMS Administrator had contended, prior to the hearing, that CMS could enforce resident protection rules regardless of ownership form. However, after listening to numerous witnesses testify about the difficulties in finding and holding the right people accountable for 

poor care when ownership is opaque—including the Attorney General of Connecticut, a local Ombudsman, the family of a neglect victim, and HHS’s Office of Inspector Generalthe Administrator promVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00227 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
220 

ised to improve the CMS tracking and survey systems and work 

with the States and OIG to ensure interoperability and broader access to information. 

AS A RESULT OF OUR INVESTIGATION AND HEARING: 

• In February 2008, CMS publicly disclosed the names of 147 

nursing homes, including those terminated from the Medicare and 

Medicaid programs for persistent failure to improve. 

• Shortly before the hearing, CMS linked the poor performer list 

to its ‘‘Nursing Home Compare’’ Web site for consumers. 

• Shortly after the hearing, CMS implemented a more informative ‘‘five-star’’ rating system on its Web site to help families 

evaluate the quality of care in nursing homes. 

• In August 2008, CMS began requiring its quality improvement 

contractors to work closely with and provide technical assistance to 

chronically poor performing nursing homes. 

• Legislation has been introduced in the Senate to require ownership information and expand legal protections for residents and 

their families, with similar legislation being drafted in the House. 

LONG-TERM CARE INSURANCE: ARE CONSUMERS PROTECTED FOR THE

LONG TERM?

The Subcommittee investigated long-term care insurance carriers 

that unfairly deny or delay payment on claims. On July 24, 2008, 

the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing at which we heard 

from GAO, State regulators, consumer advocates, industry representatives, and the family of an elderly disabled policyholder. 

The Subcommittee examined whether insurers were unfairly increasing premium rates on existing customers and improperly denying claims, and the extent to which States could adequately protect consumers from industry abuses. 

Since the hearing, efforts have increased to strengthen consumer 

protections in model long-term care insurance laws, including the 

development of procedures for independent third-party review of 

claims denials. At the same time, in response to issues raised by 

the Subcommittee, Senate and House staff is working on legislation 

to foster stronger and more uniform consumer protections at the 

State level. 

INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES

THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION’S REGULATORY

PROCESSES AND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

The Subcommittee staff conducted an investigation of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) regulatory processes and 

management practices. The Subcommittee’s investigation was 

prompted by allegations to the effect that Chairman Kevin J. Martin has abused FCC procedures by manipulating or suppressing reports, data, and information. 

Over the course of the investigation, the Committee staff reviewed several hundred thousand documents (both hard copy and 

electronic), including 95 boxes of paper documents; conducted 73 

interviews of current and former FCC employees and individuals 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
221 

associated with the telecommunications industry; solicited and received e-mails from FCC employees and contractors at a secure email address established for this purpose; and reviewed dozens of 

allegations that were delivered by hand, fax, phone, and mail. 

On December 9, 2008, the Committee released the Majority Staff 

Report on this investigation, ‘‘Deception and Distrust: The Federal 

Communications Commission Under Chairman Kevin J. Martin.’’ 

As discussed in more detail in the report, the staff found: • There are instances in which the Chairman manipulated, withheld, or suppressed data, reports, and information. Chairman Martin withheld important and relevant data from the other Commissioners during their consideration of the 13th Annual Video Competition Report in an apparent attempt to enable the Commission 

to regulate cable television companies. In addition, Chairman Martin’s manipulation of the Second A La Carte Report may have damaged the credibility of the Commission, and certainly undermined 

the integrity of the staff. Moreover, it was done with the purpose 

of affecting congressional decision-making, in that it was issued as 

a report to Congress. • Important Commission matters have not been handled in an 

open and transparent manner, thereby raising suspicions both inside and outside the Commission that some parties and issues are 

not being treated fairly. Chairman Martin’s peremptory reversal of 

the First A La Carte Report’s conclusions without seeking further 

public comment or conducting further studies gives the impression 

that the issue was not handled openly and fairly. Our investigation 

confirmed this impression. • The Commission has failed to carry out some important responsibilities. The Commission’s oversight of the Telecommunications Relay Service Fund has been lax at best. The Chairman’s 

office appears to have ignored evidence that the ratepayers have 

been overcharged, while the companies providing Telecommunications Relay Service have been overcompensated, potentially by as 

much as $100 million per year. In addition, the Commission has 

failed to submit statutorily required reports to Congress. Finally, 

the Commission took months to respond to our records request, and 

many records are still outstanding. The Commission has yet to 

produce numerous emails and other electronic records covered by 

our records request. 

• Chairman Martin’s heavy-handed, opaque, and non-collegial 

management style has created distrust, suspicion, and turmoil 

among the five current Commissioners. Relations among Commissioners are not collegial. Chairman Martin does not afford his fellow Commissioners direct and unfettered access to the Commission 

staff and their expert advice, thereby hindering the ability of the 

other Commissioners to carry out the duties of their offices and the 

work of the Commission. 

• Commission staff have not been efficiently managed. Within a 

few days of taking office, Chairman Martin imposed a major reshuffling of FCC staff throughout the agency. While a certain 

amount of reorganization is not unprecedented for a new chairman, 

it was highly unusual in both its breadth (nearly every senior position at the agency changed hands) and its depth (even a number 

of non-management line staffers found themselves inexplicably reVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00229 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
222 

assigned). In some instances, senior employees with extensive experience and expertise were reassigned to junior-level positions, a 

senseless waste of resources. It appears that some important Commission proceedings were delayed as a result. 

There is evidence that since our investigation began, Chairman 

Martin has taken some steps to address these problems. For example, Martin has initiated regular press conferences and publicized 

hearing agendas in a timely fashion. In addition, it appears that 

the Commission staff is now being engaged in certain matters 

where it was largely ignored in the past. 

THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND

The Committee has continued to conduct ongoing oversight over 

the Universal Service Fund (USF) which was created by the FCC 

to help meet the goals of ‘‘Universal Service’’ as mandated by the 

Telecommunications Act of 1996. Those goals include advancing the 

availability of telecommunications services to all consumers, including those in low income, rural, insular, and high cost areas at rates 

that are reasonably comparable to those charged in urban areas. 

USF is administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC). 

In early 2007, the Committee announced the reopening of its investigation into the USF program. Committee staff requested several meetings and briefings with the Federal Communications 

Commission’s Office of Inspector General and USAC. On April 12, 

2007, the Committee requested that GAO continue its examination 

of waste, fraud, and abuse in the E-rate program, and devote special attention to the High Cost program. In June 2008, GAO completed its review of the High Cost program and issued its report 

‘‘FCC Needs to Improve Performance Management and Strengthen 

Oversight of the High Cost Program’’, finding problems with the 

oversight of the program as the Committee had suspected. 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE—INSPECTOR GENERAL

In April 2007, the Committee launched an investigation of Inspector General Johnnie E. Frazier of the Department of Commerce 

in response to numerous allegations of widespread fraud, waste 

and abuse within the Office of Inspector General that involved Mr. 

Frazier and his management team. The allegations included the filing of fraudulent travel vouchers, contracting irregularities, wasteful expenditures, favoritism, pre-selection of Senior Executive Service (SES) candidates, harassment of whistleblowers, and obstruction of justice. 

Committee staff issued a comprehensive document request, reviewed thousands of pages of paper and electronic records, and conducted investigative interviews of numerous employees of the Department. As a result of the Committee’s investigation, Inspector 

General Johnnie Frazier announced his resignation on June 7, 

2007, which became effective on June 29, 2007. A number of other 

senior officials in Frazier’s office implicated in these allegations 

also resigned shortly after Frazier’s departure. In early 2008, two 

whistleblowers from the Office of Inspector General who were reassigned because they had questioned the Inspector General’s travel 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
223 

activities were restored to their previous positions by the incoming 

Inspector General Todd Zinser, at the insistence of the Committee. 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE—TRAVEL ABUSE

The Committee referred certain allegations to the Government 

Accountability Office’s forensics investigators to conduct an audit 

relating to a major renovation project and premium class travel at 

the Department. After reviewing travel records, including government-issued credit cards of Department employees, GAO’s forensic 

team identified several cases of potential fraudulent use of federal 

travel funds for non-business reasons and improper use of government credit cards. At the request of the Committee, on September 

24, 2008, GAO issued a ‘‘referral letter’’ to the Department’s Office 

of Inspector General to investigate these matters in lieu of an official report to the Committee. Based on this work, the Committee 

has continued to receive additional allegations concerning travel 

abuses at the Department and is continuing to monitor this matter. 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE—OTHER

The Committee conducted oversight of various other programs 

and Federal responsibilities of the Department of Commerce. For 

example, the Committee did considerable work monitoring the 

progress of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s (NTIA) digital television transition (DTV) program, 

and its billion-dollar public safety interoperability grant program. 

The Committee reviewed the Department’s and NTIA’s relationship 

and interaction with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names 

and Numbers (ICANN), the organization that coordinates the domain name system and Internet protocols and is responsible for ensuring that domain registry agreements are made in a fair and 

open process. In addition, the Committee worked to monitor developments in the Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, including oversight of the management of the National Hurricane Center. 

TOURISM AND PUBLIC ACCESS TO PUBLIC LANDS IN WASHINGTON, D.C. 

In July 2007, as part of its jurisdiction over tourism and trade, 

the Committee opened an inquiry with regard to findings issued in 

a report by the Department of Interior’s (Department) Office of Inspector General, entitled, ‘‘Private Use of Public Lands, National 

Park Service and Bureau of Land Management’’ (Report No. W– 

IN–MOA–008–2005). The Office of Inspector General found that 

the National Park Service (NPS) permitted private clubs, such as 

the Washington Canoe Club (WCC), to monopolize and use public 

lands to the exclusion of the general public. In addition to this report, the Subcommittee received allegations concerning potentially 

discriminatory practices by this club in regard to its membership. 

Accordingly, the Committee, among other things, questioned the 

appropriateness of the Department’s issuance of ‘‘special use’’ permits to private clubs to use public land on an ongoing basis without 

any apparent oversight of the activities and membership practices 

of the private clubs. On July 16, 2007, the Committee issued a docVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00231 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
224 

ument request, and it received an initial briefing from the Department and NPS staff in August 2007. 

On January 25, 2008, the Committee wrote to the Department 

indicating that NPS failed to provide the Committee with requested information regarding any actions that NPS had taken or 

were planning to take in response to the OIG audit report, and requested records to determine the progress made by NPS. In the 

course of the inquiry, the Department and NPS admitted to Committee staff that NPS did not have any legal authority to issue 

‘‘special use’’ permits to WCC as it had done in the past for decades—even calling the issuance of these permits ‘‘illegal.’’ Although 

the investigation was unable to prove discriminatory practices, 

NPS authorities admitted that they had been lax at overseeing the 

activities or even inspecting the facilities of the club. They claimed 

that though they would not tolerate discriminatory practices in the 

selection of members for the club, they had no system set up to 

even know what membership policies were there. 

Through subsequent briefings and discussions with NPS, the 

Committee was assured that NPS had undertaken a major assessment to evaluate each permit issued to private entities that use 

public land. In addition, NPS said it would, among other things, 

move expeditiously to open park lands subject to long-term permits 

and grant public access through appropriate and legal authorization, and audit 20 percent of the parks each year to ensure that 

special use programs comply with applicable regulations. 

DEATHS FROM KITCHEN RANGE TIPOVERS

Early in 2007, the Subcommittee began an investigation into 

problems with kitchen ranges tipping over and causing serious injuries, including death. On March 5, 2007, Chairman Dingell and 

Subcommittee Chairman Stupak wrote the Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) requesting extensive 

data and information on incidents involving range tipovers. The 

Subcommittee found that there are, in fact, very serious problems 

with the stability of free-standing kitchen ranges as sold and installed in the United States. Moreover, this has been a problem at 

least since 1980 and it has continued up to the present. 

According to the CPSC’s data, since 1980 at least 33 people have 

been reported killed by kitchen stoves tipping over on them. Nearly 

60 percent of those killed were small children. In addition to these 

deaths, at least another 51 people—again, mostly small children— 

were injured, most of them suffering severe burns, when stoves 

tipped over on them. 

The Subcommittee’s investigation prompted the leading retailer 

of kitchen ranges to agree to ensure the installation of stabilizing 

brackets for all kitchen ranges it sells. In addition, consumer protection advocates believe that national publicity resulting directly 

from the Subcommittee’s investigation has helped save lives by 

alerting consumers to the risk involved and the necessity for installing stabilizing brackets. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
225 

HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO

HOMELAND AND NATIONAL SECURITY

HEARINGS

CONTINUING SECURITY CONCERNS AT LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL

LABORATORY—PART I

Over the past two years, the Subcommittee has held three hearings examining security at the Department of Energy’s national 

labs, mostly relating to security at Los Alamos National Lab 

(LANL). Each hearing examined an array of concerns surfaced by 

both internal and external audits and investigations relating to 

both how LANL secures classified and other sensitive information 

and its ability to mitigate against all forms of physical intrusion including a terrorist attack. As LANL has had longstanding security 

problems for more than a decade, the Subcommittee continued its 

direct oversight of its activities including requesting a number of 

comprehensive audits and reviews by GAO. 

The first hearing on January 30, 2007, dealt with the physical 

security of the lab (often referred to as ‘‘guns, guards, and gates’’) 

and those related to the security of information, which includes unclassified and classified cyber networks. It reviewed the storage 

and safeguarding of classified and sensitive documents and other 

forms of electronic media, often referred to as Classified Removable 

Electronic Media (CREM). 

The hearing was in response to an October of 2006 incident 

wherein the Los Alamos County Police responded to a call at the 

home of a former Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) subcontractor employee. During the search of the former employee’s home, 

police found and seized computer flash drives that contained a 

number of classified documents from one of the LANL’s secure 

vaults. In addition, police found and seized several hundred pages 

of classified documents. Upon learning of these events, the Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary requested that—in addition to 

other inquiries—the Inspector General initiate a review to determine whether LANL and the Department had adequate safeguards 

in place to protect against this and other potential cyber security 

events, and specifically to examine the facts surrounding this case. 

Security, both physical and cyber (computer networks and classified removable electronic media or ‘‘CREM’’) had been a concern at 

this lab for more than a decade. That most recent event represented yet another breach and potential damage to some of the 

Nation’s most important information. The matter discussed at this 

hearing closely followed other events that the Subcommittee had 

been investigating. For example, only two years previous to this 

hearing LANL was plagued by a series of incidents involving safety 

and mishandling of classified information, resulting in hearings by 

the Subcommittee. Those security breaches prompted then-Lab Director Peter Nanos to suspend all work activities for the LANL in 

July 2004, and prompted Subcommittee Members to visit LANL for 

a briefing on new security procedures involving classified material 

and security. LANL’s shut down lasted nearly seven months at a 

cost to the taxpayer of approximately $367 million. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
226 

CONTINUING SECURITY CONCERNS AT LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL

LABORATORY—PART II

On April 20, 2007, the Subcommittee held its second hearing 

looking at security at LANL. Its purpose was to review the findings 

of two Task Forces established by the Secretary of Energy in response to prior security breaches at the lab. One focused on Personnel Security (related to how contractors and other DOE employees had been granted security clearances) and the second focused 

on Cyber Security. 

The first report was entitled Personnel Security Task Force: The 

Secretary of Energy Task Force Review of the Departmental Personnel Security Program (February 2007), and examined whether 

there were any other security clearance approvals where individuals were using drugs at the time their clearance was being adjudicated. The task force found that, of the 453 security clearances 

processed at the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) 

Service Center between June 2001—June 2002, that involved past 

use of illegal drugs, some had admitted to illegal drug use in the 

30 days prior to approval of their security clearance. Eighteen (18) 

others had derogatory information that has resulted in a re-evaluation of their status. 

In response, on April 2, 2007, the Deputy Secretary issued a 

memo to the Under Secretaries for Energy and Science, and the 

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Administrator 

mandating a number of changes relating to security clearances. 

These included: (1) a review of all security clearances granted in 

the past 5 years to individuals who had used drugs within 12 

months prior to receiving their clearance; (2) Denial of security 

clearances for individuals admitting use of drugs in the 12 months 

prior to their application; (3) Federal and contractor employees 

with clearances would be subject to pre-employment random drug 

testing, and (4) any substantiated or admitted drug involvement by 

individuals with a security clearance to result in termination of the 

clearance. 

For this hearing, the Subcommittee also examined a second report issued by the Secretary entitled ‘‘Cyber Security Task Force: 

The Report to the Secretary of the Ad Hoc Committee to Review 

the Cyber Related Recommendations in the Inspector General’s 

Special Inquiry Report to the Secretary on the Recent Security Incident at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (February 28, 

2007).’’ This report made a number of recommendations related to 

security at the labs. These included disabling USB ports in computers that could permit unauthorized diversion or theft of classified information by January 15, 2007; securing classified computer 

racks if the USB ports were not otherwise secured; limiting computer access to those who specifically require it; updating classified 

information security plans; and finally issuing new cyber security 

policy. 

The Subcommittee examined in detail these recommendations, 

the plans the Department had for implementing them (including 

key implementation milestones) and the additional measures needed to adequately safeguard security at the labs. The Subcommittee 

revealed that the DOE’s program to penalize violations of security 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
227 

regulations had been hobbled at Los Alamos because the DOE had 

omitted critical provisions in the contract with its contractor. 

REVIEW OF CONTINUING SECURITY CONCERNS AT DOE’S NATIONAL

LABS

The Subcommittee held its third hearing on September 25, 2008, 

regarding ongoing security issues at DOE’s national laboratories 

(labs) including LANL. Preliminary reports have suggested that 

LANL—which has traditionally been one of the most problematic 

labs from a security perspective in the DOE complex—has reportedly made noteworthy progress in addressing some key security 

weaknesses once listed as major concerns by outside auditors, including GAO and DOE’s Office of Safeguards and Security. Moreover, as was reported to staff by lab officials, the audits and reviews requested by the Subcommittee have assisted LANL in formulating blueprints to address ongoing security issues. Though 

LANL appears to have made measurable improvements in key 

areas relating to some aspects of physical and information security 

(particularly in the control of classified documents and other forms 

of electronic media), the Subcommittee will continue its oversight 

to encourage forward progress. 

Finally, in addition to physical security, the Subcommittee also 

examined several issues related to cyber security at the labs. Some 

of these were related to issues first raised in the April 20, 2007, 

hearing, while additional issues were related to independent work 

being conducted by DOE’s Office of Inspector General (DOE OIG) 

and GAO). 

The ‘‘yellow network,’’ which is connected to the Internet, contains unclassified but sensitive information, including diverse research data, business proprietary information, unclassified controlled nuclear information, naval nuclear propulsion information, 

export control information, the military critical technology list, confidential foreign government information, personally identifiable information (including names, aliases, Social Security numbers), and 

nuclear reactor safeguards information. 

According to related work conducted by the GAO and others, due 

to the nature of research and development conducted at LANL, the 

information on the unclassified network could present ‘‘a valuable 

target for foreign governments, terrorists, and industrial spies.’’ 

This hearing in closed session examined how secure this network 

was and whether additional protections were needed to safeguard 

it from potential cyber threats. Through its own investigation and 

based on the audits of the GAO and DOE OIG, the Subcommittee 

Members concluded that additional security controls were necessary to ensure the protection of sensitive information contained 

and transmitted over this network. 

At the conclusion of the 110th Congress, the Subcommittee had 

requested that GAO and DOE OIG conduct additional work examining security of the unclassified network. Additionally, ongoing 

work involving how the classified ‘‘red’’ network was being protected at selected weapons labs was also continuing. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
228 

NUCLEAR TERRORISM PREVENTION: STATUS REPORT ON THE FEDERAL

GOVERNMENT’S ASSESSMENT OF NEW RADIATION DETECTION MONITORS

Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Committee has been 

investigating the capacity of the Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS) to target and inspect sea cargo containers bound for the 

United States from foreign ports in order to prevent possible smuggling of nuclear weapons or radiological materials. On September 

18, 2007, the Committee held a hearing entitled, ‘‘Nuclear Terrorism Prevention: Status Report on the Federal Government’s Assessment of New Radiation Detection Monitors,’’ which reviewed 

the GAO’s critical assessment of the Domestic Nuclear Detection 

Office’s (DNDO) efforts to test, certify, and deploy a new generation 

of radiation portal monitors known as ‘‘Advanced Spectroscopic 

Portals’’ (ASPs). 

GAO found that the tests failed to assess the machine’s blind 

spots, and that the vendors were given key information which allowed them to calibrate their machines to perform better in advance of the performance tests. Following the hearing, the Subcommittee requested that DNDO conduct further tests before making a planned $1.2 billion purchase of the ASP technology. Meanwhile U.S. Customs and Border Protection flagged significant 

‘‘functionality’’ problems with the new ASP machines, and refused 

to purchase them until they were fixed. 

As the result of the Subcommittee’s investigation, the Homeland 

Security Appropriations Act FY08 prohibited DNDO from making 

full scale procurement until it conducted additional testing, and the 

Secretary certified that these new machines provided a ‘‘significant 

increase in operational effectiveness’’ and the National Academy of 

Sciences concurred. This action saved taxpayers $1.2 billion by 

blocking the purchase of machinery that was not proven to be 

ready for deployment at our ports and border crossings. This restriction was re-imposed in the FY09 appropriations act. 

GERMS, VIRUSES, AND SECRETS: THE SILENT PROLIFERATION OF BIOLABORATORIES IN THE UNITED STATES

On October 4, 2007, the Subcommittee held a hearing to examine 

the risks associated with the recent rapid proliferation of high-containment biological research laboratories in the United States. The 

hearing featured testimony from GAO with regard to their extensive investigation of high-containment bio-research laboratories. 

The Subcommittee also received testimony from the principal Government agencies involved in regulating these laboratories: CDC 

and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Also testifying were 

Texas A&M University, which owns a high-containment laboratory; 

the Center for Biosecurity of the University of Pittsburgh Medical 

Center; the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation; and the 

Sunshine Project. The Subcommittee’s Investigation revealed that: 

• No Federal agency knows for sure how many high-containment 

bio-laboratories there are in the United States, but there appear to 

be more than 600 Bio-Safety Level 3 (BSL–3) laboratories. 

• The number of Bio-Safety Level 4 (BSL–4) laboratories in the 

U.S. has grown from 2 in 1996 to 12 by 2008. BSL–4 labs handle 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
229 

the most deadly pathogens, for which there is no known cure. As 

of 2007, there were six in operation and another seven slated to 

open by 2008 over the next few years. The need for this extraordinary increase in capacity, however, is unclear. Nevertheless, over 

the last five years, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious 

Diseases, an institute within NIH, has spent more than $1 billion 

on new construction and some $3 billion on biodefense research. • No single Federal agency has overall responsibility for the regulation of laboratory biological research and not all dangerous 

pathogens are regulated. The majority of direct Federal regulation 

of biological research is limited to ‘‘select agents.’’ The largest part 

of all other federally funded biological research in high-containment laboratories is regulated through contractual obligations. 

Federal regulations and guidelines issued by separate agencies, including CDC and NIH, often overlap and are often conflicting or 

ambiguous. • The CDC has received 105 incident reports from high-containment laboratories since 2003. These have ranged from reports of 

missing inventory to the accidental infection of laboratory workers. 

This may understate the true number of incidents, however, because, apart from select agents, there is no standard reporting system for accidents involving releases or infections. In addition, laboratory researchers fear that reporting incidents will result in sanctions imposed either internally or by Government agencies. 

• NIH says there are serious questions as to whether there are 

enough personnel with proper training to work in high-containment 

biological laboratories. Most training of laboratory personnel is conducted through mentoring; there is no standard training or certification program for scientists working in high-containment labs. 

COMBATING NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION: THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY’S INITIATIVES FOR PROLIFERATION PREVENTION (IPP) PROGRAM

On January 23, 2008, the Subcommittee held a hearing to examine whether a 14-year-old Department of Energy (DOE) non-proliferation program which provides funding to re-employ Soviet-era 

weapons scientists and engineers in peaceful activity needs to be 

reformed or phased out. 

After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, many of its weapons scientists and engineers suffered significant cuts in pay or lost 

their government-supported work, and there was a concern that 

these scientists would be vulnerable to recruitment by rogue nations and terrorist groups. DOE has used a two-pronged strategy 

to stem so-called ‘‘brain drain’’ proliferation. Initially, DOE directly 

funded Soviet-era scientists to carry out non-military research and 

development work. Later, DOE sought to match U.S. industrial 

partners with scientists at Russian institutes to work on the commercialization of products and services. 

An audit by GAO found that 54 percent of the scientists and engineers hired in the IPP program are not even Soviet-era WMD scientists. GAO also found that DOE is funding the recruitment and 

hiring of young scientists who never worked on Soviet-era WMD 

programs. This is contrary to the program’s original intent—to reduce the proliferation risk posed by Soviet-era scientists. Finally, 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
230 

even though Russia is enjoying significant prosperity from oil and 

gas exports, DOE was not requiring Russia to contribute to these 

scientist engagement projects through cost sharing. 

After the hearing, the Subcommittee obtained documents showing that at least two nuclear institutes receiving DOE funding were 

also working on the Iranian nuclear power project at Buhsher. In 

response to these findings, the House Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2009 directed that no institutes be funded who are working on the Buhsher reactor, directed 

that DOE prepare an ‘‘exit’’ plan for the program, and cut the IPP 

program funding in half. In addition, on October 2, 2008, DOE announced it was implementing a cost-sharing arrangement with 

Russia, is phasing out approximately half of its projects because 

the scientists did not pose a proliferation threat, and it terminated 

work at the institutes working on the Buhsher reactor project in 

Iran. 

GERMS, VIRUSES, AND SECRETS: GOVERNMENT PLANS TO MOVE EXOTIC

DISEASE RESEARCH TO THE MAINLAND UNITED STATES

On May 22, 2008, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held the second in a series of hearings on the proliferation of 

biological research laboratories. This hearing specifically reviewed 

the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) proposal to close the 

Plum Island Animal Disease Center (PIADC or ‘‘Plum Island’’), located on Plum Island, NY, and replace it with a new laboratory located on the continental U.S., to be called the National Bio- and 

Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF). The majority of the research at 

Plum Island is concentrated on foot-and-mouth disease, which is 

very highly contagious, and which Federal law has restricted to 

Plum Island for 60 years. The DHS proposal to move foot-andmouth disease to the continental U.S. raises policy questions with 

very significant implications for livestock health and the national 

economy. 

The Subcommittee heard testimony from GAO, DHS, USDA, and 

the Plum Island Director. Additional witnesses included four of the 

leading farming and livestock associations whose members have a 

direct interest in these issues; and experts on foot-and-mouth disease and high containment laboratory security. The Subcommittee’s 

investigation revealed that: • The DHS proposal to transfer foot-and-mouth disease from 

Plum Island to the continental U.S. is highly controversial. The 

Subcommittee’s survey of livestock and farmers’ associations across 

the country showed only four livestock associations supported it, 

while nine opposed it, and another dozen wanted to see a thorough 

risk assessment performed before they took a position on it. As of 

the date of the hearing, DHS still had not performed such a risk 

assessment. 

• A release of foot-and-mouth disease in the U.S. would be devastating. Foot-and-mouth disease is among the most highly contagious diseases in the world. The 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth 

in the United Kingdom caused at least $16 billion in damage, devastated the economy, and nearly brought down the Government. 

U.S. experts estimate that a similar release in the U.S. could be 

even more destructive. Senator Pat Roberts has said that an outVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00238 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
231 

break of the disease in the U.S. could ultimately cause massive 

food shortages and rioting. • There is a serious question as to whether DHS has the expertise, understanding, and technical capability to conduct animal and 

zoonotic disease research. All of the livestock and farmers’ organizations that testified at the hearing stated that USDA, rather than 

DHS, should be in charge of animal disease research. • The DHS Science and Technology Directorate has thus far 

failed to adequately assess the health and economic risks, potential 

environmental impacts, and costs and benefits of the proposal to 

close Plum Island and transfer foot-and-mouth disease to the continental U.S. While a draft environmental impact statement was in 

progress at the time of the hearing, DHS internal documents discovered by the Subcommittee in the course of its investigation revealed that it would cost more to build and operate a new lab on 

the mainland than it would to renovate the existing lab on Plum 

Island. 

INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES

ONGOING NATIONAL SECURITY CONCERNS REGARDING CYBER

SECURITY

The Subcommittee spent considerable effort examining how well 

the Department of Energy, including the nation’s key weapons 

labs, were positioned to prevent unauthorized cyber intrusions and 

data theft. These efforts were the subject of several hearings and 

are discussed in detail elsewhere in this report. Nonetheless, because of ongoing concerns raised by DOE officials and other cybersecurity experts about the federal government’s vulnerability in 

this area generally, the Subcommittee began discussions with GAO 

to develop plans to broaden its vulnerability assessment of other 

key agencies and Departments under the Committee’s jurisdiction. 

Of particular concern are those agencies whose IT system was demonstrated to have profound weaknesses in the course of the Subcommittee’s other investigations. During the conclusion of the 

110th Congress, GAO had begun to scope and plan important 

cyber-related assessments of key agencies and Departments, including the possibility of conducting ‘‘red team’’ type intrusions to 

assess vulnerabilities. 

BIO-LABORATORY SECURITY

The Subcommittee’s hearings and ongoing investigation of the 

proliferation of high-containment bio-laboratories has revealed 

problems with the physical security of these labs and the training 

of laboratory workers. Recent revelations regarding the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation’s examination of the 2001 anthrax attacks 

has underscored the importance of this issue. On August 11, the 

Committee sent a letter to the President of the U.S. asking him to 

suspend the design and construction of new high-containment labs 

pending a thorough review of all existing labs and all proposals to 

construct new labs. The President has yet to formally respond to 

the Committee’s request. 

In addition, in response to a request by Chairman Dingell and 

Subcommittee Chairman Stupak, GAO conducted a study of perimVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00239 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
232 

eter security at five BSL–4 labs in the U.S. In its report, ‘‘Biosafety 

Laboratories: Perimeter Security Assessments of the Nation’s Five 

BSL–4 Laboratories,’’ (issued September 17, 2008), GAO found that 

two out of the five labs had a significant lack of perimeter security 

controls. Moreover, regulations issued by the CDC Select Agent 

Program do not require specific perimeter security controls. 

The Subcommittee intends to continue this investigation in the 

next Congress with an eye toward possible legislation. 

INTERNATIONAL PROLIFERATION OF HIGH-CONTAINMENT BIO- LABORATORIES

We are continuing our investigation of the recent worldwide proliferation of high-containment bio research laboratories, including 

Bio-Safety Level 4 labs, some of which may have been funded by 

the U.S. The issues include where these labs are being built; why 

these labs are being built; who is paying for them; and what are 

the risks associated with their operation. As part of this investigation, GAO visited high containment labs in the United Kingdom, 

Denmark, and Germany, and regulatory agencies in the United 

Kingdom, France, and Germany. We intend to continue this investigation in the next Congress. 

INTERNATIONAL PIRACY AND ITS IMPACT ON ENERGY TRANSPORT, SUPPLIES, AND COMMERCE

During the latter half of 2008, a number of press reports have 

surfaced suggesting that piracy—particularly off the coast of Somalia—has greatly increased, threatening to directly affect U.S. shipping interests. Significant amounts of crude oil, chemicals and 

other important commodities transit the waters off the Somali 

coast, particularly through the Gulf of Aden. In November 2008, 

one of the world’s largest crude transport vessels, the Sirius Star, 

carrying 2 million barrels of crude oil was successfully high jacked. 

It and its crew is currently being held for $25 million ransom. 

Subsequent to this event, concerns have been expressed to the 

Subcommittee that the increased rate of piracy in this region and 

elsewhere raises potential energy security issues along with potential environmental and homeland security concerns as well. Specifically, shipping interests have communicated to the Subcommittee 

that there is not a sufficiently robust or coordinated federal plan 

on how to deal with what appears to be an emerging threat for key 

interests in this region. Consequently, the Subcommittee began discussions with senior officials from the Department of Defense, Department of Energy, United States Coast Guard and key affected 

shipping industries to understand the unfolding nature of this 

problem, the threat it may have on U.S. interests and what existing solutions are being explored to eliminate or mitigate the risk. 

On a preliminary basis, the Subcommittee has found there is 

ample room for improving coordination among U.S. agencies handling this matter. Moreover, some shippers, particularly those carrying highly vulnerable cargos such as crude oil and chemicals 

have expressed concern that more assistance is needed by the U.S. 

and other foreign governments specifically because their vessels are 

particularly difficult to defend. Additionally, shippers have also expressed concerns about arming their own vessels with private secuVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00240 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
233 

rity forces (an option currently being discussed) and the liability 

issues surrounding such a move. Because piracy in this region appears to be a growing problem, it is likely that this investigation 

will carry forward into the 111th Congress. 

THE NATIONAL BIOSURVEILLANCE INTEGRATION SYSTEM (NBIS)

The Subcommittee is investigating the management, operation, 

and activities of DHS’ National Biosurveillance Integration System 

(NBIS). NBIS was created by DHS as a means of integrating biosurveillance information across the entire government. The purpose 

of our investigation is to assess the adequacy of DHS’ biosurveillance efforts, the extent to which biosurveillance systems have been 

integrated thus far, and whether biosurveillance resources are 

being effectively used. According to unofficial sources, the NBIS is 

in fact a hollow shell that contributes little if anything to the DHS 

mission and duplicates efforts of the Department of Health and 

Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and other government agencies. Records were received in response to our initial 

record request and are currently under review. The next steps are 

site visits, interviews, and additional records requests. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE—V–22 OSPREY INVESTIGATION

In July 2007, the Committee received allegations from a whistleblower and former Management Systems Deputy of the United 

States Air Force relating to the V–22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft. The 

whistleblower alleged that he participated in an internal investigation of the V–22 which found the aircraft has fundamental technical problems that threaten its airworthiness and combat effectiveness. Committee staff reviewed several documents, spoke with 

a former program insider who corroborated the account, and met 

with GAO staff to discuss possible problems with V–22 program. 

On October 30, 2007, the Committee asked GAO to review a 

number of issues regarding the performance of the V–22 Osprey 

combining this with a similar request from Chairman Henry A. 

Waxman, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 

On June 2, 2008, GAO advised Committee staff via email that 

its review team had been assembled, and it would begin its inquiry 

into four areas: (1) What is the current estimate of cost, schedule, 

and quantity for the program, and how do these estimates compare 

with original estimates?; (2) Has the current V–22 design demonstrated that it has met its key performance parameters and 

other critical requirements?; (3) What key testing, safety, and production quality issues remain open, and to what extent do they affect the V–22’s ability to conduct its planned missions?; and (4) 

How is the V–22 performing in theater, especially regarding mission capability rates and logistics burden? 

GAO plans to visit with a V–22 unit that recently returned from 

Iraq to determine what information is available to address the 

fourth question. 

HEARINGS HELD

Continuing Security Concerns at Los Alamos National Laboratory—Part I.—Oversight hearing on continuing security lapses and 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
234 

lax security protocol at the Department of Energy’s Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. Hearing held on January 30, 

2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–1. 

Adequacy of FDA Efforts to Assure the Safety of the Drug Supply—Part I.—Oversight hearing on breakdowns in FDA processes 

for approving new drugs and for considering new safety information about drugs already on the market. Hearing held on February 

13, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–5. 

Post Katrina Health Care: Continuing Concerns and Immediate 

Needs in the New Orleans Region.—Oversight hearing on public 

health conditions in the post-Katrina New Orleans area. Hearing 

held on March 13, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–17. 

Adequacy of FDA Efforts to Assure the Safety of the Drug Supply—Part II.—Oversight hearing on whether FDA is fulfilling its 

mandate to protect the American people from drugs whose risks 

outweigh their benefits. Hearing held on March 22, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–5. 

Continuing Security Concerns at Los Alamos National Laboratory—Part II.—Oversight hearing on continuing security lapses and 

lax security protocol at the Department of Energy’s Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. Hearing held on April 20, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–1. 

Diminished Capacity: Can the FDA Assure the Safety and Security of the Nation’s Food Supply?—Part I.—Oversight hearing on 

the issue of food safety as it pertains to both foods for human consumption and for pets, with focus on the victims of E. coli in spinach and lettuce, Salmonella in peanut butter, and contaminated 

wheat gluten in pet food. Hearing held April 24, 2007. PRINTED, 

Serial No. 110–33. 

2006 Prudhoe Bay Shutdown: Will Recent Regulatory Changes 

and BP Management Reforms Prevent Future Failures?—Oversight 

hearing on Prudoe Bay, the Nation’s largest and most strategic oil 

field, its temporary shutdown due to corrosion and its subsequent 

economic effects. Hearing held on May 16, 2007. PRINTED, Serial 

No. 110–46. 

Gasoline Prices, Oil Company Profits and the American Consumer.—Oversight hearing on examining the factors underlying the 

sharp rise in gasoline prices, the effects of such increases, and the 

role of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in addressing this 

problem. Hearing held on May 22, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 

110–51. 

Poisoned Patriots: Contaminated Drinking Water at Camp 

Lejeune. Oversight hearing on issues arising from the extensive, 

high-level contamination of drinking water at U.S. Marine Corps 

Base Camp Lejeune. Hearing held on June 12, 2007. PRINTED, 

Serial No. 110–56. 

Predatory Sales Practices in Medicare Advantage.—Oversight 

hearing on the aggressive, and often fraudulent, sales practices 

that have arisen in the wake of passage of the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003. Hearing held on June 26, 2007. PRINTED, 

Serial No. 110–60. 

Diminished Capacity: Can the FDA Assure the Safety and Security of the Nation’s Food Supply?—Part II.—Oversight hearing on 

the effects of the proposed reorganization of the Office of ReguVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00242 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
235 

latory Affairs and the attendant laboratory closures on the ability 

of FDA to accomplish its mandate to assure the food and drug supply is safe for the people of the United States. Hearing held on July 

17, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–33. 

Post Katrina Health Care: Progress and Continuing Concerns— 

Part II.—Oversight hearing on public health conditions in the postKatrina New Orleans area. Hearing held on August 1, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–62. 

Nuclear Terrorism Prevention: Status Report on the Federal Government’s Assessment of New Radiation Detection Monitors.—Oversight hearing on the GAO’s assessment of the Domestic Nuclear 

Detection Office’s efforts to test, certify, and deploy a new generation of radiation portal monitors, known as ‘‘Advanced 

Spectroscopic Portals.’’ Hearing held on September 18, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–63. 

Germs, Viruses, and Secrets: The Silent Proliferation of Bio-Laboratories in the United States.—Oversight hearing on risks associated with the rapid proliferation of high-containment biological research laboratories in the United States. Hearing held on October 

4, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–70. 

Diminished Capacity: Can the FDA Assure the Safety and Security of Our Nation’s Food Supply?—Part III.—Oversight hearing on 

the safety of food imported into the United States and the adequacy of the efforts of FDA and USDA to protect Americans from 

unsafe, imported food. Hearing held on October 11, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–33. 

NASPER: Why Has the National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting Act Not Been Implemented?—Oversight hearing on 

the implementation of the National All Schedules Prescription 

Electronic Reporting Act of 2005, Public Law 109–60. Hearing held 

on October 24, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–73. 

FDA Foreign Drug Inspection Program: A System at Risk.—Oversight hearing on the ability of the FDA to monitor the safety and 

efficacy of drugs imported from overseas. Hearing held on November 1, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–74. 

Diminished Capacity: Can the FDA Assure the Safety and Security of the Nation’s Food Supply?—Part IV.—Oversight hearing on 

decisions by FDA and USDA to allow meat and seafood to be packaged in a modified atmosphere containing carbon monoxide. Hearing held on November 13, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–33. 

Energy Speculation: Is Greater Regulation Necessary to Stop 

Price Manipulation?—Oversight hearing on whether more effective 

regulation is needed to prevent speculators in the futures and derivatives markets from manipulating oil, natural gas, and other energy prices, and to examine the regulatory roles of the Commodity 

Futures Trading Commission and the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission in preventing manipulation. Hearing held on December 12, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–78. 

Combating Nuclear Proliferation: The Effectiveness of the Energy 

Department’s Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention (IPP) Program.—Oversight hearing on whether a DOE program, re-employing Soviet-era weapons scientists and engineers in peaceful activity 

as a means to prevent scientist ‘‘brain drain’’ to terrorist organizations or countries of proliferation concern, needs to be reformed or 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
236 

phased out. Hearing held on January 23, 2008. PRINTED, Serial 

No. 110–82. 

Science and Mission at Risk: FDA’s Self-Assessment.—Oversight 

hearing on the FDA Science Board report entitled, ‘‘FDA Science 

and Mission at Risk: Report of the Subcommittee on Science and 

Technology.’’ Hearing held on January 29, 2008. PRINTED, Serial 

No. 110–83. 

Ketek Clinical Study Fraud: What Did Aventis Know?—Oversight 

hearing on the role of Aventis (now called Sanofi-Aventis) in failing 

to adequately monitor a pivotal clinical trial, ultimately rejected by 

FDA, as fraudulent. Hearing held on February 12, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–87. 

Contaminated Food: Private Sector Accountability.—Oversight 

hearing on companies which have produced dangerous, contaminated food and the examination of how factors within the private 

sector, and the effects of lax regulation, contribute to outbreaks of 

food-borne illnesses. Hearing held on February 26, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–92. 

Regulatory Failure: Must America Live with Unsafe Food?—Oversight hearing on of lax regulation, contributing to outbreaks of 

food-borne illnesses in food supply, focusing on the role of the Nation’s primary regulators, FDA and USDA. Hearing held on March 

12, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–92. 

Selling the Department of Energy’s Depleted Uranium Stockpile: 

Opportunities and Challenges.—Oversight hearing on whether 

DOE has legal authority to auction/barter the depleted uranium, 

and to evaluate whether DOE is able to maximize taxpayer benefits given that it must negotiate a sole source contract with the Nation’s only uranium enrichment plant operator. Hearing held on 

April 3, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–103. 

FDA’s Foreign Drug Inspection Program: Weaknesses Place Americans at Risk.—Oversight hearing on how FDA plans to address the 

multitude of weaknesses evident in FDA’s effort to protect Americans from unsafe drugs made abroad. Hearing held on April 22, 

2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–107. 

The Heparin Disaster: Chinese Counterfeits and American Failures.—Oversight hearing on the circumstances surrounding the catastrophe caused by the contamination of the drug heparin. Hearing held on April 29, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–109. 

Direct-to-Consumer Advertising: Marketing, Education or Deception?—Oversight hearing examining potentially misleading and deceptive tactics used in direct-to-consumer advertisements for prescription pharmaceutical products. Hearing held on May 8, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–114. 

In the Hands of Strangers: Are Nursing Home Safeguards Working?—Oversight hearing on examining how Federal and State enforcement of Federal quality-of-care standards can protect nursing 

home residents in all nursing homes, and whether the new financial models for nursing home chains warrant new approaches to 

quality enforcement. Hearing held on May 15, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–116. 

Germs, Viruses, and Secrets: Government Plans to Move Exotic 

Disease Research to the Mainland U.S.—Oversight hearing on the 

Department of Homeland Security’s proposal to close the Plum IsVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00244 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
237 

land Animal Disease Center, located on Plum Island, NY, and replace it with a new laboratory located on the continental U.S., to 

be called the National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility. Hearing held 

on May 22, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–120. 

American Lives Still at Risk: When Will FDA’s Food Protection 

Plan Be Fully Funded and Implemented?—Oversight hearing on 

what progress FDA has made in implementing its Food Protection 

Plan. Hearing held on June 12, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110– 

126. 

Energy Speculation: Is Greater Regulation Necessary to Stop 

Price Manipulation?—Part II.—Oversight hearing on whether market speculation is inflating the price of crude oil above underlying 

supply and demand, and whether Congress needs to improve regulatory oversight. Hearing held on June 23, 2008. PRINTED, Serial 

No. 110–128. 

Long-Term Care Insurance: Are Consumers Protected for the Long 

Term?—Oversight hearing on the unique challenges facing consumers who purchase long-term care insurance policies and need to 

use their benefits. Hearing held on July 24, 2008. PRINTED, Serial 

No. 110–140. 

The Recent Salmonella Outbreak: Lessons Learned and Consequences to Industry and Public Health.—Oversight hearing on 

CDC and FDA efforts to identify the cause of the national Salmonella outbreak; to examine a portion of the Bioterrorism Act of 

2002, which required FDA to establish procedures to trace and 

track food commodities; to examine proposals developed by States 

and industries to establish traceability systems. Hearing held on 

July 31, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–142. 

Science Under Siege: Scientific Integrity at the Environmental 

Protection Agency.—Oversight hearing on the scientific integrity at 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Hearing held on September 18, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–149. 

Review of Continuing Security Concerns at Department of Energy’s National Labs.—Oversight hearing on the vulnerability of 

DOE national laboratory computer systems containing unclassified 

sensitive information, the status of laboratory physical security 

measures, and new security-related issues at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory exposed by a DOE site assessment that 

tested the lab’s ability to deter a physical attack . Hearing held on 

September 25, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–152. 

GAO AND CRS REPORTS AND TESTIMONY REQUESTED BY THE

SUBCOMMITTEE

GAO REPORTS

Nuclear Safety: Department of Energy Needs to Strengthen Its 

Independent Oversight of Nuclear Facilities and Operations. GAO– 

09–61, October 23, 2008. 

Federal Research: Opportunities Exist to Improve the Management and Oversight of Federally Funded Research and Development Centers GAO–09–15, October 8, 2008. 

Nuclear Security: Los Alamos National Laboratory Faces Challenges In Sustaining Physical and Cyber Security Improvements. 

GAO–08–1180T, September 25, 2008. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
238 

Drug Safety: Better Data Management and More Inspections Are 

Needed to Strengthen FDA’s Foreign Drug Inspection Program. 

GAO–08–970, September 22, 2008. 

EPA Science: New Assessment Process Further Limits the Credibility and Timeliness of EPA’s Assessments of Toxic Chemicals. 

GAO–08–1168T, September 18, 2008. 

Environmental Enforcement: EPA Needs to Improve the Accuracy and Transparency of Measures Used to Report on Program Effectiveness. GAO–08–1111R, September 18, 2008. 

Biosafety Laboratories: Perimeter Security Assessments of the 

Nation’s Five BSL–4 Laboratories. GAO–08–1092, September 17, 

2008. 

Hurricane Katrina: Trends in the Operating Results of Five Hospitals in New Orleans before and after Hurricane Katrina. GAO– 

08–681R, July 17, 2008. 

Long-Term Care Insurance: Oversight of Rate Setting and 

Claims Settlement Practices. GAO–08–712, June 30, 2008. 

Los Alamos National Laboratory: Long-Term Strategies Needed 

to Improve Security and Management Oversight. GAO–08–694, 

June 13, 2008. 

Telecommunications: FCC Needs to Improve Performance Management and Strengthen Oversight of the High-Cost Program. 

GAO–08–633, June 13, 2008. 

Federal Oversight of Food Safety: FDA Has Provided Few Details 

on the Resources and Strategies Needed to Implement its Food Protection Plan. GAO–08–909T, June 12, 2008. 

High-Containment Biosafety Laboratories: DHS Lacks Evidence 

to Conclude that Foot-and-Mouth Disease Research Can Be Done 

Safely on the U.S. Mainland. GAO–08–821T, May 22, 2008. 

Prescription Drugs: Trends in FDA’s Oversight of Direct-to-Consumer Advertising. GAO–08–758T, May 8, 2008. 

Global Nuclear Energy Partnership: DOE Should Reassess Its 

Approach to Designing and Building Spent Nuclear Fuel Recycling 

Facilities. GAO–08–483, April 22, 2008. 

Drug Safety: Preliminary Findings Suggest Recent FDA Initiatives Have Potential, but Do Not Fully Address Weaknesses in Its 

Foreign Drug Inspection Program. GAO–08–701T, April 22, 2008. 

Nuclear Material: DOE Has Several Potential Options for Dealing with Depleted Uranium Tails, Each of Which Could Benefit the 

Government. GAO–08–606R, March 31, 2008. 

Homeland Security: First Responders’ Ability to Detect and 

Model Hazardous Releases in Urban Areas is Significantly Limited. 

GAO–08–180, March 4, 2008. 

Medicare Advantage: Increased Spending Relative to Medicare 

Fee-for-Service May Not Always Reduce Beneficiary Out-of-Pocket 

Costs. GAO–08–359, February 22, 2008. 

Federal Oversight of Food Safety: FDA’s Food Protection Plan 

Proposes Positive First Steps, but Capacity to Carry Them Out Is 

Critical. GAO–08–435T, January 29, 2008. 

Medical Devices: Challenges for FDA in Conducting Manufacturer Inspections. GAO–08–428T, January 29, 2008. 

Los Alamos National Laboratory: Information on Security of 

Classified Data, Nuclear Material Controls, Nuclear and Worker 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
239 

Safety, and Project Management Weaknesses. GAO–08–173R, January 10, 2008. 

Maritime Security: Federal Efforts Needed to Address Challenges 

in Preventing and Responding to Terrorist Attacks on Energy Commodity Tankers. GAO–08–141, December 10, 2007. 

High-Containment Biosafety Laboratories: Preliminary Observations on the Oversight of the Proliferation of BSL–3 and BSL–4 

Laboratories in the United States. GAO–08–108T, October 4, 2007. 

Defense Health Care: Activities Related to Past Drinking Water 

Contamination at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune. GAO–07–276, 

May 11, 2007. 

Energy Markets: Factors That Influence Gasoline Prices. GAO– 

07–902T, May 22, 2007. 

Medicaid Long-Term Care: Few Transferred Assets before Applying for Nursing Home Coverage; Impact of Deficit Reduction Act on 

Eligibility Is Uncertain. GAO–07–280, March 26, 2007. 

Nuclear Nonproliferation: Progress Made in Improving Security 

at Russian Nuclear Sites, but the Long-term Sustainability of U.S.- 

Funded Security Upgrades Is Uncertain. GAO–07–404, February 

28, 2007. 

Maritime Security: Public Safety Consequences of a Terrorist Attack on a Tanker Carrying Liquefied Natural Gas Need Clarification. GAO–07–316, February 22, 2007. 

CRS REPORTS, MEMORANDUM AND TESTIMONY

CRS Report: U.S.-Russian Civilian Nuclear Cooperation Agreement: Issues for Congress. Order Number RS22892. July 30, 2008. 

CRS Memorandum: Background and Status of State Prompt Pay 

Laws for LTC Insurance. July 15, 2008. 

CRS Testimony: Michael F. Martin, Analyst in Asian Political 

Economy. October 11, 2007. 

CRS Memorandum: Congressional Committee Disclosure of Documents Received from Executive Departments and Agencies. April 

16, 2007. 

CRS Testimony: Donna Porter, Ph.D., R.D., Specialist in Food 

Safety and Nutrition, Domestic Social Policy Division. January 29, 

2008. 

CRS Report: The Food and Drug Administration: Budget and 

Statutory History, FY1980–FY2007. Order Number RL34334. January 24, 2008. 

GAO TESTIMONY

Nuclear Security: Los Alamos National Laboratory Faces Challenges in Sustaining Physical and Cyber Security Improvements. 

GAO–08–1180T, September 25, 2008. 

EPA Science: New Assessment Process Further Limits the Credibility and Timeliness of EPA’s Assessments of Toxic Chemicals. 

GAO–08–1168T, September 18, 2008. 

Long-Term Care Insurance: State Oversight of Rate Setting and 

Claims Settlement Practices. GAO–08–1016T, July 24, 2008. 

Federal Oversight of Food Safety: FDA Has Provided Few Details 

on the Resources and Strategies Needed to Implement its Food Protection Plan. GAO–08–909T, June 12, 2008. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
240 

High-Containment Biosafety Laboratories: DHS Lacks Evidence 

to Conclude That Foot-and-Mouth Disease Research Can Be Done 

Safely on the U.S. Mainland. GAO–08–821T, May 22, 2008. 

Prescription Drugs: Trends in FDA’s Oversight of Direct-to-Consumer Advertising. GAO–08–758T, May 8, 2008. 

Drug Safety: Preliminary Findings Suggest Recent FDA Initiatives Have Potential, but Do Not Fully Address Weaknesses in Its 

Foreign Drug Inspection Program. GAO–08–701T, April 22, 2008. 

Nuclear Material: Several Potential Options for Dealing with 

DOE’s Depleted Uranium Tails Could Benefit the Government. 

GAO–08–613T, April 3, 2008. 

Federal Oversight of Food Safety: FDA’s Food Protection Plan 

Proposes Positive First Steps, but Capacity to Carry Them Out Is 

Critical. GAO–08–435T, January 29, 2008. 

Medical Devices: Challenges for FDA in Conducting Manufacturer Inspections. GAO–08–428T, January 29, 2008. 

Nuclear Nonproliferation: DOE Needs to Reassess Its Program to 

Assist Weapons Scientists in Russia and Other Countries. GAO– 

08–434T, January 23, 2008. 

Drug Safety: Preliminary Findings Suggest Weaknesses in FDA’s 

Program for Inspecting Foreign Drug Manufacturers. GAO–08– 

224T, November 1, 2007. 

High-Containment Biosafety Laboratories: Preliminary Observations on the Oversight of the Proliferation of BSL–3 and BSL–4 

Laboratories in the United States. GAO–08–108T, October 4, 2007. 

Combating Nuclear Smuggling: Additional Actions Needed to Ensure Adequate Testing of Next Generation Radiation Detection 

Equipment. GAO–07–1247T, September 18, 2007. 

Defense Health Care: Issues Related to Past Drinking Water 

Contamination at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune. GAO–07– 

933T, June 12, 2007. 

Federal Oversight of Food Safety: High-Risk Designation Can 

Bring Attention to Limitations in the Government’s Food Recall 

Programs. GAO–07–785T, April 24, 2007. 

Drug Safety: FDA Needs to Further Address Shortcomings in Its 

Post market Decision-making Process. GAO–07–599T, March 22, 

2007. 

GAO EXHIBITS

Information Security: Actions Needed to Better Protect Los Alamos National Laboratory’s Unclassified Computer Network. GAO– 

08–1001, September 9, 2008. 

Nursing Homes: Federal Monitoring Surveys Demonstrate Continued Understatement of Serious Care Problems and CMS Oversight Weaknesses. GAO–08–517, May 9, 2008. 

Chemical Assessments: Low Productivity and New Interagency 

Review Process Limit the Usefulness and Credibility of EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System. GAO–08–440, March 7, 2008. 

Nuclear Nonproliferation: DOE’s Program to Assist Weapons Scientists in Russia and Other Countries Needs to Be Reassessed. 

GAO–08–189, December 12, 2007. 

Nursing Homes: Federal Actions Needed to Improve Targeting 

and Evaluation of Assistance by Quality Improvement Organizations. GAO–07–373, May 29, 2007. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
241 

Nursing Home Reform: Continued Attention Is Needed to Improve Quality of Care in Small but Significant Share of Homes. 

GAO–07–794T, May 2, 2007. 

Nursing Homes: Efforts to Strengthen Federal Enforcement Have 

Not Deterred Some Homes from Repeatedly Harming Residents. 

GAO–07–241, March 26, 2007. 

National Nuclear Security Administration: Additional Actions 

Needed to Improve Management of the Nation’s Nuclear Programs. 

GAO–07–36, January 19, 2007. 

Drug Safety: Improvement Needed in FDA’s Post market Decision-making and Oversight Process. GAO–06–402, March 31, 2006. 

Energy Markets: Effects of Mergers and Market Concentration in 

the U.S. Petroleum Industry. GAO–04–96, May 17, 2004. 

Food Safety: FDA’s Imported Seafood Safety Program Shows 

Some Progress, but Further Improvements Are Needed. GAO–04– 

246, January 30, 2004. 

Food Irradiation: Available Research Indicates That Benefits 

Outweigh Risks. RCED–00–217, August 24, 2000. 

Nuclear Nonproliferation: Concerns with DOE’s Efforts to Reduce 

the Risks Posed by Russia’s Unemployed Weapons Scientists. 

RCED–99–54, February 19, 1999. 

Food and Drug Administration: Improvements Needed in the 

Foreign Drug Inspection Program. HEHS–98–21, March 17, 1998. 

FDA Laboratories: Magnitude of Benefits Associated With Consolidation Is Questionable. HEHS–96–30, March 19, 1996. 

CRS EXHIBITS

CRS Memorandum: Long-Term Care Insurance: Key Issues of 

Legislation in the 110th Congress. July 3, 2008. 

CRS Report: The National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility: Issues 

for Congress. Order Number RL34160. May 19, 2008. 

CRS Memorandum: Methodological Analysis of Union of Concerned Scientists Report on Political Interference at EPA. May 2, 

2008. 

CRS Report: Regulation of Energy Derivatives. Order Number 

RS21404. March 19, 2008. 

CRS Report: U.S. Food and Agricultural Imports: Safeguards and 

Selected Issues. Order Number RL34198. October 3, 2007. 

CRS Report: Food and Agricultural Imports from China. Order 

Number RL34080. July 17, 2007. 

CRS Memorandum: Food and Agricultural Imports from China. 

June 6, 2007. 

CRS Memorandum: 2006 Oil Industry Profits. May 18, 2007. 

CRS Report: Oil Industry Profit Review 2005. Order Number 

RL33373. January 12, 2007. 

PENDING GAO REQUESTS

The following is a list of pending GAO studies initiated by the 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, but were not been 

completed by the end of the 110th Congress. 

FDA Reliance on Non-Inferiority Studies as Proof of Effectiveness of Other Antibiotics. Study requested on September 6, 2006. 

Los Alamos National Laboratory’s Classified Cyber Program. 

Study requested January 19, 2007. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
242 

DHS Portal Monitor Certification. Study requested January 19, 

2007. 

Co-requester to the Review of Biosafety Laboratories. Study requested March 27, 2007. 

Government Regulation of Dietary Supplements. Study requested 

May 14, 2007. 

United States Import Safety. Study requested June 14, 2007. 

FDA’s Use of Incentive Payments. Study requested September 6, 

2007. 

A Review of the V–22 Osprey Aircraft. Study requested October 

30, 2007. 

A Study on the Safety of Irradiated Foods. Study requested December 18, 2007. 

Proactive Testing of the HHS Institutional Review Boards (IRB) 

Application Process. Study requested December 18, 2007. 

Update of the 1995 Study on ‘‘Behind-the-Counter’’ Drugs. Study 

requested January 16, 2008. 

A Review of FDA’s Resources for Drugs, Biological Products, and 

Medical Devices. Study requested February 15, 2008. 

A Review of FDA Information Technology. Study requested February 18, 2008. 

A Review of Cost Implications of Work Stoppages from Inadequate Worker Safety Protections and Weaknesses in Nuclear Safety. Study requested April 16, 2008. 

The Production and Implementation of Electronic Passports (ePassports). Study requested May 13, 2008. 

Agreement for Cooperation for the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy with Russia. May 22, 2008. 

A Review of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Plans for 

De-Inventorying Category I and II Special Nuclear Material. Study 

requested June 25, 2008. 

Co-requestor of A Review of the Department of Energy’s Handling of Security at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. 

Study requested July 10, 2008. 

Review of the Progress, Strategies, Implementation and Management of National Nuclear Security Administration’s Stockpiles & 

Facilities. Study requested August 8, 2008. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(243) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND THE INTERNET

LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES

TRUTH IN CALLER ID ACT OF 2007

(H.R. 251) 

To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit manipulation of caller identification information. 

Summary 

H.R. 251 amends the Communications Act of 1934 to make it unlawful for any person within the United States, in connection with 

any telecommunications or VoIP service, to cause any caller identification service from transmitting misleading or inaccurate caller 

identification information with the intent to defraud or cause harm. 

The Act protects the ability to block any caller identification service 

to transmit caller identification information. The Act requires the 

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to adopt implementing 

regulations six months after the date of enactment. As part of the 

rulemaking, the Act also requires the FCC to consider whether its 

regulations concerning the use of automated telephone equipment 

should be revised to require noncommercial calls to residential telephone lines using an artificial or pre-recorded voice to deliver a 

message that transmits non-misleading and accurate caller identification information. 

Legislative History 

On January 5, 2007, H.R. 251 was introduced by Representative 

Engel and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On 

February 2, 2007, H.R. 251 was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Telecommunications and the Internet. 

On February 28, 2007, the Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R. 

251, receiving testimony from representatives of the FCC, the communications industry, and consumer privacy groups. 

On February 28, 2007, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 

and the Internet met in open markup session and forwarded H.R. 

251, amended, to the full Committee by a voice vote. 

On March 15, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

met in open markup session and H.R. 251 was ordered favorably 

reported, as amended, by a voice vote. 

On June 11, 2007, H.R. 251, was reported to the House, amended 

(H. Rept. 110–188). 

On June 12, 2007, H.R. 251 passed the House, as amended, 

under suspension of the rules, by a voice vote, two-thirds having 

voted in favor. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
244 

On June 13, 2007, H.R. 251 was received by the Senate and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. 

IMPLEMENTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE 9/11 COMMISSION ACT OF

2007

Public Law 110–53 (H.R. 1, S. 4) 

(Telecommunications Provisions) 

To provide for the implementation of the recommendations of the 

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States. 

Summary 

This Act contains several titles that fall within the jurisdiction 

of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Title III establishes a 

grant program at the Department of Homeland Security to improve 

interoperable emergency communications at the local, State, and 

federal levels. Title III also establishes a pilot project on the U.S.- 

Canadian and U.S.-Mexican borders to identify issues relating to 

cross-border emergency communications interoperability. Title XXII 

modifies an existing emergency communications interoperability 

grant program housed in the Department of Commerce. Title XXII 

also requires the FCC to evaluate the feasibility of a back-up emergency communications system and the status of 800 MHz re-banding efforts along the U.S.-Canadian and U.S.-Mexican borders. 

Title XXII establishes a joint advisory committee to examine the 

state of communications for emergency medical care facilities. Title 

XXIII modifies existing law to allow certain grant funds to be used 

to upgrade public safety answering points to handle enhanced 911 

calls. 

Legislative History 

On January 5, 2007, H.R. 1 was introduced by Representative 

Thompson. It was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 

Committee on the Judiciary, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to 

be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the 

committee concerned. 

On January 9, 2007, H.R. 1 was considered under the provisions 

of H. Res. 6 and passed the House by a rollcall vote: 299–128. H.R. 

1 was received by the Senate, read twice, and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Mr. Dingell, Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce received a response to his letter of January 9, 2007, to Mr. Thompson, Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security and sponsor of H.R. 1, agreeing with Mr. Dingell that the intent of H.R. 1 

was not to dilute or diminish any authority or resources of the Assistant Secretary for Cyber Security or of other Federal agencies 

engaged in efforts to secure cyber space. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
245 

On July 9, 2007, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security 

and Governmental Affairs was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1 by unanimous consent. During consideration of H.R. 

1, the Senate struck all after the enacting clause and substituted 

the language of S. 4, as amended by the Senate. H.R. 1 then passed 

the Senate, as amended, by unanimous consent. The Senate insisted on its amendment, requested a conference with the House, 

and appointed conferees. 

On July 17, 2007, the House disagreed with the Senate amendment and agreed to a conference by a voice vote. Subsequently, the 

House agreed to a motion to instruct conferees by a rollcall vote: 

354–66. 

The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce for consideration of Title I, Title II, sections 743 

and 901 of the House bill, and Title III, sections 1002, 1481, 1482, 

1484, and Title XVII of the Senate amendment, and modifications 

committed to the conference: Representatives Dingell, Markey, and 

Barton. 

On July 25, 2007, the House considered the conference report to 

accompany H.R. 1 (H. Rept. 110–259) under the provisions of H. 

Res. 567. 

On July 26, 2007, the Senate agreed to the conference report by 

a rollcall vote: 85–8. 

On July 27, 2007, the House agreed to the conference report by 

a rollcall vote: 371–40. 

On August 1, 2007, H.R. 1 was presented to the President. On 

August 3, 2007, H.R. 1 was signed by the President (Public Law 

110–53). 

NEW AND EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 911 IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–283 (H.R. 3403) 

To promote and enhance public safety by facilitating the rapid 

deployment of IP-enabled 911 and E–911 services, encouraging the 

Nation’s transition to a national IP-enabled emergency network, 

and improving 911 and E–911 access for those with disabilities. 

Summary 

The New and Emerging Technologies 911 Improvement Act ensures that consumers using Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) 

service can access enhanced 911 (E–911) emergency services by giving VoIP service providers access to the emergency services infrastructure and by extending existing liability protections to VoIP 

service. The Act also requires the development of a national plan 

to move to an IP-enabled emergency network and alters an existing 

grant program to allow funding for IP-enabled emergency networks. The Act also amends existing law so that in times of emergency VoIP service providers may provide otherwise-protected customer information to public safety answering points. 

Legislative History 

On August 3, 2007, H.R. 3403 was introduced by Representative 

Gordon and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
246 

On August 4, 2007, the bill was referred to the Subcommittee on 

Telecommunications and the Internet. 

On September 19, 2007, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held a hearing on H.R. 3403. The Subcommittee received testimony from representatives of public safety 

and the communications industry. 

On October 10, 2007, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 

and the Internet met in open markup session and forwarded H.R. 

3403, amended, to the full Committee by a voice vote. 

On October 30, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

met in open markup session and H.R. 3403 was ordered favorably 

reported, amended, by a voice vote. 

On November 13, 2007, H.R. 3403 was reported to the House, 

amended (H. Rept. 110–442). That same day, H.R. 3403 was considered under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a 

rollcall vote: 406–1. 

On November 14, 2007, H.R. 3403 was received by the Senate, 

read twice, and referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation. 

On June 16, 2008, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 

3403 by unanimous consent. That same day, the Senate passed 

H.R. 3403, amended, by unanimous consent. 

On June 23, 2008, the House agreed to the Senate amendment 

to H.R. 3403 without objection, clearing the measure for the White 

House. 

On July 15, 2008, H.R. 3403 was presented to the President. On 

July 23, 2008, H.R. 3403 was signed by the President (Public Law 

110–283). 

FOOD, CONSERVATION, AND ENERGY ACT OF 2008

Public Law 110–246 (H.R. 6124, H.R. 2419, S. 2302) 

(Telecommunications Provisions) 

To provide for the continuation of agricultural and other programs of the Department of Agriculture through fiscal year 2012, 

and for other purposes. 

Summary 

Title VI of H.R. 6124 contains rural development provisions, 

some of which fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Section 6110 of H.R. 6124 makes improvements to a loan program to assist in the deployment of broadband 

facilities in rural communities. Section 6110 restricts loan funding 

to those communities most in need of new or additional broadband 

facilities and limits the ability of any company that serves more 

than 20 percent of the Nation’s households to take more than 15 

percent of the available funds in any given year. Section 6111 authorizes a new National Center for Rural Telecommunications Assessment to assess broadband availability in rural areas and the effectiveness of Government programs to increase broadband penetration in rural areas. Section 6112 directs the FCC Chairman to 

submit to Congress a report describing a comprehensive rural 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
247 

broadband strategy. Section 6201 contains certain provisions related to rural distance learning and telemedicine. 

Legislative History 

On May 22, 2007, H.R. 2419 was introduced by Representative 

Peterson. It was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in 

addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

On July 19, 2007, the Committee on Agriculture met in open 

markup session and H.R. 2419 was ordered favorably reported, 

amended, by a voice vote. 

On July 23, 2007, H.R. 2419 was reported to the House, amended, by the Committee on Agriculture (H. Rept. 110–256, Part 1). 

The Committee on Foreign Affairs was discharged from further 

consideration of H.R. 2419. 

On July 26, 2007, the House began consideration of H.R. 2419 

under the provisions of H. Res. 574. 

On July 27, 2007, H.R. 2419 passed the House, amended, by a 

rollcall vote: 231–191. 

On September 4, 2007, H.R. 2419 was received in the Senate, 

read the first time, and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar 

under Read the First Time. 

On September 5, 2007, H.R. 2419 was read a second time and 

placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, 

Calendar No. 339. 

On December 14, 2007, H.R. 2419 passed the Senate, amended, 

by a rollcall vote: 79–14. The Senate insisted on its amendment 

and requested a conference. 

On February 2, 2008, the Senate appointed conferees: Senators 

Harkin, Leahy, Conrad, Baucus, Lincoln, Stabenow, Chambliss, 

Lugar, Cochran, Roberts, and Grassley. 

On April 9, 2008, the House disagreed with the Senate amendment, and agreed to a conference by a voice vote. The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

for consideration of sections 6012, 6023, 6024, 6028, 6029, 9004, 

9005, and 9017 of the House bill and sections 6006, 6012, 6110– 

6112, 6202, 6302, 7044, 7049, 7307, 7507, 9001, 11060, 11072, 

11087, and 11101–11103 of the Senate amendment, and modifications committed to conference: Representatives Dingell, Pallone, 

Barton. 

On May 13, 2008, the conference report was filed in the House 

(H. Rept. 110–627). 

On May 14, 2008, the House agreed to the conference report by 

a rollcall vote: 318–106. 

On May 15, 2008, the Senate agreed to the conference report by 

a rollcall vote: 81–15. 

On May 20, 2008, H.R. 2419 was presented to the President. 

On May 21, 2008, H.R. 2419 was vetoed by the President. That 

same day, H.R. 2419 passed the House over the Presidential veto 

by a rollcall vote: 316–108, two-thirds having voted in the affirmative. 

On May 22, 2008, H.R. 2419 passed the Senate over veto by a 

rollcall vote: 82–13, two-thirds having voted in the affirmative. 

H.R. 2419 became law (Public Law 110–234). 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
248 

The House and Senate passed H.R. 2419 over veto, enacting 14 

of 15 titles into law. The trade title (Title III) was inadvertently excluded from the enrolled bill. To remedy the situation, both chambers re-passed the farm bill conference agreement (including the 

trade title) as H.R. 6124, again over veto. H.R. 6124, in section 4, 

repeals Public Law 110–234 (H.R. 2419) and amendments made by 

it, effective on the date of that Act’s enactment. 

On May 22, 2008, H.R. 6124 was introduced and referred to the 

Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

That same day, H.R. 6124 passed the House under suspension of 

the rules by a rollcall vote: 306–110. H.R. 6124 was received by the 

Senate, read twice, and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar 

under General Orders, Calendar No. 753. 

On June 5, 2008, the Senate passed H.R. 6124 by a rollcall vote: 

77–15. 

On June 16, 2008, H.R. 6124 was presented to the President. 

On June 18, 2008, H.R. 6124 was vetoed by the President. The 

Chair laid before the House the veto message from the President. 

H.R. 6124 passed the House over the veto by a rollcall vote: 317– 

109, two-thirds having voted in the affirmative. The veto message 

was received by the Senate. H.R. 6124 passed the Senate over the 

veto by a rollcall vote: 80–14, two-thirds having voted in the affirmative. H.R. 6124 became law (Public Law 110–246). 

BROADBAND CENSUS OF AMERICA ACT

Public Law 110–385 (S. 1492, H.R. 3919) 

To provide for a comprehensive nationwide inventory of existing 

broadband service. 

Summary 

The Broadband Census of America Act is intended to improve the 

quality and quantity of data the Government collects about 

broadband deployment and adoption, develop a national map displaying broadband availability, and facilitate voluntary public-private partnerships at the State and local levels to promote 

broadband deployment. The legislation is modeled loosely after 

broadband mapping initiatives by organizations such as Connected 

Nation, which have had success in States like Kentucky. 

Section 2 of H.R. 3919 requires the FCC to conduct an assessment of the nature and extent of broadband deployment, capability, 

and subscription to such services, including information comparing 

the extent of broadband service capability for comparable services 

in communities in other countries. It also requires the FCC to publicly report certain broadband data annually. Section 3 tasks the 

NTIA with developing a broadband inventory map of the Nation 

that depicts the geographic extent and attributes of broadband 

service capability deployed by both commercial and public providers throughout each State. Section 4 authorizes the NTIA to 

make grants to States or nonprofit organizations to assist in providing the NTIA with information for the map. Section 5 requires 

the NTIA to make grants to local technology planning entities to 

assess the current use of broadband service capability, set goals for 

improving or maximizing such use, identify local broadband deVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00256 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
249 

mand and aggregate such demand, and establish programs to improve computer ownership and Internet access for unserved and 

underserved populations. Section 6 requires the FCC to conduct 

and make public periodic consumer surveys on broadband use. 

Legislative History 

On May 17, 2007, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and 

the Internet held a legislative hearing entitled, ‘‘H.R. ll, a Discussion Draft Addressing Broadband Mapping and Data Collection.’’ The Subcommittee received testimony from representatives of 

the communications industry, consumer groups, and non-profit economic development organizations. 

On October 10, 2007, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 

and the Internet met in open markup session to consider a committee print of H.R. ll, the ‘‘Broadband Census of America Act 

of 2007.’’ The committee print was forwarded to the full Committee 

by a voice vote. 

On October 22, 2007, H.R. 3919, the ‘‘Broadband Census of 

America Act of 2007,’’ was introduced by Representative Markey 

and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On October 23, 2007, H.R. 3919 was referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet. 

On October 30, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

met in open markup session to consider H.R. 3919. Mr. Markey offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute, which was 

agreed to by a voice vote. H.R. 3919 was ordered favorably reported 

to the House, amended, by a voice vote. 

On November 13, 2007, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

reported H.R. 3919 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–443). 

That same day, H.R. 3919 passed the House, as amended, under 

suspension of the rules, by a voice vote, two-thirds having voted in 

favor. 

On November 14, 2007, H.R. 3919 was received by the Senate, 

read twice, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation. 

After the House passed H.R. 3919, the Senate took up the similar measure, S. 1492. 

On May 24, 2007, S. 1492 was introduce, read twice, and referred 

to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. 

On October 24, 2007, the Senate Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation reported S. 1492, with an amendment 

in the nature of a substitute (S. Rept. 110–204). 

On September 26, 2008, the Senate passed S. 1492, amended, by 

unanimous consent. 

On September 27, 2008, S. 1492 was received by the House and 

referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On September 29, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce was discharged from further consideration of S. 1492. The 

bill then passed the House, amended, without objection. 

On September 30, 2008, the Senate agreed to the House amendment to S. 1492, by unanimous consent, clearing the measure for 

the White House. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
250 

On October 2, 2008, S.1492 was presented to the President. On 

October 10, 2008, S.1492 was signed by the President (Public Law 

110–385). 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR

FISCAL YEAR 2008

(H.R. 1684) 

To authorize appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for fiscal year 2008, and for other purposes. 

Summary 

Section 703 directs the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security 

for Cybersecurity and Communications to collaborate with any Federal entity that under law has authority over the activities set 

forth in Title VII of the Act, which would include the FCC and the 

NTIA. All other provisions that concerned issues under the jurisdiction of the Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee 

were removed from the final bill prior to its passage by the House. 

Legislative History 

On March 26, 2007, H.R. 1684 was introduced and referred to 

the Committee on Homeland Security. 

On May 4, 2007, the Committee on Homeland Security reported 

H.R. 1684 to the House, amended (H. Rept. 110–122). 

On May 9, 2007, H.R. 1684 was considered under the provisions 

of H. Res. 382. H.R. 1684 passed the House, amended, by a rollcall 

vote: 296–126. 

On May 11, 2007, H.R. 1684 was received in the Senate, read 

twice, and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs. 

THE DTV TRANSITION ASSISTANCE ACT

Public Law 110–295 (S. 2607, H.R. 5696) 

To make a technical correction to section 3009 of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. 

Summary 

S. 2607 amends Sections 3008(a) and 3009(a) of the Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005 (P.L. 109–171) to 

make a technical correction and to permit the Assistant Secretary 

of Commerce for Communications and Information to use certain 

funds to help ensure a smooth DTV transition. S. 2607 makes a 

technical correction to the dates by which certain DTV transition 

assistance funds for low-power television stations may be released 

by the Department of Commerce. S. 2607 also requires the Assistant Secretary to make a determination, which the Assistant Secretary may adjust from time to time, with respect to whether the 

full amount of grant funds provided under paragraph (1) of Section 

3008(a) for digital-to-analog conversion equipment for television 

translator stations will be needed for payments under that paragraph. If the Assistant Secretary determines that the full amount 

will not be needed, the Assistant Secretary may use the remaining 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
251 

amount for consumer education and technical assistance regarding 

the DTV transition and the availability of the TV Converter Box 

Coupon Program. 

Legislative History 

On February 7, 2008, S. 2607 was introduced and referred to the 

Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. 

On June 10, 2008, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation reported S. 2607 to the Senate (S. Rept. 110–348). 

On June 19, 2008, S. 2607 passed the Senate, amended, by unanimous consent. 

On June 20, 2008, S. 2607 was received by the House and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On July 9, 2008, S. 2607 passed the House, as amended by the 

Senate, under suspension of the rules, by a voice vote, two-thirds 

having voted in favor. 

On July 22, 2008, S. 2607 was presented to the President. S. 

2607 was signed by the President on July 30, 2008 (Public Law 

110–295). 

THE CHILD SAFE VIEWING ACT OF 2007

Public Law 110–452 (S. 602) 

To develop the next generation of parental control technology. 

Summary 

S. 602 requires the FCC to, within 90 days of the date of enactment, issue a Notice of Inquiry to examine issues related to the 

availability and use of advanced blocking technology that enables 

parents to block access to objectionable video or audio programming. The FCC is required to issue a report to Congress detailing 

the results of the Notice of Inquiry not later than 270 days after 

the date of enactment. 

Legislative History 

On February 15, 2007, S. 602 was introduced and referred to the 

Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. 

On March 3, 2008, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation reported S. 602, with an amendment in the nature 

of a substitute, to the Senate (S. Rept. 110–268). 

On October 1, 2008, S. 602 passed the Senate, amended, by 

unanimous consent. 

On October 2, 2008, S. 602 was received by the House and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On October 3, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

was discharged from further consideration of S. 602 by unanimous 

consent. S. 602 passed the House, amended, without objection. 

On November 17, 2008, the Senate agreed to the House amendment to S. 602, by unanimous consent, clearing the measure for the 

White House. 

On November 21, 2008, S. 602 was presented to the President. 

On December 2, 2008, S. 602 was signed by the President (Public 

Law 110–452). 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
252 

THE SHORT-TERM ANALOG FLASH AND EMERGENCY READINESS ACT

Public Law 110–459 (S. 3663, H.R. 7013) 

To require the Federal Communications Commission to provide 

for a short-term extension of analog television broadcasting authority so that essential public safety announcements and digital television (DTV) transition information may be provided for a short 

time after February 17, 2009. 

Summary 

S. 3663 requires the FCC to develop and implement, not later 

than January 15, 2009, a program to encourage and permit continued broadcasting in analog format of public safety information and 

information about the DTV transition for 30 days after February 

17, 2009. The Act places several limitations on permissible continued analog broadcasts, including some to prevent interference with 

commercial operations in the spectrum reclaimed from broadcasters 

and auctioned to commercial entities or set aside for public safety. 

Legislative History 

On October 1, 2008, S. 3663 was introduced and referred to the 

Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. 

On November 20, 2008, the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation was discharged from further consideration of S. 

3663 by unanimous consent. S. 3663 passed the Senate, amended, 

by unanimous consent. 

On December 9, 2008, the House received S. 3663, and the bill 

was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

On December 10, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

was discharged from further consideration of S. 3663 by unanimous 

consent. That same day, S. 3663 passed the House without objection, clearing the measure for the White House. 

On December 12, 2008, S. 3663 was presented to the President. 

The bill was signed into law on December 23, 2008 (P.L. 110–459). 

OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES

OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held 

general oversight hearings concerning the practices and activities 

of the FCC. The first of these hearings occurred on March 14, 2007, 

and all five FCC Commissioners testified. The witnesses answered 

questions from the Members of the Subcommittee concerning a variety of telecommunications policy matters. 

On July 24, 2007, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and 

the Internet held another hearing at which it received testimony 

from all five FCC Commissioners concerning a variety of telecommunications policy matters. On December 5, 2007, the Subcommittee held an FCC oversight hearing focused on a pending 

media ownership rulemaking, and on April 15, 2008, the Subcommittee held an FCC oversight hearing focused on the 700 MHz 

auction. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
253 

DIGITAL TELEVISION TRANSITION

The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held 

a series of hearings regarding the digital television (DTV) transition, including the TV Converter Box Coupon Program administered by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), which allows households to receive by U.S. mail 

up to two $40 coupons, each of which may be used towards the purchase of a digital-to-analog converter box that will display digital 

signals on an analog television set, and consumer education about 

the DTV transition. The hearings took place on March 28, October 

17, and October 31, 2007, and February 13, June 10, and September 16, 2008. At the hearings, the Subcommittee received testimony from representatives of the NTIA and the FCC; IBM, the 

contractor for the TV Converter Box Coupon Program; and stakeholders in the DTV transition, including broadcasters, cable and 

satellite operators, consumer electronics manufacturers and retailers and consumer and public interest groups. 

On January 22, 2007, Ranking Member Barton, Mr. Upton, and 

Mr. Hastert introduced H.R. 608, the ‘‘Digital Television Consumer 

Education Act of 2007.’’ The Act was designed to replace certain 

DTV consumer education provisions that the Senate struck from 

the original DTV legislation included in the Deficit Reduction Act 

of 2006 because of the Byrd rule. 

On May 24, 2007, Chairman Dingell and Telecommunications 

and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey sent a letter to 

FCC Chairman Martin and Commissioners Copps, Adelstein, Tate 

and McDowell expressing concern about the lack of leadership, direction and focus at the FCC concerning the DTV transition and 

urging the FCC to immediately implement a national consumer 

education campaign about the DTV transition. FCC Chairman 

Martin responded to the letter on June 18, 2007. As a result of the 

letter, the FCC adopted rules regarding the consumer education obligations of broadcasters, multichannel video programming providers and other stakeholders in the DTV transition. 

On October 1, 2007, Ranking Member Barton and Mr. Upton 

sent a letter to FCC Chairman Martin regarding whether he would 

support passage of H.R. 608, the Digital Television Consumer Education Act of 2007. The letter also asked if and when the FCC 

would be updating its estimate of the percentage of U.S. households that rely exclusively on over-the-air television. On October 

12, 2007, Chairman Martin responded to the letter. 

On February 8, 2008, Chairman Dingell and Senate Committee 

on Commerce, Science, and Transportation Chairman Inouye sent 

a letter to President Bush urging him to immediately establish an 

inter-agency task force to oversee the DTV transition and ensure 

a robust consumer education effort. 

On February 12, 2008, Chairman Dingell, Telecommunications 

and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey, and 19 additional Committee Members sent a letter to Acting Assistant Secretary Baker strongly urging NTIA to allow households whose TV 

converter box coupons have expired after the statutorily-prescribed 

90 days to reapply for coupons, provided sufficient monies remain 

in the TV Converter Box Coupon Program to fund such reissuance. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
254 

Because NTIA’s February 21, 2008, response suggested that NTIA 

would have a better understanding of the impact of the 90-day expiration and demands on the coupon program as consumers began 

to redeem coupons, on July 7, 2008, Chairman Dingell and Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey 

sent a follow-up letter regarding coupon reissuance. NTIA’s August 

27, 2008, response to that letter stated that NTIA did not believe 

that changing the coupon program to allow for coupon reissuance 

at that time was advisable. 

On March 5, 2008, Chairman Dingell and Telecommunications 

and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey sent letters to 

Acting Assistant Secretary Baker and FCC Chairman Martin requesting that the NTIA and the FCC inform the Committee in 

writing on a quarterly basis regarding whether each agency anticipates that additional funds will be needed for the TV Converter 

Box Coupon Program to accommodate requests from any eligible 

household. 

On July 9, 2008, Chairman Dingell, Ranking Member Barton, 

Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman 

Markey and Subcommittee Ranking Member Stearns sent a letter 

to Postmaster General John Potter after receiving complaints that 

households were not receiving TV converter box coupons, which 

were being mailed Standard Class, promptly. This circumstance 

created problems because coupons expire 90 days from the date of 

mailing. The letter urged the U.S. Postal Service to give mailed TV 

converter box coupons priority status so households receive them in 

a timely manner, especially since coupons expire 90 days from the 

date of mailing. The United States Postal Service responded to the 

letter on August 8, 2008. 

On July 10, 2008, Chairman Dingell and Telecommunications 

and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey sent a letter to 

Acting Assistant Secretary Baker regarding an anticipated shortfall 

in administrative funds for the TV Converter Box Coupon Program. 

The letter posed a series of questions related to administrative 

funds for the TV Converter Box Coupon Program. The Acting Assistant Secretary responded to the letter on July 25, 2008. 

On September 15, 2008, Chairman Dingell and Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey sent a 

letter to Acting Assistant Secretary Baker asking questions about 

a legislative proposal submitted to the Committee by NTIA to address an anticipated shortfall in administrative funds for the TV 

Converter Box Coupon Program so that the Committee could better 

understand how to address the shortfall. The Acting Assistant Secretary responded to the letter on September 18, 2008. 

Chairman Dingell, Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey, and 4 additional Subcommittee 

Members sent letters to FCC Chairman Martin and Acting Assistant Secretary Baker on September 25, 2008, and September 26, 

2008, respectively, urging the FCC and the NTIA to ensure that 

television viewers near the U.S.-Mexico border are adequately informed of and prepared for the DTV transition. 

On October 21, 2008, Chairman Dingell and Telecommunications 

and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey sent a letter to 

Acting Assistant Secretary Baker asking questions about the TV 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
255 

Converter Box Coupon Program, including funding for the program 

and the distribution of TV converter box coupons. The Acting Assistant Secretary responded to the letter on November 7, 2008. 

On November 7, 2008, Chairman Dingell and Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey sent letters to Acting Assistant Secretary Baker and Chairman Martin 

asking questions about lessons learned from the early switch to 

digital broadcasting in Wilmington, North Carolina. The FCC responded to the letter on November 14, 2008, and the NTIA responded on November 18, 2008. 

DIGITAL FUTURE OF THE UNITED STATES

The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held 

several hearings related to the digital future of the Nation to highlight how the advent of digital, broadband technologies and services were evolving, where and in what conditions innovation was 

flourishing, and how new digital, broadband services were buffeting 

existing marketplace participants and current regulatory structures. 

The first hearing, on March 1, 2007, had a solo witness: Sir Timothy Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World Wide Web. The Subcommittee received testimony on the special architecture of the 

World Wide Web and plans for further innovations in mobile web 

technologies and services, as well as the ‘‘semantic web,’’ an evolution that will transform the web’s capabilities for users and applications. 

On March 7, 2007, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the future of radio services. Witnesses representing traditional radio 

broadcasting, Internet webcasting and satellite radio addressed 

issues relating to the future of radio and the music industry as 

technologies and content further migrate to digital formats. 

On April 19, 2007, the Subcommittee held a hearing focused on 

the future of wireless technology. The hearing examined spectrum 

opportunities for new wireless services and competition in the wireless industry, with a particular eye toward the upcoming 700 MHz 

auction. Witnesses addressed policy questions about how best to 

promote competition, advance public safety goals, ensure a wide diversity of ownership in wireless licenses, and foster wireless innovation. A subsequent hearing on July 11, 2007, highlighted the introduction of the iPhone and evaluated issues related to existing 

and future openness, innovation, and competition in the wireless 

marketplace. 

On April 24, 2007, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 

‘‘Broadband Lessons From Abroad.’’ Witnesses included foreign government officials, a foreign telecommunications executive, an entrepreneur, and a representative of a think tank. The purpose of the 

hearing was to obtain testimony on the advanced state of 

broadband deployment, speeds, choice, and subscription rates 

abroad and draw lessons for use in U.S. broadband policymaking. 

On May 10, 2007, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the future 

of video services. The Subcommittee obtained testimony from video 

services entrepreneurs and a representative of a writers union and 

wireless video providers. The hearing explored the fact that digital 

video, particularly video delivered over the World Wide Web, was 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
256 

transforming the video marketplace and calling into question the 

applicability of broadcast network non-duplication, syndicated exclusivity, program access, must-carry, sport blackout, and product 

integration rules. 

On July 12, 2007, Subcommittee Chairman Markey convened a 

roundtable discussion with industry and consumer representatives 

of web-based streaming radio stations and copyright interests to 

address issues stemming from recent decisions about copyright royalty rates by the Copyright Royalty Board. The roundtable made 

significant progress in helping several participants find negotiated 

resolutions to thorny royalty payment issues. 

INTERNET FREEDOM

On May 6, 2008, the Subcommittee held a legislative hearing on 

H.R. 5353, the ‘‘Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2008.’’ Witnesses included representatives of the music recording industry, 

online retailers, the telephone and cable industries, and public interest groups. The purpose of the hearing was to obtain testimony 

on the issue of network neutrality, assess the rights of consumers 

and entrepreneurs on the Internet through various media and technology, and examine the proposals set forth in H.R. 5353. 

H.R. 5353 would establish national broadband policy principles 

in Title I of the Communications Act of 1934 to guide FCC decision-making. The bill would direct the FCC to examine the nature 

and extent of consumer rights on the Internet and to convene several broadband summits around the country to obtain input from 

the public and other stakeholders on consumer rights on the Internet. Finally, the bill would require the FCC to convey to Congress 

the results of its examination of the broadband market and these 

summits and any other recommendations for Congressional action. 

PRIVACY AND DEEP PACKET INSPECTION TECHNOLOGIES

The Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on July 17, 2008, 

entitled, ‘‘What Your Broadband Provider Knows About Your Web 

Use: Deep Packet Inspection and Communications Laws and Policies.’’ Witnesses included representatives of academia, investment 

companies, and companies offering deep packet inspection technologies. The purpose of the hearing was to explore the nature of 

deep packet inspection and other technologies and what their arrival in the marketplace portends for consumer privacy and the nature of the Internet. 

SPECTRUM POLICY AND WIRELESS CONSUMER PROTECTION

The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held 

several hearings examining spectrum policy and wireless consumer 

protection. The first oversight hearing, entitled ‘‘Digital Future of 

the United States: Part 3: Spectrum Opportunities and the Future 

of Wireless,’’ was held on April 19, 2007. The Subcommittee received testimony from wireless industry executives concerning the 

700 MHz spectrum auction and other wireless issues. 

On July 11, 2007, the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing 

entitled, ‘‘Wireless Innovation and Consumer Protection,’’ that focused on wireless consumer protection and how the practices of 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
257 

wireless carriers impact the pace of technological innovation in the 

wireless industry. The Subcommittee received testimony from a 

state government official, a consumer advocate, a law school professor, and several wireless industry executives. 

On February 27, 2008, the Subcommittee held a legislative hearing entitled, ‘‘H.R. ll, a Discussion Draft on Wireless Consumer 

Protection and Community Broadband Empowerment Act of 2008.’’ 

This hearing focused on draft legislation that established a new 

regulatory regime for the wireless industry, prohibited State and 

local laws that prevent municipalities from entering the broadband 

marketplace, and sought to make the Federal government’s use of 

spectrum more efficient by requiring the use of smart radio technologies. The Subcommittee received testimony from a local government official, consumer advocates, and a wireless industry official. 

On April 15, 2008, the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing 

focused on the 700 MHz spectrum auction entitled, ‘‘Oversight of 

the Federal Communications Commission—the 700 MHz Auction.’’ 

The Subcommittee received testimony from all five FCC Commissioners, as well as representatives of public safety organizations, a 

public interest organization, and wireless companies. 

On September 23, 2008, Chairman Dingell, Telecommunications 

and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey, and Congresswoman Harman sent a letter to FCC Chairman Martin urging the 

FCC to provide adequate time for public comment on the proposed 

rules for the auction of spectrum in the 700 MHz D Block. 

SPECTRUM CLEARING OVERSIGHT

On June 27, 2007, Chairman Dingell, Ranking Member Barton, 

Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman 

Markey, Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee 

Ranking Member Upton, Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Stupak, and Oversight and Investigations 

Subcommittee Ranking Member Whitfield sent a letter to Secretary 

of Commerce Gutierrez and Director Portman of the Office of Management and Budget concerning the implementation of certain provisions of the Commercial Spectrum Enhancement Act (Public Law 

108–494). The letter urged the Administration to ensure that the 

Federal agencies required to relocate certain wireless operations do 

so in the timeframe specified by Congress and that the Administration keep the Members informed of the progress of the relocation 

efforts. 

UNIVERSAL SERVICE

On June 24, 2008, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and 

the Internet held a hearing entitled, ‘‘Universal Service: To Whom, 

By Whom, For What, and How Much?’’. The Subcommittee received 

testimony about what the core principles of universal service 

should be from representatives of public policy advocacy groups, 

state government, and an educational foundation. 

On April 12, 2007, Chairman Dingell, Ranking Member Barton, 

Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Stupak, and 

Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Ranking Member 

Whitfield sent a letter to the Comptroller General of the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) requesting assistance in exVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00265 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
258 

amining waste, fraud, and abuse in universal service fund programs. Also on April 12, 2007, these same members informed FCC 

Chairman Martin that the Full Committee and the Oversight and 

Investigations Subcommittee were reopening an investigation into 

universal service fund programs and had requested the assistance 

of the GAO. 

On November 25, 2008, the FCC’s Inspector General released an 

audit showing that between July 2006 and June 2007, there were 

almost $1 billion in erroneous payments in the high-cost fund, 

which represents an improper payment rate of more than 23 percent. 

ACCESS TO COMMUNICATION SERVICES BY THOSE WITH DISABILITIES

On May 1, 2008, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and 

the Internet held a legislative hearing entitled, ‘‘H.R. ll, Draft 

Legislation Enhancing Access to Broadband Technology and Services for Persons with Disabilities.’’ The hearing focused on draft 

legislation that would update telecommunications statutes to ensure that disabled individuals have meaningful access to Internetbased communications and media. The Subcommittee received testimony from disabled individuals, the wireless industry, a public 

broadcasting station that pioneered accessibility solutions for 

broadcast media, and the private sector. 

On November 26, 2007, Chairman Dingell, Ranking Member 

Barton, Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey, and Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Ranking Member Upton sent a letter to FCC Chairman 

Martin requesting that the FCC promptly complete two 

rulemakings regarding access by the deaf or hard of hearing to 911 

services. In response, the FCC adopted an order and issued a further notice of proposed rulemaking on June 11 and December 19, 

2008. 

OVERSIGHT OF THE NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION AND INNOVATIONS IN INTEROPERABILITY

On March 22, 2007, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 

and the Internet held an oversight hearing entitled, ‘‘Oversight of 

the National Telecommunications and Information Administration 

and Innovations in Interoperability.’’ The Subcommittee received 

testimony from the Assistant Secretary for Communications and 

Information of the Department of Commerce, who also serves as 

the Administrator of the NTIA. The Subcommittee also received 

testimony concerning public safety interoperability from representatives of public safety, equipment and software manufacturers, and 

the private sector. 

DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE

On October 2, 2007, Chairman Dingell, Telecommunications and 

the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey, and Oversight and 

Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Stupak sent letters to 

three major telecommunications carriers seeking information about 

each company’s policy for releasing customer records in light of reports of the Government’s warrantless surveillance program. On 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
259 

October 12, 2007, the three companies responded, stating that any 

such information, if it existed, was under the exclusive control of 

the executive branch. Citing the ‘‘state secrets’’ privilege, they also 

stated that it was their understanding that it would be unlawful 

for the companies to respond to the letters. On October 12, 2007, 

the Director of Legislative Affairs for the Director of National Intelligence wrote the Committee, asserting that any response by the 

telecommunications carriers could disclose classified information 

relating to intelligence activities. 

On November 1, 2007, Chairman Dingell, Telecommunications 

and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey, and Oversight 

and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Stupak sent a letter to 

Acting Attorney General Keisler requesting a briefing from the executive branch about the Government’s warrantless surveillance 

program. The letter noted that because the telecommunications 

carriers seeking immunity from participation in the warrantless 

surveillance program informed the Committee that they could not 

provide information about the program, a briefing by the executive 

branch was needed. 

PUBLIC SAFETY INTEROPERABLE COMMUNICATIONS GRANT PROGRAM

On March 26, 2007, Chairman Dingell, Ranking Member Barton, 

Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman 

Markey, and Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee 

Ranking Member Upton sent a letter to the Associate Director of 

the Office of Management and Budget concerning the Public Safety 

Interoperable Communications (PSIC) grant program administered 

by the NTIA. The letter addressed concerns about the role of the 

Department of Homeland Security, which NTIA had hired as a subcontractor for the grant program. 

On May 1, 2007, Chairman Dingell, Ranking Member Barton, 

Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman 

Markey, and Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee 

Ranking Member Upton sent a letter to Department of Commerce 

Secretary Gutierrez concerning the manner in which NTIA was designing and implementing the PSIC grant program. On May 23, 

2007, the Secretary responded to the Committee’s letter. 

MEDIA CONCENTRATION

On December 5, 2007, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 

and the Internet held an oversight hearing on the FCC and concentration of media ownership. The hearing examined a proposed 

FCC rule that would relax the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rule. The Subcommittee received testimony from the five FCC 

Commissioners and from representatives of industry, minority and 

public interest groups. 

SPORTS PROGRAMMING

On March 5, 2008, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 

and the Internet held an oversight hearing examining competition 

in sports programming, including regional sports networks, league 

sports networks and program access. The Subcommittee received 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
260 

testimony from representatives of sports leagues and programmers, 

as well as industry executives, a consumer group and a think tank. 

PRIVATE EQUITY

On March 11, 2008, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the role 

of private equity in the telecommunications marketplace. The hearing examined the effects of private equity investment on competition, investment, innovation, diversity and localism and underscored the need for policymakers to remain abreast of changes in 

the financial marketplace. Witnesses included representatives of a 

private equity firm, a state regulatory commission and academia. 

On July 12, 2007, Chairman Dingell and Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet Chairman Markey wrote to FCC 

Chairman Martin regarding private equity investments in telecommunications assets and whether ownership of telecommunications assets by non-public financial holding companies posed particular challenges for the FCC in adequately performing its regulatory and oversight functions, including with respect to the policy 

objectives of diversity and localism. Chairman Martin replied on 

August 31, 2007. 

PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL, AND GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES

On January 29, 2008, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications 

and the Internet held an oversight hearing to explore the future of 

Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) services in the digital television era and the effect that changes in technology and the 

marketplace will have on the network capacity, services, and applications available to PEG programming providers and on the delivery of PEG services to consumers. The Subcommittee received testimony from executives in the multichannel video programming industry, municipal officials and PEG programming providers. 

INTERNET CORPORATION FOR ASSIGNED NAMES AND NUMBERS

On May 6, 2008, Chairman Dingell, Ranking Member Barton, 

Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman 

Markey, Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee 

Ranking Member Stearns, and 12 additional Subcommittee Members sent a letter to Secretary of Commerce Gutierrez expressing 

support for the Department of Commerce’s continued role in facilitating the transition of the technical management and coordination 

of the Internet’s domain name system from the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to the private sector and asking questions about the Department’s future oversight 

of ICANN. 

WHITE SPACES

On August 5, 2008, Chairman Dingell sent a letter to FCC Chairman Martin regarding the FCC’s consideration of use of the television white spaces. The letters asked Chairman Martin to consider 

licensing some of the white spaces spectrum. On October 24, 2008, 

Chairman Dingell sent another letter to Chairman Martin concerning the white spaces and sought assurances that the FCC 

would be able to quickly remedy any harms to consumers caused 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
261 

by white spaces devices that interfere with free, over-the-air television signals. Chairman Martin replied to the letter on October 31, 

2008. 

TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPETITION

The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held 

two hearings that focused exclusively on telecommunications competition issues. On October 2, 2007, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held an oversight hearing entitled, ‘‘Digital Future of the United States: Part VI: The Future of 

Telecommunications Competition,’’ which focused on issues including special access and the forbearance process set forth in Section 

10 of the Communications Act of 1934. The Subcommittee received 

testimony from representatives of incumbent and competitive telecommunications carriers. 

On July 22, 2008, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and 

the Internet held a hearing entitled, ‘‘Issues in Telecommunications 

Competition.’’ This hearing was both a general oversight hearing 

and a legislative hearing on H.R. 3914, the Protecting Consumers 

Through Proper Forbearance Procedures Act. The witnesses, which 

included representatives of incumbent and competitive telecommunications carriers and the cable industry, provided testimony concerning a number of issues related to telecommunications 

competition, including the ease which consumers are able to change 

phone carriers, pole attachment rates, and phone company use of 

proprietary information in retention marketing. 

CHILDREN AND THE MEDIA

On June 22, 2007, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and 

the Internet held an oversight hearing on the images children see 

in the media. The hearing considered the effects of images of violence, advertising and smoking on children. The Subcommittee received testimony from executives in the television, advertising and 

motion picture industries, as well as from representatives of consumer groups. 

ONLINE VIRTUAL WORLDS

On April 1, 2008, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and 

the Internet held an oversight hearing exploring online virtual 

worlds, including the evolution of online virtual worlds for both social networking and business development. The Subcommittee received testimony from the creator of an online virtual world, as 

well as various groups operating in this space. 

MERGER OF XM SATELLITE RADIO AND SIRIUS SATELLITE RADIO

On April 21, 2008, Chairman Dingell sent a letter to FCC Chairman Martin drawing his attention to a letter from Representative 

Butterfield regarding the importance of promoting a diversity of 

voices in the context of the FCC’s review of the proposed merger 

of XM Satellite Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio merger. 

On May 1, 2008, Chairman Dingell and Telecommunications and 

the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey sent a letter to FCC 

Chairman Martin concerning the proposed merger of XM Satellite 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
262 

Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio. The letter requested that the FCC 

ensure the merger is in the public interest by requiring the merged 

entity to adhere at a minimum to pricing constraints that XM and 

Sirius had already filed at the FCC and requiring the merged company to permit any device manufacturer to develop equipment capable of delivering the company’s satellite radio service and to incorporate in satellite radio receivers any other technology that 

would not result in harmful interference with the merged company’s network. 

HATE SPEECH IN THE MEDIA

On June 15, 2007, Chairman Dingell and Telecommunications 

and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey sent a letter to 

Assistant Secretary Kneuer requesting that the NTIA issue an updated report on the dissemination of speech in the media that may 

encourage or advocate for hate crimes. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization Act, enacted 

in 1992, had required a report on hate speech in the media that 

was released in 1993. 

TELECOMMUNICATIONS ISSUES

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

During the 110th Congress, the Committee conducted vigorous 

oversight of the Federal Communications Commission. All five FCC 

Commissioners appeared before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet four times, and FCC Chairman 

Martin appeared at several other hearings devoted to the digital 

television transition. The Subcommittee’s first FCC oversight hearing, on March 14, 2007, marked the first time in three years that 

all five FCC Commissioners appeared before the Subcommittee. 

The Committee evaluated the impact of the FCC’s management 

and regulatory practices on consumers at two general oversight 

hearings, one on March 14, 2007, and the other on July 24, 2007. 

At these hearings Members asked questions concerning a wide 

array of issues, with a particular emphasis on matters then pending at the FCC. Many Members asked questions concerning the 

openness of the FCC’s regulatory processes and whether the FCC 

was acting, at all times, in the best interests of consumers. On December 5, 2007, the Subcommittee held an FCC oversight hearing 

focused on a pending media ownership rulemaking, and on April 

15, 2008, the Subcommittee held an FCC oversight hearing focused 

on the 700 MHz auction. 

DIGITAL TELEVISION TRANSITION

In 1997, to facilitate a transition from traditional analog to digital technology, Congress and the FCC provided each full-power television station with an additional 6 MHz of spectrum so stations 

could transmit both an analog and a digital signal. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109–171) set a hard date of February 17, 

2009, for broadcasters to return their analog spectrum and operate 

solely in digital. The benefits of this digital television (DTV) transition include more television programming with better picture and 

sound quality and the freeing up of spectrum for innovative and 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
263 

wide-reaching wireless services. One of the most important benefits 

will be using some of that spectrum to create a nationwide 

broadband public safety network for first responders. The legislation also allocated $1 billion for creation of an NTIA grant program 

to help provide interoperable communications equipment for first 

responders. 

After the DTV transition, analog television sets will not be able 

to display broadcast signals from full-power television stations unless they are connected to cable or satellite service or to a digitalto-analog converter box. 

The Deficit Reduction Act also directed the NTIA to implement a $1.5 billion program to distribute up to two $40 coupons per 

household to subsidize the cost of digital-to-analog converter boxes 

and to educate consumers about that effort. Coupons are available 

from January 1, 2008, through March 1, 2009, and by law, each 

coupon expires 3 months after issuance. After administrative expenses, the program will fund 33.5 million coupons. NTIA also certifies coupon-eligible converter boxes and the retailers that are eligible to participate in the coupon program. In August of 2007, 

NTIA awarded IBM a contract for approximately $120 million to 

run the TV Converter Box Coupon Program. 

The FCC has been working with stakeholders to educate consumers and ensure that the technical aspects of the DTV transition 

are occurring in a timely manner. 

During the 110th Congress, the Committee conducted vigorous 

oversight of the DTV transition, including the TV Converter Box 

Coupon Program and the efforts of the NTIA and the FCC to prepare consumers for the transition. This oversight included six Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet hearings focused on the DTV transition, as well as numerous letters from 

Chairman Dingell, Ranking Member, and Telecommunications and 

the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey to the NTIA, the 

FCC, and others about the progress of the transition. 

On October 1, 2007, Ranking Member Barton and Mr. Upton 

sent a letter to FCC Chairman Martin regarding whether he would 

support passage of H.R. 608, the Digital Television Consumer Education Act of 2007. The letter also asked if and when the FCC 

would be updating its estimate of the percentage of U.S. households that rely exclusively on over-the-air television. On October 

12, 2007, Chairman Martin responded to the letter. 

While the NTIA and the FCC have made progress, the GAO reports that much more remains to be done. Specifically, in November 2007, the GAO recommended that the FCC develop a comprehensive plan for the technical, policy, consumer outreach, and 

other critical elements of the DTV transition. An April 2008 GAO 

report concluded that while most broadcasters were prepared for 

the transition, some technical and coordination issues remain. In 

June 2008, the GAO published the results of a consumer survey indicating that many consumers remain confused about the DTV 

transition and how to prepare for it. In September 2008, the GAO 

questioned the NTIA’s preparedness for a surge in requests for TV 

converter box coupons as the end of the DTV transition nears. On 

November 6, 2008, the GAO named the DTV transition as one of 

the 13 urgent issues needing the attention of President-Elect 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
264 

Obama and the 111th Congress during the transition and first year 

of the new Administration. 

BROADBAND AND INTERNET FREEDOM

H.R. 3919, the ‘‘Broadband Census of America Act,’’ was introduced on October 22, 2007, by Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey. The Telecommunications and 

the Internet Subcommittee held a hearing on a draft version of the 

legislation on May 17, 2007. Witnesses testifying in general support of the draft included representatives of consumer and public 

interest groups and organized labor, as well as the telephone, 

cable, and wireless industries. 

Another oversight hearing addressing issues raised by the legislation was held on April 24, 2007. This hearing highlighted 

broadband lessons from abroad and conveyed that other countries 

have much more comprehensive information about broadband deployment, adoption, and speeds and have plans to promote such attributes. Some witnesses point to an OECD study suggesting the 

United States has fallen further behind in international rankings, 

while others said that the study is flawed. H.R. 3919 was marked 

up on October 30, 2007, and unanimously passed the House on November 13, 2007. A companion bill, S. 1492, was approved by the 

Senate and enacted in October 2008. 

The goal of this legislation was to take the indispensible first 

step in laying the groundwork for future broadband policymaking. 

Without adequate and accurate data to indicate the current state 

of America’s broadband deployment, subscribership, competition, 

and speeds, policymakers would be operating in the dark. Modeled 

loosely after broadband mapping initiatives by entities such as 

Connected Nation, the enacted bill therefore seeks to ensure greater accountability for broadband services by updating the methodology the FCC uses to measure broadband deployment and requiring better data collection from providers, a robust international 

comparison, and consumer surveys to report on broadband speeds 

and prices. It provides for grants to help public-private partnerships in which local community leaders and stakeholders identify 

and aggregate demand for broadband in unserved and underserved 

communities. Finally, it seeks to develop broadband access maps in 

partnership with state governments and by providing grants to 

states entities for such efforts. By knowing where broadband is deployed, we can better target federal resources to deploy broadband 

in our rural and underserved communities. 

H.R. 5353, the ‘‘Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2008,’’ was 

introduced on February 12, 2008, by Telecommunications and the 

Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey, with Subcommittee colleagues Representatives Pickering, Eshoo, and Doyle. Some of the 

witnesses at the May 6, 2008, Subcommittee hearing on this legislation testified that the global leadership in high technology provided by the United States stems directly from historic policies that 

have ensured that telecommunications networks are open to all 

lawful uses and all users. They said that because broadband networks and the Internet play a vital role in enabling Americans to 

exercise their First Amendment rights, a policy endorsing the open 

nature of broadband networks is an important cornerstone of comVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00272 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
265 

munications policy. Other witnesses testified that the United 

States’ leadership has resulted from the deregulatory policies the 

United States has adopted regarding the Internet and broadband. 

The goal of H.R. 5353 is to preserve and foster the historic, open 

architecture nature of the Internet and to assess and promote 

Internet freedom for consumers and content providers. Internet 

freedom generally embodies the notion that consumers and content 

providers should be free to send, receive, access and use the lawful 

applications, content, and services of their choice on broadband networks, possess the effective right to attach and use non-harmful devices in conjunction with their broadband services, and not be subjected to unreasonably discriminatory practices by broadband network providers. 

The bill does not require regulation of the Internet. It does, however, suggest that the principles which have guided the Internet’s 

development and expansion are highly worthy of retention, and it 

seeks to enshrine such principles in the law as hallmarks for U.S. 

broadband policy. The bill tasks the FCC with conducting an assessment of broadband practices and consumer rights. Finally, it 

requires the FCC to hold eight broadband summits around the Nation and to report back to Congress on its findings and any recommendations for further action. 

PRIVACY AND DEEP PACKET INSPECTION TECHNOLOGIES

The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held 

an oversight hearing on July 17, 2008, with respect to privacy 

issues as highlighted by the emergence of deep packet inspection 

technologies as a tool being considered for deployment and tested 

by many broadband service providers. Telecommunications and the 

Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey and Full Committee 

Ranking Member Joe Barton had sent a letter on May 16, 2008, 

to the CEO of Charter Communications regarding a test of deep 

packet inspection technology the company planned to undertake 

and the privacy implications raised by such a test. Chairman Dingell, Full Committee Ranking Member Joe Barton and Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey 

wrote to the CEO of Embarq on July 14, 2008, expressing similar 

concerns about a test that Embarq had conducted of deep packet 

inspection technology. On August 1, 2008, Chairman Dingell, Full 

Committee Ranking Member Joe Barton, Telecommunications and 

the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey and Telecommunications and the Internet Ranking Member Stearns wrote to more 

than 30 other broadband service providers, as well as three Internet portal operators, the data they collect and the methods they 

use to tailor Internet advertising. 

Deep packet inspection technology can be deployed not only with 

the intent to serve targeted advertising tailored to a user’s web 

habits, but also to manage traffic on the network, detect network 

threats, discover the presence of copyrighted or illegal material, 

and other applications. As a result, deep packet inspection raises 

not only significant privacy concerns, but also highlights broader 

policy questions, including how it impacts the evolution of the 

Internet and its future prospects for driving innovation and fostering competition and job creation. The digital era in communicaVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00273 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
266 

tions technology will heighten concern about the sensitivity of personal information that can be collected or disclosed about individual citizens and the ever increasing pervasiveness of such data 

collection. The hearing as well as the Subcommittee’s letters underscored the importance of consumer privacy to the future of successful U.S. broadband policy. 

SPECTRUM POLICY AND WIRELESS CONSUMER PROTECTION

The Committee spent considerable time monitoring the development of wireless broadband services and the impact of wireless carrier practices on consumers. The Committee took note of the structure of the industry and how that structure affects competition and 

choice for consumers. The Committee also reviewed whether wireless carriers should revise certain practices related to technological 

innovation and consumer contracts. 

The Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee’s first 

spectrum policy hearing was held on April 19, 2007, and examined 

the state of the wireless broadband market and the impact the 700 

MHz auction could have on consumers. The Committee received 

testimony concerning consolidation in the wireless industry and its 

effects on competition, roaming rates and other issues that affect 

consumers. 

The Committee also examined wireless industry practices concerning customer contracts and technological innovation. The Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee held a hearing on 

February 27, 2008, on draft legislation to create a Federal set of 

wireless consumer protection standards. The Subcommittee focused 

on early termination fees and whether and how they are related to 

the cost of customer equipment. The draft legislation sought to require the amount of early termination fees to decrease over the life 

of a contract. The draft legislation also provided wireless carriers 

with a uniform set of consumer protection standards to abide by, 

including a requirement that wireless carriers adequately disclose 

the extent of network coverage to consumers at the time of entry 

into a service contract. Finally, the draft legislation sought to make 

the Federal government’s use of the public airwaves more efficient 

by requiring the use of smart radio technologies. 

The Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee’s April 

15, 2008, hearing on rules for the FCC’s auction of spectrum in the 

700 MHz band focused on the need for a more open and technologically innovative wireless industry. The Subcommittee received 

testimony about how much control wireless carriers exercise a disproportionate amount of control over the software applications and 

services available to consumers. The Subcommittee also examined 

the ability of consumers to take their wireless devices with them 

when they change carriers, a practice most carriers do not readily 

enable. 

PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS

During the 110th Congress, the Committee on Energy and Commerce conducted oversight to ensure that our Nation’s first responders have access to interoperable networks that will allow 

them to communicate effectively during any emergency. Members 

of the Committee expressed a strong commitment to ensuring the 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
267 

creation of a nationwide, interoperable broadband network for public safety communications. The Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee held several hearings examining the feasibility 

of using a public-private partnership to build such a network as 

part of the auction for the D-Block portion of the 700 MHz spectrum, including whether creating a public-private partnership 

could meet the dual needs of financing the build-out of a nationwide network and providing the necessary network reliability to 

public safety. 

On June 29, 2007, Ranking Member Barton, Mr. Upton, and 14 

other Members from both sides of the aisle sent a letter to FCC 

Chairman Martin expressing concern that a complicated proposal 

to impose conditions on the ‘‘D Block’’ of spectrum in the 700 MHz 

auction was likely to fail. The letter suggested it would be better 

to auction the spectrum unencumbered after Congress passed legislation allowing the proceeds to be used directly for a public safety 

grant program. The D Block did not meet its reserve price at the 

700 MHz auction, so this matter remains unresolved. 

The Committee also sought to ensure that the Public Safety 

Interoperable Communications grant program, created by the 2005 

Deficit Reduction Act and administered by the Department of Commerce, was implemented in accordance with Congressional intent 

by funding innovative, effective, integrated, and forward-looking 

interoperability programs at the State and local levels. 

UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND OVERSIGHT AND REFORM

During the 110th Congress, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet conducted oversight of the Federal universal service fund (USF), with a particular emphasis on reform 

and whether to add broadband subsidies to the program. 

Chairman Dingell expressed support for reforming and rejuvenating the USF, including by: (1) using the USF to support 

broadband as the future platform of communications; (2) focusing 

on consumers rather than carriers; (3) examining the effects of regulatory imbalances between types of providers; and (4) ensuring 

that consumers have access to affordable communications services. 

A June 24, 2008, Subcommittee hearing examined the future of the 

USF, including whether existing USF programs will meet future 

communications infrastructure needs and whether they reflect the 

core principles of the policy of universal service. 

On April 12, 2007, Chairman Dingell, Ranking Member Barton, 

Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Stupak, and 

Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Ranking Member 

Whitfield requested that the GAO continue to examine waste, 

fraud, and abuse in USF programs. 

On November 25, 2008, the FCC’s Inspector General released an 

audit showing that between July 2006 and June 2007, there were 

almost $1 billion in erroneous payments in the high-cost fund, 

which represents an improper payment rate of more than 23 percent. 

DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE

In the fall of 2005, press reports revealed that the Administration had been conducting a warrantless domestic surveillance proVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00275 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
268 

gram, which it used to obtain, among other things, many customers’ calling records from telecommunications carriers. Citizens 

and advocacy organizations sued the telecommunications carriers, 

alleging violations of federal privacy statutes. The telecommunications carriers, in turn, sought retroactive immunity from Congress for their participation in the program. To evaluate the need 

for immunity, the Committee on Energy and Commerce examined 

the domestic surveillance program and the issues raised by the 

lawsuits. 

On October 2, 2007, Chairman Dingell, Telecommunications and 

the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey, and Oversight and 

Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Stupak asked for and received comments from various civil liberties and privacy organizations on Public Law 110–55, the Protect America Act, which proposed to legalize certain tenets of the warrantless surveillance program going forward. They also sent letters to three major telecommunications carriers seeking information about each company’s 

policy for releasing customer records in light of reports of the Government’s warrantless surveillance program. On October 12, 2007, 

the three companies responded, stating that any such information, 

if it existed, was under the exclusive control of the executive 

branch. Citing the ‘‘state secrets’’ privilege, they also stated that it 

was their understanding that it would be unlawful for the companies to respond to the letters. On October 12, 2007, the Director of 

Legislative Affairs for the Director of National Intelligence wrote 

the Committee, asserting that any response by the telecommunications carriers could disclose classified information relating to intelligence activities. 

On November 1, 2007, Chairman Dingell, Telecommunications 

and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey, and Oversight 

and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Stupak sent a letter to 

Acting Attorney General Keisler requesting a briefing from the executive branch about the Government’s warrantless surveillance 

program. The letter noted that because the telecommunications 

carriers seeking immunity from participation in the warrantless 

surveillance program informed the Committee that they could not 

provide information about the program, a briefing by the executive 

branch was needed. Ultimately, Chairman Dingell and Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey 

opposed legislation granting telecommunications carriers retroactive immunity for their participation in the Administration’s 

warrantless surveillance program because the Administration refused to provide the Committee with a full explanation of the facts 

underlying the program. 

MEDIA CONCENTRATION

In the 110th Congress, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

examined concentration in the media, with the intent of ensuring 

localism and diversity. 

The Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee held an 

FCC oversight hearing concerning media ownership on December 

5, 2007. The hearing focused on a proposed FCC rule that would 

relax restrictions on newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership. Many 

Members of the Subcommittee voiced concern that the proposed 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
269 

rule would not be in the public interest. Others noted that the 

courts have questioned the validity of current ownership restrictions and expressed support for deregulation in light of increasing 

audio and video competition from cable, satellite, and the Internet. 

The Subcommittee also examined ways in which mergers of certain media companies could affect their public interest obligations. 

On March 11, 2008, the Subcommittee held a hearing on private 

equity ownership, which examined the policy implications of a private equity company running a media company. On May 1, 2008, 

Chairman Dingell and Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Markey sent a letter to FCC Chairman Martin regarding the proposed merger of XM Satellite Radio and Sirius 

Satellite Radio. The letter requested that the FCC ensure the 

merger is in the public interest by requiring the merged entity to 

adhere at a minimum to pricing constraints that XM and Sirius 

had already filed at the FCC and required the merged companies 

to permit any device manufacturers to develop equipment that can 

deliver the company’s satellite radio service and to incorporate in 

satellite radio receivers any other technology that would not result 

in harmful interference to the merged company’s network. 

The Subcommittee also addressed issues relating to competition 

in sports programming. The Subcommittee held a hearing on 

March 7, 2008, that examined issues relating to regional sports 

networks, sports league networks and program access, as well as 

the shifting of sports programming from free, over-the-air television 

to pay television platforms. 

HEARINGS HELD

H.R. 251, the ‘‘Truth in Caller ID Act of 2007’’.—Legislative hearing on the provisions of H.R. 251. Hearing held on February 28, 

2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–8. 

Digital Future of the United States: Part 1—The Future of the 

World Wide Web.—Oversight hearing on the World Wide Web and 

the future of web-based protocols, services, and applications. Hearing held on March 1, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–10. 

Digital Future of the United States: Part 2—The Future of 

Radio.—Oversight hearing on the radio business and its future, including issues of competition, innovation, localism, and diversity in 

radio services and content. Hearing held on March 7, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–10. 

Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission.—Oversight hearing on management and functioning of the FCC and the 

views of all five of the Commissioners on matters of policy and 

process. Hearing held on March 14, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 

110–18. 

Oversight of the National Telecommunications and Information 

Administration and Innovations in Interoperability.—Oversight 

hearing on policies and procedures of the NTIA, including an examination of the need for innovative approaches to interoperability. 

Hearing held on March 22, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–24. 

The Status of the Digital Television Transition.—Oversight hearing on NTIA’s implementation of the TV Converter Box Coupon 

Program; steps the NTIA and the FCC must take to ensure a successful and timely DTV transition; and the efforts to educate conVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00277 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
270 

sumers about the DTV transition. Hearing held on March 28, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–27. 

Digital Future of the United States: Part III, Spectrum Opportunities and the Future of Wireless.—Oversight hearing on issues relating to the 700 MHz auction, as well as an examination of the 

future of the wireless industry. Hearing held on April 19, 2007. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–10. 

Digital Future of the United States: Part IV, Broadband Lessons 

from Abroad.—Oversight hearing on broadband policies, deployment, subscribership, speed and price from an international perspective. Hearing held on April 24, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 

110–10. 

Digital Future of the United States: Part V, The Future of 

Video.—Oversight hearing on the emergence of digital video, including video delivered over the Internet, and implications for current laws, regulations, and business practices in the video marketplace, as well as the prospects for further innovation. Hearing held 

on May 10, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–10. 

H.R. ————, A Discussion Draft Addressing Broadband Mapping and Data Collection.—Legislative hearing on provisions of 

draft legislation concerning broadband data. Hearing held on May 

17, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–48. 

Images Kids See on the Screen.—Oversight hearing on images 

children see in the media and their effect on children’s behavior 

and health. Hearing held on June 22, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 

110–58. 

Wireless Innovation and Consumer Protection.—Oversight hearing on wireless consumer protection issues and the role of States, 

as well as an examination of the state of innovation and consumer 

choice in the wireless equipment market. Hearing held on July 11, 

2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–61. 

Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission. Part 2.— 

Oversight hearing on the FCC and its processes. Hearing held on 

July 24, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–18. 

H.R. 3403, the 911 Modernization and Public Safety Act of 

2007.—Legislative hearing on the provisions of H.R. 3403. Hearing 

held on September 19, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–66. 

Digital Future of the United States: Part VI: The Future of Telecommunications Competition.—Oversight hearing on the nature 

and extent of telecommunications competition, including an examination of special access, FCC forbearance authority, copper loop retirement, and the municipal provision of broadband service. Hearing held on October 2, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–10. 

Status of the DTV Transition—Part 2.—Oversight hearing on the 

status of the transition to digital television, potential challenges to 

successful implementation of the transition, impacts upon consumers and the marketplace, and implementation of consumer education initiatives. Hearing held on October 17, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–27. 

Status of the DTV Transition—Part 3.—Oversight hearing on the 

status of the transition to digital television, potential challenges to 

successful implementation of the transition, impacts upon consumers and the marketplace, and implementation of consumer eduVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00278 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
271 

cation initiatives. Hearing held on October 31, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–27. 

Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission—Media 

Ownership.—Oversight hearing on FCC Chairman Martin’s proposal to relax the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rule and an 

examination of how to advance longstanding media policy objectives of competition, diversity, localism, and minority ownership. 

Hearing held on December 5, 2007. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–77. 

Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) Services in the 

Digital Age.—Oversight hearing on the future of PEG services in 

the digital television era and the effect that changes in technology 

and the marketplace will have on the network capacity, services, 

and applications available to PEG programming providers and on 

the delivery of PEG services to consumers. Hearing held on January 29, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–84. 

Status of the DTV Transition: 370 Days and Counting.—Oversight hearing on the status of the transition to digital television, 

potential challenges to successful implementation of the transition, 

impacts upon consumers and the marketplace, and implementation 

of consumer education initiatives. Hearing held on February 13, 

2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–88. 

H.R.————, A Discussion Draft on Wireless Consumer Protection and Community Broadband Empowerment.—Legislative hearing on draft legislation establishing a national framework for wireless services and consumer protection, promoting community 

broadband, and ensuring spectrum efficiency. Hearing held on February 27, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–95. 

Competition in the Sports Programming Marketplace.—Oversight 

hearing on the state of competition in the sports programming 

marketplace, including the nature of programming distribution, 

consumer choice, and other issues. Hearing held on March 5, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–98. 

The Role of Private Equity in the Communications Marketplace.— 

Oversight hearing on the role of private equity in communications 

markets, including its effect on innovation, competition, employment, diversity, FCC regulatory requirements, and the public interest. Hearing held on March 11, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110– 

100. 

Online Virtual Worlds: Applications and Avatars in a User-Generated Medium.—Oversight hearing on the nature and growth of 

online virtual worlds, including the evolution of online virtual 

worlds for both social networking and business development. Hearing held on April 1, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–102. 

Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission: The 700 

Mhz Auction.—Oversight hearing on results of the auction for licenses in the 700 megahertz band and its impact on competition, 

consumer choice, diversity of ownership, introduction of new technologies and services, and public safety communications, as well as 

to explore options for the reauction of the D-block license. Hearing 

held on April 15, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–106. 

H.R.————, Draft Legislation Enhancing Access to Broadband 

Technology and Services for Persons With Disabilities.—Legislative 

hearing on draft legislation to enhance access to telecommuniVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00279 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
272 

cations technologies and services for individuals with disabilities. 

Hearing held on May 1, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–110. 

H.R. 5353, the ‘‘Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2008’’.— 

Legislative hearing on the provisions of H.R. 5353 and network 

neutrality principles, their application in the broadband marketplace, and national broadband policy. Hearing held on May 6, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–112. 

Status of the DTV Transition: 252 Days and Counting.—Oversight hearing on the status of the digital television transition, including updated information about consumer awareness and outreach efforts, the TV Converter Box Coupon Program, and technical obstacles to the transition. Hearing held on June 10, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–124. 

The Future of Universal Service: To Whom, By Whom, For What, 

and How Much?—Oversight hearing on the universal service fund, 

core principles of universal service, and ideas regarding the future 

of the universal service fund. Hearing held on June 24, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–131. 

What Your Broadband Provider Knows About Your Web Use: 

Deep Packet Inspection and Communications Laws and Policies.— 

Oversight hearing on the technical capabilities of deep packet inspection, the nature and scope of deployment of such technologies 

by network operators, and implications for consumer privacy. Hearing held on July 17, 2008. PRINTED, Serial No. 110–137. 

Issues in Telecommunications Competition.—Legislative hearing 

on the provisions of H.R. 3914, the ‘‘Protecting Consumers through 

Proper Forbearance Procedures Act,’’ and oversight hearing on the 

state of competition in telecommunications markets and issues affecting the prospects for greater competition, including rules governing interconnection and access, number porting, retention marketing, and pole attachment rates. Hearing held on July 22, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–138. 

Status of the DTV Transition: 154 Days and Counting.—Oversight hearing on the status of the digital television transition, including updated information about consumer awareness and outreach efforts, the TV Converter Box Coupon Program, technical obstacles to the transition, and the transition test market in Wilmington, North Carolina. Hearing held on September 16, 2008. 

PRINTED, Serial No. 110–148. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(273) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE OVERSIGHT 

PLAN, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 110TH CONGRESS, THE HONORABLE JOHN D. DINGELL 

Rule X, clause 2(d) of the Rules of the House requires each 

standing Committee to adopt an oversight plan for the two-year period of the Congress and to submit the plan to the Committee on 

Oversight and Government Reform and to the Committee on House 

Administration not later than February 15 of the first session of 

the Congress. 

This is the oversight plan of the Committee on Energy and Commerce for the 110th Congress. It includes the areas in which the 

Committee expects to conduct oversight during the 110th Congress, 

subject to limits on staff and resources, but does not preclude oversight or investigation of additional matters as the need arises. 

COMMERCE, TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ISSUES 

THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will review the management, operations, rulemaking, and enforcement actions of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). In particular, the Committee will review Commission activity with regard to mergers and acquisitions, 

franchises, business opportunities, telemarketing, identity theft, 

and privacy, as well as actions regarding false and deceptive advertising, including offerings made by mail and e-mail. 

THE CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will conduct a broad review of the management, operations, activities, and performance of 

the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in safeguarding 

consumers, particularly children, from faulty or dangerous products. This will include review of the CPSC’s implementation of Section 15(b) of the Consumer Product Safety Act pertaining to Substantial Product Hazard Reports; other data gathering and dissemination efforts with respect to products within its jurisdiction; the 

assessment of civil penalties to enforce safety; CPSC work on 

emerging hazards; and the relationship of CPSC orders to common 

law. The Committee will examine other activities that may enhance consumer product safety, such as safety standard-setting and 

certifying organizations. 

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will review the management, operations, and activities of the National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, particularly as they pertain to motor vehicle-related safety. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
274 

INTERSTATE COMMERCE AND E-COMMERCE

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will examine issues that 

substantially affect interstate commerce. The Committee will continue its review of consumer information privacy in the commercial 

context. The Committee will also examine impediments to electronic commerce, including State legal and regulatory impediments 

and potentially anti-competitive activities in the private sector. In 

addition, the Committee will review and consider issues relating to 

private-sector cyber security, fraud, and other criminal issues confronting e-commerce. 

TRADE

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will monitor and examine 

both multilateral trade agreements (including World Trade Organization agreements) and bilateral agreements as those agreements 

relate to industries, commodities, and services within the Committee’s jurisdiction, including telecommunications, electronic commerce, food and drugs, and energy. The Committee will particularly examine the issue of whether these trade agreements adequately protect the interests of domestic and foreign workers and 

the environment. In addition, some of the trade practices that require investigation include: Currency manipulation by China and 

others; widespread theft of American intellectual property; failure 

to abide by agreements regarding environment and worker health 

and safety; use of offshore havens to perpetrate frauds on U.S. consumers and investors; and the proper enforcement of anti-dumping 

and countervailing duty laws by the Department of Commerce. In 

doing so, the Committee will review the programs, policies, and 

procedures of various Government agencies that may needlessly 

impair the flow of people and commerce across our Nation’s borders 

and, in particular, their ability to protect the international supply 

chain as it affects the economy of the United States. 

TRAVEL AND TOURISM

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will review issues affecting the travel and tourism industries, as well as how the travel and 

tourism industries, along with Federal and State governments, can 

encourage and promote the United States as a travel destination 

for international and domestic passengers. This review will include, 

but not be limited to, the operations of various government departments that may needlessly interfere with the free flow of tourists 

across our border including activities related to the policies, procedures, and administration of programs related to passports, visas, 

and other relevant travel documents. In addition, the Committee 

will review issues related to the plans and programs of various 

Government agencies that may affect travel and tourism in response to pandemic outbreaks. 

ATHLETICS

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will examine issues arising from the commerce of professional and amateur athletics, including drug abuse, and the health and welfare of athletes. In addiVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00282 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
275 

tion, the Committee will monitor the governance of organizations 

responsible for administering athletics, including the U.S. Olympic 

Committee. 

ENERGY AND AIR QUALITY ISSUES 

GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will carry out a broad review of the global climate change issue, with a particular focus on 

the role of human activity in global warming. The Committee will 

examine the social, economic, cultural, and homeland security implications of climate change and policy options for responding to 

this problem. The Committee will also review the Department of 

Energy (DOE), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

(FERC), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) strategies 

and activities in this area. 

NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will examine U.S. policies 

pertaining to energy efficiency and conservation, production, and 

consumption of electricity, oil, natural gas, coal, hydroelectric 

power, nuclear power, and renewable energy. The Committee will 

examine the impact of government policies and programs on the exploration, production, and development of domestic energy resources, including the effect of budget cuts on research on alternative energy. In addition, the Committee will review issues arising from the production and delivery of oil and gas from Alaska 

and the Gulf of Mexico, including pipeline safety, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and foreign pipeline and LNG facilities crucial to 

American interests. The Committee will also examine global crude 

oil supplies in light of potential supply interruptions, such as the 

war in Iraq and political turmoil in Venezuela. The Committee will 

review the national security and energy policy implications of disruptions to Russian oil and gas deliveries to Europe and elsewhere. 

OIL AND NATURAL GAS MARKETS

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will examine the unregulated over-the-counter oil futures market, investigate whether this 

market is being manipulated by speculators, and examine whether 

this speculation may be artificially inflating the price of crude oil. 

The Committee will also review solutions to this problem, including 

possible regulation by the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). In addition, the Committee will investigate allegations of gasoline price gouging. The Committee will also examine 

the unregulated over-the-counter natural gas market, focusing on 

the need for market transparency and regulation. The Committee 

will also examine the role of the U.S. and Iraqi Governments in 

legislation requiring Iraq to cede control of its oil industry to foreign oil companies and the implications for the global crude oil supply, as well as U.S. national security and energy policy. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
276 

MANAGEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND ITS NATIONAL

LABORATORIES

The Committee will oversee management and operations issues 

at the Department of Energy, including management and operations of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) 

and the DOE National Laboratories. Such a review will also include investigating allegations that laboratory employees on detail 

to Government agencies have improperly utilized their position to 

improperly steer Government contracts to themselves or their host 

labs. The Committee will particularly focus on DOE’s management 

of the environment, safety, and health aspects of its policies and 

activities. The Committee will also review DOE management of the 

contractors that operate the National Laboratories. The Committee’s oversight work will include a review of the implementation of 

nuclear security requirements at NNSA and DOE facilities; ongoing safety and security problems at the Los Alamos National Laboratory; and the Office of Environmental Management’s accelerated 

cleanup program and high-level radioactive waste management efforts. The Committee will conduct a careful review of DOE’s compliance with Federal and State environmental laws and regulations. In addition, the protection of nuclear materials around the 

globe is among the Committees highest priorities. Oversight in the 

110th Congress will focus on DOE operation of the First and Second Lines of Defense programs overseas; DOE and Customs and 

Border Patrol (CBP) efforts to secure foreign ports that ship into 

the U.S.; on-going problems at both the National Labs and at nuclear power plants with respect to leaks of both nuclear materials 

and sensitive security information; and nuclear detection systems 

at air, land, and seaports. 

THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will examine the activities 

of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission pertaining to energy 

industry licensing, ratemaking, and mergers and acquisitions, with 

a particular focus on the protection of consumers. The Committee 

will also examine issues pertaining to the adequacy and reliability 

of the Nation’s interstate electric transmission grid. In addition, 

the Committee will conduct oversight of FERC’s handling of lessons 

learned from the crisis in California and western electricity markets during 2001 and 2002, and steps taken to prevent future manipulation of energy markets for both natural gas and electricity. 

THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

The Committee will review the activities of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The Committee will examine NRC’s 

budget requests, conduct oversight of how the Commission discharges its various responsibilities, and review whether the Commission is an effective regulator of nuclear facilities. In particular, 

the Committee will monitor closely the efforts of NRC to fully implement new security requirements at commercial nuclear power 

plants. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
277 

CLEAN AIR ACT

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will review the Environmental Protection Agency’s implementation of the Clean Air Act, 

particularly pertaining to rulemakings affecting power plants, including new source review, mercury emissions, and other regulation of air pollution. The Committee will also investigate allegations of undue industry influence on Clean Air Act rulemakings 

and purported attempts to undercut existing enforcement actions. 

ENVIRONMENT AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ISSUES 

EPA MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

In the 110th Congress, the Committee intends to conduct an extensive review of the management, operations, and activities of the 

Environmental Protection Agency, including a review of the agency’s budget, funding decisions, resource allocations, grants, research activities, enforcement actions, relations with State and 

local Governments, and program management and implementation. 

The Committee will particularly examine EPA’s substitution of voluntary compliance programs instead of enforcement, including the 

shifting of funds and personnel to voluntary compliance programs 

and initiatives that have no specific authorization and that the 

EPA Inspector General has reported often fail to achieve the promised compliance. In addition, the Committee will investigate all aspects of the EPA’s decision to close its libraries and give away and/ 

or destroy parts of the library collections. The Committee will also 

examine the issue of whether scientists both inside and outside 

EPA are playing an adequate role in rulemaking and other decision-making at the agency. 

HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTES

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will review the management, operations, activities, and funding of the Superfund program, 

with a particular focus on EPA failure to investigate, score, and list 

toxic waste sites that local communities, States, and EPA Regional 

Offices have requested for listing on the National Priorities List 

(NPL). The Committee will examine the issue of whether there is 

adequate funding for remedial action at NPL sites that are ready 

to begin final cleanup. The Committee will also examine the issue 

of whether EPA has adequately addressed widespread perchlorate 

contamination and the public health risks posed by Concentrated 

Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). The Committee will review 

global hazardous materials treaties to which the United States is 

signatory and review these agreements for compliance with Federal 

and State environmental laws and regulations. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL

LAWS

The Committee will review Department of Defense (DOD) environmental activities and ascertain its record of clean-up effectiveness, ongoing monitoring, and compliance with Federal and State 

environmental laws and regulations. The Committee will particuVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00285 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
278 

larly examine EPA’s failure to enforce environmental laws at DOD 

facilities; DOD opposition to the listing of toxic waste sites on the 

NPL; DOD refusal to sign interagency cleanup agreements with 

EPA; DOD challenges to State regulatory authority under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) at formerly utilized 

defense sites (FUDS); DOD delays in cleaning up its Superfund 

sites; and DOD refusal to respond to data requests from the Agency 

for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) pertaining to 

contamination of Marine families’ drinking water at Camp Lejeune. 

HEALTH AND HEALTHCARE ISSUES 

THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will review the management, operations, and activities of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), including its implementation of statutes and regulations pertaining to its mission to ensure the safety of drugs and the 

food supply. Drug safety investigations will focus on allegations 

that the FDA has repressed expert scientific opinion regarding serious problems arising during clinical trials and dismissed credible 

information developed by FDA scientists charged with monitoring 

adverse events associated with approved drugs. The Committee 

will also review the failure of the FDA and other Federal law enforcement agencies to control the importation and sale of illicit, 

counterfeit, and dangerous drugs. 

Food safety investigations will focus on the effect of budget and 

other resource cuts on the ability of the FDA to adequately enforce 

food safety laws and regulations. The Committee will also investigate allegations that compliance with the law has become voluntary with the effect on the food supply of: Increases in E. Coli 

outbreaks in fresh produce; meat that is packaged in an atmosphere containing carbon monoxide with the specific purpose of preserving the red coloring beyond the time when it can be consumed 

safely; and inadequate inspection of imported food. 

The Committee will also conduct a broad examination of the regulation of medical device safety. In addition, the Committee will review the issue of generic drug lag and the FDA’s failure to approve 

generic biopharmaceuticals; the adequacy of clinical trial oversight 

conducted by FDA and the related issue of human subject protection; the effect of six-month exclusivity extensions granted by the 

FDA upon approval of pediatric drug testing protocols and whether 

such protocols are sufficient to determine either the safety or efficacy of these drugs in children; the FDA’s implementation of the 

Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act; the safety and regulation of 

the blood supply; and the frequency and reliability on inspections 

of foreign drug manufacturing, particularly in China and India. 

CENTERS FOR MEDICARE AND MEDICAID SERVICES

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will review the management, operations, and activities of the Centers for Medicare and 

Medicaid Services (CMS), including its management and oversight 

of the programs it administers. The Committee will also examine 

and review Medicare and Medicaid management and activity as it 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
279 

relates to ongoing Committee efforts to prevent waste, fraud, and 

abuse in Federal healthcare programs. Medicare and Medicaid 

fraud investigations will include drug pricing abuses under Part D 

(the Medicare drug benefit); CMS policing of rebates due the Medicaid program under the Medicaid drug rebate program; and fraud 

involving durable medical equipment. The Committee will also review alleged fraud in billing by home health agencies (HHAs); hospice benefit fraud; CMS enforcement against nursing home abuses; 

the effectiveness and reliability of Program Safeguard Contractors 

(PSCs); the high rate of hospital-acquired infections; and the effectiveness of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act 

(HIPPA) enforcement. 

HURRICANE KATRINA AND HEALTH SERVICES

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will investigate the efforts 

of Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and others to reconstruct the 

healthcare infrastructure in New Orleans following Hurricane 

Katrina, including the homeland security implications of such efforts for future disasters. The Committee will also review the performance of the HHS Office of Emergency Preparedness during and 

after Katrina and the use of the Public Health Service Corps during Katrina and other emergencies. 

CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will review the management, operations, and activities of the Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention, with particular focus on the effects of outsourcing 

of critical Government functions and its impact on its ability to respond to both natural and man-made outbreaks of disease. 

NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will examine the National 

Institutes of Health (NIH) organizational structure, priority setting, and research activities. This effort will include oversight of 

management and operations of internal NIH programs, as well as 

NIH-funded extramural research. Particular emphasis will be 

placed on the effectiveness of NIH’s policies, procedures, and programs related to preparing for and responding to terrorist events. 

TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INTERNET ISSUES 

THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

During the 110th Congress, the Committee will review the management, operations, and activities of the Federal Communications 

Commission (FCC), including the effect of its decisions on increasing competition, increasing the availability of technologies and 

services, assuring widespread deployment and reasonable rates for 

telecommunication and broadband services, protecting consumers, 

assuring adequate emergency communications capability and otherwise serving the public interest, convenience and necessity. The 

Committee will examine the FCC’s spectrum management policies 

to determine whether the policies encourage efficient use of the 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
280 

electromagnetic spectrum and equitable distribution of Commission 

licenses and authorizations. The FCC’s efforts to transition the Nation from analog to digital broadcasting will be a particular focus 

of the Committee. The Committee will also examine the management and funding of the FCC’s Office of Inspector General (IG), 

particularly with respect to the issue of whether the IG has adequate resources and the institutional independence necessary to 

carry out its responsibilities. 

UNIVERSAL SERVICE REFORM

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will investigate waste, 

fraud, and abuse in the FCC’s Universal Service Fund, including 

the management and administration of the High Cost program, the 

E-Rate program that pays to connect schools and libraries to the 

Internet, and the Rural Health Care program. 

INTERNET GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS

The Committee will review programs and efforts to assure the 

safe, secure, and robust functioning of the Internet. In particular, 

the Committee will examine the adequacy of efforts to protect the 

integrity of telecommunications networks and commercial use of 

the Internet, including reviewing programs of the Department of 

Commerce, FCC, DHS, and others to secure cyberspace. The Committee will examine the adequacy of efforts by the FCC and others 

to fight child pornography on the Internet, including the role of 

Internet Service Providers; and the activities of the Department of 

Justice in providing the necessary law enforcement resources for 

the discovery and prosecution of Internet child pornography. The 

Committee will also examine issues regarding the structure of 

Internet governance, including activities of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). 

NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION

ADMINISTRATION

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will review programs 

under the management of the National Telecommunications and 

Information Administration (NTIA), including the interoperable 

communications grant program intended to help the Nation’s first 

responders obtain state-of-the-art communications equipment to effectively communicate with each other in times of disaster. In addition, the Committee will investigate the adequacy and effectiveness 

of NTIA’s converter box program intended to help consumers in the 

government-driven transition to digital television. NTIA’s actions 

related to Internet governance will also be examined. 

CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will continue to review activities and funding of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the 

Public Broadcasting System, National Public Radio, and Public 

Radio International, with a particular focus on maintaining the 

independence of these important functions and assuring that the 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
281 

public interest remains paramount in their administration and 

management. 

HOMELAND SECURITY ISSUES 

CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE ASSURANCE ACTIVITIES

In the 110th Congress, the Committee intends to review infrastructure assurance efforts, including the Department of Homeland 

Security efforts to increase critical infrastructure resilience, in 

areas within the Committee’s jurisdiction. 

NUCLEAR SMUGGLING

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will review Federal Government and private sector efforts to detect the illicit transportation of nuclear materials and devices at border crossings, seaports, and mail facilities. The Committee’s review will analyze and 

assess DHS, Customs and Border Patrol, DOE, and other Government efforts and equipment aimed at detecting and preventing the 

smuggling of dangerous commerce, particularly nuclear and radiological weapons of mass destruction. The Committee will also review measures taken by private sector companies to detect and prevent the use of their facilities and equipment for such purposes. 

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND BIOTERRORISM

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will conduct an extensive 

examination of the efforts and fund expended to protect the U.S. 

from pandemic disease and biological and chemical weapons. The 

Committee will review the implementation by HHS of the Public 

Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act 

of 2002, and the coordination between HHS and DHS with respect 

to setting priorities and goals for bioterrorism-related research and 

preparedness activities, as well as overseeing activities and funding. The Committee will review HHS efforts against avian influenza and other pandemic diseases; Federal subsidies and other 

funding provided to pharmaceutical companies to develop vaccines; 

and particularly, the status of the development of anthrax and 

smallpox vaccines. 

PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS OPERATIONS

In the 110th Congress, the Committee will examine whether the 

communications needs of first responders are being met. The Committee will examine efforts to ensure that first responders have 

interoperable communications capabilities with local, State, and 

Federal public safety officials. The Committee will also consider 

whether first responders have an adequate amount of and are effectively utilizing spectrum for voice, video, and data transmissions. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF GOVERNMENT-WIDE CYBER SECURITY

PROGRAM

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 included a separate legislative provision entitled the Federal Information Security ManageVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00289 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
282 

ment Act, which reauthorized a government-wide cyber security 

program under the direction of the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). During the 110th Congress, the Committee will review the management and implementation of the cyber security 

provisions of the Homeland Security Act. 

MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES 

FEDERAL AGENCY MANAGEMENT

As part of the Committee’s oversight responsibilities generally 

and as an expansion of its review of conflict-of-interest policies in 

particular, the Committee will examine ethics policies and practices at Federal agencies and commissions within the Committee’s 

jurisdiction. The Committee will also examine agency procurement 

practices and contracts, risk assessment practices, and agency implementation of laws and regulations. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 

COMMERCE OVERSIGHT PLAN FOR THE 110TH CONGRESS 

COMMERCE, TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION 

ISSUES 

THE CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION 

In the 110th Congress, the Committee conducted a broad review 

of the management, budget, operations, activities, performance, 

and statutory authorities of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) with regard to safeguarding consumers, particularly 

children, from faulty or dangerous products. In response to the 

record number of recalls in 2007 of China-made toys containing 

dangerous magnets and high levels of lead, the Committee expanded its inquiry to include the effectiveness of import and export 

regulations, as well as safety-standard setting and certifying organizations. The Committee used this record to write landmark reform legislation that was signed into law by the President. 

THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

In the 110th Congress, the Committee reviewed actions of the 

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) with respect to mergers and acquisitions, telemarketing, unfair or deceptive advertising, Internet 

safety, and identity theft and privacy. The Committee used the 

telemarketing record to write two bills that have been signed into 

law: the first eliminated the automatic removal of phone numbers 

registered on the popular ‘‘Do-Not-Call’’ registry, while the other 

Act allows the FTC to continue collecting the fees necessary to 

maintain and enforce that registry. Also based on the Committee’s 

investigation and signed into law by the President was legislation 

providing $5 million to the FTC for an Internet safety campaign 

aimed at children. The Committee’s review of deceptive practices 

produced legislation to protect consumers who purchase calling 

cards by enhancing the ability of the FTC to combat widespread 

abusive and deceptive marketing practices, such as hidden charges 

and false advertising of calling minutes. This bill passed the House 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
283 

with no action by the Senate. The Committee’s identity theft and 

privacy review produced two bills, neither of which became a public 

law; legislation that would protect Internet users from unknowing 

transmission of their personally identifiable information through 

spyware programs passed the House with no action by the Senate, 

while legislation that would protect consumers by prohibiting the 

public display and purchase and sale of Social Security numbers in 

interstate commerce to commit fraud, deception, crime, or financial 

harm to individuals was referred to the Committee on Ways and 

Means for further consideration. No further action was taken on 

this latter legislation. 

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION 

In the 110th Congress, the Committee reviewed the activities of 

the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, particularly 

as they pertain to motor vehicle-related safety. 

TRADE 

In the 110th Congress, the Committee monitored and examined 

both multilateral trade agreements (including World Trade Organization agreements) and bilateral agreements as those agreements 

relate to industries, commodities, and services within the Committee’s jurisdiction. In particular, the Committee held a joint oversight hearing with the Committee on Ways and Means and the 

Committee on Financial Services to consider the impact of currency 

manipulation practices by China and Japan on the U.S. economy, 

businesses, and workers. 

TRAVEL AND TOURISM 

In the 110th Congress, the Committee reviewed issues affecting 

the travel and tourism industries, as well as means to encourage 

and promote the United States as a travel destination for international and domestic passengers. This examination included the 

operations of various government departments, including the policies, procedures, and administration of programs related to passports, visas, and other travel documentation or restrictions. On the 

basis of this record, the Committee reported legislation to establish 

a nonprofit corporation to promote travel to the United States. The 

bill passed the House but no further action was taken. 

SPORTS 

In the 110th Congress, the Committee examined issues arising 

from the commerce of professional and amateur athletics, including 

the lack of diversity in leadership positions in the National Collegiate Athletic Association, the use of performance enhancing drugs 

by professional athletes, and abuses permeating thoroughbred 

horse racing. The Committee examined the applicable regulatory 

structures and the possible need for Federal regulation. 

ENERGY AND AIR QUALITY ISSUES 

In the 110th Congress, the Committee reviewed a large number 

of management, budget, policy and other matters in the areas of 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
284 

energy and air quality, consistent with the oversight plan provided 

by the Committee at the outset of the Congress. The Subcommittee 

on Energy and Air Quality, through hearings, correspondence, and 

other communications with the executive branch and private sector, conducted a number of oversight activities, and accordingly 

wrote and approved legislation where needed. 

Independently, and in conjunction with the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air 

Quality reviewed and developed legislative proposals to address the 

effects of speculation and the lack of transparency and regulation 

in international oil markets. 

In more than 20 hearings, the Subcommittee examined both the 

strengths and weaknesses of various approaches to the issue of climate change, including crucial systems such as trading schemes 

and emissions allowances in cap and trade systems, and the role 

of different levels of government in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The Subcommittee produced four white papers on these matters, and crafted draft legislation to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas 

emissions by up to 80 percent by the year 2050. 

The Subcommittee reviewed matters relating to the supply, distribution, and conservation of energy and the role of various Federal agencies pertaining to the adequacy and reliability of the Nation’s energy systems, both in terms of management of the Nation’s 

electric grid, and its vulnerability to cybersecurity attacks. 

The Subcommittee also subjected to scrutiny, for the first time in 

years, the budget and priorities of the Environmental Protection 

Agency, the role of science in Agency decisions, and the lack of 

transparency in many of its operations. For example, efforts by the 

Subcommittee forestalled EPA efforts to close its regional libraries. 

ENVIRONMENT AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ISSUES 

During the 110th Congress, the Committee endeavored, through 

vigorous oversight, to ensure that the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) effectively performs its mission of protecting the public health and environment. As part of that effort, the Committee 

also worked to ensure that EPA also has the resources it needs to 

do its job. 

Oversight hearings were held on EPA’s proposed rules for geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide. The Subcommittee examined 

the potential storage capacity in deep subsurface geologic formations in the United States. The Committee also conducted vigorous 

oversight of EPA’s efforts to enforce hazardous waste laws at Department of Defense facilities, in order to facilitate cleanup actions. 

The Committee looked into EPA’s Office of Inspector General 

proposed buyout of employees and office closings. The buyout plan 

would have significantly reduced an important division of EPA that 

prevents waste, fraud, and abuse at the agency. Due to efforts by 

the Committee and in close cooperation with the Committee on Appropriations, the buyout program was abandoned; no additional offices were closed and the budget was increased. 

A proposed EPA rule that would eliminate reporting requirements for air emissions of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide from animal waste at large factory farms or Concentrated Animal Feeding 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
285 

Operations (CAFOs) was examined in a September 24, 2008, hearing. 

HEALTH AND HEALTHCARE ISSUES 

FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION 

In the 110th Congress, the Committee conducted a broad review 

of the management, budget, operations, activities, performance, 

and statutory authorities of the Food and Drug Administration 

(FDA) with regard to post-market safety of pharmaceuticals, user 

fees for the review of drugs and medical devices, pediatric drug 

testing, and public access to clinical trials information. Based on 

the Committee’s work, legislation was drafted and signed into law 

by the President that provides FDA with new authorities to monitor and act on postmarket safety concerns, and that renew drug 

and medical devices user fees, reauthorizes and expands pediatric 

drug testing incentives and mandates, and creates a registry of information about clinical trials. 

Additionally, the Committee reviewed the FDA’s authority and 

resources related to the review of animal drugs, including holding 

a hearing on legislation proposed by the Administration. Based on 

that review, the Committee drafted legislation that was signed into 

law to revise and extend the animal drug user fee program, to establish a program of fees for the review of generic new animal 

drugs, and to expand available information about the use of antibiotics in food-producing animals. 

Threats to the safety of the Nation’s food and drug supply were 

highlighted when adulterated wheat gluten imported from China 

and used for pet food sickened or killed a number of dogs and cats. 

Subsequently, contaminated heparin produced in Chinese facilities 

was found to have caused the deaths of more than one hundred 

people. In addition, outbreaks of E. coli in spinach, Salmonella in 

peanut butter, and botulism in chili sauce in the United States 

brought renewed attention to the risks posed by accidental food 

contamination. 

The Committee also reviewed the adequacy of the funding and 

authorities to protect American consumers from unsafe food, drugs, 

devices, and cosmetics, with a particular focus on the safety of imported products. The review led to the introduction of legislation to 

improve the safety of imported products. Four hearings were held 

on this legislation with further action expected in the 111th Congress. 

Further information about the Committee’s efforts regarding the 

safety of the Nation’s drug supply and food supply can be found in 

the Subcommittee on Health and Subcommittee on Oversight and 

Investigations sections of this report. 

CENTERS FOR MEDICARE AND MEDICAID SERVICES 

In the 110th Congress, in response to a wave of acquisitions of 

large, publicly held nursing home chains by private equity firms 

and the development of new and opaque investment models, the 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations launched an invesVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:30 Jan 07, 2009 Jkt 046137 PO 00000 Frm 00293 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR937.XXX HR937

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
286 

tigation into the effect of new ownership structures. As a result of 

the investigation and hearing: • In February 2008, CMS publicly disclosed the names of 147 

nursing homes, including those terminated from the Medicare and 

Medicaid programs for persistent failure to improve. • Shortly before the hearing, CMS linked the poor performer list 

to its ‘‘Nursing Home Compare’’ Web site for consumers. • Shortly after the hearing, CMS implemented a more informative ‘‘five-star’’ rating system on its Web site to help families 

evaluate the quality of care in nursing homes. • In August 2008, CMS began requiring its quality improvement 

contractors to work closely with and provide technical assistance to 

chronically poor performing nursing homes. • Legislation has been introduced in the Senate to require ownership information and expand legal protections for residents and 

their families, with similar legislation being drafted in the House. 

The Committee investigated predatory sales practices in the 

Medicare Advantage program. During a hearing on the topic, testimony was heard from victims of Medicare Advantage (MA) marketing abuses by sales agents, as well as industry representatives, 

State regulators, and the Director of the MA program at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. As a result of the investigation and hearings: • CMS imposed a marketing moratorium on seven insurance 

companies associated with some of the more egregious sales practices targeting seniors. • In September 2007, CMS issued the first monetary penalties 

against MA plans for marketing abuses. • On October 1, 2007, as a result of the Chairman’s request, 

CMS made public the corrective action plans it had imposed on 

various MA plans. • In fall 2007, CMS launched a ‘‘secret shopper’’ program to ensure that plans were complying with CMS’ marketing guidelines. 

On May 20, 2008, the majority staff issued a staff report on additional problems with the design, oversight, and administration of 

MA plans. Two months later, on July 15, 2008, Congress overrode 

the President’s veto of H.R. 6331, the ‘‘Medicare Improvements for 

Patients and Providers Act of 2008.’’ This legislation addresses 

problems identified by the Subcommittee and prohibits MA and 

prescription drug plans and their sales agents from selling their 

products via door-to-door sales; cold calling; cross selling nonhealth-related products; offering meals of any sort; and conducting 

sales activities of any kind at educational events or in healthcare 

settings. The bill also calls for limits on commissions and gifts, and 

mandates that agents be licensed and appointed as required under 

State law and receive annual training on Medicare and the specific 

MA and Part D plans they sell. 

HURRICANE KATRINA AND HEALTH SERVICES 

Hurricane Katrina, which made landfall near the Louisiana-Mississippi border on the morning of August 29, 2005, and the subsequent flooding caused by the failure of the New Orleans levee system resulted in one of the largest natural disasters to hit the 

United States. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
287 

In the 110th Congress, the Committee focused significant efforts 

on stabilizing and restoring the New Orleans healthcare system, 

recognizing that the availability of healthcare services and 

healthcare-related jobs, and the restoration of access for the uninsured as well as the insured, were essential to the region’s longterm recovery. As a result of the investigation and hearings: 

• HHS released $100 million in Deficit Reduction Act healthcare 

monies to establish and maintain primary care clinics throughout 

the metropolitan area over the next 3 years, and issued grants to 

support retention and recruitment of medical providers to expand 

access to medical services in the region. 

• In November 2007, HHS began work on revisions to its Medicare graduate medical education rules to address community disaster situations involving the loss of a major teaching hospital. 

• The VA entered into an agreement with the City of New Orleans to begin construction of a new hospital, as plans developed for 

creation of a new medical district in downtown New Orleans that 

would include a new VA Hospital and a new public teaching hospital. The co-location of the two hospitals will facilitate the sharing 

of support services and other resources. 

• The Health Resources and Services Administration provided 

technical assistance to providers in areas ravaged by the Hurricane 

to increase healthcare access for underserved communities. • In September 2008, Congress approved, and the President 

signed, legislation appropriating $600 million in Social Services 

Block Grant monies that will be available to the State of Louisiana 

for assistance with stabilization of its healthcare system. The Congressional relief package provides flexible funding to States impacted by natural disasters in 2008, as well as States such as Louisiana still struggling to recover from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. 

NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH 

In the 110th Congress, the Committee conducted an oversight 

hearing related to implementation of the National Institutes of 

Health Reform Act of 2006, which is scheduled for reauthorization 

in the 111th Congress. The hearing examined the Agency’s 

progress in meeting the goals of the legislation, which include improving interdisciplinary coordination, the translation of scientific 

studies into patient care, transparency, and accountability. 

CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION 

In the 110th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations investigated the management, operation, and activities 

of DHS’ National Biosurveillance Integration System (NBIS) of the 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS). NBIS was created by 

DHS as a means of integrating bio-surveillance information across 

the entire government. The purpose of the investigation was to assess the adequacy of DHS’ biosurveillance efforts, the extent to 

which biosurveillance systems have been integrated thus far, and 

whether biosurveillance resources are being effectively used. According to unofficial sources, the NBIS is in fact a hollow shell that 

contributes little if anything to the DHS mission and duplicates efforts of the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
288 

Disease Control and Prevention and other government agencies. 

Records were received in response to the initial record request and 

are currently under review. The next steps are site visits, interviews, and additional records requests. 

TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INTERNET ISSUES 

During the 110th Congress, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet implemented the Committee’s oversight 

plan for the 110th Congress through oversight hearings, correspondence with relevant executive branch offices and independent agencies, and enlisting the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to commence investigations. 

The Subcommittee conducted oversight of the activities of the 

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). The Subcommittee held four FCC oversight hearings at which all five FCC 

Commissioners testified. These hearings examined the effect of the 

FCC’s decisions on increasing competition, increasing the availability of advanced technologies and services, efficiently managing 

spectrum, protecting consumers, assuring adequate emergency 

communications capability, and otherwise serving the public interest, convenience and necessity. The Subcommittee held an oversight hearing examining programs under NTIA’s management, including the interoperable communications grant program intended 

to help the Nation’s first responders obtain state-of-the-art communications equipment to effectively communicate with each other in 

times of disaster. The Subcommittee also focused on the efforts of 

the FCC and the NTIA to transition the Nation from analog to digital broadcasting and held six hearings regarding this transition. 

The Subcommittee worked to assure the safe, secure, and robust 

functioning of the Internet, including by ensuring proper Department of Commerce oversight of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. The Subcommittee also investigated 

waste, fraud, and abuse in the Universal Service Fund, including 

by holding an oversight hearing examining the program and requesting the GAO’s assistance in examining waste, fraud, and 

abuse in the program. 

HOMELAND AND SECURITY ISSUES 

In the 110th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held three hearings examining security at the Department of Energy’s national labs, mostly relating to security at Los 

Alamos National Lab (LANL). Each hearing examined an array of 

concerns surfaced by both internal and external audits and investigations relating to both how LANL secures classified and other 

sensitive information and its ability to mitigate against all forms 

of physical intrusion, including a terrorist attack. As LANL has 

had longstanding security problems for more than a decade, the 

Subcommittee continued its direct oversight of its activities including requesting a number of comprehensive audits and reviews by 

GAO. 

Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Committee has been 

investigating the capacity of the Department of Homeland Security 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
289 

(DHS) to target and inspect sea cargo containers bound for the 

United States from foreign ports in order to prevent possible smuggling of nuclear weapons or radiological materials. On September 

18, 2007, the Committee held a hearing entitled, ‘‘Nuclear Terrorism Prevention: Status Report on the Federal Government’s Assessment of New Radiation Detection Monitors,’’ which reviewed 

the GAO’s critical assessment of the Domestic Nuclear Detection 

Office’s (DNDO) efforts to test, certify, and deploy a new generation 

of radiation portal monitors known as ‘‘Advanced Spectroscopic 

Portals’’ (ASPs). 

As the result of the Subcommittee’s investigation, the legislation 

making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security 

for fiscal years 2008 and 2009 prohibited DNDO from making full 

scale procurement until it conducted additional testing, and the 

Secretary certified that these new machines provided a ‘‘significant 

increase in operational effectiveness’’ and the National Academy of 

Sciences concurred. This action saved taxpayers $1.2 billion by 

blocking the purchase of machinery that was not proven to be 

ready for deployment at our ports and border crossings. 

The Subcommittee made considerable efforts to examine how 

well the Department of Energy, including the Nation’s key weapons 

labs, were positioned to prevent unauthorized cyber intrusions and 

data theft. These efforts were the subject of several hearings and 

are discussed in detail elsewhere in this report. Nonetheless, because of ongoing concerns raised by DOE officials and other cybersecurity experts about the Federal government’s vulnerability in 

this area generally, the Subcommittee began discussions with GAO 

to develop plans to broaden its vulnerability assessment of other 

key agencies and Departments under the Committee’s jurisdiction. 

Of particular concern are those agencies whose IT system was demonstrated to have profound weaknesses in the course of the Subcommittee’s other investigations. As the 110th Congress came to a 

close, GAO had begun to plan important cyber-related assessments 

of key agencies and Departments. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(291) 

APPENDIX I 

LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

Statistical Summary of Committee Activities 

Total Bills and Resolutions Referred to Committee ..................................... 1531 

Public Laws ...................................................................................................... 58 

Bills and Resolutions Reported to the House ................................................ 59 

Hearings Held: 

Days of Hearings ...................................................................................... 170 

Full Committee .................................................................................. 6 

Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection ... 16 

Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality ...................................... 31 

Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials ............ 9 

Subcommittee on Health .................................................................. 40 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations ............................. 36 

Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet ............... 32 

Hours of Sitting ........................................................................................ 535:29 

Full Committee .................................................................................. 17:02 

Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection ... 51:07 

Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality ...................................... 85:32 

Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials ............ 23:11 

Subcommittee on Health .................................................................. 113:54 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations ............................. 154:07 

Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet ............... 90:36 

Legislative Markups: 

Days of Markups ...................................................................................... 47 

Full Committee .................................................................................. 24 

Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection ... 5 

Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality ...................................... 2 

Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials ............ 3 

Subcommittee on Health .................................................................. 11 

Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet ............... 2 

Hours of Sitting ........................................................................................ 123:28 

Full Committee .................................................................................. 79:39 

Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection ... 5:27 

Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality ...................................... 8:38 

Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials ............ 1:50 

Subcommittee on Health .................................................................. 25:54 

Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet ............... 2:00 

Business Meetings: 

Days of Meetings ...................................................................................... 4 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations ............................. 4 

Hours of Sitting ........................................................................................ 2:00 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations ............................. 2:00 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(293) 

APPENDIX II 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

PUBLIC LAWS 

This list includes: (1) legislation on which the Committee on Energy and Commerce acted directly; (2) legislation developed 

through Committee participation in House-Senate conferences; and 

(3) legislation which included provisions within the Committee’s jurisdiction, including legislation enacted by reference as part of 

other legislation. 

Public Laws: 58 

Public Law Date Approved Bill Title 

110–18 April 20, 2007 H.R. 1132 National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 

110–23 May 3, 2007 H.R. 727 Trauma Care Systems Planning and Development Act of 2007 

110–49 July 26, 2007 H.R. 556 Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007 

110–53 August 3, 2007 H.R. 1 Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 

110–54 August 3, 2007 H.R. 2429 To amend Title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide and exception to the 60–day limit on Medicare reciprocal billing arrangements between two physicians during the period in which one of 

the physicians is ordered to active duty as a member of a reserve 

component of the Armed Forces 

110–85 September 27, 2007 H.R. 3580 Food and Drug Administration Amendments of 2007 

110–90 September 29, 207 H.R. 3668 TMA, Abstinence Education, and QI Programs Extension Act of 2007 

110–140 December 19, 2007 H.R. 6 Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 

110–144 December 21, 2007 H.R. 710 Charlie W. Norwood Living Organ Donation Act 

110–150 December 21, 2007 S. 597 To amend title 39, United States Code, to extend the authority of the 

United States Postal Service to issue a semipostal to raise funds 

for breast cancer research 

110–154 December 21, 2007 S. 2484 To rename the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development as the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child 

Health and Human Development 

110–170 December 26, 2007 S. 1916 Chimp Haven is Home Act 

110–173 December 29, 2007 S. 2499 Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 

110–187 February 15, 2008 H.R. 3541 Do-Not-Call Improvement Act of 2007 

110–188 February 15, 2008 S. 781 Do-Not-Call Registry Fee Extension Act of 2007 

110–189 February 28, 2008 H.R. 1216 K.T. Safety Act of 2007 

110–202 April 23, 2008 S. 845 Safety of Seniors Act of 2007 

110–204 April 24, 2008 S. 1858 Newborn Screening Saves Lives Act of 2007 

110–206 April 28, 2008 S. 793 Traumatic Brain Injury Act of 2008 

110–232 May 19, 2008 H.R. 6022 Strategic Petroleum Reserve Fill Suspension and Consumer Protection 

Act of 2008 

110–233 May 21, 2008 H.R. 493 Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 

110–234 May 22, 2008 H.R. 2419 Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 

110–237 May 27, 2008 H.R. 5919 To make technical corrections regarding the Newborn Screening Saves 

Lives Act of 2007 

110–246 June 18, 2008 H.R. 6124 Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 

110–252 June 30, 2008 H.R. 2642 Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2008 

110–255 June 30, 2008 S. 2146 To authorize the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency 

to accept, as part of a settlement, diesel emission reduction supplemental environmental projects 

110–275 July 15, 2008 H.R. 6331 Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 

110–278 July 17, 2008 H.R. 814 Children’s Gasoline Burn Prevention Act 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
294 

Public Laws: 58—Continued 

Public Law Date Approved Bill Title 

110–283 July 23, 2008 H.R. 3403 New and Emerging Technologies 911 Improvement Act of 2008 

110–285 July 29, 2008 H.R. 1553 Caroline Pryce Walker Conquer Childhood Cancer Act of 2008 

110–289 July 30, 2008 H.R. 3221 Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 

110–293 July 30, 2008 H.R. 5501 Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership 

Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 

2008 

110–295 July 30, 2008 S. 2607 To make a technical correction to section 3009 of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 

110–314 August 14, 2008 H.R. 4040 Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 

110–316 August 14, 2008 H.R. 6432 To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to revise and extend the Animal Drug User Fee Program, to establish a program of 

fees relating to generic new animal drugs, to make certain technical corrections to the Food and Drug Administration Amendments 

Act of 2007 

110–325 September 25, 2008 S. 3406 ADA Amendments Act of 2008 

110–339 October 3, 2008 S. 1760 Healthy Start Reauthorization Act of 2007 

110–343 October 3, 2008 H.R. 1424 Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 

110–345 October 7, 2008 H.R. 1199 Drug Endangered Children Act of 2007 

110–354 October 8, 2008 H.R. 1157 Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act of 2008 

110–355 October 8, 2008 H.R. 1343 Health Care Safety Net Act of 2008 

110–361 October 8, 2008 H.R. 5265 Paul D. Wellstone Muscular Dystrophy Community Assistance, Research, and Education Amendments of 2008 

110–368 October 8, 2008 H.R. 6946 To make a technical correction in the NET 911 Improvement Act of 

2008 

110–373 October 8, 2008 S. 1382 ALS Registry Act 

110–374 October 8, 2008 S. 1810 Prenatally and Postnatally Diagnosed Conditions Awareness Act 

110–377 October 8, 2008 S. 2932 Poison Center Support, Enhancement, and Awareness Act of 2008 

110–379 October 8, 2008 S. 3560 QI Program Supplemental Funding Act of 2008 

110–381 October 9, 2008 H.R. 2851 Michelle’s Law 

110–385 October 10, 2008 S. 1492 Broadband Data Services Improvement Act 

110–392 October 13, 2008 H.R. 1532 Comprehensive Tuberculosis Elimination Act of 2008 

110–413 October 14, 2008 H.R. 7198 Stephanie Tubbs Jones Gift of Life Medal Act of 2008 

110–414 October 14, 2008 S. 906 Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 

110–415 October 14, 2008 S. 1276 Methamphetamine Production Prevention Act of 2008 

110–417 October 14, 2008 S. 3001 Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2009 

110–425 October 15, 2008 H.R. 6353 Ryan Haight Online Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act of 2008 

110–426 October 15, 2008 H.R. 6469 Stephanie Tubbs Jones Organ Transplant Authorization Act of 2008 

110–452 December 2, 2008 S. 602 Child Safe Viewing Act of 2007 

110–457 December 23, 2008 H.R. 7311 William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act 

of 2008 

110–459 December 23, 2008 S. 3663 Short-term Analog Flash and Emergency Readiness Act 

110–460 December 23, 2008 S. 3712 To make a technical correction in the Paul Wellstone and Pete 

Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(295) 

APPENDIX III 

PART A 

Printed Hearings of the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

Serial No. Hearing Title Hearing Date(s) 

110–1 Continuing Security Concerns at Los Alamos National Laboratory (Subcommittee on 

Oversight and Investigations).

January 30, 2007 

April 20, 2007 

110–2 Review of the Department of Health and Human Services Fiscal Year 2008 Budget 

(Full Committee).

February 6, 2007 

110–3 The Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Request for the U.S. Department of Energy (Full Committee).February 8, 2007 

110–4 Addressing Climate Change: Views from Private Sector Panels (Subcommittee on 

Energy and Air Quality).

February 8, 2007 

110–5 The Adequacy of the FDA to Assure the Safety of the Nation’s Drug Supply (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).February 13, 2007 

March 22, 2007 

110–6 Covering the Uninsured: Through the Eyes of a Child (Subcommittee on Health) ..... February 14, 2007 

March 1, 2007 

110–7 The Lack of Diversity in Leadership Positions in NCAA Collegiate Sports (Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection).February 28, 2007 

110–8 The Truth in Caller ID Act (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet) February 28, 2007 

110–9 Review of the Administration’s Energy Proposals for the Transportation Sector 

(Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).

February 28, 2007 

110–10 The Digital Future of the United States (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and 

the Internet).

March 1, 7, 2007 

April 19, 24, 2007 

May 10, 2007 

October 2, 2007 

110–11 Environmental Protection Agency Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Request (Subcommittee 

on Environment and Hazardous Materials and Subcommittee on Energy and Air 

Quality).

March 1, 8, 2007 

110–12 Carbon Capture and Sequestration: An Overview (Subcommittee on Energy and Air 

Quality).

March 6, 2007 

110–13 Exploring Options for Improving the Medicare Physician Payment System (Subcommittee on Health).March 6, 2007 

110–14 Climate Change: Are Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Human Activities Contributing to the Warming of the Planet? (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).March 7, 2007 

110–15 The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (Subcommittee on Health) ................ March 8, 2007 

110–16 Combating Pretexting: H.R. 936, the ‘‘Prevention of Fraudulent Access to Phone 

Records Act’’ (Full Committee).

March 9, 2007 

110–17 Post Katrina Health Care: Continuing Concern and Immediate Needs in the New Orleans Region Part 1 (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).March 13, 2007 

110–18 Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).March 14, 2007 

July 24, 2007 

110–19 Climate Change and Energy Security: Perspectives from the Automobile Industry 

(Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).

March 14, 2007 

110–20 Climate Change: State and Local Perspectives (Subcommittee on Energy and Air 

Quality).

March 15, 2007 

110–21 Combating Spyware: H.R. 964, the ‘‘SPY ACT’’ (Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection).

March 15, 2007 

110–22 Climate Change: Perspectives of Utility CEOs (Subcommittee on Energy and Air 

Quality).

March 20, 2007 

110–23 Perspectives on Climate Change (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality) ............. March 21, 2007 

110–24 Oversight of the National Telecommunications Information Administration and Innovations in Interoperability (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).

March 22, 2007 

110–25 Insuring Bright Futures: Improving Access to Dental Care and Providing a Healthy 

Start for Children (Subcommittee on Health).

March 27, 2007 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
296 

Printed Hearings of the Committee on Energy and Commerce—Continued 

Serial No. Hearing Title Hearing Date(s) 

110–26 Climate Change: International Issues, Engaging Developing Countries (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).March 27, 2007 

110–27 The Status of the Digital Television Transition (Subcommittee on Telecommunications the Internet).March 28, 2007 

October 17, 31, 2007 

110–28 Climate Change: Lessons Learned from the Existing Cap-and-Trade Programs (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).March 29, 2007 

110–29 Reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (Subcommittee on Health) .... April 17, 2007 

110–30 Medicare Program Efficiency and Integrity (Subcommittee on Health) ....................... April 18, 2007 

110–31 Alternative Transportation Fuels: An Overview (Subcommittee on Energy and Air 

Quality).

April 18, 2007 

110–32 Implementation of EPACT 2005 Loan Guarantee Programs by the Department of Energy (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).April 24, 2007 

110–33 Diminished Capacity: Can the FDA Assure the Safety and Security of the Nation’s 

Food Supply? (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).

April 24, 2007 

July 17, 2007 

October 11, 2007 

November 13, 2007 

110–34 Living Without Health Insurance: Why Every American Needs Coverage (Subcommittee on Health).April 25, 2007 

110–35 Perchlorate: Health and Environmental Impacts of Unregulated Exposure (Subcommittee on Environmental and Hazardous Materials).April 25, 2007 

110–36 Achieving-At Long Last-Appliance Efficiency Standards (Subcommittee on Energy 

and Air Quality).

May 1, 2007 

110–37 H.R. 1014, the ‘‘Heart Disease Education, Analysis, Research, and Treatment for 

Women Act’’ (Subcommittee on Health).

May 1, 2007 

110–38 H.R. 20, the ‘‘Melanie Blocker-Stokes Postpartum Depression Research and Health 

Care Act’’ (Subcommittee on Health).

May 1, 2007 

110–39 H.R. 1902, the ‘‘Protecting Consumer Access to Generic Drugs Act of 2007’’ (Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection).May 2, 2007 

110–40 Assessing the Impact of a Safe and Equitable Biosimilar Policy in the United 

States (Subcommittee on Health).

May 2, 2007 

110–41 Facilitating the Transition to a Smart Electric Grid (Subcommittee on Energy and 

Air Quality).

May 3, 2007 

110–42 Alternative Fuels: Current Status, Proposals for New Standards, and Related Infrastructure Issues (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).May 8, 2007 

110–43 Assessing the Safety of Our Nation’s Drug Supply (Subcommittee on Health) .......... May 9, 2007 

110–44 Protecting Our Children: Current Issues in Children’s Product Safety (Subcommittee 

on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection).

May 15, 2007 

110–45 Medicare Savings Programs and Low Income Subsidy: Keeping Medicare’s Promise 

for Seniors and People with Disabilities (Subcommittee on Health).

May 15, 2007 

110–46 The 2006 Prudhoe Bay Shutdown: Will Recent Regulatory Changes and BP Management Reforms Prevent Future Failures? (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).

May 16, 2007 

110–47 Reauthorization of the Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act (Subcommittee on Health).May 16, 2007 

110–48 H.R. , A Discussion Draft Addressing Broadband Mapping and Data Collection 

(Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).

May 17, 2007 

110–49 Programs Affecting Safety and Innovation in Pediatric Therapies (Subcommittee on 

Health).

May 22, 2007 

110–50 Discussion Drafts Concerning Energy Efficiency, Smart Electricity Grid, Energy Policy Act of 2005 Title XVII Loan Guarantees, and Standby Loans for Coal-to-Liquids Projects (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).

May 24, 2007 

110–51 Gasoline Prices, Oil Company Profits, and the American Consumer (Subcommittee 

on Oversight and Investigations).

May 22, 2007 

110–52 Legislation to Improve Consumer Product Safety for Children: H.R. 2474, H.R. 1699, 

H.R. 814, H.R. 1721 (Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection).

June 6, 2007 

110–53 Discussion Draft Concerning Alternative Fuels, Infrastructure and Vehicles (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).June 7, 2007 

110–54 H.R. 1328, the ‘‘Indian Health Care Improvement Act Amendments of 2007’’ (Subcommittee on Health).June 7, 2007 

110–55 Discussion Drafts Concerning Prescription Drug User Fee Act Reauthorization and 

Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act Reauthorization (Subcommittee 

on Health).

June 12, 2007 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
297 

Printed Hearings of the Committee on Energy and Commerce—Continued 

Serial No. Hearing Title Hearing Date(s) 

110–56 Poisoned Patriots: Contaminated Drinking Water at Camp LeJeune (Subcommittee 

on Oversight and Investigations).

June 12, 2007 

110–57 H.R. 1424, the ‘‘Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007’’ 

(Subcommittee on Health).

June 15, 2007 

110–58 Images Kids See on the Screen (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the 

Internet).

June 22, 2007 

110–59 H.R. 1524, the ‘‘Mercury Export Ban Act of 2007’’ (Subcomittee on Environment 

and Hazardous Materials).

June 22, 2007 

110–60 Predatory Sales Practices in Medicare Advantage (Subcommittee on Oversight and 

Investigations).

June 26, 2007 

110–61 Wireless Innovation and Consumer Protection (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).July 11, 2007 

110–62 Post-Katrina Health Care in the New Orleans Region: Progress and Continuing Concerns—Part 2 (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).August 1, 2007 

110–63 Nuclear Terrorism Prevention: Status Report on the Federal Government’s Assessment of New Radiation Detection Monitors (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).

September 18, 2007 

110–64 Answering the Call: Medical Monitoring and Treatment of 9/11 Health Effects (Subcommittee on Health).September 18, 2007 

110–65 Protecting Children from Lead-Tainted Imports (Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, 

and Consumer Protection).

September 19, 2007 

September 20, 2007 

110–66 Issues in Emergency Communications: H.R. 3403, the ‘‘911 Modernization and Public Safety Act of 2007’’ (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).September 19, 2007 

110–67 From Imus to Industry: The Business of Sterotypes and Degrading Images (Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection).September 25, 2007 

110–68 H.R. 3610, the ‘‘Food and Drug Import Safety Act’’ (Subcommittee on Health) ......... September 26, 2007 

110–69 H.R. 1108, the ‘‘Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act’’ (Subcommittee on Health).October 3, 2007 

110–70 Germs, Viruses, and Secrets: The Silent Proliferation of Bio-laboratories in the 

United States (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).

October 4, 2007 

110–71 H.R. 1103 and H.R. 1055: Environmental Justice and the Toxic Release Inventory 

Reporting Program—Communities Have a Right to Know (Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials).

October 4, 2007 

110–72 Enhancing FTC Consumer Protection in Financial Dealings, with Telemarketers, and 

on the Internet (Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection).

October 23, 2007 

110–73 NASPER: Why Has the National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting Act 

Not Been Implemented? (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).

October 24, 2007 

110–74 FDA Foreign Drug Inspection Program: A System at Risk (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).November 1, 2007 

110–75 Comprehensive Children’s Product Safety and Consumer Product Safety Commission Reform Legislation (Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection).

November 6, 2007 

110–76 H.R. 1343, the ‘‘Health Centers Renewal Act of 2007’’; H.R. 2915, the ‘‘National 

Health Service Corps Scholarship and Loan Repayment Programs Reauthorization 

Act of 2007’’; and H.R. 4230, the ‘‘School-Based Health Clinic Act of 2007’’ 

(Subcommittee on Health).

December 4, 2007 

110–77 Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission—Media Ownership (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).December 5, 2007 

110–78 Energy Speculation: Is Greater Regulation Necessary to Stop Price Manipulation? 

(Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).

December 12, 2007 

110–79 Helping Families with Needed Care: Medicaid’s Critical Role for Americans with 

Disabilities (Subcommittee on Health).

January 16, 2008 

110–80 Administration Perspectives on United Nations Climate Change Conference in Bali 

(Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).

January 17, 2008 

110–81 H.R. 1232, the ‘‘Veterinary Public Health Workforce Expansion Act of 2007’’ (Subcommittee on Health).January 23, 2008 

110–82 Combating Nuclear Proliferation: The Effectiveness of the Department of Energy’s 

Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention (IPP) Program (Subcommittee on Oversight 

and Investigations).

January 23, 2008 

110–83 Science and Mission at Risk: FDA’s Self-Assessment (Subcommittee on Oversight 

and Investigations).

January 29, 2008 

110–84 Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) Services in the Digital Age (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).January 29, 2008 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
298 

Printed Hearings of the Committee on Energy and Commerce—Continued 

Serial No. Hearing Title Hearing Date(s) 

110–85 Covering Uninsured Kids: Missed Opportunities for Moving Forward (Subcommittee 

on Health).

January 29, 2008 

110–86 Department of Energy’s Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Proposal (Full Committee) ............ February 7, 2008 

110–87 Ketek Clinical Study Fraud: What Did Adventis Know? (Subcommittee on Oversight 

and Investigations).

February 12, 2008 

110–88 Status of the DTV Transition: 370 Days and Counting (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).February 13, 2008 

110–89 H.R. 3754: Authorizing Supplemental Environmental Projects to Incent Reductions 

of Diesel Emissions (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).

February 13, 2008 

110–90 A Review of the Department of Health and Human Services Fiscal Year 2009 Budget (Full Committee).February 28, 2008 

110–91 Covering Uninsured Kids: Reversing Progress Already Made (Subcommittee on 

Health).

February 26, 2008 

110–92 Contaminated Food: Private Sector Accountability (Subcommittee on Oversight and 

Investigations).

February 26, 2008 

110–93 Drugs in Sports: Compromising the Health of Athletes and Undermining the Integrity of Competition (Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection).

February 27, 2008 

110–94 Department of Commerce Fiscal Year 2009 Budget (Full Committee) ........................ March 13, 2008 

110–95 Discussion Draft on Wireless Consumer Protection and Community Broadband Empowerment (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).February 27, 2008 

110–96 S. 742, the ‘‘Ban Asbestos in America Act of 2007’’ and Draft Legislation to Ban 

Asbestos in Products (Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials).

February 28, 2008 

110–97 Climate Change: Competitiveness Concerns and Prospects for Engaging Developing 

Countries (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).

March 5, 2008 

110–98 Competition in the Sports Programming Marketplace (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).March 5, 2008 

110–99 Regulatory Failure: Must America Live with Unsafe Food? (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).March 12, 2008 

110–100 The Role of Private Equity in the Communications Marketplace (Subcommittee on 

Telecommunications and the Internet).

March 11, 2008 

110–101 The Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006: Implementation Review and Discussion of Safety Reassessment Intervals for Natural 

Gas Pipelines (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).

March 12, 2008 

110–102 Online Virtual Worlds: Applications and Avatars in a User-Generated Medium (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).April 1, 2008 

110–103 Selling the Department of Energy’s Depleted Uranium Stockpile: Opportunities and 

Challenges (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).

April 3, 2008 

110–104 H.R. 5613, the ‘‘Protecting the Medicaid Safety Net Act of 2008’’ (Subcommittee on 

Health).

April 3, 2008 

110–105 Strengths and Weaknesses of Regulating Greenhouse Gas Emissions Using Existing 

Clean Air Act Authorities (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).

April 10, 2008 

110–106 Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission: The 700 Mhz Auction (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).April 15, 2008 

110–107 FDA’s Foreign Drug Inspection Program: Weaknesses Place Americans at Risk (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).April 22, 2008 

110–108 Discussion Draft of the ‘‘Food and Drug Administration Globalization Act’’—Food 

Provisions (Subcommittee on Health).

April 24, 2008 

110–109 The Heparin Disaster: Chinese Counterfeits and American Failures (Subcommittee 

on Oversight and Investigations).

April 29, 2008 

110–110 Draft Legislation Enhancing Access to Broadband Technology and Services for Persons with Disabilities (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).May 1, 2008 

110–111 Discussion Draft of the ‘‘Food and Drug Administration Globalization Act’’—Drug 

Safety (Subcommittee on Health).

May 1, 2008 

110–112 H.R. 5353, the ‘‘Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2008’’ (Subcommittee on 

Telecommunications and the Internet).

May 6, 2008 

110–113 The Renewable Fuels Standard: Issues, Implementation, and Opportunities (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).May 6, 2008 

110–114 Direct-to-Consumer Advertising: Marketing, Education, or Deception? (Subcommittee 

on Oversight and Investigations).

May 8, 2008 

110–115 Stem Cell Science: The Foundation for Future Cures (Subcommittee on Health) ....... May 8, 2008 

110–116 In the Hands of Strangers: Are Nursing Home Safeguards Working? (Subcommittee 

on Oversight and Investigations).

May 15, 2008 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
299 

Printed Hearings of the Committee on Energy and Commerce—Continued 

Serial No. Hearing Title Hearing Date(s) 

110–117 Discussion Draft of the ‘‘Food and Drug Administration Globalization Act’’—Device 

and Cosmetic Safety Provisions (Subcommittee on Health).

May 14, 2008 

110–118 H.R. 5998, the ‘‘Protecting Children’s Health Coverage Act of 2008’’ (Subcommittee 

on Health).

May 15, 2008 

110–119 H.R. 5632, To Prohibit the Importation of Certain Low-Level Radioactive Waste Into 

the United States (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).

May 20, 2008 

110–120 Germs, Viruses, and Secrets: Government Plans to Move Exotic Disease Research to 

the Mainland United States (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).

May 22, 2008 

110–121 H.R. 1157, the ‘‘Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act of 2007’’; and H.R. 

758, the ‘‘Breast Cancer Patient Protection Act of 2007’’ (Subcommittee on 

Health).

May 21, 2008 

110–122 Discussion Draft of Health Information Technology and Privacy Legislation (Subcommittee on Health).June 4, 2008 

110–123 Committee Prints on Administration Legislative Proposals on the Animal Drug User 

Fee Act Amendments of 2008 and the Animal Generic Drug User Fee Act of 

2008 (Subcommittee on Health.

June 5, 2008 

110–124 Status of the DTV Transition: 252 Days and Counting (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).June 10, 2008 

110–125 Safety of Phthalates and Bisphenol-A in Everyday Consumer Products (Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection).June 10, 2008 

110–126 American Lives Still at Risk: When Will FDA’s Food Protection Plan Be Fully Funded 

and Implemented? (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).

June 12, 2008 

110–127 H.R. 5533, the ‘‘Chemical Facilities Act of 2008’’, H.R. 5577, the ‘‘Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act of 2008’’ (Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous 

Materials).

June 12, 2008 

110–128 Energy Speculation: Is Greater Regulation Necessary to Stop Price Manipulation? 

Part 2 (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).

June 23, 2008 

110–129 Breeding, Drugs, and Breakdowns: The State of Thoroughbred Horseracing and the 

Welfare of the Thoroughbred Racehorse (Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and 

Consumer Protection).

June 19, 2008 

110–130 Legislative Proposals to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: An Overview (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality).June 19, 2008 

110–131 The Future of Universal Service: To Whom, By Whom, For What, and How Much? 

(Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).

June 24, 2008 

110–132 H.R. 3014, the ‘‘Health Equity and Accountability Act of 2007’’ (Subcommittee on 

Health).

June 24, 2008 

110–133 Climate Change: Costs of Inaction (Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality) ......... June 26, 2008 

110–134 H.R. 6258, The Carbon Capture and Storage Early Deployment Act (Subcommittee 

on Energy and Air Quality).

July 10, 2008 

110–135 Next Steps Toward Permanent Nuclear Waste Disposal (Subcommittee on Energy 

and Air Quality).

July 15, 2008 

110–136 Climate Benefits of Improved Building Energy Efficiency (Subcommittee on Energy 

and Air Quality).

July 17, 2008 

110–137 What Your Broadband Provider Knows About Your Web Use: Deep Packet Inspection 

and Communications Laws and Policies (Subcommittee on Telecommunications 

and the Internet).

July 17, 2008 

110–138 Issues in Telecommunications Competition (Subcommittee on Telecommunications 

and the Internet).

July 22, 2008 

110–139 H.R. 5268, State Fiscal Relief in an Economic Downturn (Subcommittee on Health) July 22, 2008 

110–140 Long-Term Care Insurance: Are Consumers Protected for the Long Term? (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).July 24, 2008 

110–141 Carbon Sequestration: Risks, Opportunities, and Protection of Drinking Water (Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials).July 24, 2008 

110–142 The Recent Salmonella Outbreak: Lessons Learned and Consequences to Industry 

and Public Health (Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).

July 31, 2008 

110–143 H.R. 6594, the ‘‘James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2008’’ (Subcommittee on Health).July 31, 2008 

110–144 NIH Reform Act of 2006: Progress, Challenges, and Next Steps (Subcommittee on 

Health).

September 9, 2008 

110–145 Protecting the Electric Grid from Cyber-Security Threats (Subcommittee on Energy 

and Air Quality).

September 11, 2008 

110–146 Economic and Security Concerns in Tourism and Commerce: H.R. 3232 and H.R. 

1776 (Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection).

September 11, 2008 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
300 

Printed Hearings of the Committee on Energy and Commerce—Continued 

Serial No. Hearing Title Hearing Date(s) 

110–147 H.R. 3402, the ‘‘Calling Card Consumer Protection Act’’ (Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection).

September 16, 2008 

110–148 Status of the DTV Transition: 154 Days and Counting (Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet).

September 16, 2008 

110–149 Science Under Siege: Scientific Integrity at the Environmental Protection Agency 

(Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations).

September 18, 2008 

110–150 America’s Need for Health Reform (Subcommittee on Health) .................................... September 18, 2008 

110–151 Hazardous Substance Releases and Reporting Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and the 

Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA).

September 24, 2008 

110–152 A Review of Continuing Security Concerns at DOE’s National Labs (Subcommittee 

on Oversight and Investigations).

September 25, 2008 

110–153 Treatments for an Ailing Economy: Protecting Health Care Coverage and Investing 

in Biomedical Research (Subcommittee on Health).

November 13, 2008 

PART B 

Committee Prints 

The Committee on Energy and Commerce did not publish any 

committee prints during the 110th Congress. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS