datamatters24/research-document-archive huggingface dataset:
I
105TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 1675
To require the Secretary of the Air Force to conduct a study to identify
Air Force property suitable for exchange to acquire land authorized
for addition to Shaw Air Force Base in the State of South Carolina.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MAY 20, 1997
Mr. SPRATT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on National Security
A BILL
To require the Secretary of the Air Force to conduct a
study to identify Air Force property suitable for ex-
change to acquire land authorized for addition to Shaw
Air Force Base in the State of South Carolina.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. STUDY OF LAND EXCHANGE OPTIONS, SHAW
AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH CAROLINA.
Section 2874 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104–106; 110 Stat.
583) is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
‘‘(g) STUDY OF EXCHANGE OPTIONS.—To facilitate
the use of a land exchange to acquire the real property
described in subsection (a), the Secretary of the Air Force
shall conduct a study to identify real property in the pos-
session of the Air Force (located in the State of South
Carolina or elsewhere) that satisfies the requirements of
subsection (b)(2), is acceptable to the party holding the
property to be acquired, and is otherwise suitable for ex-
change under this section. Not later than three months
after the date of the enactment of this subsection, the Sec-
retary shall submit to Congress a report containing the
results of the study.’’.
Æ
I
105TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 1676
To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide for the competitive selection
of lessees when a military department leases certain nonexcess personal
property and to ensure that the Government obtains fair market value
for the property.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MAY 20, 1997
Mr. SPRATT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on National Security
A BILL
To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide for the
competitive selection of lessees when a military depart-
ment leases certain nonexcess personal property and to
ensure that the Government obtains fair market value
for the property.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. LEASE OF NON-EXCESS PROPERTY OF THE
MILITARY DEPARTMENTS.
(a) RECEIPT OF FAIR MARKET VALUE.—Subsection
(b)(4) of section 2667 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by striking out ‘‘, in the case of the lease of real
property,’’.
(b) COMPETITIVE SELECTION.—Such section is fur-
ther amended—
(1) by redesignating subsection (g) as sub-
section (h); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (f) the follow-
ing new subsection:
‘‘(g) If a proposed lease under subsection (a) involves
only personal property, the lease term exceeds one year,
and the fair market value of the lease interest exceeds
$100,000, as determined by the Secretary concerned, the
Secretary shall use competitive procedures to select the
lessee.’’.
Æ
I 
114TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 3434 
To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act with respect to the 
guidelines for specification of certain disposal sites for dredged or fill material. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
JULY 31, 2015 
Mr. HURT of Virginia (for himself, Mrs. KIRKPATRICK, Mr. GRIFFITH, Mr. 
FORBES, Mrs. COMSTOCK, and Mr. HANNA) introduced the following bill; 
which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastruc-
ture 
A BILL 
To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act with 
respect to the guidelines for specification of certain dis-
posal sites for dredged or fill material. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Commonsense Permit-
ting for Job Creation Act of 2015’’. 
SEC. 2. GUIDELINES FOR SPECIFICATION OF CERTAIN DIS-
POSAL SITES. 
Section 404(b) of the Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act (33 U.S.C. 1344(b)) is amended by adding at the 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
20:13 Aug 10, 2015
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3434.IH
H3434
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR EMPLOYEES PARTICIPATING IN QUALI-
FIED APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Subpart D of part IV of sub-
chapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new 
section: 
‘‘SEC. 45S. EMPLOYEES PARTICIPATING IN QUALIFIED AP-
PRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS. 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of section 38, the 
apprenticeship credit determined under this section for the 
taxable year is an amount equal to the sum of the applica-
ble credit amounts (as determined under subsection (b)) 
for each apprentice of the employer that exceeds the appli-
cable apprenticeship level (as determined under subsection 
(e)) during such taxable year. 
‘‘(b) APPLICABLE CREDIT AMOUNT.—For purposes 
of subsection (a), the applicable credit amount for each 
apprentice for each taxable year is equal to— 
‘‘(1) in the case of an apprentice who has not 
attained 25 years of age at the close of the taxable 
year, $1,500, or 
‘‘(2) in the case of an apprentice who has at-
tained 25 years of age at the close of the taxable 
year, $1,000. 
‘‘(c) LIMITATION ON NUMBER OF YEARS WHICH 
CREDIT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.—The appren-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
20:13 Aug 10, 2015
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3435.IH
H3435
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
end the following new sentence: ‘‘Such guidelines may not 
prohibit the specification of a site due to the lack of a 
final site plan resulting from the lack of an identified end 
user or industry or industrial classification for the site 
when determining whether there is a practicable alter-
native to a proposed discharge that would result in less 
adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem.’’. 
Æ 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
20:13 Aug 10, 2015
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\H3434.IH
H3434
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
I
105TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 1677
To suspend temporarily the duty on certain chemicals.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MAY 20, 1997
Mr. SPRATT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on Ways and Means
A BILL
To suspend temporarily the duty on certain chemicals.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY.
(a) CAPROLACTAM BLOCKED METHYLENE.—Sub-
chapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tariff Sched-
ule of the United States is amended by inserting in numer-
ical sequence the following new heading:
‘‘
9902.34.02
Caprolactam blocked methyl-
ene-bis-(4-phenylisocyanate)
(CAS No. 54112–23–1) (pro-
vided for in subheading
3402.90.30) ...........................
Free
No change
No change
On or before
12/31/2000
’’.
(b) BETA HYDROXYALKYLAMIDE.—Subchapter II of
chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the Unit-
ed States is amended by inserting in numerical sequence
the following new heading:
‘‘
9902.38.24
N,N,N1,N1-tetrakis (2-
hydroxyethyl)-heaxane
diamide (Beta
Hydroxyalkylamide) (CAS
No. 6334–25–4) (provided for
in subheading 3824.90.90) ....
Free
No change
No change
On or before
12/31/2000
’’.
(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by
this section applies to articles entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after
the date of the enactment of this Act.
Æ
I
105TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 1678
To suspend temporarily the duty on Para ethyl phenol (PEP).
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MAY 20, 1997
Mr. SPRATT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on Ways and Means
A BILL
To suspend temporarily the duty on Para ethyl phenol
(PEP).
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PARA ETHYL PHENOL.
Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tar-
iff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting
in numerical sequence the following new heading:
‘‘
9902.31.12
Para ethyl phenol (pro-
vided for in subheading
2907.19.20) .................
Free
No change
No change
On or before
12/31/2000
’’.
SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The amendment made by section 1 shall apply to
goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consump-
tion, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enact-
ment of this Act.
Æ
I 
114TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 3436 
To provide discretionary authority to an immigration judge to determine 
that an alien parent of a United States citizen child should not be 
ordered removed, deported, or excluded from the United States. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
JULY 31, 2015 
Mr. SERRANO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on the Judiciary 
A BILL 
To provide discretionary authority to an immigration judge 
to determine that an alien parent of a United States 
citizen child should not be ordered removed, deported, 
or excluded from the United States. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT 
TO REMOVAL, DEPORTATION, OR EXCLUSION 
OF PARENTS OF CITIZEN CHILDREN. 
Section 240(c)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act (8 U.S.C. 1229a(c)(4)) is amended by adding at the 
end the following: 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
20:13 Aug 10, 2015
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3436.IH
H3436
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
‘‘(D) DISCRETION OF JUDGE IN CASE OF 
CITIZEN CHILD.—In the case of an alien subject 
to removal, deportation, or exclusion who is the 
parent of a child who is a citizen of the United 
States, the immigration judge may exercise dis-
cretion to decline to order the alien removed, 
deported or excluded from the United States if 
the judge determines that such removal, depor-
tation, or exclusion is clearly against the best 
interests of the child, except that this subpara-
graph shall not apply to any alien who the 
judge determines— 
‘‘(i) is described in section 212(a)(3) 
or 237(a)(4); or 
‘‘(ii) has engaged in conduct described 
in paragraph (8) or (9) of section 103 of 
the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 
2000 (22 U.S.C. 7102).’’. 
Æ 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
20:13 Aug 10, 2015
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\H3436.IH
H3436
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
for purposes of this section as having made
such election,
then such election shall be valid with respect to
both such individuals but only the individual so
specified shall be treated for purposes of sub-
paragraph (A) as having made such election.’’
(b) INCREASE
IN MAXIMUM EXCLUSION WHERE
BOTH HUSBAND AND WIFE MAKE ELECTION FOR SAME
RESIDENCE.—Paragraph (1) of section 121(b) of such
Code (relating to dollar limitation) is amended to read as
follows:
‘‘(1) DOLLAR LIMITATION.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as otherwise
provided in this paragraph, the amount of the
gain excluded from gross income under sub-
section (a) shall not exceed $125,000.
‘‘(B) $250,000 LIMITATION FOR CERTAIN
MARRIED
INDIVIDUALS
FILING
JOINT
RE-
TURN.—In the case of a joint return of a hus-
band and wife each of whom—
‘‘(i) without regard to subsection
(d)(1) satisfies the age, holding, and use
requirements of subsection (a) with respect
to the property, and
part) under subsection (b) of section 1033 (relating
to basis of property acquired through involuntary
conversion), then the holding and use by the tax-
payer of the converted property shall be treated as
holding and use by the taxpayer of the property sold
or exchanged.
‘‘(9) DETERMINATION OF USE DURING PERIODS
OF OUT-OF-RESIDENCE CARE.—In the case of a tax-
payer who—
‘‘(A) becomes physically or mentally in-
capable of self-care, and
‘‘(B) owns property and uses such property
as the taxpayer’s principal residence during the
5-year period described in subsection (a) for pe-
riods aggregating at least 1 year,
then the taxpayer shall be treated as using such
property as the taxpayer’s principal residence during
any time during such 5-year period in which the tax-
payer owns the property and resides in any facility
(including a nursing home) licensed by a State or
political subdivision to care for an individual in the
taxpayer’s condition.
‘‘(d) ELECTION TO HAVE SECTION NOT APPLY.—
At the election of the taxpayer with respect to any sale
ards, requiring product labeling, facilitating the de-
velopment of low emission products, coordinating 
Federal noise reduction programs, assisting State 
and local abatement efforts, and promoting noise 
education and research. However, funding for the 
Office of Noise Abatement and Control was termi-
nated in 1982 and no funds have been provided 
since. 
(6) Because the Environmental Protection 
Agency remains legally responsible for enforcing reg-
ulations issued under the Noise Control Act of 1972 
even though funding for these activities were termi-
nated, and because the Noise Control Act of 1972 
prohibits State and local governments from regu-
lating noise sources in many situations, noise abate-
ment programs across the country lie dormant. 
(7) As population growth and air and vehicular 
traffic continue to increase, noise pollution is likely 
to become an even greater problem in the future. 
The health and welfare of our citizens demands that 
the Environmental Protection Agency, the lead Fed-
eral agency for the protection of public health and 
welfare, once again assume a role in combating noise 
pollution.
SEC. 3. REESTABLISHMENT OF OFFICE OF NOISE ABATE-
MENT AND CONTROL. 
(a) REESTABLISHMENT.—The Administrator of the 
Environmental Protection Agency shall reestablish within 
the Environmental Protection Agency an Office of Noise 
Abatement and Control. 
(b) DUTIES.—The responsibilities of the Office in-
clude the following: 
(1) To promote the development of effective 
State and local noise control programs by providing 
States with technical assistance and grants to de-
velop the programs, including the purchase of equip-
ment for local communities. 
(2) To carry out a national noise control re-
search program to assess the impacts of noise from 
varied noise sources on mental and physical health. 
(3) To carry out a national noise environmental 
assessment program to identify trends in noise expo-
sure and response, ambient levels, and compliance 
data and to determine the effectiveness of noise 
abatement actions, including actions for areas 
around major transportation facilities (such as high-
ways, railroad facilities, and airports). 
(4) To develop and disseminate information and 
educational materials to the public on the mental 
and physical effects of noise and the most effective
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Require Evaluation 
before Implementing Executive Wishlists Act of 2016’’ or 
as the ‘‘REVIEW Act of 2016’’. 
SEC. 2. RELIEF PENDING REVIEW. 
Section 705 of title 5, United States Code, is amend-
ed— 
(1) by striking ‘‘When’’ and inserting the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—When’’; and 
(2) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(b) HIGH-IMPACT RULES.— 
‘‘(1) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection— 
‘‘(A) the term ‘Administrator’ means the 
Administrator of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management 
and Budget; and 
‘‘(B) the term ‘high-impact rule’ means 
any rule that the Administrator determines may 
impose an annual cost on the economy of not 
less than $1,000,000,000. 
‘‘(2) IDENTIFICATION.—A final rule may not be 
published or take effect until the agency making the 
rule submits the rule to the Administrator and the 
Administrator makes a determination as to whether
the rule is a high-impact rule, which shall be pub-
lished by the agency with the final rule. 
‘‘(3) RELIEF.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in 
subparagraph (B), an agency shall postpone the 
effective date of a high-impact rule of the agen-
cy until the final disposition of all actions seek-
ing judicial review of the rule. 
‘‘(B) FAILURE TO TIMELY SEEK JUDICIAL 
REVIEW.—Notwithstanding section 553(d), if 
no person seeks judicial review of a high-impact 
rule— 
‘‘(i) during any period explicitly pro-
vided for judicial review under the statute 
authorizing the making of the rule; or 
‘‘(ii) if no such period is explicitly pro-
vided for, during the 60-day period begin-
ning on the date on which the high-impact 
rule is published in the Federal Register, 
the high-impact rule may take effect as early as 
the date on which the applicable period ends. 
‘‘(4) RULE
OF
CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in 
this subsection may be construed to impose any limi-
tation under law on any court against the issuance
of any order enjoining the implementation of any 
rule.’’. 
Passed the House of Representatives September 21, 
2016. 
Attest: 
Clerk.
114TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. R. 3438 
AN ACT 
To amend title 5, United States Code, to postpone 
the effective date of high-impact rules pending 
judicial review.
I
105TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 1680
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a separate election
for each spouse under the 1-time election to exclude gain on the sale
or exchange of a principal residence and to increase the maximum exclu-
sion to $250,000 if both a husband and wife make the election for
the same residence.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MAY 20, 1997
Mr. WELDON of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to
the Committee on Ways and Means
A BILL
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a
separate election for each spouse under the 1-time elec-
tion to exclude gain on the sale or exchange of a prin-
cipal residence and to increase the maximum exclusion
to $250,000 if both a husband and wife make the elec-
tion for the same residence.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Married Couples Home
Sale Equity Act of 1997’’.
SEC. 2. MODIFICATIONS TO ELECTION OF 1-TIME EXCLU-
SION OF GAIN FROM SALE OF PRINCIPAL
RESIDENCE BY INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE AT-
TAINED AGE 55.
(a) SEPARATE ELECTIONS
FOR EACH SPOUSE.—
Paragraph (2) of section 121(b) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (relating to application to only 1 sale or
exchange) is amended to read as follows:
‘‘(2) APPLICATION
TO
ONLY
SALE
OR
EX-
CHANGE.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—An individual may not
make an election under subsection (a) with re-
spect to any sale or exchange if an election by
such individual under subsection (a) is in effect
with respect to any other sale or exchange.
‘‘(B) SEPARATE ELECTIONS BY HUSBAND
AND WIFE.—If—
‘‘(i) property is held by a husband
and wife as joint tenants, tenants by the
entirety, or community property,
‘‘(ii) such husband and wife make a
joint return for the taxable year of the sale
or exchange, and
‘‘(iii) the election under subsection (a)
with respect to such property specifies
which of such individuals is to be treated
‘‘(ii) makes an election under sub-
section (a) with respect to a sale or ex-
change of such property,
the limitation under subparagraph (A) shall be
$250,000.
‘‘(C) MARRIED INDIVIDUALS FILING SEPA-
RATE RETURNS.—In the case of a separate re-
turn of a married individual who does not make
the election under subsection (a) with respect to
a sale or exchange, the limitation under sub-
paragraph (A) shall be—
‘‘(i) zero, or
‘‘(ii) if such individual’s spouse makes
such election with respect to such sale or
exchange, the portion of such spouse’s lim-
itation under subparagraph (A) (but not
more than $62,500) which such spouse al-
locates to such married individual.’’
(c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Subsection (c) of
section 121 of such Code is amended by striking the last
sentence.
(d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by
this section shall apply to sales and exchanges after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
Æ
I 
114TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 3438 
To amend title 5, United States Code, to postpone the effective date of 
high-impact rules pending judicial review. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
AUGUST 4, 2015 
Mr. MARINO (for himself and Mr. GOODLATTE) introduced the following bill; 
which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 
A BILL 
To amend title 5, United States Code, to postpone the 
effective date of high-impact rules pending judicial review. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Require Evaluation 
before Implementing Executive Wishlists Act of 2015’’ or 
as the ‘‘REVIEW Act of 2015’’. 
SEC. 2. RELIEF PENDING REVIEW. 
Section 705 of title 5, United States Code, is amend-
ed— 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
20:14 Aug 10, 2015
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3438.IH
H3438
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(1) by striking ‘‘When’’ and inserting the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—When’’; and 
(2) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(b) HIGH-IMPACT RULES.— 
‘‘(1) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection— 
‘‘(A) the term ‘Administrator’ means the 
Administrator of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management 
and Budget; and 
‘‘(B) the term ‘high-impact rule’ means 
any rule that the Administrator determines may 
impose an annual cost on the economy of not 
less than $1,000,000,000. 
‘‘(2) RELIEF.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in 
subparagraph (B), an agency shall postpone the 
effective date of a high-impact rule of the agen-
cy pending judicial review. 
‘‘(B) FAILURE TO TIMELY SEEK JUDICIAL 
REVIEW.—Notwithstanding section 553(d), if 
no person seeks judicial review of a high-impact 
rule during the 60-day period beginning on the 
date on which the high-impact rule is published 
in the Federal Register, the high-impact rule 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
20:14 Aug 10, 2015
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3438.IH
H3438
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
shall take effect on the date that is 60 days 
after the date on which the high-impact rule is 
published.’’. 
Æ 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
20:14 Aug 10, 2015
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\H3438.IH
H3438
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
I
105TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 1681
To amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 with respect to the activities
of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MAY 20, 1997
Mr. GILMAN (for himself and Mr. HAMILTON) introduced the following bill;
which was referred to the Committee on International Relations
A BILL
To amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 with respect
to the activities of the Overseas Private Investment Cor-
poration.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Overseas Private In-
vestment Corporation Amendments Act of 1997’’.
SEC. 2. ISSUING AUTHORITY.
(a) MAXIMUM
CONTINGENT
LIABILITY.—Section
235(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C.
2195(a)) is amended by striking paragraph (1) and all
that follows through the end of subparagraph (A) of para-
graph (2) and inserting the following:
‘‘(1) INSURANCE
AND
FINANCING.—(A) The
maximum contingent liability outstanding at any one
time pursuant to insurance issued under section
234(a), and the amount of financing issued under
sections 234 (b) and (c), shall not exceed in the ag-
gregate $32,000,000,000.’’.
(b) TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.—Paragraph (3)
of section 235(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
(22 U.S.C. 2195(a)(3)) is amended—
(1) by redesignating such paragraph as para-
graph (2); and
(2) by striking ‘‘1997’’ and inserting ‘‘2000’’.
Æ