datamatters24/research-document-archive huggingface dataset:
I 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 1202 
To suspend temporarily the duty on unidirectional (cardioid) electret 
condenser microphone modules for use in motor vehicles. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MARCH 9, 2005 
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
the Committee on Ways and Means 
A BILL 
To suspend temporarily the duty on unidirectional (cardioid) 
electret condenser microphone modules for use in motor 
vehicles. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. CERTAIN MICROPHONES FOR USE IN AUTO-
MOTIVE INTERIORS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of Chapter 99 of 
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 
amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 
new heading:
‘‘ 
9902.85.18 
Unidirectional (cardioid) 
electret condenser micro-
phone modules for use in 
motor vehicles provided for 
in headings 8701 through 
8705 (other than such mod-
ules designed for handheld, 
microphone stand, or lapel 
use), the foregoing each in-
cluding wire leads for exter-
nal connection, whether or 
not including a multi-pin 
board level type connector 
but not including a battery 
compartment; having a typ-
ical frequency response of 
250 Hertz through 7,000 
Hertz with no more than a 
20 decibel deviation in that 
frequency range and an elec-
trostatic discharge immunity 
of 4,000 V (contact) and 
8,000 V (air); and capable of 
operation and storage in the 
temperature range of -40°C 
through 85°C and a humid-
ity of not over 95 percent 
(provided for in subheading 
8518.10.80) .........................
Free 
No change 
No change 
On or before 
12/31/2007 
’’. 
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The amendments made by 
subsection (a) shall apply to goods entered, or with-
drawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 
January 1, 2005. 
(2) 
RETROACTIVE
APPLICATION.—Notwith-
standing section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 or 
any other provision of law, and subject to paragraph 
(4), the entry of any article— 
(A) that was made on or after January 1, 
2005, and 
(B) to which duty-free treatment would 
have applied if the amendment made by this
section had been in effect on the date of such 
entry, 
shall be liquidated or reliquidated as if such duty- 
free treatment applied, and the Secretary of the 
Treasury shall refund any duty paid with respect to 
such entry. 
(3) ENTRY.—As used in this subsection, the 
term ‘‘entry’’ includes a withdrawal from warehouse 
for consumption. 
(4) REQUESTS.—Liquidation or reliquidation 
may be made under paragraph (2) with respect to 
an entry only if a request therefor is filed with the 
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, within 
180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
that contains sufficient information to enable the 
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection— 
(A) to locate the entry; or 
(B) to reconstruct the entry if it cannot be 
located. 
Æ
I 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 1229 
To amend chapter 111 of title 28, United States Code, to limit the duration 
of Federal consent decrees to which State and local governments are 
a party, and for other purposes. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MARCH 10, 2005 
Mr. BLUNT (for himself, Mr. COOPER, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. CHABOT, Mr. 
DAVIS of Tennessee, Mr. DELAY, Mr. FORD, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, 
Mr. GORDON, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. MATHESON, Mr. TAN-
NER, Mr. WAMP, and Mr. WESTMORELAND) introduced the following bill; 
which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 
A BILL 
To amend chapter 111 of title 28, United States Code, 
to limit the duration of Federal consent decrees to which 
State and local governments are a party, and for other 
purposes. 
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 ‘‘Federal Consent De-
cree Fairness Act’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 
Congress finds the following:
(1) Consent decrees are made for remedying 
violations of rights, and they should not be used to 
advance any policy extraneous to the protection of 
those rights. 
(2) Consent decrees are also made for pro-
tecting the party who faces imminent injury and 
should not be expanded to apply to parties not in-
volved in the litigation. 
(3) In structuring consent decrees, courts 
should take into account the interests of State and 
local governments in managing their own affairs. 
(4) Consent decrees should, whenever possible, 
be structured to give due deference to the policy 
judgments of State and local officials as to how to 
obey the law. 
(5) Courts should not impose consent decrees 
that require technically complex and evolving policy 
choices, especially in the absence of judicially discov-
erable and manageable standards. 
(6) Consent decrees should not be unlimited, 
but should contain an explicit and realistic strategy 
for ending court supervision.
SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON CONSENT DECREES. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 111 of title 28, United 
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘§ 1660. Consent decrees 
‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
‘‘(1) The term ‘consent decree’— 
‘‘(A) means any final order that imposes 
injunctive relief against a State or local govern-
ment, or a State or local official sued in his or 
her official capacity, is entered by a court of the 
United States, and is based in whole or part 
upon the consent or acquiescence of the parties; 
‘‘(B) does not include private settlements; 
and 
‘‘(C) does not include any final order en-
tered by a court of the United States— 
‘‘(i) to implement a plan to end seg-
regation of students or faculty on the basis 
of race, color, or national origin in elemen-
tary schools, secondary schools, or institu-
tions of higher education; or 
‘‘(ii) to remedy discrimination on the 
basis of race in an action brought under 
title VI or VII of the Civil Rights Act of 
1964.
IIA 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. J. RES. 61 
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 
SEPTEMBER 22, 2005 
Received 
OCTOBER 7 (legislative day, OCTOBER 6), 2005 
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 
JOINT RESOLUTION 
Supporting the goals and ideals of Gold Star Mothers Day. 
Whereas the American Gold Star Mothers have suffered the 
supreme sacrifice of motherhood by losing sons and 
daughters who served in the Armed Forces, and thus per-
petuate the memory of all whose lives were sacrificed in 
our wars;
HJ 61 RFS 
Whereas the American Gold Star Mothers assist veterans of 
the Armed Forces and their dependents in the presen-
tation of claims to the Veterans’ Administration, and aid 
the men and women who served and died or were wound-
ed or incapacitated during hostilities; 
Whereas the services rendered to the United States by the 
mothers of America have strengthened and inspired our 
Nation throughout our history; 
Whereas we honor ourselves and the mothers of America 
when we revere and emphasize the role of the home and 
the family as the true foundations of our Nation; 
Whereas by doing so much for the home, the American moth-
er is a source of moral and spiritual guidance for the 
people of the United States and thus acts as a positive 
force to promote good government and peace among all 
mankind; and 
Whereas September 25, 2005, is being recognized as Gold 
Star Mothers Day: Now, therefore, be it 
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
That the Congress— 
(1) supports the goals and ideals of Gold Star 
Mothers Day; and 
(2) requests that the President issue a procla-
mation calling upon the people of the United States
HJ 61 RFS 
to observe such day with appropriate ceremonies and 
activities. 
Passed the House of Representatives September 21, 
2005. 
Attest: 
JEFF TRANDAHL, 
Clerk.
I 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 1203 
To amend chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code (the Uniform Code 
of Military Justice), to define and punish stalking by persons subject 
to that chapter. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MARCH 9, 2005 
Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California introduced the following bill; which was 
referred to the Committee on Armed Services 
A BILL 
To amend chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code (the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice), to define and punish 
stalking by persons subject to that chapter. 
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 ‘‘Military Stalking Pre-
vention Act of 2005’’. 
SEC. 2. STALKING. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter X of chapter 47 of 
title 10, United States Code (the Uniform Code of Military
Justice), is amended by inserting after section 917 (article 
117) the following new section: 
‘‘§ 917a. 117a. Stalking 
‘‘Any person subject to this chapter who wrongfully 
and knowingly engages in a course of conduct, or a course 
of unwanted communication, that would cause emotional 
distress to a reasonable person or would place a reasonable 
person in fear of injury to the person, property, or reputa-
tion of that person or any other person, is guilty of stalk-
ing and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.’’. 
(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 
at the beginning of such subchapter is amended by insert-
ing after the item relating to section 917 (article 117) the 
following new item: 
‘‘917a. 117a. Stalking.’’. 
Æ
IA 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. J. RES. 62 
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to require 
that Federal district court judges be reconfirmed every ten years by 
the executive and legislative authorities of the State in which they serve. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
JULY 28, 2005 
Mr. CULBERSON (for himself, Mr. AKIN, Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS of Virginia, Mr. 
DUNCAN, Ms. FOXX, Mr. GOODE, Mr. HAYWORTH, Mr. HERGER, Mr. 
SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. LEWIS of 
Kentucky, Mr. MARCHANT, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. POE, Mr. TANCREDO, 
and Mr. WILSON of South Carolina) introduced the following joint resolu-
tion; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 
JOINT RESOLUTION 
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United 
States to require that Federal district court judges be 
reconfirmed every ten years by the executive and legisla-
tive authorities of the State in which they serve. 
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 
of the United States of America in Congress assembled 
(two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol-
lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con-
stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all 
intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when
•HJ 62 IH 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several 
States within seven years after the date of its submission 
for ratification: 
‘‘ARTICLE — 
‘‘Each judge of a court of general original jurisdiction 
established under article III of this Constitution that sits 
in a State shall cease to hold office unless, at least once 
every ten years after that judge’s appointment, the legisla-
tive and executive authorities of that State, at such times 
and in such manner as each State shall by law provide 
for, approve the continuation in office of that judge.’’. 
Æ
115TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. CON. RES. 116 
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
concurring), That in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 1625, 
the Clerk of the House of Representatives shall make the 
following correction: Amend the long title so as to read:
IA 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. J. RES. 63
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to allow 
an item veto of appropriation bills. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
JULY 29, 2005
Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota introduced the following joint resolution; which 
was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 
JOINT RESOLUTION 
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United 
States to allow an item veto of appropriation bills.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 
of the United States of America in Congress assembled
(two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol-
lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con-
stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all 
intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several 
States within seven years after the date of its submission 
for ratification:
HJ 63 IH 
‘‘ARTICLE —
‘‘The President may disapprove any item of appro-
priation in any bill. If any bill is approved by the Presi-
dent, any item of appropriation contained therein which 
is not disapproved shall become law. The President shall 
return with his objections any item of appropriation dis-
approved to the House in which the bill containing such 
item originated. The Congress may, in the manner pre-
scribed under section 7 of Article I for bills disapproved 
by the President, reconsider any item disapproved under 
this article.’’.
Æ
•HCON 116 EH 
‘‘Making appropriations for the fiscal year ending Sep-
tember 30, 2018, and for other purposes.’’. 
Passed the House of Representatives March 22, 
2018. 
Attest: 
Clerk.
IA 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. J. RES. 64 
Disapproving the recommendations of the Defense Base Closure and 
Realignment Commission. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 
Mr. FORD introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the 
Committee on Armed Services 
JOINT RESOLUTION 
Disapproving the recommendations of the Defense Base 
Closure and Realignment Commission. 
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
That Congress disapproves the recommendations of the 
Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission as 
submitted by the President on September 15, 2005. 
Æ
‘‘(2) The term ‘special master’ means any per-
son, regardless of title or description given by the 
court, who is appointed by a court of the United 
States under rule 53 of the Federal Rules of Civil 
Procedure, rule 48 of the Federal Rules of Appellate 
Procedure, or similar Federal law. 
‘‘(b) LIMITATION ON DURATION.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A State or local govern-
ment, or a State or local official sued in his or her 
official capacity, or a successor to such official, may 
file a motion under this section with the court that 
entered a consent decree to modify or vacate the 
consent decree upon the earlier of— 
‘‘(A) 4 years after a consent decree is 
originally entered by a court of the United 
States, regardless of whether the consent decree 
has been modified or reentered during that pe-
riod; or 
‘‘(B) in the case of a civil action in 
which— 
‘‘(i) a State is a party (including an 
action in which a local government is also 
a party), the expiration of the term of of-
fice of the highest elected State official
IA 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. J. RES. 65 
Disapproving the recommendations of the Defense Base Closure and 
Realignment Commission. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 
Mr. LAHOOD introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to 
the Committee on Armed Services 
JOINT RESOLUTION 
Disapproving the recommendations of the Defense Base 
Closure and Realignment Commission. 
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
That Congress disapproves the recommendations of the 
Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission as 
submitted by the President on September 15, 2005. 
Æ
IA 
Union Calendar No. 132 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. J. RES. 65 
[Report No. 109–243] 
Disapproving the recommendations of the Defense Base Closure and 
Realignment Commission. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 
Mr. LAHOOD introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to 
the Committee on Armed Services 
SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 
Additional sponsors: Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas, Mr. HOLT, Mr. BARROW, 
Mr. PALLONE, Mr. EVANS, Mr. ABERCROMBIE, Mr. FITZPATRICK of 
Pennsylvania, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, and Mr. SCOTT of Georgia 
SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 
Reported adversely from the Committee on Armed Services, committed to the 
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, and ordered 
to be printed 
JOINT RESOLUTION 
Disapproving the recommendations of the Defense Base 
Closure and Realignment Commission. 
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
That Congress disapproves the recommendations of the
•HJ 65 RH 
Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission as 
submitted by the President on September 15, 2005.
Union Calendar No. 132 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. J. RES. 65 
[Report No. 109–243] 
JOINT RESOLUTION 
Disapproving the recommendations of the Defense 
Base Closure and Realignment Commission. 
SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 
Reported adversely from the Committee on Armed Serv-
ices, committed to the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed
115TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. CON. RES. 119 
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 
Whereas a carbon tax is a Federal tax on carbon released 
from fossil fuels; 
Whereas a carbon tax will increase energy prices, including 
the price of gasoline, electricity, natural gas, and home 
heating oil;
IV
103D CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. CON. RES. 214
Urging the President to promote political stability in Tajikistan through
efforts to encourage political resolution of the conflict and respect for
human rights and through the provision of humanitarian assistance and
(subject to certain conditions) economic assistance.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 3, 1994
Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey submitted the following concurrent resolution;
which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Urging the President to promote political stability in
Tajikistan through efforts to encourage political resolu-
tion of the conflict and respect for human rights and
through the provision of humanitarian assistance and
(subject to certain conditions) economic assistance.
Whereas the conflict in Tajikistan between the government
and opposition forces has caused the death of tens of
thousands of persons and has displaced 500,000 persons,
one-tenth of the country’s 5,400,000 people;
Whereas the conflict has been characterized on all sides by
gross human rights violations, abuses, and brutalities, in-
cluding the murders of children, pregnant women, and
babies, widespread use of torture, and summary execu-
tions;
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. J. RES. 66
JOINT RESOLUTION 
Supporting the goals and ideals of ‘‘Lights On Afterschool!’’, 
a national celebration of after-school programs.
Whereas high-quality after-school programs provide safe, 
challenging, engaging, and fun learning experiences to 
help children and youth develop their social, emotional, 
physical, cultural, and academic skills;
•HJ 66 EH 
Whereas high-quality after-school programs support working 
families by ensuring that their children are safe and pro-
ductive after the regular school day ends; 
Whereas high-quality after-school programs build stronger 
communities by involving the Nation’s students, parents, 
business leaders, and adult volunteers in the lives of the 
Nation’s young people, thereby promoting positive rela-
tionships among children, youth, families, and adults; 
Whereas high-quality after-school programs engage families, 
schools, and diverse community partners in advancing the 
well-being of the Nation’s children; 
Whereas ‘‘Lights On Afterschool!’’, a national celebration of 
after-school programs on October 20, 2005, promotes the 
critical importance of high-quality after-school programs 
in the lives of children, their families, and their commu-
nities; 
Whereas more than 28,000,000 children in the United States 
have parents who work outside the home, and 14,300,000 
children have no place to go after school; and 
Whereas many after-school programs across the Nation are 
struggling to keep their doors open and their lights on: 
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
That the Congress supports the goals and ideals of
•HJ 66 EH 
‘‘Lights On Afterschool!’’, a national celebration of after-
school programs.
Passed the House of Representatives September 27, 
2005. 
Attest:
Clerk.
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. J. RES. 66
JOINT RESOLUTION 
Supporting the goals and ideals of ‘‘Lights On 
Afterschool!’’, a national celebration of after-
school programs.
who authorized the consent of the State in 
the consent decree; or 
‘‘(ii) a local government is a party and 
the State encompassing the local govern-
ment is not a party, the expiration of the 
term of office of the highest elected local 
government official who authorized the 
consent of the local government to the con-
sent decree. 
‘‘(2) BURDEN OF PROOF.—With respect to any 
motion filed under paragraph (1), the burden of 
proof shall be on the party who originally filed the 
civil action to demonstrate that the continued en-
forcement of a consent decree is necessary to uphold 
a Federal right. 
‘‘(3) RULING ON MOTION.—Not later than 90 
days after the filing of a motion under this sub-
section, the court shall rule on the motion. 
‘‘(4) EFFECT PENDING RULING.—If the court 
has not ruled on the motion to modify or vacate the 
consent decree during the 90-day period described 
under paragraph (3), the consent decree shall have 
no force or effect for the period beginning on the 
date following that 90-day period through the date 
on which the court enters a ruling on the motion.
IA 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. J. RES. 66 
Supporting the goals and ideals of ‘‘Lights On Afterschool!’’, a national 
celebration of after-school programs. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 
Mrs. LOWEY (for herself, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Mr. LYNCH, 
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, Mr. LARSEN of Washington, Ms. DELAURO, 
Mr. SCHIFF, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. HIGGINS, and Mr. HOLT) introduced 
the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 
Education and the Workforce 
JOINT RESOLUTION 
Supporting the goals and ideals of ‘‘Lights On Afterschool!’’, 
a national celebration of after-school programs. 
Whereas high-quality after-school programs provide safe, 
challenging, engaging, and fun learning experiences to 
help children and youth develop their social, emotional, 
physical, cultural, and academic skills; 
Whereas high-quality after-school programs support working 
families by ensuring that their children are safe and pro-
ductive after the regular school day ends; 
Whereas high-quality after-school programs build stronger 
communities by involving the Nation’s students, parents, 
business leaders, and adult volunteers in the lives of the
•HJ 66 IH 
Nation’s young people, thereby promoting positive rela-
tionships among children, youth, families, and adults; 
Whereas high-quality after-school programs engage families, 
schools, and diverse community partners in advancing the 
well-being of the Nation’s children; 
Whereas ‘‘Lights On Afterschool!’’, a national celebration of 
after-school programs on October 20, 2005, promotes the 
critical importance of high-quality after-school programs 
in the lives of children, their families, and their commu-
nities; 
Whereas more than 28,000,000 children in the United States 
have parents who work outside the home, and 14,300,000 
children have no place to go after school; and 
Whereas many after-school programs across the Nation are 
struggling to keep their doors open and their lights on: 
Now, therefore, be it 
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
That the Congress supports the goals and ideals of 
‘‘Lights On Afterschool!’’, a national celebration of after- 
school programs. 
Æ