alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### Proposed Provision: D4. Establish an alternative benefit for a surviving spouse. For the surviving spouse, the alternative benefit would equal 75 percent of the sum of the survivor's own worker benefit and the deceased worker's PIA (including any actuarial reductions or delayed retirement credits). If the deceased worker died before becoming entitled, use the age 62 actuarial reduction if deceased before age 62, or the applicable actuarial reduction/DRC for entitlement at the age of death if deceased after 62. The alternative benefit would not exceed the PIA of a hypothetical earner who earns the SSA average wage index (AWI) every year, and who becomes eligible for retired-worker benefits in the same year in which the deceased worker became entitled to worker benefits or died (if before entitlement). The alternative benefit would be paid only if more than the current-law benefit. This benefit would be available to surviving spouses on the rolls at the beginning of 2025 and those becoming eligible after 2024.
**Exhibit 31.1**

** **

Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification

 

I,Perry A. Glassgow, certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this annualreport on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filedin respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Harley-DavidsonMotorcycle Trust 2007-1 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, theExchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, allof the distribution, servicing and other information required to be providedunder Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in theExchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.     I am responsible forreviewing the activities performed by the servicer and, based on my knowledgeand the compliance reviews conducted in preparing the servicer compliancestatement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and exceptas disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilledits obligations under the servicing agreement; and

 

5.     All of the reports onassessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securitiesand their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance withservicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in thisreport in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

Ingiving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on informationprovided to me by the following unaffiliated party: The Bank of New York TrustCompany, N.A.

 
|                | HARLEY-DAVIDSON  MOTORCYCLE TRUST 2007-1 |
|---------------------|------------------------------------------|
|                |                                     |   |
|                | By:                                      | Harley-Davidson  Credit Corp.,

  as Servicer |
|                |                                     |   |
|                | By:                                      |   /s/ Perry  A. Glassgow |
|                |                                     |   Perry A.  Glassgow |
|                |                                     |   Vice  President, Treasurer, Acting Chief Financial        Officer and Assistant Secretary |
|                |                                     |   |
|                |                                     |   |
| March 28, 2008 |                                     |   |
|                     |                                          |  |  |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3299 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

<DOC>

                                                       Calendar No. 174
117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 3299

 To prohibit the Department of Defense from discharging or withholding 
 pay or benefits from members of the National Guard based on COVID-19 
                          vaccination status.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            December 1, 2021

 Mr. Lankford introduced the following bill; which was read the first 
                                  time

                            December 2, 2021

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit the Department of Defense from discharging or withholding 
 pay or benefits from members of the National Guard based on COVID-19 
                          vaccination status.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON DISCHARGING OR WITHHOLDING PAY OR BENEFITS 
              FROM NATIONAL GUARD MEMBERS BASED ON COVID-19 VACCINATION 
              STATUS.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall not, based on 
whether or not a member of the National Guard has received a COVID-19 
vaccine, take any of the following actions:
            (1) Involuntarily discharge or discipline the member under 
        chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code (the Uniform Code of 
        Military Justice).
            (2) Withhold pay or benefits from the member.
            (3) Prohibit the member from participating in training or 
        using equipment funded by amounts appropriated by an Act of 
        Congress.
    (b) Pay and Benefits Included.--The pay and benefits referred to in 
subsection (a)(2) include the following:
            (1) Basic pay and special pay under title 37, United States 
        Code, or title 10, United States Code.
            (2) Medical and dental care under chapter 55 of title 10, 
        United States Code.
            (3) Transitional health benefits under section 1145 of such 
        title.
            (4) Commissary and exchange benefits under section 1146 of 
        such title.
                                                       Calendar No. 174

117th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                S. 3299

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To prohibit the Department of Defense from discharging or withholding 
 pay or benefits from members of the National Guard based on COVID-19 
                          vaccination status.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            December 2, 2021

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF FLORIDA BANKS, INC. FOR THE THREE MONTH
PERIOD FROM JANUARY 1, 1999 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                      22,041,101
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      12,361,248
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             3,955,999
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 26,781,149
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         738,650
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                     96,131,042
<ALLOWANCE>                                    762,547
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             150,688,999
<DEPOSITS>                                  92,970,214
<SHORT-TERM>                                15,992,449
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                  0
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        58,538
<OTHER-SE>                                  41,667,798
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              41,726,336
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              3,625,447
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              720,494
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               453,979
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             4,799,920
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           1,609,433
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,943,081
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        2,856,839
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  265,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              31,729
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              3,696,779
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (835,238)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    (835,238)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (476,680)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                    298,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                    80,799
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 64,148
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             1,073,346
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  586,558
<RECOVERIES>                                    10,759
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              762,547
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           762,547
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 542 

To limit restrictions on deer hunting within the Kisatchie National Forest. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 6, 2013 

Mr. FLEMING introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To limit restrictions on deer hunting within the Kisatchie 

National Forest. 

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

3 SECTION 1. HUNTING IN KISATCHIE NATIONAL FOREST. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Consistent with the Act of June 

5 4, 1897 (16 U.S.C. 551), the Secretary of Agriculture may 

6 not restrict the use of dogs in deer hunting activities in 

7 Kisatchie National Forest, unless such restrictions— 

8 (1) apply to the smallest practicable portions of 

9 such unit; and 

10 (2) are necessary to reduce or control trespass 

11 onto land adjacent to such unit. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 542 IH

1 (b) PRIOR RESTRICTIONS VOID.—Any restrictions re2 garding the use of dogs in deer hunting activities in 

3 Kisatchie National Forest in force on the date of the en4 actment of this Act shall be void and have no force or 

5 effect. 

6 (c) ADJACENT LANDOWNERS.—Landowners whose 

7 property abuts a unit of the Kisatchie National Forest 

8 may petition the Secretary of Agriculture to restrict the 

9 use of dogs in deer hunting activities that take place on 

10 such units which abut their property. If the Secretary of 

11 Agriculture receives a petition from an adjacent land12 owner, the Secretary, after notice and opportunity for a 

13 hearing, may impose restrictions on the use of dogs in deer 

14 hunting— 

15 (1) limited to those units of the Kisatchie Na16 tional Forest within 300 yards of the boundary of 

17 the petitioning landowner’s property; and 

18 (2) consistent with subsection (a). 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### STATE v. MRS. J. E. HENDERSON.

(Filed 20 November, 1940.)

1. Intoxicating Liquor § 8c—

In this prosecution for illegal possession of intoxicating liquor, the admission of testimony that defendant’s tavern was a public place where people went to dance and eat *is helcL*not to constitute prejudicial error.

3. Criminal Law § 81c—

An excerpt from a portion of the judge’s statement of the State’s contentions will not be held for prejudicial error1 when it is apparent that considering the charge contextually, defendant was not prejudiced thereby.

Appeal by defendant from *Sinle, J.,*at April Term, 1940, of G-astoN.

No error.

*Attorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorneys-General Bruton and Patton for the State.*

*Ernest B. Warren and P. G. Fronéberger for defendant.*

DeviN, J.

The defendant was charged in the bill with the possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale and with unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor under the statute. The State’s evidence tended to show that defendant operated a tavern or road-house known as “Ma’s Tavern”; that the sheriff and his deputies, upon a search of the premises, found 58 pints of whiskey concealed in a trap; that the defend^ ant, who was not present at the time of the search, stated afterwards that “selling a little liquor was the worst thing she ever did.” The defendant offered no evidence. There was general verdict of guilty.

*514Tbe defendant assigns as error tbe ruling of tbe trial judge in permitting a witness to testify that defendant’s tavern was a public place where people went to dance and eat. This does not afford sufficient ground upon wbicb to predicate prejudicial error.

Tbe defendant’s exception to tbe judge’s charge cannot be sustained. Tbe excerpt therefrom, to wbicb exception was noted, was contained in tbe recitation of tbe State’s contentions, and, considered contextually, was insufficient to justify serious complaint. All other exceptions were abandoned. There was evidence sufficient to support tbe verdict, and in tbe trial we find

No error.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3374 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 3374

           To reauthorize the COPS ON THE BEAT grant program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            December 9, 2021

 Ms. Klobuchar (for herself, Ms. Murkowski, and Mr. Coons) introduced 
the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 
                            on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
           To reauthorize the COPS ON THE BEAT grant program.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``COPS Reauthorization Act of 2021''.

SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF COPS ON THE BEAT GRANT PROGRAM.

    Section 1001(a)(11)(A) of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and 
Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10261(a)(11)(A)) is amended by 
striking ``$1,047,119,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2009'' 
and inserting ``$651,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2022 through 
2027''.
                                 <all>
```
### Proposed Provision: E3.15. Increase the taxable maximum such that 90 percent of earnings are subject to the payroll tax (phased in 2024-2033). In addition, apply a tax rate of 6.2 percent for earnings above the revised taxable maximum (phased in from 2024-2033). Provide benefit credit for earnings taxed up to the revised taxable maximum.

back
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3439 

To direct the Secretary of Agriculture to promulgate regulations modifying 

labeling requirements for beef and beef food products. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 4, 2022 

Mr. MARSHALL introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Agriculture to promulgate regulations modifying labeling requirements for beef and beef 

food products. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Bona Fide Beef 

5 Branding Act of 2022’’. 

6 SEC. 2. BEEF LABELING REGULATIONS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the 

8 date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture 

9 shall promulgate regulations that, for beef and beef food 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3439 IS

1 products subject to the requirements of the Federal Meat 

2 Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)— 

3 (1) eliminate the use of the label ‘‘Product of 

4 U.S.A.’’; and 

5 (2) establish, and allow for the voluntary use of, 

6 the labels described in subsection (b). 

7 (b) LABELS.—The labels referred to in subsection 

8 (a)(2) are the following: 

9 (1) PROCESSED IN U.S.A.—The label ‘‘Proc10 essed in U.S.A.’’ means that the beef or beef food 

11 product has undergone substantial transformation in 

12 a facility in the United States subject to inspection 

13 under the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 

14 601 et seq.). 

15 (2) RAISED AND PROCESSED IN U.S.A.—The 

16 label ‘‘Raised and Processed in U.S.A.’’ means that 

17 the live animal that is the source of the beef or beef 

18 food product is raised in the United States for not 

19 less than 100 days before it is processed at a facility 

20 described in paragraph (1). 

21 (3) BORN, RAISED, AND PROCESSED IN

22 U.S.A.—The label ‘‘Born, Raised, and Processed in 

23 U.S.A.’’ means that the live animal that is the 

24 source of the beef or beef food product is born and 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 3439 IS

1 raised in the United States and processed at a facil2 ity described in paragraph (1). 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION OF
PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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

I, Greg H. Guettler, the President of Hypertension Diagnostics, Inc. (the
Company) in compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that, the
Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31,
2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                                                
|------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Greg H. Guettler                            
|                                                
|Greg H. Guettler                                
|Title: President, Hypertension Diagnostics, Inc.
|Dated: February 14, 2003                        

I, James S. Murphy, the Chief Financial Officer of Hypertension Diagnostics,
Inc. (the Company) in compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that
the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31,
2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ James S. Murphy                                           
|                                                              
|James S. Murphy                                               
|Title: Chief Financial Officer, Hypertension Diagnostics, Inc.
|Dated: February 14, 2003                                      

22
## Methodology for Estimates of Provisions that Affect Social          Security

- Office of the Chief Actuary
- Individual Provisions

    The annual Trustees Report provides financial estimates of the Social Security     program under current law. Estimates for the effects of implementing provisions	and proposals (groups of provisions) under the intermediate assumptions of the 	2023 Trustees Report reflect a number of assumptions and methodologies, including	those described below:    
        -  Provisions intended to change the amount of payroll tax income reflect 	   an estimated behavioral response to any change in the taxable maximum or any	   change in the payroll tax rate above or below the taxable maximum.

-  We assume all compensation (other than payroll taxes paid by the employer) 	    would be reduced proportionally to completely offset the increase in payroll 		taxes paid by the employer, for those employees to whose earnings the change 		in payroll tax is attributable. The employer's total compensation cost, 		therefore, is assumed to remain the same.

        -  All rates and summary measures (annual income rate, annual cost rate, 	   annual balance, and the long-range actuarial balance and deficit) for provisions	   and proposals are expressed in terms of taxable payroll under current law. This 	   presentation better illustrates the magnitude of changes in income and cost, thus 	   simplifying the consideration of multiple provisions. Prior to the 2009 Trustees	   Report, the rates and summary measures were expressed in terms of taxable payroll 	   as estimated under the proposal.
#### STATE v. ROBERT S. TREADAWAY.

(Filed 4 March, 1959.)

Criminal Law § 83—

In a prosecwKcm for operating a motor vehicle on a public street while under the influence o-f intoxicating liquor, the exclusion of testimony that the prosecuting witness was biased because interested adversely to defendant in a civil action arising out of the operation of the vehicle by defendant at the time in question, *held*erroneous on authority of *8. v. Bart,*239 N.C. 709.

Appeal by defendant from *Burgwyn, Emergency Judge,*September Criminal Term 1958 of Gaston.

The defendant was tried upon a warrant in the Municipal Court of the City of Gastonia, charging him with operating a motor vehicle upon the public streets of the City of Gastonia on 5 April 1958, while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. He was found guilty and upon the sentence imposed appealed to the Superior Court, where he was tried *de novo*on the original warrant.

The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and from the fine imposed the defendant appeals, assigning error.

*Attorney General Seawell, Assistant Attorney General Bruton, for the State.*

*Childers & Fowler for defendant.*

Per Curiam.

The defendant assigns as error the refusal of the court below to admit testimony tending to show that the prosecuting witness, Peter J. Mandamis, was biased against the defendant or was interested adversely to him in that he is claiming damages as a result of injuries sustained when the defendant ran into his automobile on the occasion he is charged with driving a motor vehicle upon the public streets of Gastonia while under the influence of intoxicating liquor

*658We think the exclusion of this evidence was erroneous. Therefore, the defendant is entitled to a new trial and it is so ordered on authority of *S. v. Hart,*239 N.C. 709, 80 S.E. 2d 901.

New Trial.