alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 533 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

<DOC>

107th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 533

    Welcoming Madame Chen Wu Sue-jen, the first lady of Taiwan, to 
                            Washington, D.C.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 18, 2002

     Mr. Gilman (for himself, Mr. Lantos, Mr. Rohrabacher, and Mr. 
Faleomavaega) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                the Committee on International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Welcoming Madame Chen Wu Sue-jen, the first lady of Taiwan, to 
                            Washington, D.C.

Whereas Taiwan's First Lady Chen Wu Sue-jen, wife and political partner to her 
        husband President Chen Shui-bian, has been unwaveringly and courageously 
        striving for justice, human rights, and democracy in Taiwan and has 
        herself held a seat in the Legislative Yuan;
Whereas Taiwan is now a model vibrant democracy and one of the top ten trading 
        partners of the United States;
Whereas supporting democracy, human rights, and free market economies has been a 
        longstanding policy of the United States;
Whereas the Government and people in Taiwan have consistently provided 
        tremendous support and generous contributions to the United States after 
        the terrorist attacks against the United States that occurred on 
        September 11, 2001;
Whereas First Lady Chen Wu was one of the main forces behind Taiwan's charity 
        and humanitarian assistance for the victims of the terrorist attacks;
Whereas First Lady Chen Wu will visit the United States beginning on September 
        22, 2002, and will bring with her a strong message from her husband and 
        the people of Taiwan that Taiwan's cooperation with the United States in 
        this joint anti-terrorism campaign will continue and be further 
        strengthened;
Whereas First Lady Chen Wu, on behalf of President Chen Shui-bian, visited 
        France in November 2001 to receive the International Human Rights Award; 
        and
Whereas First Lady Chen Wu, confined to a wheelchair due to a tragic traffic 
        accident during a political campaign, is a strong and effective advocate 
        for Taiwan's physically challenged citizens: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives extends its warmest 
welcome to Taiwan's First Lady Chen Wu Sue-jen during her visit to 
Washington, D.C., in September 2002.
                                 <all>
```
Hillsborough,

June, 1894.

#### Whitten *v.*Stockwell *& a.*

*Sulloway Topliff*and *John FT. Riedell,*for the plaintiff.

*Frank G. Clarke*and *Charles PL. Burns,*for the defendants.

*Per Curiam.****

At the close of the evidence the plaintiff moved to amend his declaration, and the defendants moved for a non-suit. Without passing upon the plaintiff’s motion, the court ordered a nonsuit, which is to be set aside if the plaintiff’s motion should have been granted. It is apparent that the nonsuit was ordered upon the ground that the relation of master and servant, as alleged in the declaration, did not exist between the parties. But the ruling of the court did not amount to a finding that there was no evidence of the defendants’ liability on some other ground. It is inferred from the reported facts that there was evidence of their liability under the rule announced in *King*v. *Railroad,*66 N. Y. 181, which both parties regard as the correct rule, and the plaintiff’s motion should have been-granted.

*Nonsuit set aside.*

Blodgett, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

*

 See foot-note on page 22.
From: mary kopuster

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44 Mandatory Birth Control

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:46:22 PM

To Whom it May Concern,

I object in the strongest of terms to mandating birth control with no co-pays under

the Affordable Care Act.

Birth control is already widely available to all women, subsidized largely by

taxpayers. Demanding that we further subsidize other people's birth control by

increasing our insurance premiums in these days when families are struggling just to

make ends meet is an outrage. 

The mandate violates my conscience and that of millions of Americans who oppose

birth control on moral and religious grounds. 

It is undisputed that one of the operations of contraceptives is to render the

endometrium hostile to implantation, so that if fertilization occurs, the newly

conceived child may be lost to an early abortion. I also strongly object to the

inclusion of free sterilization as well as abortifacient pills like ella, which can work

weeks after a person's biological beginning to cause an abortion.

And what of Catholic employers and others who oppose birth control, but are now

going to be forced to participate in these plans and/or offer it to their employees?

This flies in the face of the conscience protections that Americans have historically

enjoyed.

The conscience provisions attached to the rule are so narrowly crafted that they

would appear to force Catholic institutions to make free birth control and sterilization

available in health plans, or cease hiring and providing services to non-Catholics. 

It is incomprehensible that such a mandate is being forced upon the people of the

United States.

It is no secret that Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion chain in America, is

behind this mandate, and will reap huge financial benefits from it at a time when

citizens in the United States are working on both the state and federal levels to

defund the abortion giant. 

The majority of Americans are pro-life and we do not want our tax dollars and

insurance premiums supporting the nation's largest abortion chain.

It is imperative that you give credence to my personal objection along with those of

millions of other Americans who do not want to be forced to pay for and provide

medication, devices, and procedures that do not treat or prevent any disease or

illness, but distort and render inoperable a healthy reproductive system. This rule is

unjust, untenable, and un-American--and it should be stricken.

Sincerely,

mary kopuster
st peters, Missouri
Page 1 of 2

REC [PY 12-/0

LEGAL PROCESSING DIVISION
PUBLICATION & REGULATIONS
BRANCH

[As of: September 07, 2010

PUBLIC Status: Posted

Posted: September 0”. 2010
SUBMISSION Comments Bue August 36, 2030

Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0010
Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Rules Relating to Status as a Grandfathe-ed
Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Afforable Care Act

Comment On: IRS-2010-0010-0001
Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage: Interim Final Rules for Relating to Status as
a Grandfathered Health Plan under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Document: IRS-2010-0010-0768
Comment on FR Doc # 2010-14488

Submitter Information

Name: Gary Konstant
Address:
Watertown, SD,
Organization: Konstant Chiropractic Clinic

General Comment

August 12, 2010

Below are my comments regarding the Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health
Insurance Coverage Relating to Status as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA).

I believe that every effort should be made to increase the number of individuals covered by
PPACA, especially as of January 1, 2014 when most of the reform components (Insurance
Exchanges, Subsidies, Tax Credits, etc.) come into play.

The average consumer has a broad definition of "benefits." Consumers view their health plan
beyond the covered benefits, cost sharing, and the contribution levels associated with the plan. It
is my opinion that the Rule may still result in some confusion to the marketplace in its
application. For example, if an employer raised the copayment level beyond the maximum in one
area (i.e. outpatient services) but retained the copayment level for primary care doctor visits,
does that mean a loss of grandfather status? Clarity will be critical both for the employer and the
employee.

Even by the most optimistic estimates, a substantial portion of the employee population will
remain outside the PPACA as of January 2014 based on current rules. While I understand the
difficulty involved in making change, creating another large sub-population of excluded
individuals will only add to costs, increase confusion, and mitigate the population impact of the
tegislation.

The Rule needs to be clear, reasonable, and with no ambiguities involved in determining whether
a group health plan is "in or out." The decisions the federal government make today will

https://fdms.erulemaking .net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P..._ 9/7/2010



Page 2 of 2

determine the outcomes for tomorrow. We may need to make some difficult decisions to creete a
sustainable health care system that will support a growing economy in the future. That means
getting as may citizens across the country participating at teh beginning to make it work and
delivering on its promises to retain their support.

Thank you!

Dr. Gary Konstant

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 9/7/2010
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.98 MB)
 
 Dusty Dogs ras Ike Deployment
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Page 1 of 1 '!<£G-) I fj ql:l -/0 

LEGALPROC 

,PUBLICATION~S~~J>IVISION BRANCH LATIONS 
 As of: August 20, 2010 

Received: August 09,2010 

Status: Posted 

Posted: August 20, 2010 

Tracking No. 80b2c6ed 

PUBLIC 

SUBMISSION Comments Due: August 16, 2010 

Submission Type: Web 

Docket: IRS-2010-0010 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Rules Relating to Status as a Grandfathel"ed 

Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Afforable Care Act 

Comment On: IRS-2010-001O-0001 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage: Interim Final Rules for Relating to Status as 

a Grandfathered Health Plan under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

Document: IRS-201O-0010-0266 

Comment on FR Doc # 2010-14488 

____________________________________________________---------1---­

Submitter Information 

Name: Marian - Peterson 

Address: 

54 Goudy St 

South Portland, ME, 04106 

Submitter's Representative: ­

Organization: ­

General Comment 

See attached file(s) 

-------------------------------------------------------------.... 

Attachments 

IRS-2010-0010-0266.1: Comment on FR Doc # 2010-14488 

https:llfdms.erulemaking.netlfdms-web-agency1component/submitter InfoCoverPage ?Call=... 8/20/201 0 
August 9,2010 

Office of Consumer Infonnation and Insurance Oversight 

Department ofHealth and Human Services 

Attention: OCIIO-9991-IFC 

P.O. Box 8016 

Baltimore, MD 21244-1850 

Re: Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Relating to 

Status as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

As a consumer I wish to take this opportunity to fonnally comment on 

the interim final rule regarding health plans and "grandfather" status (Document ID IRS-2010­

0010-0001). 

I believe the consumer protections included as part of the new health care law are vitally 

important and should be extended to as many people as possible. Accordingly, every effort 

should be made to increase the number of individuals covered by the Patient Protection and 

Affordable Care Act (PPACA) via the above regulations. The triggers or conditions that would 

extend these protections to consumers under currently existing "grandfathered" plans should not 

be weakened or reduced in any way. I specifically support the position and detailed comments 

offered by the American Chiropractic Association with respect to the implementation of these 

regulations. 

Marian Peterson 

Portland, Maine 04102 

Tpeters3(g}maine.rr.com
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT LETTER OF JULY 1, 1999



That certain Employment Letter (the "Agreement") dated July 1, 1999 between Alpharma Inc. (the "Company") and Einar W. Sissener (the "Chairman") was amended by recommendation of the Compensation Committee of the Company's Board of Directors at its March 23, 2004 meeting and by action of the Board of Directors at its March 23-24, 2004 meeting. This amendment increased the Chairman's annual Chairman Fee (set forth in paragraph 1 of the Agreement) from $150,000 to $200,000 effective as of March 23, 2004.  All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remained unchanged and in full force and effect.

Please acknowledge this Amendment by executing where indicated below.

ALPHARMA INC.

By:  /s/ Robert F. WrobelRobert F. Wrobel
Secretary

The foregoing accurately reflects my understanding:

By:  /s/ Einar W. SissenerEinar W. Sissener
Chairman
From: Tim Schauf

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44 Mandatory Birth Control

Date: Sunday, August 07, 2011 2:05:46 AM

To Whom it May Concern,

I object in the strongest of terms to mandating birth control with no co-pays under

the Affordable Care Act.

Birth control is already widely available to all women, subsidized largely by

taxpayers. Demanding that we further subsidize other people's birth control by

increasing our insurance premiums in these days when families are struggling just to

make ends meet is an outrage. 

The mandate violates my conscience and that of millions of Americans who oppose

birth control on moral and religious grounds. 

It is undisputed that one of the operations of contraceptives is to render the

endometrium hostile to implantation, so that if fertilization occurs, the newly

conceived child may be lost to an early abortion. I also strongly object to the

inclusion of free sterilization as well as abortifacient pills like ella, which can work

weeks after a person's biological beginning to cause an abortion.

And what of Catholic employers and others who oppose birth control, but are now

going to be forced to participate in these plans and/or offer it to their employees?

This flies in the face of the conscience protections that Americans have historically

enjoyed.

The conscience provisions attached to the rule are so narrowly crafted that they

would appear to force Catholic institutions to make free birth control and sterilization

available in health plans, or cease hiring and providing services to non-Catholics. 

It is incomprehensible that such a mandate is being forced upon the people of the

United States.

It is no secret that Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion chain in America, is

behind this mandate, and will reap huge financial benefits from it at a time when

citizens in the United States are working on both the state and federal levels to

defund the abortion giant. 

The majority of Americans are pro-life and we do not want our tax dollars and

insurance premiums supporting the nation's largest abortion chain.

It is imperative that you give credence to my personal objection along with those of

millions of other Americans who do not want to be forced to pay for and provide

medication, devices, and procedures that do not treat or prevent any disease or

illness, but distort and render inoperable a healthy reproductive system. This rule is

unjust, untenable, and un-American--and it should be stricken.

Sincerely,

Tim Schauf
Fort Worth, Texas
H. Res. 458

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

June 26, 2002.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 4598) to provide for the sharing of homeland

security information by Federal intelligence and law enforcement agencies with State and local entities. The first reading

of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against

consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be

confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour, with 40

minutes equally divided and controlled by the chairman and

ranking minority member of the Permanent Select Committee

on Intelligence and 20 minutes equally divided and controlled

by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary. It shall be in order to consider as

an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the fiveminute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in
2

•HRES 458 EH

the bill. Each section of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. All points of

order against the committee amendment in the nature of a

substitute are waived. During consideration of the bill for

amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole

may accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the

Member offering an amendment has caused it to be printed

in the portion of the Congressional Record designated for

that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as read. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and

report the bill to the House with such amendments as may

have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote

in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee

of the Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in

the nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be

considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to

final passage without intervening motion except one motion

to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
From: ankydoggy@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 12:03:13 AM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you to accept the

recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of preventive care under the

new health care law, and to reject any exemptions for “religious employers.” These preventive

services are a critical element of the new law and would provide countless women better access

to necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women access to

contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all contraceptive services, are

pushing the government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing for

the exemption to apply to religiously-run health providers, so hospitals with religious affiliations

would be exempt from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of all faiths

and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny access to thousands of women just

because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting IOM’s

recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption provisions.
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.31 MB)
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil