cheaptrix/billsum-US_congress_and_house huggingface dataset:
To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to limit Medicare part B premium increases for 2017.

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to limit Medicare part B premium increases for 2017. 1. Limiting Medicare part B premium increases for 2017 (a) In general Section 1839(a) of the Social Security Act ( 42 U.S.C. 1395r(a) (1) in the second sentence of paragraph (1), by striking paragraphs (5) and (6) paragraphs (5), (6), and (7) (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: (7) (A) In applying this part (including subsection (i) and section 1833(b)), subject to subparagraph (B), the monthly premium otherwise determined under this section for an individual for 2017 shall not be increased by more than $4 from the monthly premium determined under this section for the individual for 2016. (B) Nothing in subparagraph (A) shall affect the application of paragraph (6) with respect to a repayment month described in subparagraph (B) of such paragraph. . (b) Conforming funding Section 1844(d)(1) of the Social Security Act ( 42 U.S.C. 1395w(d)(1) (1) by inserting and 2017 2016 (2) by striking such year such respective year (3) by striking section 1839(a)(5)(A) paragraph (5)(A) of section 1839(a) or (7)(A) of such section, respectively,

Summary: This bill amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to limit increases to monthly premiums under Medicare for 2017. Specifically, an individual's monthly premium shall increase by no more than $4 over the individual's monthly premium for 2016.
To amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 to include certain areas in the Central Texas Corridor.

To amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 to include certain areas in the Central Texas Corridor. 1. Central Texas Corridor Section 1105(c)(84) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2032; 112 Stat. 190; 119 Stat. 1213) is amended by adding at the end the following: The Corridor also shall— (A) not include the section of US 190 from I–10 in Pecos County to Brady in McCullough County; (B) include the following routes in the Central Texas Corridor and the I–14 system in Texas— (i) beginning in the vicinity of State Highway 338 in Odessa, Texas, running eastward concurrent with Interstate 20, connecting to State Highway 158 in the vicinity of Midland, Texas, then following State Highway 158 eastward to US 87 and then following US 87 southeastward, passing in the vicinity of San Angelo; and (ii) connecting to US 190 in the vicinity of Brady, Texas; and (C) include US 83 southward from the vicinity of Eden, Texas, to a logical connection to Interstate 10 at Junction, Texas; (D) include US 96 from I–10 at Beaumont, Texas, north to US 84 in the vicinity of Tenaha, Texas; and (E) include US 69 from I–10 at Beaumont north to US 59 in the vicinity of Lufkin, Texas. .

Summary: This bill amends the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 to include the following named areas as part of the high priority Central Texas Corridor of the National Highway System in Texas: certain routes in the Corridor and the I-14 system in Texas, beginning in the vicinity of State Highway 338 in Odessa, Texas, running eastward concurrent with Interstate 20, connecting to State Highway 158 in the vicinity of Midland, Texas, then following State Highway 158 eastward to US 87 and then following US 87 southeastward, passing in the vicinity of San Angelo, and connecting to US 190 in the vicinity of Brady, Texas; US 83 southward from the vicinity of Eden, Texas, to a logical connection to Interstate 10 at Junction, Texas; US 96 from I-10 at Beaumont, Texas, north to US 84 in the vicinity of Tenaha, Texas; and US 69 from I-10 at Beaumont north to US 59 in the vicinity of Lufkin, Texas. The Corridor shall not include the section of US 190 from I-10 in Pecos County to Brady in McCullough County, Texas.
Great Lakes Maritime Heritage Assessment Act

To require the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere to conduct an assessment of cultural and historic resources in the waters of the Great Lakes, and for other purposes. 1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Great Lakes Maritime Heritage Assessment Act 2. Assessment of cultural and historic resources in waters of Great Lakes (a) In general Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere shall— (1) conduct an assessment of cultural and historic resources in the waters of the Great Lakes; and (2) submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives a report on the findings of the Under Secretary with respect to such assessment. (b) Elements The report required by subsection (a)(2) shall include the following: (1) Identification of underwater geographic areas in the Great Lakes that possess historical and archaeological resources of sufficient value and density to make them nationally significant. (2) A description of the historical and archaeological resources in such geographic areas. (3) An evaluation of community interest in preserving and interpreting such resources. (4) A recommendation regarding whether such geographic areas should be designated as national marine sanctuaries to protect resources of historical and archeological significance. (5) Recommendations regarding whether the designation of a network of underwater Great Lakes areas that protect resources of historical and archeological significance, including the existing successful Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary, could bring significant educational opportunities, economic development, jobs, and tourism to the Great Lakes region. (c) Collaboration In carrying out this section, the Under Secretary shall collaborate with local communities.

Summary: Great Lakes Maritime Heritage Assessment Act This bill directs the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)to assess and report on the cultural and historic resources in the waters of the Great Lakes. NOAA must recommend in its report whether: (1) underwater geographic areas in the Great Lakes should be designated as national marine sanctuaries to protect resources of historical and archeological significance; and (2) the designation of a network of underwater Great Lakes areas that protect those resources could bring significant educational opportunities, economic development, jobs, and tourism to the Great Lakes region.
Protect the Flag Act

To render ineligible for Federal funds any institution of higher education that removes, censors, takes down, prohibits, or otherwise halts display of a flag of the United States. 1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Protect the Flag Act 2. Ineligibility for Federal funds (a) In general Federal funds may not be made available to an institution of higher education (as defined in section 102(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 ( 20 U.S.C. 1002(a) (b) Reinstatement of eligibility The prohibition described in subsection (a) shall cease to apply with respect to an institution described in such subsection upon complete and proper reinstatement, by the institution in its official capacity, of the flag of the United States at any and all locations on campus property (including across multiple campuses, if applicable) from which a previously displayed flag of the United States was removed, censored, taken down, prohibited, or otherwise halted from display pursuant to an official policy of the institution to prohibit the display of the flag of the United States by the institution.

Summary: Protect the Flag Act This bill makes an institution of higher education ineligible for federal funds if it has an official policy that prohibits or limits the display of the U.S. flag.
U.S. Insurance Regulation Works Act of 2016

To require that any international insurance standards agreed to by parties representing the United States reflect existing United States laws, regulations, and policies on regulation of insurance, and for other purposes. 1. Short title This Act may be cited as the U.S. Insurance Regulation Works Act of 2016 2. Congressional findings The Congress finds the following: (1) The State-based system for insurance regulation in the United States has served American consumers well for more than 150 years. (2) Protecting policyholders by guaranteeing an insurer’s ability to pay claims has been the hallmark of the successful U.S. system and should be the paramount objective of domestic prudential regulation and emerging international standards. (3) The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act ( Public Law 111–203 3. Requirement that international insurance standards reflect United States policy Before assenting to any international insurance regulatory proposal, including proposals developed by the International Association of Insurance Supervisors, parties representing the Federal Government shall ensure that— (1) the proposal is consistent with and reflective of existing Federal and State laws, regulations, and policies on regulation of insurance, including the primacy of policyholder protection in solvency regulation; and (2) existing Federal and State laws, regulations, and policies on the regulation of insurance would be recognized as satisfying such proposals. 4. State insurance regulator involvement in international standard setting Parties representing the Federal Government in any international regulatory, standard-setting, or supervisory forum or in any negotiations of any international agreements relating to insurance shall, on matters related to insurance, consult with and seek to include in such meetings, State insurance commissioners or their designees.

Summary: U.S. Insurance Regulation Works Act of 2016 This bill requires parties representing the federal government on international insurance regulatory proposals to ensure that any proposals they assent to: are consistent with, and reflective of, existing federal and state insurance laws and regulations, including the primacy of policyholder protection in solvency regulation; and recognize existing federal and state laws and regulations as satisfying such proposals. Federal government representatives must consult with, and seek to include, state insurance commissioners in meetings of any international regulatory, standard-setting, or supervisory forum or in any negotiations of international agreements relating to insurance.
To amend the National Trails System Act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study on the feasibility of designating the Chief Standing Bear National Historic Trail, and for other purposes.

To amend the National Trails System Act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study on the feasibility of designating the Chief Standing Bear National Historic Trail, and for other purposes. 1. Chief Standing Bear National Historic Trail feasibility study Section 5(c) of the National Trails System Act ( 16 U.S.C. 1244(c) (46) Chief standing bear national historic trail (A) In general The Chief Standing Bear Trail, extending approximately 550 miles from Niobrara, Nebraska, to Ponca City, Oklahoma, which follows the route taken by Chief Standing Bear and the Ponca people during Federal Indian removal, and approximately 550 miles from Ponca City, Oklahoma, through Omaha, Nebraska, to Niobrara, Nebraska, which follows the return route taken by Chief Standing Bear and the Ponca people, as generally depicted on the map entitled Chief Standing Bear National Historic Trail Feasibility Study (B) Availability of map The map described in subparagraph (A) shall be on file and available for public inspection in the appropriate offices of the Department of the Interior. (C) Components The feasibility study conducted under subparagraph (A) shall include a determination on whether the Chief Standing Bear Trail meets the criteria described in subsection (b) for designation as a national historic trail. (D) Considerations In conducting the feasibility study under subparagraph (A), the Secretary of the Interior shall consider input from owners of private land within or adjacent to the study area and shall not consider acquiring any land or interest in land outside the exterior boundaries of any federally administered area. (E) Consultation In conducting the feasibility study under subparagraph (A), the Secretary of the Interior shall consult with the Nebraska Natural Resources Districts. .

Summary: This bill amends the National Trails System Act to direct the Department of the Interior to conduct a study on feasibility of designating as a national historic trail the Chief Standing Bear Trail extending approximately 550 miles from Niobrara, Nebraska, to Ponca City, Oklahoma, which follows the route taken by Chief Standing Bear and the Ponca people during federal Indian removal, and approximately 550 miles from Ponca City through Omaha to Niobrara, Nebraska, which follows the return route taken by Chief Standing Bear and the Ponca people. Interior shall consider input from owners of private land within or adjacent to such study area and shall not consider acquiring any land outside the exterior boundaries of any federally administered area.
Perkins Loan Program Inflation Adjustment Act of 2016

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require the Secretary of Education to annually adjust Federal Perkins loan amounts for inflation. 1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Perkins Loan Program Inflation Adjustment Act of 2016 2. Federal Perkins loan amounts adjusted for inflation Section 464(a)(2) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 ( 20 U.S.C. 1087dd(a)(2) (C) With respect to each academic year, the Secretary shall adjust the amounts described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) by the percentage equal to the estimated percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (as determined by the Secretary using the definition in section 478(f)) for the most recent calendar year ending prior to the beginning of that academic year. .

Summary: Perkins Loan Program Inflation Adjustment Act of 2016 This bill amends title IV (Student Assistance) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 to adjust the maximum annual and aggregate amount that a student may borrow under the Federal Perkins Loan program to account for inflation.
American Manufacturing Jobs for Students Act

To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to provide career education pathways in manufacturing. 1. Short title This Act may be cited as the American Manufacturing Jobs for Students Act 2. Career education pathways Section 5421 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 ( 20 U.S.C. 7245 (1) in subsection (a)(2)— (A) by striking and (B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (C) and inserting ; and (C) by adding at the end the following: (D) significantly engage students, in a coordinated effort with local manufacturing employers, teachers, students, and parents, to promote careers in the manufacturing field. ; and (2) in subsection (c)(2)— (A) by striking and (B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (L) and inserting ; and (C) by adding at the end the following: (M) provide students in grades 7 through 12 with— (i) information on career and educational pathways leading to jobs and career opportunities in the labor markets of the geographic area of the local educational agency of the school, particularly in the manufacturing field; and (ii) opportunities for interaction with employers of such labor markets, with preference given to employers in the manufacturing field, including opportunities to visit the workplaces of such employers to facilitate a greater understanding of the job requirements, job opportunities, and what the job entails. .

Summary: American Manufacturing Jobs for Students Act Amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to direct the Secretary of Education, when awarding grants to local educational agencies (LEAs) for school counseling programs, to give special consideration to coordinated efforts to significantly engage students in manufacturing careers. Requires such programs to provide students in grades 7-12 with: (1) information on career and educational pathways leading to jobs and career opportunities in the LEA's geographic area, particularly in the manufacturing field; and (2) opportunities to interact with employers in the LEA's geographic area, with preference given to employers in the manufacturing field.
To clarify the effect of a Memorandum Opinion for the Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, dated September 20, 2011, and pertaining to the lawfulness of proposals by Illinois and New York to use the Internet and out-of-state transaction processors to sell lottery tickets to in-state adults, and for other purposes.

To clarify the effect of a Memorandum Opinion for the Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, dated September 20, 2011, and pertaining to the lawfulness of proposals by Illinois and New York to use the Internet and out-of-state transaction processors to sell lottery tickets to in-state adults, and for other purposes. 1. Memorandum not to have force and effect of law The Memorandum Opinion for the Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, dated September 20, 2011, and pertaining to the lawfulness of proposals by Illinois and New York to use the Internet and out-of-state transaction processors to sell lottery tickets to in-state adults (including the applicability of the Wire Act ( 18 U.S.C. 1084 31 U.S.C. 5361–5367

Summary: This bill declares that the Memorandum Opinion for the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice (dated September 20, 2011) shall have no force or effect for purposes of interpreting the definition of "unlawful Internet gambling" under current federal law. (The memorandum opinion concluded that state proposals to use the Internet and out-of-state vendors to sell lottery tickets to in-state adults did not constitute unlawful Internet gambling.)
Energizing American Maritime Act

To require a certain percentage of LNG and crude oil exports be transported on vessels documented under the laws of the United States, and for other purposes. 1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Energizing American Maritime Act 2. National policy on strategic energy asset export transportation (a) LNG exports (1) Findings Congress finds the following: (A) LNG is an explosive gas that can be hazardous to national import and export terminals and ports when mishandled. (B) LNG is a strategic national asset, the export of which will be used to preserve the United States tanker fleet and skilled mariner workforce that are essential to national security. (C) For the safety and security of the United States, LNG should be exported on vessels documented under the laws of the United States. (2) Requirement Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act ( 15 U.S.C. 717b (g) Transportation of exports of LNG on vessels documented under laws of the United States As a condition for approval of any authorization to export LNG, the Secretary of Energy shall require the applicant to transport the authorized exports on vessels documented under the laws of the United States, as follows: (1) Fifteen percent of the LNG authorized to be exported in each of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024. (2) Thirty percent of the LNG authorized to be exported in 2025 and each year thereafter. . (3) Opportunities for licensed and unlicensed mariners Each Federal official responsible for the issuance of a permit authorizing the export of LNG shall require, as a condition and term of the permit, that the permittee shall provide opportunities for United States licensed and unlicensed mariners to receive experience and training necessary for them to become credentialed in working on an LNG vessel. (b) Crude oil Section 101 of title I of division O of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 ( 42 U.S.C. 6212a (1) in subsection (b), by striking subsections (c) and (d) subsections (c), (d), and (e) (2) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f); and (3) by inserting after subsection (d) the following: (e) Transportation of exports of crude oil on vessels documented under laws of the United States As a condition to export crude oil, the President shall require an applicant to transport the exports on vessels documented under the laws of the United States, as follows: (1) Fifteen percent of the crude oil to be exported in each of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024. (2) Thirty percent of the crude oil to be exported in 2025 and each year thereafter. .

Summary: Energizing American Maritime Act This bill amends: (1) the Natural Gas Act to direct the Department of Energy to require specified percentages of liquefied natural gas exports to be transported on vessels documented under U.S. law, and (2) the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 to direct the President to require specified percentages of crude oil exports to be transported on vessels documented under U.S. law.
End the Backlog Act

To render the amounts authorized to be appropriated for U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for fiscal years 2018 through 2021 contingent upon the amount appropriated for the Executive Office for Immigration Review for fiscal year 2017. 1. Short title This Act may be cited as the End the Backlog Act 2. Findings The Congress finds as follows: (1) Over the last decade, the Department of Homeland Security’s immigration enforcement resources have increased drastically. (2) Combined spending for U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement increased 105 percent from fiscal year 2003 to fiscal year 2016, from $9,100,000,000 to approximately $20,100,000,000. (3) Over the last decade, the Executive Office for Immigration Review’s resources have not increased at the same rate as the rates for U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. (4) Immigration court spending for the Executive Office of Immigration Review increased 74 percent from fiscal year 2003 to fiscal year 2015, from $199,000,000 to $347,200,000. (5) In comparison to other Federal judges with similar responsibilities, immigration judges are expected to process 100 percent more cases with their current resources. (6) Immigration judges processed and adjudicated over 1,400 cases on average in fiscal year 2014 in comparison to 1998, during which immigration judges processed 641 cases. (7) In comparison, Federal judges averaged 566 cases in 2011 and Social Security administrative law judges processed 544 cases and hearings in 2007. (8) As more immigration cases are filed than processed, immigration court backlogs have more than doubled since 2002, with 166,000 cases processed during that fiscal year. (9) The Executive Office for Immigration Review reported 521,676 pending immigration cases as of November 2016. (10) The average removal case as of April 2015 had been pending for 604 days. (11) In July 2016, the Executive Office for Immigration Review announced plans for an increase of 122 immigration judges, bringing the total from 277 to 399. (12) A total of 524 judges is required to eliminate the current backlog and adjudicate incoming cases in a timely manner. 3. Rendering amounts authorized for CBP and ICE for contingent on amount appropriated for EOIR If, for fiscal year 2017, the total amount appropriated for the Executive Office for Immigration Review does not exceed 485,300,000, then, for fiscal year 2018 and each of the 3 succeeding fiscal years, the total amount authorized to be appropriated for— (1) U.S. Customs and Border Protection is $13,219,051; and (2) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is $6,151,579.

Summary: End the Backlog Act This bill requires that if the total amount appropriated for the Executive Office for Immigration Review does not exceed $485.3 million for FY2017, the total amount authorized to be appropriated for FY2018 and each of the three succeeding fiscal years for: (1) U.S. Customs and Border Protection is $13,219,051; and (2) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is $6,151,579.