alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: drbusch@lagrant.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:37:04 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Ruth Busch

Cuba City, WI 53807
No. 400, Misc.

#### Jones *v.*New York.

Court of Appeals of New York. Certiorari denied.
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 127 

Recognizing and celebrating the 50th anniversary of the entry of Alaska 

into the Union as the 49th State. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 5, 2007 

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska submitted the following resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing and celebrating the 50th anniversary of the 

entry of Alaska into the Union as the 49th State. 

Whereas July 7, 2008, marks the 50th anniversary of the enactment of the Alaska Statehood Act as approved by the 

United States Congress and signed by President Dwight 

D. Eisenhower; 

Whereas the Alaska Statehood Act authorized the entry of 

Alaska into the Union on January 3, 1959; 

Whereas the land once known as ‘‘Seward’s Folly’’ is now regarded as critical to the strategic defense of the United 

States and important to our national and economic security; 

Whereas the people of Alaska remain committed to the preservation and protection of the Union, with among the 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 127 IH 

highest rates of veterans and residents in active military 

service of any State in the Nation; 

Whereas Alaska is the northernmost, westernmost, and easternmost State of the Union, encompassing an area onefifth the size of the United States; 

Whereas the State of Alaska has an abundance of natural resources vital to the Nation; 

Whereas Alaska currently provides over 16 percent of the 

daily crude oil production in the United States and has 

44 percent of the undiscovered oil resources and 36 percent of undiscovered conventional gas in the United 

States; 

Whereas Alaska’s 34,000 miles of shoreline form a gateway 

to one of the world’s greatest fisheries, providing over 60 

percent of the country’s commercial seafood harvest; 

Whereas over 230 million acres of Alaska are set aside in national parks, wildlife refuges, national forests, and other 

conservation units for the benefit of the entire country; 

Whereas over 58 million acres are designated wilderness in 

Alaska, representing 55 percent of the wilderness areas 

in the United States; 

Whereas Alaska Natives, the State’s first people, are an integral part of Alaska’s history, and preserving the culture 

and heritage of Alaska’s Native people is of primary importance; 

Whereas the passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement 

Act in 1971 signaled a new era of economic opportunity 

for Alaska Natives; 

Whereas Alaska’s Native people have made major contributions to the vitality and success of Alaska as a State; 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 127 IH 

Whereas the people of Alaska represent the pioneering spirit 

that built this great Nation and contribute to our cultural and ethnic diversity; and 

Whereas the golden anniversary, on January 3, 2009, provides an occasion to honor Alaska’s entry into the Union: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives recog2 nizes and celebrates the 50th anniversary of the entry of 

3 Alaska into the Union as the 49th State. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
From: rollinh32@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:37:58 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Joy Hickcox

North Haven, CT 06473
JUDGMENT

Court of Appeals 

 

First District of Texas 

NO. 01-14-00135-CV

PETER HARDSTEEN, PAULINA MAYBERG HARDSTEEN, AND INTERVENOR 

TEXAS FARM BUREAU, Appellants

V.

DEAN’S CAMPIN’ CO., Appellee

Appeal from the 506th District Court of Grimes County. (Tr. Ct. No. 27885).

This case is an appeal from the final judgment signed by the trial court on January 3, 

2014. After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments properly raised 

by the parties, the Court holds that there was reversible error in the trial court’s judgment in 

the following respect: granting summary judgment to appellee and denying summary 

judgment for appellants. Accordingly, the Court reverses the trial court’s judgment and 

remands the case to the trial court for entry of judgment in the appellants’ favor and a 

determination of costs, if any.

The Court orders that the appellee, Dean’s Campin’ Co., pay all appellate costs.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below for observance.

Judgment rendered April 30, 2015.

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Bland, and Brown. Opinion delivered by Justice Brown.
****Consumer Product Safety Commission**GUIDE TO CPSC INTERNET AND HOTLINE SERVICES**CPSC Document #181**                                    The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is an independent regulatory agency of the United States Government established to protect the public against unreasonable risks ofinjuries and deaths associated with consumer products.  The CPSC has jurisdiction over approximately 15,000 types of consumer products from coffee makers, to toys, to lawn mowers, tofireworks.  Information on CPSC activities can be obtained in a number of ways including the agency's Internet and toll-free Hotline services. **ACCESS THROUGH THE INTERNET**CPSC news releases, public calendar and other information can be obtained via the Internet from the agency's web site.  The web site address is:  www.cpsc.gov Agency staff may be contacted by e-mail.  The E-Mail address is:  info@cpsc.govIf you know the name of the CPSC staff person to whom the messageshould be directed, please include the name at the beginning ofyour message.  **INTERNET E-MAIL SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE**Copies of product recall and product safetyinformation can be sent to you automatically via Internet e-mail,as they are released by CPSC.  To subscribe or unsubscribe to this service go to the following web page:  http://www.cpsc.gov/cpsclist.asp
If you cannot use this on-line form, or have any other problems, please notify the list's manager, mcohn@cpsc.gov.**HOTLINE**     The CPSC's telephone Consumer Hotline can be dialed 24 hourseach day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year.  CPSC Hotline staff areavailable to assist you between the hours of 8:30 am to 5:00 pm,Eastern time, weekdays (excluding Federal holidays).  Prerecordedinformation on product recalls and product safety is available 24hours a day when calling from a "touchtone" telephone.  The Hotline number is: (800) 638-CPSC, that is, (800) 638-2772.Hearing- and speech-impaired callers can use Hotlineservices by dialing the agency's teletypewriter at (800) 638-8270.2/01
**
To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:25:09 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Mike Fimbres

Grants Pass, OR 97526
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

May 22, 2013

t0515

Order 

May 22, 2013

146515

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 146515

COA: 305493

Jackson CC: 10-006210-FH

ANNA MARIE RAND,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 20, 2012 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1198 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1198

             To reauthorize Franchise Fund Pilot Programs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 19, 2001

 Mr. Lieberman (for himself and Mr. Thompson) introduced the following 
      bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                          Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
             To reauthorize Franchise Fund Pilot Programs.

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

SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF FRANCHISE FUND PILOT PROGRAMS.

    Section 403(f) of the Federal Financial Management Act of 1994 (31 
U.S.C. 501 note) is amended by striking ``October 1, 2001'' and 
inserting ``October 1, 2002''.
                                 <all>
```
Adams, Kevin (OST) From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Dear Mr. Strobel, Chuck Howell [chowell@flygreatlakes.com] Monday, August 22, 2011 4:09 PM 'Ken Strobel' 'Doug Voss'; Adams, Kevin (OST); Devany, Dennis (OST) EAS Agreement-DOC letter

Thanks for your call today. 

### l P 2:**l~O**

As discussed in our conversations with you, Great Lakes agrees to provide 1680 annual non-stop departures between Dodge City 

### &Denverfor $1,688,598, thatwould reflectthe balance of monies available to DOT for paymentto Great Lakes by DOT, per our understandings ofyour calculations. Ifthis reflects your understanding of this matter, please acknowledge by return email. Regards, Chuck Howell

1
```

[House Report 107-660]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

107th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     107-660
======================================================================
 
  PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF HOUSE RESOLUTION 524, EXPRESSING THE 
    SENSE OF THE HOUSE THAT CONGRESS SHOULD COMPLETE ACTION ON THE 
   PERMANENT DEATH TAX REPEAL ACT OF 2002 AND HOUSE RESOLUTION 525, 
  EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THAT THE 107TH 
CONGRESS SHOULD COMPLETE ACTION ON AND PRESENT TO THE PRESIDENT, BEFORE 
    SEPTEMBER 30, 2002, LEGISLATION EXTENDING AND STRENGTHENING THE 
                    SUCCESSFUL 1996 WELFARE REFORMS

                                _______
                                

 September 17, 2002.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Hastings of Washington, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 527]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 527, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution provides for consideration of House 
Resolution 524, expressing the sense of the House that Congress 
should complete action on the Permanent Death Tax Repeal Act of 
2002 and House Resolution 525, expressing the sense of the 
House of Representatives that the 107th Congress should 
complete action on and present to the President, before 
September 30, 2002, legislation extending and strengthening the 
successful 1996 welfare reforms, under a closed rule.
    The rule provides that the resolution (H. Res. 524) shall 
be debatable in the House for one hour equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Ways and Means. The rule provides that the 
resolution (H. Res. 524) shall be considered as read for 
amendment.
    The rule provides that the resolution (H. Res. 525) shall 
be debatable in the House for one hour equally divided among 
and controlled by the chairmen and ranking minority members of 
the Committees on Ways and Means and Education and the 
Workforce. Finally, the rule provides that the resolution (H. 
Res. 525) shall be considered as read for amendment.

                                

```
| **Derivative Financial Instruments and Risk Management (Details 3) (USD $)In Billions, unless otherwise specified** | Jun. 30, 2014 | Dec. 31, 2013 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------|---------------|
| **Derivative**                                                                                                      |          |          |
| Derivative instruments, notional amount                                                                             | $ 5.97        | $ 6.74        |

| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Aggregate notional amount specified by the derivative(s). Expressed as an absolute value.
+ References
Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher SEC -Name Regulation S-X (SX) -Number 210 -Article 12 -Section 13 -Sentence Column B
+ Details**Name:**invest_DerivativeNotionalAmount**Namespace Prefix:**invest_**Data Type:**xbrli:monetaryItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**instant |
| X                                                                                                                                                       |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Details**Name:**us-gaap_DerivativeLineItems**Namespace Prefix:**us-gaap_**Data Type:**xbrli:stringItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
From: taevans@buckeye-express.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:22:57 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Ann Evans

Maumee, OH 43537