alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Call to End Renewed Violence in Eastern DRC

# 									Call to End Renewed Violence in Eastern DRC							

Press Statement

Ned Price, Department Spokesperson

October 31, 2022

The United States strongly condemns the resumption of fighting by the March 23 Movement (M23) armed group in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).  The resumption of hostilities since October 20 has caused significant human suffering, including deaths and injuries among civilians and significant numbers of newly displaced persons. 

The United States calls for an immediate cessation of hostilities and respect for human rights and international humanitarian law.  We call for the U.S.- and UN-sanctioned M23 armed group to withdraw from its positions, disarm, and rejoin the Inter-Congolese dialogue (Nairobi process) in preparation for disarmament, demobilization, and community reintegration offered by the Government of the DRC. We call on all actors in the region to stop any support or cooperation with M23 or other non-state armed groups.  We remain deeply alarmed by the increase in hate speech and urge a halt to violent rhetoric.  We also reiterate that involvement in planning, directing, sponsoring or conducting attacks against UN peacekeepers constitutes a basis for sanctions designations pursuant to United Nations Security Council resolutions.

We urge an  immediate resumption of the Nairobi Process and of the Luanda trilateral mediation process to find a lasting resolution.  All state parties of the East African Community (EAC) and the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR) must uphold the principles agreed through the East African Heads of State Conclave and the Luanda mediation Process. Finally, we express our strong support for the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the DRC.

Tags

AfricaAngolaDemocratic Republic of the CongoHuman Rights and DemocracyKenyaOffice of the SpokespersonUnited Nations

Back to Top
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**1125 KA 10-01928**  PRESENT: FAHEY, J.P., CARNI, SCONIERS, GORSKI, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V ORDER
SHAWN M. MUNT, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

DAVID J. FARRUGIA, PUBLIC DEFENDER, LOCKPORT (MARY-JEAN BOWMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
MICHAEL J. VIOLANTE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LOCKPORT (THOMAS H. BRANDT OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Niagara County Court (Sara S. Sperrazza, J.), rendered September 3, 2010. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of burglary in the third degree and criminal contempt in the second degree.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed ( see People v Lococo , 92 NY2d 825, 827).

Entered: November 10, 2011 Patricia L. Morgan Clerk of the Court
#### § 583.310 Person.

The term *person* means an individual or entity.
IIA

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 2685

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 13, 1996

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

AN ACT

To repeal the Medicare and Medicaid Coverage Data Bank.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 2685 RFS

1 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF MEDICARE AND MEDICAID

2 COVERAGE DATA BANK.

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1144 of the Social

4 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320b–14), as added by section

5 13581(a) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of

6 1993 (in this section referred to as ‘‘OBRA–93’’), is re7 pealed.

8 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—

9 (1) MEDICARE.—Section 1862(b)(5) of such

10 Act (42 U.S.C. 1395y(b)(5)), as amended by section

11 13581(b)(1) of OBRA–93, is amended—

12 (A) in subparagraph (B), by striking the

13 dash and all that follows through the end and

14 inserting ‘‘subparagraph (A) for purposes of

15 carrying out this subsection.’’, and

16 (B) in subparagraph (C)(i), by striking

17 ‘‘subparagraph (B)(i)’’ and inserting ‘‘subpara18 graph (B)’’.

19 (2) MEDICAID.—Section 1902(a)(25)(A)(i) of

20 such Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)(25)(A)(i)), as amend21 ed by section 13581(b)(2) of OBRA–93, is amended

22 by striking ‘‘including the use of’’ and all that

23 follows through ‘‘any additional measures’’.

24 (3) DATA MATCHES.—Section 552a(a)(8)(B) of

25 title 5, United States Code, as amended by section

26 13581(c) of OBRA–93, is amended—
3

HR 2685 RFS

1 (A) by adding ‘‘or’’ at the end of clause

2 (v),

3 (B) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of clause

4 (vi), and

5 (C) by striking clause (vii).

Passed the House of Representatives March 12,

1996.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Botswana National Day

# 									Botswana National Day							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

September 30, 2021

On behalf of the United States, I congratulate all Batswana on the 55th anniversary of your country’s independence.

This occasion presents an opportunity to reflect on our values and to recommit ourselves to building a better future for all.  The United States greatly values our enduring friendship with Botswana and our shared commitment to democracy and human rights.  We also commend Botswana for its constructive role in promoting regional peace and stability through the Southern African Development Community.

As we continue to jointly battle the devastating impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, we are building on a strong foundation developed over two decades of partnership to fight HIV/AIDS and strengthen global health security.  Our bonds will grow deeper as we urgently address the climate crisis, and we are committed to working with Botswana to advance the Mega Solar project that will reduce dependence on fossil fuels and transform Botswana’s energy sector.

In the spirit of friendship, partnership, and cooperation, we send best wishes on this important day.

Tags

BotswanaBureau of African AffairsOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
CEHR-E

Engineer Pamphlet

690-1-11(RP)

Department of the Army

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Washington, DC 20314-1000

EP 690-1-11(RP)

25 May 1993

Command-wide Recruitment and 

Outreach Materials

MISSION AREA SUPPLEMENT -

RECREATION AND PARK MANAGEMENT

Distribution Restriction Statement

Approved for public release; distribution is 

unlimited.
HomeDiplomatic Security Service Memorial...Andrew Adamu

# 				Andrew Adamu			

				Local Law Enforcement			

Deceased				May 16, 2023			

Nigerian Police Force Inspector Andrew Adamu was killed when gunmen attacked a U.S. diplomatic convoy in southeast Nigeria’s Anambra State, May 16, 2023.

Tags

Diplomatic Security Service MemorialNigeria

Back to Top
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

#### § 337.14 Address for further information.

Further information regarding the issuance of, transactions in, and redemption of, FHA debentures may be obtained from the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, Office of Fiscal Service Accounting, 200 Third Street, P.O. Box 396, Parkersburg, West Virginia 26102-0396.

[66 FR 56432, Nov. 8, 2001]
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

ARSENIO GARCIA-CRUZ,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 13-10174

D.C. No. 4:12-cr-50231-DCB

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 25, 2014** 

Before: HAWKINS, TALLMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Arsenio Garcia-Cruz appeals from the revocation of supervised release and

six-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967), Garcia-Cruz’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are

no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We

FILED

JUN 27 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
have provided Garcia-Cruz the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No

pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. 

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.

75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal. 

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.

 

2 13-10174
en

:;

-no

'■

I)

/f

**

JtS

~r

3</

CcsuUW, -' I/?

,-t>

SS'S

_._„[__
•■ '■ ,■• '" ": :■'■.
A._

7~O

^£

.•

<£<z<z£*=5>j.

.^/%-&
■• •„

'-■■•- '■

■•. ,. ''•■.. *■■
^vs^-jr**.

j/jU*Ji£0±lJ[*^<*? J2>*.,

^.^

P^

-.<?jh4-~t--/J-&C*-p.*Jt4/C-.l J&. J^A/~Q>4a&*--S!%*r-S?''

&_

£2-

^^

-srvs^t- yp
V." ..

. * h« .:

...
•-^.*0*^K^O_^

(9)
-•• -?•;,. .■-
,^_#

(P

^'.-


1-

i#

*■- N.

•.

• - «.
#### Normar Products, Inc., v. Friedman

*Reynolds, Reynolds & Doran,*for plaintiff.

*David Yelen,*for defendant.

May 5, 1954.

Flannery, J.,

Rule was granted on plaintiff, a foreign corporation, to show cause why it should not give security for costs as provided by our local rules of court, rule 9 (2) (/), which is as follows:

> “The defendant in any case, upon filing an affidavit of defense, may petition for a rule on plaintiff to give security for costs. After argument, the Court may require security and upon default enter non-suit.”

Suit was started, was heard by a board of arbitrators, an award for' plaintiff was made, an appeal was taken, and this rule was then obtained.

Plaintiff resists on the theory that it comes too late.

There is no appellate authority, and the lower courts in deciding the question have held that depending on the rule of court to. be applied, the decision is one for the exercise of sound discretion by the court. .

The time element alone is not decisive.

> “. . . On the other hand, there are many cases holding that it is never too late to take a rule for security for costs - where it will not delay thé trial”: 15 Standard Pa. Practice 543, §133.

*763Even after the ease has been tried and the jury disagreed, it has been held that security for costs may be required: Knoll v. Philadelphia Traction Co., 42 W. N. C. 232.

Where a rule of court authorizes security for costs the consensus of opinion holds that if the application is made in good faith, is not a deliberate attempt to delay justice and causes no inequitable inconvenience to plaintiff, the request for security will be granted: Jeanes v. Fellows, 46 D. & C. 649.

We believe this is such a case and, therefore, rule absolute.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                             CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
                            TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Delphi Financial Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned officers of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

/s/ ROBERT ROSENKRANZ
------------------------------------------

Robert Rosenkranz
Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer

/s/  THOMAS W. BURGHART
------------------------------------------

Thomas W. Burghart
Vice President and Treasurer

November 8, 2004
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

MARIANNE ARCHAMBO

, *

* No. 12

- 291V

Petitioner, * Special Master Christian J. Moran

*

v. * Filed: May 13 , 2013

*

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Attorneys’ fees and costs; stipulation of

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * fact s ; award in the amount to which

* respondent has not objected

Respondent. *

*

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Dennis Woody, Woody & Falkenbach, Media, PA , for Petitioner;

Jennifer L. Reynaud , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

UNPUBLISHED DECISION ON FEES AND COSTS 1

Petitioner, Marianne Archambo

, filed a stipulation of fact s concerning final attorneys’

fees and costs in the above

- captioned matter on May 2 , 2013 . Previously, Ms. Arachambo

informally submitted a draft application for attorneys’ fees and costs to respondent for review.

Upon review of petitioner’s application, respondent raised objections to certain items. Based on

subsequent discussions, petitioner amended her application to request $ 41,590.76 , an amount to

which respondent does not object

. The Court awards this amount

.

On May 7, 2012, M s. Arachambo filed for compensation alleging that she was injured by

the influenza vaccine she received. Ms. Arachambo received compensation based upon the

parties’ stipulation. Decision , filed April 29, 2013 . Because Ms. Arachambo received

compensation, she is entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and costs. 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 15(e).

Ms. Arachambo seeks a total of $ 41,590.76 in attorneys’ fees and costs for her counsel.

I n compliance with General Order No. 9, Ms. Arachambo fi led a statement on May 10, 2013

indicating that she incurred no out

- of

- pocket litigation expenses while pursuing this claim.

Respondent has no objection to th e amount requested for attorneys’ fees and costs.

1 T he E

- Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107

- 347, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (Dec. 17,

2002), requires that the Court post this decision on its website. Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 18(b),

the parties have 14 days to file a motion proposing redaction of medical inf ormation or other

information described in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 12(d)(4). Any redactions ordered by the special

master will appear in the document posted on the website.2

After reviewing the request, the court award s a check made payable to petitioner and

petitioner’s attorney in the amount of $ 41,590.76 for attorneys’ fees and other litigation costs.

The court thanks the parties for their cooperative efforts in resolving this matter.

The Clerk shall enter judgme nt accordingly. 2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Christian J. Moran

Christian J. Moran

Special Master

2 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties can expedite entry of judgment by each pa rty filing

a notice renouncing the right to seek review by a United States Court of Federal Claims judge.
CHORUS: 

# c. C:r .. ' We have the power to make this, the greatest generation, 

## ' Orwe have the powerto make this generation the last. 

# c & L 

## "f So ifwe wanna survive, gonna have to struggle and strive, 

### • (,-, I C And we're gonna have to fight the powers ofthe past. Verse 1: 

## ,,**-~** 

### f\' I'm talkin' about carbon, I'mtalkin' about fossil fuels, 

## (- f 

# c I'm talkin' about CEOs who manipulate the rules, 

# r & c Av---, I'm talkin' about money, put before the good of us all, 

# /...· t ( These are the'p'owers, that will lead us to ourfall. CHORUS Verse 2: '\ ' 

## I

. Cause the waters are rising, and the forests are burning down, And the twisters are taking, whole damn towns, 1 (.**l·r-~** C' ' And we know how to stop this, but the question is ifwe will, 

# c**(~­** \ .. We gotta get a move on, we got no time to kill. CHORUS Verse 3: 

# I , There's a future a waitin, there's a future that we can make, I' 

### (

... 

## l We have the powerofpeople, with a vision to create, 

# /, Another world, built on wisdom, hope, and love, 

### (. 

### ( ' Another world, built on thejustice from above. CHORUS
§ 584.204 Expenses of maintaining blocked physical property; liquidation of blocked property. ( a ) Except as otherwise authorized, and notwithstanding the existence of any rights or obligations conferred or imposed by any international agreement or contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date, all expenses incident to the maintenance of physical property blocked pursuant to § 584.201(a) shall be the responsibility of the owners or operators of such property, which expenses shall not be met from blocked funds.
( b ) Property blocked pursuant to § 584.201(a) may, in the discretion of OFAC, be sold or liquidated and the net proceeds placed in a blocked interest-bearing account in the name of the owner of the property.
§ 570.518 Transactions related to the provision of agricultural commodities, medicine, medical devices, replacement parts and components, or software updates for personal, non-commercial use. ( a ) All transactions prohibited by this part that are related to the provision, directly or indirectly, of agricultural commodities, medicine, medical devices, replacement parts and components for medical devices, or software updates for medical devices to an individual whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this part are authorized, provided the items are in quantities consistent with personal, non-commercial use.
( b ) For the purposes of this section, agricultural commodities, medicine, and medical devices are defined as follows: ( 1 ) *Agricultural commodities.* For the purposes of this section, agricultural commodities are: ( i ) Products that fall within the term “agricultural commodity” as defined in section 102 of the Agricultural Trade Act of 1978 (7 U.S.C. 5602); and
( ii ) That are intended for ultimate use as: ( A ) Food for humans (including raw, processed, and packaged foods; live animals; vitamins and minerals; food additives or supplements; and bottled drinking water) or animals (including animal feeds);
( B ) Seeds for food crops;
( C ) Fertilizers or organic fertilizers; or
( D ) Reproductive materials (such as live animals, fertilized eggs, embryos, and semen) for the production of food animals.
( 2 ) *Medicine.* For the purposes of this section, medicine is an item that falls within the definition of the term “drug” in section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321).
( 3 ) *Medical devices.* For the purposes of this section, a medical device is an item that falls within the definition of “device” in section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321).
Note 1 to § 570.518 .
This section does not relieve any person authorized thereunder from complying with any other applicable laws or regulations.
[87 FR 78497, Dec. 21, 2022]
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

ERCELY WAYNE COLEMAN a/k/a WAYNE COLEMAN, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee.

No. 4D 20

- 864

[ June 18, 2020 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.8 0 0 motion from the Circuit Court for the Seven t eenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Mariya Weekes

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 90

- 005417

- CF

- 10 A

.
Ercely Wayne Coleman

, Florida City, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee

.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed

.

L EVINE , C.J.

, M AY and D AMOORGIAN , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 6 A0 73 6 . DAVI S v . THE STATE.

Th i s ap p eal wa s d o c k et ed o n Decem ber 2 2

, 2 0 1 5

. On J an u ary 19

, 2 0 1 6

, t h i s

Co u rt o rd ered ap p el lan t t o fi le h i s b ri ef an d en um erat io n o f erro rs wi t h i n 1 0 d ay s.

As of t h e d a t e o f t h i s o rd er, ap p el l an t has fai l ed t o fi l e t h e b ri ef an d

en u m erat i o n o f erro rs

. Th erefo re, t h i s ap p eal i s DISM ISSED. See Co u rt o f Ap p eal s

Ru l es 1 3 an d 2 3 (a).

TO THE DEFENDANT: Yo u r ap p eal h as b een DISM ISSED b ec a u s e yo u r

at t o rn ey fai l ed t o fi le a b ri ef an d en u m erat i o n o f erro rs . If y o u h av e d eci d ed y o u d o

n o t wan t t o ap peal

, y o u n eed n o t d o an y t h i ng m o re. Ho w ev er, if y o u s t i l l wan t to

ap p eal

, y o u m ay h av e t h e ri gh t t o an OUT-OF TIM E APPEAL

- b u t Y OU M UST

TAKE ACTION to ex erci se t h at ri g h t b y m o vi n g fo r an o u t-o f-t i m e ap p eal i n t h e t ri al

co u rt

. If yo u r m o t i o n fo r an o u t -o f-t i m e ap p eal i s g ran ted

, th e tri al co u rt s h o u ld

ap p oi n t an ot h er at t orn ey fo r y o u i f y o u wan t o n e an d can n o t p ay fo r o n e. If y o u r

m o ti o n fo r an o ut -o f-t i m e ap p eal i s d en i ed y ou m ay ap p eal th a t d en i al t o th i s co u rt

wi t h i n t h i rt y (3 0 ) d ay s o f t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n. February 12, 2016C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e

, A t la n t a

,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a tr u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 02/12/2016
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 26 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 H. R. 26

  To provide for return of excess amounts from official allowances of 
  Members of the House of Representatives to the Treasury for deficit 
                               reduction.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

  Mr. Roemer (for himself, Mr. Dickey, Mr. McHale, Mr. Hoekstra, Mr. 
 Hayes, Mr. Parker, Mr. Skelton, Mr. Goss, Mr. Taylor of Mississippi, 
 Mr. McHugh, Mr. Holden, Mr. Bentsen, Mr. Jacobs, Ms. Furse, Mr. Brown 
of California, Ms. Slaughter, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Poshard, Mr. Upton, Mr. 
 Pomeroy, Mr. Andrews, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Barrett of Wisconsin, and  Ms. 
   Kaptur) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on House Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To provide for return of excess amounts from official allowances of 
  Members of the House of Representatives to the Treasury for deficit 
                               reduction.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. RETURN OF EXCESS AMOUNTS FROM OFFICIAL ALLOWANCES OF MEMBERS 
              OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO THE TREASURY FOR 
              DEFICIT REDUCTION.

        Notwithstanding any other law, or any rule or other authority, 
any amount remaining in an official allowance of a Member of the House 
of Representatives at the end of the session of Congress or other 
period for which the allowance is made available shall be returned to 
the Treasury, to be used for deficit reduction.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

        As used in this Act--
            (1) the term ``Member of the House of Representatives'' 
        means a Representative in, or a Delegate or Resident 
        Commissioner to, the Congress; and
            (2) the term ``official allowance'' means, with respect to 
        a Member of the House of Representatives, the Clerk Hire 
        Allowance, the Official Expenses Allowance, or the Official 
        Mail Allowance.
                                 <all>
```