datamatters24/research-document-archive huggingface dataset:
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through
(6) as paragraphs (4) through (7), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the fol-
lowing:
‘‘(3) a certification that the State has imple-
mented adequate safeguards and enforcement proce-
dures to ensure that, during school hours, on public
school premises, only a student with a lawful pre-
scription for a controlled substance in Schedule II
under section 202(c) of the Controlled Substances
Act (21 U.S.C. 812(c)) may receive and ingest such
controlled substance in the manner prescribed;’’.
Æ
I
106TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 4084
To amend the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 to prohibit
the use of community development block grant funds for activities involv-
ing acquisition of church property, unless the consent of the church
is obtained.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 23, 2000
Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee
on Banking and Financial Services
A BILL
To amend the Housing and Community Development Act
of 1974 to prohibit the use of community development
block grant funds for activities involving acquisition of
church property, unless the consent of the church is
obtained.
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 ‘‘Church Protection Act
of 2000’’.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USE OF AMOUNTS TO ACQUIRE
CHURCH PROPERTY.
Section 105 of the Housing and Community Develop-
ment Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5305) is amended by adding
at the end the following new subsection:
‘‘(i) PROHIBITION ON USE OF ASSISTANCE TO AC-
QUIRE CHURCH PROPERTY.—Notwithstanding any other
provision of this section, no amount from a grant under
section 106 may be used to carry out or assist any activity
if such activity, or the project for which such activity is
to be conducted, involves acquisition of real property
owned by a church that is exempt from tax under section
501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C.
501(a)), unless the governing body of the church has pre-
viously consented to such acquisition.’’.
Æ
I
106TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 4085
To amend title 13, United States Code, to provide that decennial census
questionnaires be limited to requesting only the information required
by the Constitution.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 23, 2000
Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee
on Government Reform
A BILL
To amend title 13, United States Code, to provide that
decennial census questionnaires be limited to requesting
only the information required by the Constitution.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON INFORMATION THAT MAY BE
REQUESTED ON CENSUS QUESTIONNAIRES.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 141(a) of title 13, United
States Code, is amended by striking the last sentence and
inserting the following: ‘‘In connection with any such cen-
sus, the Secretary is authorized to request no information
aside from the number of individuals residing or staying
at a particular address or location, and the names of those
individuals.’’.
(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 141(f) of
title 13, United States Code, is amended by striking the
matter following ‘‘census—’’ and inserting the following:
‘‘(1) not later than 2 years before the appro-
priate census date, a report containing the Sec-
retary’s determination of the questions proposed to
be included in such census; and
‘‘(2) after submission of a report under para-
graph (1) and before the appropriate census date, if
the Secretary finds new circumstances exist which
necessitate that the questions contained in a report
so submitted be modified, a report containing the
Secretary’s determination of the questions as pro-
posed to be modified.’’.
Æ
I
106TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 4086
To amend the National Trails System Act to require that property owners
be compensated when certain railbanked trails are developed for purposes
of public use, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 23, 2000
Mr. RYUN of Kansas (for himself, Mr. STENHOLM, Mr. ARMEY, Mr. BOS-
WELL, Mr. HILLEARY, Mr. HALL of Texas, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr.
TRAFICANT, Mr. WATKINS, Mr. POMBO, Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. BUYER, Mr.
GREEN of Wisconsin, Mr. PITTS, Mr. TAUZIN, Mr. HEFLEY, Mr.
TIAHRT, Mr. HERGER, Mrs. CUBIN, Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. PAUL, Mr.
ROGAN, Mr. LARGENT, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. HOSTETTLER, Mr.
SESSIONS, Mr. HANSEN, Mr. THORNBERRY, Mr. COLLINS, Mr. HILL of
Montana, Mr. SCHAFFER, Mr. COBURN, Mrs. CHENOWETH-HAGE, Mr.
JONES of North Carolina, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. SOUDER, Mr.
HAYWORTH, Mr. GIBBONS, Mr. PETERSON
of Pennsylvania, Mr.
SHIMKUS, 
Mr. 
CANNON, 
Mr. 
TANCREDO, 
Mr. 
CALVERT, 
Mr.
NETHERCUTT, Mr. RADANOVICH, Mr. DELAY, Mr. HAYES, Mr. DUNCAN,
Mr. GALLEGLY, Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota, Mr. WALDEN of Oregon,
Ms. DANNER, and Mr. ORTIZ) introduced the following bill; which was
referred to the Committee on Resources
A BILL
To amend the National Trails System Act to require that
property owners be compensated when certain railbanked
trails are developed for purposes of public use, 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. 
COMPENSATION 
FOR 
PUBLIC 
USE 
OF
RAILBANKED TRAILS.
Section 8(d) of the National Trails System Act (16
U.S.C. 1247(d)) is amended by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ after ‘‘(d)’’
and by adding the following at the end thereof:
‘‘(2) Whenever any right-of-way is subject to the in-
terim use provisions of paragraph (1), no such right-of-
way may be developed for purposes of public use as a trail
unless fair and reasonable compensation for such use has
been tendered to the person to whom such right-of-way
would revert upon abandonment for railroad purposes.’’
Æ
included within the national park or the park preserve and
the boundary adjusted accordingly.
(b) LUIS MARIA BACA GRANT NO. 4.—
(1) ACQUISITION
AUTHORITY.—The Secretary
may negotiate for and acquire all or appropriate
parts of the Luis Maria Baca Grant No. 4, as de-
picted on the park and preserve map.
(2) TREATMENT OF ACQUIRED LAND.—
(A) FISH
AND
WILDLIFE
ADMINISTRA-
TION.—In the case of those portions of the Luis
Maria Baca Grant No. 4 acquired under para-
graph (1) that are depicted in Zone A of the
park and preserve map, the Secretary, acting
through the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service, shall administer the acquired lands for
the conservation of fish and wildlife as a unit
of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
(B) FOREST SERVICE ADMINISTRATION.—
In the case of those portions of the Luis Maria
Baca Grant No. 4 acquired under paragraph
(1) that are depicted in Zone B of the park and
preserve map, the Secretary may transfer the
acquired lands to the administrative jurisdiction
of the Forest Service, as provided in section
3(c), for management consistent with the pur-
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Each Medicare+Choice
organization shall provide the Secretary with a
surety bond—
‘‘(i) effective for a period of 4 years
(as specified by the Secretary) or in the
case of a change in the ownership or con-
trol of the agency (as determined by the
Secretary) during or after such 4-year pe-
riod, an additional period of time that the
Secretary determines appropriate, such ad-
ditional period not to exceed 4 years from
the date of such change in ownership or
control;
‘‘(ii) in a form specified by the Sec-
retary; and
‘‘(iii) for a year in the period de-
scribed in clause (i) in an amount that is
equal to the lesser of $500,000 or 10 per-
cent of the aggregate amount of payments
to the agency under this title and title XIX
for that year, as estimated by the Sec-
retary.
‘‘(B) ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.—Each
Medicare+Choice organization shall meet such
additional requirements (including conditions
relating to bonding or establishing of escrow ac-
counts as the Secretary finds necessary for the
financial security of the program) as the Sec-
retary finds necessary for the effective and effi-
cient operation of the program.
‘‘(C) WAIVER.—The Secretary may waive
the requirement of a surety bond under sub-
paragraph (A) in the case of an organization
that provides a comparable surety bond under
State law.
‘‘(D) FORFEITURE.—If a Medicare+Choice
organization forfeits a surety bond provided
under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall
use the proceeds from such forfeiture for the
benefit of beneficiaries, providers, and suppliers
under this title.’’.
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by
subsection (a) shall—
(1) take effect on the date of enactment of this
Act; and
(2) apply with respect to contracts entered into
or renewed on or after the date of enactment of this
Act.
Æ
I
106TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 4088
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to deny any deduction for
certain gifts and benefits provided to physicians by prescription drug
manufacturers.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 23, 2000
Mr. STARK 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 deny any
deduction for certain gifts and benefits provided to physi-
cians by prescription drug manufacturers.
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 ‘‘Save Money for Pre-
scription Drug Research Act of 2000’’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds that—
(1) drug company expenditures on marketing
and administration are twice research and develop-
ment expenditures,
(2) 
the 
pharmaceutical 
industry 
annually
spends $11,000,000,000 promoting and marketing
their products, by way of meals, travel subsidies,
and other gifts to medical professionals,
(3) drug companies annually spend $8,000 to
$13,000 per physician on such promotions,
(4) the present extent of physician-industry
interactions appears to adversely affect prescribing
and professional behavior and should be further ad-
dressed at the level of policy and education, and
(5) research and development is a much more
needed expenditure by the pharmaceutical industry.
SEC. 3. DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION FOR PHYSICIAN
GIFT EXPENSES OF PRESCRIPTION DRUG
MANUFACTURERS.
(a) GENERAL RULE.—Part IX of subchapter B of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating
to items not deductible) is amended by adding at the end
thereof the following new section:
‘‘SEC. 280I. PHYSICIAN GIFT EXPENSES OF PRESCRIPTION
DRUG MANUFACTURERS.
‘‘(a) GENERAL RULE.—No deduction shall be allowed
under this chapter for any physician gift expense paid or
incurred by any prescription drug manufacturer.
‘‘(b) PHYSICIAN GIFT EXPENSE.—For purposes of
this section, the term ‘physician gift expense’ means any
gift provided directly or indirectly to or for the benefit of
a physician, including gifts of meals, sponsored teachings,
symposia, and travel.
‘‘(c) PRESCRIPTION DRUG MANUFACTURER.—For
purposes of this section, the term ‘prescription drug man-
ufacturer’ means—
‘‘(1) any person engaged in the trade or busi-
ness of manufacturing or producing any prescription
drug, and
‘‘(2) any person who is a member of an affili-
ated group which includes a person described in
paragraph (1).
For purposes of the preceding sentence, the term ‘affili-
ated group’ means any affiliated group as defined in sec-
tion 1504 (determined without regard to paragraphs (3)
and (4) of 1504(b)).’’
(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections
for part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of such Code
is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new
item:
‘‘Sec. 280I. Physician gift expenses of prescription drug manufac-
turers.’’
(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by
this section shall apply to amounts paid or incurred after
December 31, 2000.
Æ
I
106TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 4089
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to deny any deduction for
certain gifts and benefits provided to physicians by prescription drug
manufacturers.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 23, 2000
Mr. STARK 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 deny any
deduction for certain gifts and benefits provided to physi-
cians by prescription drug manufacturers.
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 ‘‘Save Money for Pre-
scription Drug Research Act of 2000’’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds that—
(1) drug company expenditures on marketing
and administration are twice research and develop-
ment expenditures,
(2) 
the 
pharmaceutical 
industry 
annually
spends $11,000,000,000 promoting and marketing
their products, by way of meals, travel subsidies,
and other gifts to medical professionals,
(3) drug companies annually spend $8,000 to
$13,000 per physician on such promotions,
(4) the present extent of physician-industry
interactions appears to adversely affect prescribing
and professional behavior and should be further ad-
dressed at the level of policy and education, and
(5) research and development is a much more
needed expenditure by the pharmaceutical industry.
SEC. 3. DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION FOR PHYSICIAN
GIFT EXPENSES OF PRESCRIPTION DRUG
MANUFACTURERS.
(a) GENERAL RULE.—Part IX of subchapter B of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating
to items not deductible) is amended by adding at the end
thereof the following new section:
‘‘SEC. 280I. PHYSICIAN GIFT EXPENSES OF PRESCRIPTION
DRUG MANUFACTURERS.
‘‘(a) GENERAL RULE.—No deduction shall be allowed
under this chapter for any physician gift expense paid or
incurred by any prescription drug manufacturer.
‘‘(b) PHYSICIAN GIFT EXPENSE.—For purposes of
this section, the term ‘physician gift expense’ means any
gift provided directly or indirectly to or for the benefit of
a physician, including gifts of meals, sponsored teachings,
symposia, and travel, but not including product samples.
‘‘(c) PRESCRIPTION DRUG MANUFACTURER.—For
purposes of this section, the term ‘prescription drug man-
ufacturer’ means—
‘‘(1) any person engaged in the trade or busi-
ness of manufacturing or producing any prescription
drug, and
‘‘(2) any person who is a member of an affili-
ated group which includes a person described in
paragraph (1).
For purposes of the preceding sentence, the term ‘affili-
ated group’ means any affiliated group as defined in sec-
tion 1504 (determined without regard to paragraphs (3)
and (4) of 1504(b)).’’
(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections
for part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of such Code
is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new
item:
‘‘Sec. 280I. Physician gift expenses of prescription drug manufac-
turers.’’
(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by
this section shall apply to amounts paid or incurred after
December 31, 2000.
Æ
I
106TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 408
To amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to expand the number of acres
authorized for inclusion in the conservation reserve.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JANUARY 19, 1999
Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota introduced the following bill; which was referred
to the Committee on Agriculture
A BILL
To amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to expand the
number of acres authorized for inclusion in the conserva-
tion reserve.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. INCREASE IN AUTHORIZED MAXIMUM ENROLL-
MENT IN CONSERVATION RESERVE.
Section 1231(d) of the Food Security Act of 1985
(16 U.S.C. 3831(d)) is amended by striking ‘‘36,400,000
acres’’ and inserting ‘‘45,000,000 acres’’.
Æ
be considered to be assistance for purposes of any
provision of law limiting assistance to a country.
(2) INAPPLICABILITY
OF
CERTAIN
PROHIBI-
TIONS RELATING TO CANCELLATION OF DEBT.—The
authority to provide for cancellation of debt under
subsection (a) may be exercised notwithstanding sec-
tion 620(r) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
or any similar provision of law.
(3) OTHER
DEBT
CANCELLATION
AUTHORI-
TIES.—The authority to cancel debt under sub-
section (a) is in addition to the authority to cancel
debt under any other provision of law and does not
in any way limit or otherwise affect such other au-
thority.
(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—For the
cost (as defined in section 502(5) of the Federal Credit
Reform Act of 1990) of the cancellation of any debt under
subsection (a), there are authorized to be appropriated to
the President such sums as may be necessary for each of
the fiscal years 2001 and 2002.
SEC. 102. DEBT FORGIVENESS BY PARIS CLUB MEMBERS.
The Congress urges the President to use the influ-
ence of the United States within the Paris Club of Official
Creditors to urge each nation that is a member of the
I
106TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 4090
To authorize appropriations for the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act to achieve full funding in fiscal year 2001 and fiscal year 2002,
and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 23, 2000
Mr. VITTER (for himself, Mrs. KELLY, Mr. LUCAS of Oklahoma, Mr.
BILBRAY, Mr. MORAN of Kansas, Mr. HILLIARD, and Mr. SANDERS) in-
troduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Edu-
cation and the Workforce
A BILL
To authorize appropriations for the Individuals with Disabil-
ities Education Act to achieve full funding in fiscal year
2001 and fiscal year 2002, 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 ‘‘IDEA Keeping Our
Commitment Act of 2000’’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds the following:
(1) In 1975, Congress passed the Education for
All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (enacted as
Public Law 94–142), now known as the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et
seq.), which established a Federal commitment to
provide schools with 40 percent of the national aver-
age per pupil expenditure for the purpose of edu-
cating children with disabilities.
(2) To date, the Federal Government has never
contributed more than 12.6 percent of the maximum
State grant allocation for educating children with
disabilities under the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act.
(3) The failure by the Federal Government to
fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Edu-
cation Act has forced State and local governments to
divert funding from other worthy projects, including
school construction and hiring additional teachers, in
order to pay for the full costs of educating children
with disabilities.
(4) Each year, State and local educational
agencies are forced to spend precious resources to
simply comply with numerous reporting require-
ments called for under the Individuals with Disabil-
ities Education Act.
(5) Although Congress has increased Federal
funding for special education by 85 percent since
1995, the failure by the Federal Government to fully
fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
constitutes a de facto unfunded Federal mandate on
the States.
SEC. 3. PURPOSE.
It is the purpose of this Act to reach the Federal Gov-
ernment’s goal of providing 40 percent of the national av-
erage per pupil expenditure for the purpose of educating
all children with disabilities in fiscal year 2001 and fiscal
year 2002.
SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE IN-
DIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION
ACT.
Section 611(j) of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1411(j)) is amended to read
as follows:
‘‘(j) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—For the
purpose of carrying out this part, other than section 619,
there are authorized to be appropriated—
‘‘(1) $16,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2001; and
‘‘(2) $17,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2002.’’.
Æ
I
106TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 4092
To direct the Secretary of Transportation to prohibit the commercial operation
of supersonic transport category aircraft that do not comply with stage
3 noise levels.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 23, 2000
Mr. WEINER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
A BILL
To direct the Secretary of Transportation to prohibit the
commercial operation of supersonic transport category
aircraft that do not comply with stage 3 noise levels.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF SUPERSONIC
TRANSPORT CATEGORY AIRCRAFT.
Beginning 1 year after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall prohibit the
commercial operation of a civil supersonic transport cat-
egory aircraft to or from an airport in the United States
unless the Secretary finds that the aircraft complies with
stage 3 noise levels.
Æ
I
106TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 4093
To amend the Truth in Lending Act to require a store in which a consumer
may apply to open a credit or charge card account to display a sign,
at each location where the application may be made, containing the
same information required by such Act to be prominently placed in
a tabular format on the application.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 27, 2000
Mr. WEINER (for himself, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, and Ms. MILLENDER-
MCDONALD) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Com-
mittee on Banking and Financial Services
A BILL
To amend the Truth in Lending Act to require a store
in which a consumer may apply to open a credit or
charge card account to display a sign, at each location
where the application may be made, containing the same
information required by such Act to be prominently
placed in a tabular format on the application.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT FOR STORES AC-
CEPTING CREDIT AND CHARGE CARD AC-
COUNT APPLICATIONS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 122 of the Truth in Lend-
ing Act (15 U.S.C. 1632) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
‘‘(d) SIGNS
REQUIRED
ON
CERTAIN
PREMISES
WHERE CREDIT OR CHARGE CARD ACCOUNT APPLICA-
TIONS ACCEPTED.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A person who sells personal
property to consumers on a business premises and
makes available to consumers on such premises any
application to open a credit card account under an
open end consumer credit plan, or any application to
open a charge card account, shall display in the
premises on a sign any information that is subject
to subsection (c) and that is required to be disclosed
by the person on that application.
‘‘(2) FORMAT.—Such information shall be dis-
played on the sign in the form and manner which
the Board shall prescribe by regulations and which,
to the extent practicable and appropriate, shall be
consistent with the form and manner required for
the disclosure of such information on the credit or
charge card application.
‘‘(3) SIGN PLACEMENT.—Such signs shall be
conspicuously placed at each location on the prem-
ises where the credit or charge card application may
be submitted by the consumer.’’.
(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 111(e) of
the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1610(e)) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
‘‘Section 122(d) shall supersede State laws relating to
store display of the information that is subject to the re-
quirements of such section, except that any State may em-
ploy or establish State laws for the purpose of enforcing
the requirements of such section.’’.
Æ