114 HR 1062 IH: Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2
U.S. House of Representatives
2015-02-25
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

		I
		114th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		H. R. 1062
		IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

			February 25, 2015
			Mr. Graves of Missouri (for himself, Mr. Lipinski, Mr. Peterson, and Mr. Rokita) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such
			 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

		A BILL
		To amend the Pilot’s Bill of Rights to facilitate appeals and to apply to other certificates issued
			 by the Federal Aviation Administration, to require the revision of the
			 third class medical certification regulations issued by the Federal
			 Aviation Administration, and for other purposes.

 1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2. 2.Medical certification of certain small aircraft pilots (a)In generalNot later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall issue or revise medical certification regulations to ensure that an individual may operate as pilot in command of a covered aircraft without regard to any medical certification or proof of health requirement otherwise applicable under Federal law if—
 (1)the individual possesses a valid State driver's license and complies with any medical requirement associated with that license;
 (2)the individual is transporting not more than 5 passengers; (3)the individual is operating under visual flight rules or instrument flight rules; and
 (4)the relevant flight, including each portion thereof, is not carried out— (A)for compensation, including that no passenger or property on the flight is being carried for compensation;
 (B)at an altitude that is more than 14,000 feet above mean sea level; (C)outside the United States, unless authorized by the country in which the flight is conducted; or
 (D)at an indicated air speed exceeding 250 knots. (b)Covered aircraft definedIn this section, the term covered aircraft means an aircraft that—
 (1)is not authorized under Federal law to carry more than 6 occupants; and (2)has a maximum certificated takeoff weight of not more than 6,000 pounds.
 (c)Report requiredNot later than 5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to Congress a report that describes the effect of the regulations issued or revised under subsection (a) and includes statistics with respect to changes in small aircraft activity and safety incidents.
 (d)Prohibition on enforcement actionsOn and after the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator may not take an enforcement action for not holding a valid third-class medical certificate against a pilot of a covered aircraft for a flight if the pilot and the flight meet the applicable requirements under paragraphs (1) through (4) of subsection (a) unless the Administrator has published final regulations in the Federal Register under subsection (a).
			3.Expansion of Pilot's Bill of Rights
			(a)Appeals not subject to exhaustion of administrative remedies
 (1)In generalSection 2(d)(1) of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights (Public Law 112–153; 126 Stat. 1159; 49 U.S.C. 44703 note) is amended to read as follows:

 (1)In generalUpon a decision by the Administrator denying a covered certificate, or imposing a punitive civil action or an order of revocation under section 44709 of title 49, United States Code, a person substantially affected by the decision may, at the person’s election, file an appeal with the National Transportation Safety Board or, without further administrative review, in the United States district court in which the person resides or in which the action in question occurred, or in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia..
 (2)Conforming amendmentSection 2(d)(2) of such Act is amended by striking Federal district court and inserting United States district court. (b)De novo review by district court; burden of proofSection 2(e) of such Act is amended—
 (1)by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows:  (1)In generalIn an appeal filed under subsection (d) in a United States district court with respect to a denial, suspension, or revocation of a covered certificate by the Administrator—
 (A)the district court shall review the denial, suspension, or revocation de novo, including by— (i)conducting a full independent review of the complete administrative record of the denial, suspension, or revocation;
 (ii)permitting additional discovery and the taking of additional evidence; and (iii)making the findings of fact and conclusions of law required by Rule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure without being bound to any facts found by the Administrator or the National Transportation Safety Board; and
 (B)the Administrator shall bear the burden of proof.; and (2)by adding at the end the following:

 (3)Applicability of Administrative Procedure ActNotwithstanding paragraph (1)(A) or subsection (a)(1) of section 554 of title 5, United States Code, that section applies to adjudications of the Administrator and the National Transportation Safety Board to the same extent as that section applied to such adjudications before the date of the enactment of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2..
				(c)Expansion to all certificates issued by Federal Aviation Administration
 (1)In generalSection 2 of such Act is amended— (A)in subsection (a)—
 (i)by striking subpart C, D, or F of; and (ii)by striking an airman certificate and inserting a covered certificate; and
 (B)in subsection (b)(1), by striking an airman certificate under chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code and inserting a covered certificate. (2)Covered certificate definedSection 2 of such Act is amended by adding at the end the following:

 (k)Covered certificate definedIn this section, the term covered certificate means an airman certificate, design organization certificate, holder of type certificate, production certificate, airworthiness certificate, air carrier operating certificate, airport operating certificate, air agency certificate, air navigation facility certificate, medical certificate, or any other authorization issued by the Administrator under chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code..
 (3)Conforming amendmentsSection 2 of such Act, as amended by this subsection, is further amended— (A)in subsection (b)(4)(C)—
 (i)in clause (i), by striking Any individual and inserting Any person; (ii)in clauses (ii) and (iii), in the clause headings, by striking individual and inserting person; and
 (iii)in clause (iii)(II), by striking the requesting individual and inserting the requesting person; (B)by striking the individual’s each place it appears and inserting the person’s;
 (C)by striking the individual each place it appears and inserting the person; and (D)by striking an individual each place it appears and inserting a person.
 (d)Notification of investigationSection 2 of such Act is further amended— (1)by striking subsection (c);
 (2)by redesignating paragraph (5) of subsection (b) as subsection (c), and by moving such subsection, as so redesignated, two ems to the left;
 (3)in subsection (b)— (A)in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting and the specific incident or incidents on which the investigation is based after nature of the investigation;
 (B)in paragraph (3), by striking timely; (C)by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
 (D)by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:  (4)Failure to provide informationIf the Administrator does not provide a person with the notification required by paragraph (1) with respect to an investigation relating to the approval, denial, suspension, modification, or revocation of a covered certificate, including all of the information required under paragraph (2), the Administrator may not—
 (A)retain records of the investigation; (B)deny, suspend, or revoke the covered certificate;
 (C)seek a civil penalty or other punitive action against the person; or (D)in any way take action, including issuance of a warning letter or letter of correction or any other administrative action, with regard to the matter that was the subject of the investigation.; and
 (4)in subsection (c), as redesignated by paragraph (2), by striking section 44709(c)(2) and inserting section 44709(e)(2). (e)Release of investigative reportsSection 2 of such Act is amended by inserting after subsection (e) the following:

					(f)Release of investigative reports
						(1)In general
 (A)Emergency ordersIn any proceeding conducted under part 821 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, relating to denial, amendment, modification, suspension, or revocation of a covered certificate, in which the Administrator issues an emergency order of revocation under subsections (d) and (e) of section 44709 of title 49, United States Code, an emergency order under section 46105(c) of such title, or another order that takes effect immediately, the Administrator shall provide to the person holding the covered certificate the releasable portion of the investigative report before issuing the order.
 (B)Other ordersIn any proceeding conducted under part 821 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, relating to denial, amendment, modification, suspension, or revocation of a covered certificate, in which the Administrator notifies the holder of the covered certificate of a proposed action under subsections (b) and (c) of section 44709 of title 49, United States Code, the Administrator shall, upon request of the holder of the covered certificate and at any time after that notification, provide to the holder of the covered certificate the releasable portion of the investigative report.
 (2)Motion for dismissalIf the Administrator does not provide the investigative report to the person holding the covered certificate subject to the proceeding referred to in paragraph (1) by the time required by that paragraph, the person may move to dismiss the complaint of the Administrator or for other relief and, unless the Administrator establishes good cause for the failure to provide the investigative report, the administrative law judge shall order such relief as the judge considers appropriate.
 (3)Releasable portion of reportFor purposes of paragraph (1), the releasable portion of an investigative report is all information in the report, except for the following:
 (A)Information that is privileged. (B)Information that constitutes work product or reflects internal deliberative process.
 (C)Information that would disclose the identity of a confidential source. (D)Information the disclosure of which is prohibited by any other provision of law.
 (E)Information that is not relevant to the subject matter of the proceeding. (F)Information the Administrator can demonstrate is withheld for good cause.
 (G)Sensitive security information, as defined in section 15.5 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (or any corresponding similar ruling or regulation).
 (4)Rule of constructionNothing in this subsection shall be construed to prevent the Administrator from releasing to a person subject to an investigation described in subsection (b)(1)—
 (A)information in addition to the information included in the releasable portion of the investigative report; or
 (B)a copy of the investigative report before the Administrator issues a complaint.. (f)Limitation on document requestsSection 2 of such Act, as amended by subsection (e), is further amended by inserting after subsection (f) the following:

 (g)Limitation on document requestsIn any case in which the Administrator initiates an investigation described in subsection (b)(1) with respect to a person, the Administrator and the investigating officials may request documents from the person only if the request is limited and narrowly tailored to issues in the investigation..
 (g)Response to requests by repair stations To settle or withdrawSection 2 of such Act, as amended by subsections (e) and (f), is further amended by inserting after subsection (g) the following:

 (h)Response to Requests by Repair Stations To Settle or WithdrawThe Administrator shall respond to a written request by a repair station holding a certificate under part 145, Code of Federal Regulations, that is subject to an investigation described in subsection (b)(1) to withdraw from or settle a proceeding relating to the investigation not later than 30 calendar days after receiving the request..
 (h)Limitation on retention of recordsSection 2 of such Act, as amended by subsections (e), (f), and (g), is further amended by inserting after subsection (h) the following:

 (i)Limitation on retention of recordsThe Administrator shall expunge the record of any investigation described in subsection (b)(1) with respect to a covered certificate that does not lead to the denial, suspension, modification, or revocation of the certificate not later than 90 days after the Administrator determines not to deny, suspend, modify, or revoke the certificate.
 (j)Prohibition on publicizing pending enforcement actionsThe Administrator may not indicate in the publicly accessible records of a person holding a covered certificate who is the subject of an investigation described in subsection (b)(1) any information that is different from information in such records of an airman who is not under such an investigation..
			4.Limitations on reexamination of certificate holders
 (a)In generalSection 44709 of title 49, United States Code, is amended— (1)in subsection (a)—
 (A)in the subsection heading, by striking and reexamination; (B)by striking The Administrator and inserting the following:

 (1)In generalThe Administrator;  (C)by striking , or reexamine an airman holding a certificate issued under section 44703 of this title; and
 (D)by adding at the end the following:  (2)Reexamination of airmen certificates (A)In generalThe Administrator may reexamine an airman holding a certificate issued under section 44703 of this title only if the Administrator has reasonable grounds—
 (i)to question the airman’s lack of competence based on acts or omissions committed while the airman was exercising the privileges of the certificate; or
 (ii)to believe the airman obtained the certificate through fraudulent means. (B)Notification requirementsBefore taking any action to reexamine an airman holding a certificate issued under section 44703 of this title, the Administrator shall provide to the airman—
 (i)the specific justification for the reexamination; and (ii)any releasable information gathered by the Federal Aviation Administration that form the basis for that justification..
 (b)Modification, suspension, or revocation of airmen certificates after reexaminationSection 44709(b) of such title is amended— (1)by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as clauses (i) and (ii), and by moving such clauses, as so redesignated, two ems to the right;
 (2)by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as subparagraphs (A) and (B), and by moving such subparagraphs, as so redesignated, two ems to the right;
 (3)by striking The Administrator and inserting the following:  (1)In generalThe Administrator; and
 (4)by adding at the end the following:  (2)Modification, suspension, or revocation of airmen certificates after reexaminationThe Administrator may not amend, modify, suspend, or revoke an airman certificate issued under section 44703 of this title after a reexamination of the airman holding the certificate unless the Administrator demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that the airman—
 (A)lacks the skills and competency, or care, judgment, and responsibility, necessary to hold the certificate; or
 (B)materially contributed to the issuance of the certificate by fraudulent means.. (c)AppealsSection 44709(f) of such title is amended—
 (1)by striking A person and inserting the following:  (1)In generalA person; and
 (2)by adding at the end the following:  (2)Appeals relating to reexamination of airmen certificatesIf the Administrator amends, modifies, suspends, or revokes an airman certificate after reexamination of the airman holding the certificate in violation of subsection (a)(2), the airman may elect to file an appeal in the United States district court in which the airman resides or in which the action in question occurred, or in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, instead of filing an appeal with the Board under subsection (d)..
 (d)Conforming amendmentsSection 44709(d)(1) of such title is amended— (1)in subparagraph (A), by striking subsection (b)(1)(A) and inserting subsection (b)(1)(A)(i); and
 (2)in subparagraph (B), by striking subsection (b)(1)(B) and inserting subsection (b)(1)(A)(ii). 5.Expediting updates to NOTAM program (a)In generalThe Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may not take any enforcement action, on or after the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, against any individual for a violation of a NOTAM (as defined in section 3 of the Pilot's Bill of Rights (49 U.S.C. 44701 note)) until the Administrator certifies that the Administrator has complied with the requirements of section 3 of the Pilot's Bill of Rights, as amended by this section, to—
 (1)the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate; and
 (2)the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives.
 (b)AmendmentsSection 3 of the Pilot's Bill of Rights (Public Law 112–153; 126 Stat. 1162; 49 U.S.C. 44701 note) is amended—
 (1)in subsection (a)(2)— (A)in the matter preceding subparagraph (A)—
 (i)by striking this Act and inserting the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2; and (ii)by striking begin and inserting complete the implementation of;
 (B)by amending subparagraph (B) to read as follows:  (B)to establish a repository, in a public central location, to maintain and archive all NOTAMs, including the original content and form of the notices, the original date of publication, and any amendments to such notices with the date of each amendment, in a manner that is Internet-accessible, machine-readable, and searchable;;
 (C)in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and (D)by adding at the end the following:

 (D)to establish a rating system to prioritize each NOTAM by the urgency and importance of the NOTAM; and
 (E)to specify the times during which temporary flight restrictions are in effect and the duration of a designation of special use airspace in a specific area.; and
 (2)by amending subsection (d) to read as follows:  (d)Designation of repository as sole source for NOTAMs (1)In generalThe Administrator—
 (A)shall consider the repository for NOTAMs established under subsection (a)(2)(B) to be the sole location for airmen to check for NOTAMs; and
 (B)may not consider a NOTAM to be announced and published until the NOTAM is included in the repository.
								(2)Prohibition on taking action for violations of NOTAMs not in repository
 (A)In generalExcept as provided in subparagraph (A), on and after the date on which the repository established under subsection (a)(2)(B) is final and published, the Administrator may not take any enforcement action against an airman for a violation of a NOTAM during a flight if that NOTAM is not available through the repository before the commencement of the flight and reasonably accessible and identifiable to the airman.
 (B)Exception for national securitySubparagraph (A) shall not apply in the case of an enforcement action for a violation of a NOTAM that directly relates to national security..
				6.Accessibility of certain flight data
 (a)In generalSubchapter I of chapter 471 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 47124 the following:

					47124a.Accessibility of certain flight data
 (a)DefinitionsIn this section: (1)Contract towerThe term contract tower means an air traffic control tower providing air traffic control services pursuant to a contract with the Federal Aviation Administration under the Contract Tower Program under section 47124(b)(3).
 (2)Covered flight recordThe term covered flight record means any flight data, including air traffic data (as defined in section 2(b)(4)(B) of the Pilot's Bill of Rights (49 U.S.C. 44703 note)), created, maintained, or controlled by any program of the Federal Aviation Administration, whether carried out by employees or contractors of the Federal Aviation Administration, including contract towers, flight service stations, and controller training programs.
							(b)Provision of covered flight data to Federal Aviation Administration
 (1)Request from Federal Aviation AdministrationWhen the Federal Aviation Administration receives a request, pursuant to section 552 of title 5, United States Code, for a covered flight record that is not in the possession of the Federal Aviation Administration, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall request the record from the contract tower or other contractor of the Federal Aviation Administration that possesses the record.
 (2)Provision of records to Federal Aviation AdministrationAny covered flight record created, maintained, or controlled by a contract tower or another contractor of the Federal Aviation Administration that maintains covered flight records shall be provided to the Federal Aviation Administration if the Federal Aviation Administration requests the record pursuant to paragraph (1).
 (c)Applicability of FOIAAfter the Federal Aviation Administration receives a covered flight record under subsection (b), that record shall be—
 (1)considered an agency record of the Federal Aviation Administration for purposes of section 552(f)(2) of title 5, United States Code; and
 (2)subject to section 552 of title 5, United States Code (commonly known as the Freedom of Information Act), to the same extent as if the record was created, maintained, and controlled by the Federal Aviation Administration.
 (d)Withholding of informationThe Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may withhold information that would otherwise be required to be made available under this section only if—
 (1)the Administrator determines, based on information in the possession of the Administrator, that the Administrator may withhold the information in accordance with section 552(b) of title 5, United States Code; or
 (2)the information is voluntarily provided safety- or security-related information covered by section 40123.
 (e)Format of recordsEach contract tower or other contractor of the Federal Aviation Administration that maintains covered flight records shall maintain records relating to covered flight records in formats that are readily reproducible and reasonably searchable by the Federal Aviation Administration.
						(f)Regulations
 (1)In generalNot later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2, the Administrator shall promulgate regulations or guidance to ensure compliance with this section by the Federal Aviation Administration, contract towers, and other contractors of the Federal Aviation Administration that maintain covered flight records.
							(2)Compliance by applicable entities
 (A)In generalCompliance with this section by a contract tower or other contractor of the Federal Aviation Administration that maintains covered flight records shall be included as a material term in any contract between the Federal Aviation Administration and the contract tower or contractor entered into or renewed on or after the date of the enactment of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2.
 (B)Modification of contract or agreementNot later than one year after the date of the enactment of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2, the Administrator shall secure a modification to include compliance with this section by each contract tower and other contractor of the Federal Aviation Administration that maintains covered flight records as a material term in any contract between the Federal Aviation Administration and the contract tower or contractor that will not otherwise be renegotiated, renewed, or modified before the date that is one year after such date of enactment..
 (b)Clerical amendmentThe table of sections for chapter 471 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 47124 the following:

						47124a. Accessibility of certain flight data..
			7.Limitation of liability for certain individuals designated as representatives of the Federal
			 Aviation Administration
 (a)In generalAny individual designated by the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration under subpart C of part 183 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, to act as a representative of the Administrator, including an aviation medical examiner, pilot examiner, or designated airworthiness representative, shall, when carrying out duties pursuant to that designation and without regard to the individual's employer—
 (1)be considered to be performing an activity necessary to safeguard a uniquely Federal interest; and (2)not be liable in a civil action for actions performed with reasonable care in connection with those duties.
 (b)Fraudulent misconductThis section does not relieve an individual described in subsection (a) that causes harm to any person through intentional or fraudulent misconduct while carrying out duties pursuant to that subsection from any penalty applicable under any provision of law for that misconduct.
 8.Authority for legal counsel to issue certain noticesNot later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall revise section 13.11 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, to authorize legal counsel to close enforcement actions covered by that section with a warning notice, letter of correction, or other administrative action.
		9.Liability protection for volunteer pilots that fly for the public benefit
			(a)Findings and purpose
 (1)FindingsCongress finds the following: (A)Many volunteer pilot nonprofit organizations fly for public benefit and provide valuable services to communities and individuals.
 (B)In each calendar year, volunteer pilot nonprofit organizations provide long-distance, no-cost transportation for tens of thousands of people during times of special need.
 (C)Such nonprofit organizations are no longer able to purchase liability insurance for aircraft they do not own to provide liability protection at a reasonable price, and therefore face a highly detrimental liability risk.
 (D)Such nonprofit organizations have supported the homeland security of the United States by providing volunteer pilot services during times of national emergency.
 (2)PurposeThe purpose of this section is to promote the activities of volunteer pilot nonprofit organizations that fly for public benefit and to sustain the availability of the services that such nonprofit organizations provide, including the following:
 (A)Transportation at no cost to financially needy medical patients for medical treatment, evaluation, and diagnosis.
 (B)Flights for humanitarian and charitable purposes. (C)Other flights of compassion.
					(b)Liability protection for volunteer pilot nonprofit organizations that fly for public benefit and to
 pilots and staff of such nonprofit organizationsSection 4 of the Volunteer Protection Act of 1997 (42 U.S.C. 14503) is amended— (1)in subsection (a)(4)—
 (A)by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as clauses (i) and (ii), respectively; (B)by striking the harm and inserting (A) except in the case of subparagraph (B), the harm;
 (C)in subparagraph (A)(ii), as redesignated by this paragraph, by striking the period at the end and inserting ; and; and
 (D)by adding at the end the following:  (B)the volunteer—
 (i)was operating an aircraft in furtherance of the purpose of a volunteer pilot nonprofit organization that flies for public benefit; and
 (ii)was properly licensed and insured for the operation of such aircraft.; and (2)in subsection (c)—
 (A)by striking Nothing in this section and inserting the following:  (1)In generalExcept as provided in paragraph (2), nothing in this section; and
 (B)by adding at the end the following:  (2)ExceptionA volunteer pilot nonprofit organization that flies for public benefit, the staff, mission coordinators, officers, and directors (whether volunteer or otherwise) of that nonprofit organization, and a referring agency of that nonprofit organization shall not be liable for harm caused to any person by a volunteer of the nonprofit organization while the volunteer—
 (A)is operating an aircraft in furtherance of the purpose of the nonprofit organization; (B)is properly licensed for the operation of the aircraft; and
 (C)has certified to the nonprofit organization that the volunteer has insurance covering the volunteer's operation of the aircraft..


116 HR 7013 IH: Jump-Start the American Economy Act
U.S. House of Representatives
2020-05-26
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

I116th CONGRESS2d SessionH. R. 7013IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESMay 26, 2020Mr. Crenshaw introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and MeansA BILLTo amend title II of division A of the CARES Act to provide reemployment support benefits to recently unemployed individuals, and for other purposes.1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Jump-Start the American Economy Act.2.Reemployment support benefits(a)In generalSection 2104(b) of the Cares Act (Public Law 116–136) is amended—(1)by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); and(2)by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:(2)Reemployment support benefits(A)In generalAny agreement under this section may also provide that the State agency of the State may, except as provided in subparagraph (B), make weekly payments of reemployment support benefits in the amount of $600 to each individual who—(i)was eligible for Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation under paragraph (1) for any week prior to the date of enactment of this Act; and(ii)is no longer so eligible as a result of obtaining reemployment.(B)DisqualificationAn individual described in subparagraph (A) shall be ineligible for reemployment support benefits under this paragraph if, upon obtaining reemployment, the individual has weekly wages that exceed the total amount of unemployment assistance the individual received for the previous week under this subtitle and as determined under State law.(C)DurationPayments to an individual under this paragraph shall begin with the 1st week for which the individual is not eligible for Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation and shall end with the earlier of—(i)the 6th week following such week; or(ii)the last week with respect to which the agreement applies..(b)Conforming amendmentsSection 2104 of such Act is amended—(1)by inserting or payments under subsection (b)(2) after Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation each place it appears in subsection (d) or (f) of such section; and(2)in subsection (g), by inserting , as such provisions apply with respect to Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation, after the preceding provisions of this section.


		I
		111th CONGRESS
		2d Session
		H. R. 5639
		IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

			June 29, 2010
			Mr. Stearns
			 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 exclude
		  executive branch officers and employees from nonrecognition rules relating to
		  the sale of property to comply with conflict-of-interest
		  requirements.

		1.Exclusion of executive branch
			 officers and employees from conflict-of-interest nonrecognition rules
			(a)In
			 generalSubparagraph (A) of
			 section 1043(b)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking
			 an officer or employee of the executive branch, or a judicial
			 officer, and inserting a judicial officer.
			(b)Conforming
			 amendments
				(1)Paragraphs (1)(A)
			 and (5)(B) of section 1043(b) of such Code are each amended by striking
			 judicial canon, or executive order and inserting or
			 judicial canon.
				(2)(A)Subparagraph (A) of
			 section 1043(b)(2) of such Code is amended by striking judicial canon,
			 or executive order and all that follows through Code)
			 and inserting or judicial canon.
					(B)Subparagraph (B) of section 1043(b)(2)
			 of such Code is amended to read as follows:

							(B)that has been issued by the Judicial
				Conference of the United States (or its designee),
				and
							.
					(c)Effective
			 dateThe amendment made by this section shall apply to sales
			 after the date of the enactment of this Act.


114 HR 988 IH: Elder Justice Reauthorization Act
U.S. House of Representatives
2015-02-13
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

		I
		114th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		H. R. 988
		IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

			February 13, 2015
			Mr. King of New York (for himself, Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico, Mr. Swalwell of California, Mr. Blumenauer, Ms. Frankel of Florida, Mr. Grayson, and Mr. Honda) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, Energy and Commerce, and Education and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such
			 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

		A BILL
		To reauthorize the Elder Justice Act of 2009.

 1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Elder Justice Reauthorization Act. 2.FindingsCongress finds the following:
 (1)According to the American Journal of Public Health, at least 10 percent of older Americans experience elder abuse.
 (2)Victims of elder financial abuse are estimated to lose at least $2.9 billion a year. (3)Victims of elder abuse are three times more likely to end up in a hospital and four times more likely to end up in a nursing home than nonvictims.
 (4)Adult protective services which operate in all 50 States to help prevent elder abuse and investigate cases have no dedicated Federal funding or any designated Federal agency home.
 (5)Underreporting of elder abuse cases, especially financial abuse, remains a major issue combined with a dearth of comprehensive and reliable data which collectively leads to a vast underestimation of the real amount of elder abuse in the Nation.
 (6)Differences in State laws and practices in the areas of abuse, neglect, and exploitation of older adults lead to significant disparities in prevention, protective and social services, treatment systems, and law enforcement, and lead to other inequities.
 (7)Starting with the 1974 enactment of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, the Federal Government has played an important role in promoting research, training, public safety, data collection, the identification, development, and dissemination of promising health care, social, and protective services, and law enforcement practices, relating to child abuse and neglect, domestic violence, and violence against women. The Federal Government should promote similar efforts and protections relating to elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation.
 (8)The Federal Government should provide leadership to assist States and communities in their efforts to prevent elder abuse, including the promotion of coordinated planning between all levels of government and nongovernment entities and generating and sharing knowledge relevant to protecting elders.
 (9)The problem of elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation requires a comprehensive approach that— (A)recognizes the statutory role of State and local adult protective services and long-term care ombudsman programs to respond to elder abuse;
 (B)integrates the work of health, legal, and social service agencies and organizations; (C)emphasizes the need for prevention, detection, reporting, investigation, assessment and treatment, and prosecution of elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation at all levels of government;
 (D)ensures that sufficient numbers of properly trained personnel with specialized knowledge are in place to treat, assess, and provide services related to elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation, and carry out elder protection duties;
 (E)ensures there is cultural competency to address the unique needs of a diverse older adult population with respect to elder abuse; and
 (F)balances an elder’s right to self-determination with society’s responsibility to protect elders. (10)The future well-being of millions of older adults may be challenged by elder abuse and a coordinated and comprehensive Federal response is needed. Elder abuse prevention is a sound investment that can produce savings to the Medicare and Medicaid programs in the future.
 (11)A victim of elder abuse is never the same after being victimized. 3.Reauthorization of the Elder Justice Act of 2009 (a)Amendments to the Social Security Act (1)Each of the following provisions of the Social Security Act is amended by striking 2014 and inserting 2019:
 (A)Section 2024(2) (42 U.S.C. 1397k–3(2)). (B)Section 2042(a)(2) (42 U.S.C. 1397m–1(a)(2)).
 (C)Section 2042(b)(5) (42 U.S.C. 1397m–1(b)(5)). (D)Section 2042(c)(5) (42 U.S.C. 1397m–1(c)(5)).
 (E)Section 2043(b)(2) (42 U.S.C. 1397m–2(b)(2)). (2)Each of the following provisions of the Social Security Act is amended by striking and 2014 and inserting through 2019:
 (A)Section 2031(f)(3) (42 U.S.C. 1397l(f)(3)). (B)Section 2041(d)(3) (42 U.S.C. 1397m(d)(3)).
 (C)Section 2043(a)(2)(C) (42 U.S.C. 1397m–2(a)(2)(C)). (3)Section 2045 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397m–4) is amended by striking October 1, 2014 and inserting 2 years after the completion of grants made to States under section 2042.
 (b)Amendments to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care ActSection 6703(b) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 1395i–3a(b)) is amended in each of paragraphs (1)(C) and (2)(C), by striking 2014 and inserting 2019.


113 SRES 482 IS: Expressing the sense of the Senate that the area between the intersections of International Drive, Northwest and Van Ness Street, Northwest and International Drive, Northwest and International Place, Northwest in Washington, District of Columbia, should be designated as “Liu Xiaobo Plaza”.
U.S. Senate
2014-06-24
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

		III
		113th CONGRESS
		2d Session
		S. RES. 482
		IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

			June 24, 2014
			Mr. Cruz submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

		RESOLUTION
		Expressing the sense of the Senate that  the area between the intersections of International Drive,
			 Northwest and Van Ness
			 Street, Northwest and International Drive, Northwest and International
			 Place, Northwest in Washington, District of Columbia, should be designated
			 as Liu Xiaobo Plaza.

			Whereas June 4, 2014, marked the 25th anniversary of the brutal crackdown on protestors at
			 Tiananmen
			 Square in Beijing;Whereas Dr. Liu Xiaobo is a Chinese human rights activist and Nobel Laureate who is currently
			 serving an 11-year prison sentence for inciting subversion against the
			 Government of the
			 People’s Republic of China;Whereas in recognition of Dr. Liu Xiaobo’s long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human
			 rights in
			 the People's Republic of China, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in
			 October 2010; andWhereas renaming a portion of the street in front of the Embassy of the People's Republic of China
			 in the District of
			 Columbia after Dr. Liu Xiaobo serves as an expression of solidarity
			 between the people of the United States and the people of the People's
			 Republic of China who are,
			 like Dr. Liu Xiaobo, engaged in a long and non-violent struggle for
			 fundamental human rights: Now, therefore, be it

	That it is the sense of the Senate that—(1)the area between the intersections of International Drive, Northwest and Van Ness Street, Northwest
			 and International Drive, Northwest  and International Place, Northwest in
			 Washington, District of Columbia, should be known and designated as Liu Xiaobo Plaza, and any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record to that area
			 should be deemed to be a reference to Liu Xiaobo Plaza;

				(2)
				the address of 3505 International Place, Northwest, Washington, District of Columbia, should be
			 redesignated as 1 Liu
			 Xiaobo Plaza, and any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,
			 paper, or other record of the United States to
			 that address should be deemed to be a reference
			 to 1 Liu Xiaobo Plaza; and

				(3)
				the Administrator of General Services should construct
			 street signs that—

					(A)
					contain the phrase Liu Xiaobo Plaza;

					(B)
					are similar in design to the signs used by Washington, District of Columbia, to designate the
			 location of Metro stations; and

					(C)
					should be  placed on—

						(i)
						the parcel Federal property that is closest to 1 Liu Xiaobo Plaza (as described in paragraph
			 (2)); and

						(ii)
						the street corners
			 of International Drive, Northwest and Van Ness Street, Northwest and
			 International Drive, Northwest and International Place,
			 Northwest, Washington, District of Columbia.


115 HR 3263 IH: To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to extend the Medicare independence at home medical practice demonstration program.
U.S. House of Representatives
2017-07-17
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

I115th CONGRESS1st SessionH. R. 3263IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESJuly 17, 2017Mr. Burgess (for himself, Mrs. Dingell, Mr. Roskam, and Mr. Thompson of California) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concernedA BILLTo amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to extend the Medicare independence at home medical practice demonstration program.
1. Extending the Medicare independence at home demonstration programSection 1866E of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395cc–5) is amended— (1)in subsection (e)—
(A)in paragraph (1), by striking 5-year and inserting 7-year; and (B)in paragraph (5), by striking 10,000 and inserting 15,000;
(2)in subsection (g), in the first sentence, by inserting , including, to the extent practicable, with respect to the use of electronic health information systems, as described in subsection (b)(1)(A)(vi) after under the demonstration program; and  (3)in subsection (i)(1)(A), by striking will not receive an incentive payment for the second of 2 and inserting did not achieve savings for the third of 3.


116 S967 IS: Reducing Costs for Out-of-Network Services Act of 2019
U.S. Senate
2019-04-01
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

II116th CONGRESS1st SessionS. 967IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATESApril 1, 2019Mrs. Shaheen (for herself, Ms. Baldwin, and Mr. Merkley) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and PensionsA BILLTo amend the Public Health Service Act to establish limitations on cost-sharing for out-of-network
			 services in the individual market, to prohibit balance billing for such
			 services, and for other
			 purposes.

 1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Reducing Costs for Out-of-Network Services Act of 2019. 2.Limitations on cost-sharing for out-of-network services (a)In generalSubpart 2 of part B of title XXVII of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg–51 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

					2754.Limitations on cost-sharing for out-of-network services
 (a)Health insurance issuer requirementA health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage, in the individual market in a State, that offers benefits with respect to a health care service provided in the State by a participating provider shall ensure that the cost-sharing requirement with respect to such service provided in the State by a nonparticipating provider does not exceed the rate selected by the applicable State authority under subsection (c)(1) for such service.
						(b)Limitation on charges by health care providers
 (1)In generalA health care provider may not charge a patient for a health care service at a rate in excess of the following:
 (A)In the case of a patient who is enrolled in health insurance coverage in the individual market that does not provide out-of-network benefits for such service, the health care provider may charge such patient no more than the rate selected by the applicable State authority under subsection (c)(1).
 (B)In the case of a patient enrolled in health insurance coverage in the individual market that provides out-of-network benefits for such service, the health care provider may charge such patient no more than—
 (i)the rate selected by the applicable State authority under subsection (c)(1); minus (ii)the sum of—
 (I)the payment made by the health insurance issuer to the health care provider pursuant to such coverage; and
 (II)the out-of-network cost-sharing amount required under such coverage. (C)In the case of an uninsured individual, the health care provider may charge such patient no more than the lower of—
 (i)the rate selected by the applicable State authority under subsection (c)(2); or
 (ii)the rate otherwise allowed to be charged to such an individual for such a service under an applicable law in the State.
 (2)EnforcementA health care provider that violates the requirement under paragraph (1) shall be subject to the same civil monetary penalties described in paragraph (1) of section 922(f), including the provisions described in paragraph (2) of such section, as a person who commits a violation described in paragraph (1) of such section.
							(c)Rate
 (1)Individuals enrolled in health insurance coverageAn applicable State authority shall select for the State as applicable for purposes of subsection (a) and subparagraphs (A) and (B) of subsection (b)(1) one of the following as a maximum rate for a health care service for individuals enrolled in health insurance coverage in the individual market in the State:
 (A)125 percent (or, in a case described in paragraph (3) and at the discretion of the applicable State authority, 200 percent) of the allowed charges determined for the item or service under the original Medicare fee-for-service program under parts A and B of title XVIII of the Social Security Act.
 (B)The 80th percentile of usual, customary, and reasonable charge rates for the service for the geographic area, as determined by a database of usual, customary, and reasonable charges selected by the applicable State authority and approved as appropriate by the Secretary.
 (C)100 percent of the allowed charges for the service if the service were provided by a participating provider, which shall be determined based upon the average actual allowed rate under the coverage for all participating providers for such service in the health insurance issuer’s participating provider network.
 (2)Uninsured individualsAn applicable State authority shall select for the State as applicable for purposes of subsection (b)(1)(C) one of the following as a maximum rate for a health care service for uninsured individuals:
 (A)The rate described in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1). (B)The rate described in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1).
 (3)Services provided in rural areasA case described in this paragraph is a case in which the item or service is furnished by a provider of services (as defined in subsection (u) of section 1861 of the Social Security Act) or supplier (as defined in subsection (d) of such section) in a rural area (as defined in section 1886(d)(2)(D) of such Act).
 (4)Default rateIn the case in which an applicable State authority does not select a rate under paragraph (1) or (2) for a service, the maximum rate applicable in the State for the service for purposes of subsections (a) and (b) shall—
 (A)be the rate described in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1), if the service is covered under the original Medicare fee-for-service program under parts A and B of title XVIII of the Social Security Act; or
 (B)be a rate established by the Secretary, if the service is not covered under such program. (5)ClarificationIn selecting a rate under paragraph (1) or (2) for a health care service, the applicable State may select a rate that differs from the rate selected under such paragraph for a different health care service.
 (d)DefinitionsFor purposes of this section: (1)Health care providerThe term health care provider includes a hospital (as defined in section 1861(e) of the Social Security Act), a critical access hospital (as defined in section 1861(mm) of such Act), a physician (as defined in section 1861(r) of such Act), and other providers as determined by the Secretary.
 (2)Uninsured individualThe term uninsured individual, with respect to an individual receiving a health care service, means an individual who, at the time at which the service was furnished, was not enrolled in a plan that provides medical care benefits, including any Federal health benefit program, as determined by the Secretary.
							2755.Reports to Congress on network adequacy
 Not later than January 1, 2022, and every year thereafter, the Secretary shall prepare and submit to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives a report on—
 (1)how State network adequacy laws, section 2702(c), and any other network adequacy requirements for qualified health plans under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ensure that provider networks are broad enough to meet the needs of enrolled patients;
 (2)the impact of section 2754 on network adequacy; and (3)any recommendations for Congress, as necessary, on how to improve network adequacy..
 (b)Effective dateSection 2754 of the Public Health Service Act, as added by subsection (a), shall take effect on January 1, 2021.
			3.Grants for group market
 (a)In generalThe Secretary of Health and Human Services shall award grants to States for the purpose of studying the potential for imposing limitations on charges for health care services provided to individuals enrolled in group health plans or group health insurance coverage that are similar to the limitations that apply under section 2754 of the Public Health Service Act, as added by section 2.
 (b)Authorization of appropriationsThere are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section. (c)DefinitionsIn this section, the terms group health plan and group health insurance coverage have the meanings given such terms in section 2791 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg–91).


116 HR 3779 RH: Resilience Revolving Loan Fund Act of 2019
U.S. House of Representatives
2020-09-04
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

IBUnion Calendar No. 389116th CONGRESS2d SessionH. R. 3779[Report No. 116–486]IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESJuly 16, 2019Ms. Craig (for herself, Mr. Rodney Davis of Illinois, Ms. McCollum, Mr. Crawford, Mr. Kind, and Mr. Smith of Missouri) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and InfrastructureSeptember 4, 2020Additional sponsors: Mr. Richmond, Ms. Titus, Ms. Finkenauer, Mr. Pappas, Miss González-Colón of Puerto Rico, Mr. Garamendi, Mr. Graves of Louisiana, and Mr. LipinskiSeptember 4, 2020Reported with an amendment; committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printedStrike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italicFor text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on July 16, 2019A BILLTo amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to allow the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to provide capitalization grants to eligible entities to establish revolving funds to provide assistance to reduce disaster risks, and for other purposes.1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Resilience Revolving Loan Fund Act of 2019.2.Grants to entities for establishment of hazard mitigation revolving loan fundsTitle II of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5131 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:205Grants to entities for establishment of hazard mitigation revolving loan funds(a)General authority(1)In generalThe Administrator may enter into agreements with eligible entities to make capitalization grants to such entities for the establishment of hazard mitigation revolving loan funds (referred to in this section as entity loan funds) for providing funding assistance to local governments to carry out eligible projects under this section to reduce disaster risks for homeowners, businesses, nonprofit organizations, and communities in order to decrease—(A)the loss of life and property;(B)the cost of insurance claims; and(C)Federal disaster payments.(2)AgreementsAny agreement entered into under this section shall require the participating entity to—(A)comply with the requirements of this section; and(B)use accounting, audit, and fiscal procedures conforming to generally accepted accounting standards.(b)Application(1)In generalTo be eligible to receive a capitalization grant under this section, an eligible entity shall submit to the Administrator an application that includes the following:(A)Project proposals comprised of local government hazard mitigation projects, on the condition that the entity provides public notice not less than 6 weeks prior to the submission of an application.(B)An assessment of recurring major disaster vulnerabilities impacting the entity that demonstrates an escalating risk to life and property.(C)A description of how the hazard mitigation plan of the entity has or has not taken the vulnerabilities described in paragraph (2) into account.(D)A description about how the projects described in paragraph (1) could conform with the hazard mitigation plans of the entity and local governments.(E)A proposal of the systematic and regional approach to achieve resilience in a vulnerable area, including impacts to river basins, river corridors, watersheds, estuaries, bays, coastal regions, micro-basins, micro-watersheds, ecosystems, and areas at risk of earthquakes, tsunamis, droughts, and wildfires, including the wildland-urban interface.(2)Technical assistanceThe Administrator shall provide technical assistance to eligible entities for applications under this section. (c)Entity loan fund(1)Establishment of fundAn entity that receives a capitalization grant under this section shall establish an entity loan fund that complies with the requirements of this subsection.(2)Fund managementExcept as provided in paragraph (3), an entity loan fund shall be administered by the agency responsible for emergency management for such entity and shall include only—(A)funds provided by a capitalization grant under this section;(B)repayments of loans under this section to the entity loan fund; and(C)interest earned on amounts in the entity loan fund. (3)AdministrationA participating entity may combine the financial administration of the entity loan fund of such entity with the financial administration of any other revolving fund established by such entity if the Administrator determines that—(A)the capitalization grant, entity share, repayments of loans, and interest earned on amounts in the entity loan fund are accounted for separately from other amounts in the revolving fund; and(B)the authority to establish assistance priorities and carry out oversight activities remains in the control of the agency responsible for emergency management for the entity. (4)Entity share of fundsOn or before the date on which a participating entity receives a capitalization grant under this section, the entity shall deposit into the entity loan fund of such entity, an amount equal to not less than 10 percent of the amount of the capitalization grant.(d)Apportionment(1)In generalExcept as otherwise provided by this subsection, the Administrator shall apportion funds made available to carry out this section to entities that have entered into an agreement under subsection (a)(2) in amounts as determined by the Administrator.(2)Reservation of fundsThe Administrator shall reserve not more than 2.5 percent of the amount made available to carry out this section for—(A)administrative costs incurred in carrying out this section; and(B)providing technical assistance to participating entities under subsection (b)(2).(3)PriorityIn the apportionment of capitalization grants under this subsection, the Administrator shall give priority to entity applications under subsection (b) that—(A)propose projects increasing resilience and reducing risk of harm to natural and built infrastructure;(B)involve a partnership between 2 or more eligible entities to carry out a project or similar projects; (C)take into account regional impacts of hazards on river basins, river corridors, micro-watersheds, macro-watersheds, estuaries, bays, coastal regions, and areas vulnerable to earthquake, drought, tsunamis and wildfire, including the wildland-urban interface; or(D)propose projects for the resilience of major economic sectors or critical national infrastructure, including ports, global commodity supply chain assets (located within an entity or within the jurisdiction of local governments and tribal governments), capacity, power and water production and distribution centers, and bridges and waterways essential to interstate commerce.(e)Use of funds(1)Types of assistanceAmounts deposited in an entity loan fund, including loan repayments and interest earned on such amounts, may be used—(A)to make loans, on the condition that—(i)such loans are made at an interest rate of not more than 1.5 percent;(ii)annual principal and interest payments will commence not later than 1 year after completion of any project and all loans will be fully amortized—(I)not later than 20 years after the date on which the project is completed; or(II)for projects in a low-income geographic area, not later than 30 years after the date on which the projects is completed and not longer than the expected design life of the project;(iii)the local government receiving a loan establishes a dedicated source of revenue for repayment of the loan;(iv)the local government receiving a loan has a hazard mitigation plan that has been approved by the participating entity; and(v)the entity loan fund will be credited with all payments of principal and interest on all loans;(B)for mitigation planning, not to exceed 10 percent of the capitalization grants made to the participating entity in a fiscal year; (C)for the reasonable costs of administering the fund and conducting activities under this section, except that such amounts shall not exceed $100,000 per year, 2 percent of the capitalization grants made to the participating entity in a fiscal year, or 1 percent of the value of the entity loan fund, whichever amount is greatest, plus the amount of any fees collected by the entity for such purpose regardless of the source; and(D)to earn interest on the entity loan fund.(2)Prohibition on determination that loan is a duplicationIn carrying out this section, Administrator may not determine that a loan is a duplication of assistance or a duplication of programs.(3)Projects and activities eligible for assistanceExcept as provided in this subsection, a participating entity may use funds in the entity loan fund to provide financial assistance for projects or activities that mitigate the impacts of hazards, including—(A)drought and prolonged episodes of intense heat;(B)severe storms, including tornados, wind storms, cyclones, and severe winter storms;(C)wildfires;(D)earthquakes;(E)flooding, including the construction, repair, or replacement of a non-Federal levee or other flood control structure, provided the Administrator, in consultation with the Corps of Engineers (if appropriate), requires an eligible entity to determine that such levee or structure is designed, constructed, and maintained in accordance with sound engineering practices and standards equivalent to the purpose for which such levee or structure is intended; (F)storm surges;(G)chemical spills that present an imminent threat to life and property;(H)seepage resulting from chemical spills and flooding; and(I)any catastrophic event that the entity determines appropriate.(4)Zoning and land use planning changesA participating entity may use not more than 10 percent of the entity loan fund in a fiscal year to provide financial assistance for zoning and land use planning changes focused on— (A)the development and improvement of zoning and land use codes that incentivize and encourage low-impact development, resilient wildland-urban interface land management and development, natural infrastructure, green stormwater management, conservation areas adjacent to floodplains, implementation of watershed or greenway master plans, and reconnection of floodplains;(B)the study and creation of land use incentives that reward developers for greater reliance on low impact development stormwater best management practices, exchange density increases for increased open space and improvement of neighborhood catch basins to mitigate urban flooding, reward developers for including and augmenting natural infrastructure adjacent to and around building projects without reliance on increased sprawl, and reward developers for addressing wildfire ignition; and (C)the study and creation of an erosion response plan that accommodates river, lake, forest, plains, and ocean shoreline retreating or bluff stabilization due to increased flooding and disaster impacts.(5)Administrative and technical costsFor each fiscal year, a participating entity may use the amount described in paragraph (1)(C) to—(A)pay the reasonable costs of administering the programs under this section, including the cost of establishing an entity loan fund; (B)provide technical assistance to recipients of financial assistance from the entity loan fund, on the condition that such technical assistance does not exceed 5 percent of the capitalization grant made to such entity.(6)Limitation for single projectsA participating entity may not provide an amount equal to or more than $5,000,000 to a single hazard mitigation project. (f)Intended use plans(1)In generalAfter providing for public comment and review, and consultation with appropriate agencies in an entity, Federal agencies, and interest groups, each participating entity shall annually prepare and submit to the Administrator a plan identifying the intended uses of the entity loan fund.(2)Contents of planAn entity intended use plan prepared under paragraph (1) shall include—(A)the integration of entity planning efforts, including entity hazard mitigation plans and other programs and initiatives relating to mitigation of major disasters carried out by such entity; (B)an explanation of the mitigation and resiliency benefits the entity intends to achieve by—(i)reducing future damage and loss associated with hazards;(ii)reducing the number of severe repetitive loss structures and repetitive loss structures in the entity;(iii)decreasing the number of insurance claims in the entity from injuries resulting from major disasters or other hazards; and(iv)increasing the rating under the community rating system under section 1315(b) of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4022(b)) for communities in the entity;(C)information on the availability of, and application process for, financial assistance from the entity loan fund of such entity;(D)the criteria and methods established for the distribution of funds;(E)the amount of financial assistance that the entity anticipates apportioning;(F)the expected terms of the assistance provided from the entity loan fund; and(G)a description of the financial status of the entity loan fund, including short-term and long-term goals for the fund.(g)Audits, reports, publications, and oversight(1)Biennial entity audit and reportBeginning not later than the last day of the second fiscal year after the receipt of payments under this section, and biennially thereafter, any participating entity shall—(A)conduct an audit of such fund established under subsection (b); and(B)provide to the Administrator a report including—(i)the result of any such audit; and(ii)a review of the effectiveness of the entity loan fund of the entity with respect to meeting the goals and intended benefits described in the intended use plan submitted by the entity under subsection (e). (2)PublicationA participating entity shall publish and periodically update information about all projects receiving funding from the entity loan fund of such entity, including—(A)the location of the project;(B)the type and amount of assistance provided from the entity loan fund; (C)the expected funding schedule; and(D)the anticipated date of completion of the project.(3)Oversight(A)In generalThe Administrator shall, at least every 4 years, conduct reviews and audits as may be determined necessary or appropriate by the Administrator to carry out the objectives of this section and determine the effectiveness of the fund in reducing hazard risk.(B)GAO requirementsThe entity shall conduct audits under paragraph (1) in accordance with the auditing procedures of the Government Accountability Office, including chapter 75 of title 31.(C)Recommendations by AdministratorThe Administrator may at any time make recommendations for or require specific changes to an entity’s loan fund in order to improve the effectiveness of the fund.(h)Regulations or guidanceThe Administrator shall issue such regulations or guidance as are necessary to—(1)ensure that each participating entity uses funds as efficiently as possible; and(2)reduce waste, fraud, and abuse to the maximum extent possible. (i)Waiver AuthorityUntil such time as the Administrator issues regulations to implement this section, the Administrator may—(1)waive notice and comment rulemaking, if the Administrator determines the waiver is necessary to expeditiously implement this section; and(2)provide capitalization grants under this section as a pilot program.(j)DefinitionsIn this section, the following definitions apply:(1)Eligible entityThe term eligible entity means a State or an Indian tribal government (as such terms are defined in section 102 of this Act (42 U.S.C. 5122)).(2)Hazard mitigation planThe term hazard mitigation plan means a mitigation plan submitted under section 322 and approved by the Administrator.(3)Low-income geographic areaThe term low-income geographic area means an area described in paragraph (1) or (2) of section 301(a) of the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3161(a)). (4)Participating entityThe term participating entity means an eligible entity that has entered into an agreement under this section.(5)Repetitive loss structureThe term repetitive loss structure has the meaning given the term in section 1370 of the National Flood Insurance Act (42 U.S.C. 4121).(6)Severe repetitive loss structureThe term severe repetitive loss structure has the meaning given the term in section 1366(h) of the National Flood Insurance Act (42 U.S.C. 4104c(h).(7)Wildland-urban interfaceThe term wildland-urban interface has the meaning given the term in section 101 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6511). (k)Authorization of appropriationsThere is authorized to be appropriated $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2020 and 2021..September 4, 2020Reported with an amendment; committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed


		I
		112th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		H. R. 989
		IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

			March 9, 2011
			Mr. Van Hollen (for
			 himself, Ms. Pingree of Maine, and
			 Mr. Sarbanes) introduced the following
			 bill; which was referred to the Committee
			 on Energy and Commerce

		A BILL
		To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to require,
		  at the option of a State, drug manufacturers to pay rebates to State
		  prescription drug discount programs as a condition of participation in a rebate
		  agreement for outpatient prescription drugs under the Medicaid
		  program.

		1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the
			 Voluntary State Discount Prescription
			 Drug Plan Act of 2011.
		2.Optional State
			 prescription discount program
			(a)In
			 generalSection 1927(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396r–8(a)) is
			 amended by adding at the end the following:

					(8)Requirements
				relating to agreements for drugs procured by individuals through optional State
				prescription drug discount programs
						(A)In
				generalA manufacturer meets the requirements of this paragraph
				if the manufacturer enters into an agreement with the State to make rebate
				payments for drugs covered by a State prescription drug discount program in the
				same amounts as are paid by the manufacturer to the State for such drugs under
				a rebate agreement described in subsection (b). The previous sentence shall
				only apply to a State that has elected to establish an optional State
				prescription drug discount program and to apply the provisions of such
				sentence.
						(B)Optional State
				prescription drug discount program defined
							(i)In
				generalIn this paragraph, the term optional State
				prescription drug discount program means a State program under which,
				with respect to a rebate period, not less than the amount equal to 95 percent
				of all the rebates paid to the State under agreements entered into under
				subparagraph (A) during such period are provided to eligible State residents in
				the form of discounted prices for the purchase of outpatient prescription
				drugs.
							(ii)Eligible State
				residentFor purposes of clause (i), the term eligible
				State resident means an individual who is a State resident and whose
				income does not exceed a percentage (specified under the optional State
				prescription drug discount program, but not to exceed 300 percent) of the
				income official poverty line (as defined by the Office of Management and
				Budget, and revised annually in accordance with section 673(2) of the Omnibus
				Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981) applicable to a family of the size
				involved.
							(iii)Additional
				subsidiesNothing in this subparagraph shall be construed
				as—
								(I)requiring a State
				to expend State funds to carry out a State prescription drug discount program;
				or
								(II)prohibiting a
				State from electing to contribute State funds to a State prescription drug
				discount program to provide greater subsidies to eligible State residents for
				outpatient prescription drugs covered under the program.
								(iv)No section 1115
				waiver required to implementNothing in this subparagraph shall
				be construed as requiring a State to obtain a waiver under section 1115 or
				otherwise of any requirement of this title to implement an optional State
				prescription drug discount program.
							(C)No offset
				against medical assistanceAmounts received by a State under an
				agreement entered into under subparagraph (A) in any quarter shall not be
				considered to be a reduction in the amount expended under the State plan in the
				quarter for medical assistance for purposes of section
				1903(a)(1).
						.
			(b)Conforming
			 amendmentThe first sentence of section 1927(a)(1) of such Act
			 (42 U.S.C. 1396r–8(a)(1)) is amended, by striking and paragraph
			 (6) and inserting , paragraph (6), and paragraph
			 (8).


116 HRES 1210 IH: Recognizing the service of all District of Columbia veterans, condemning the denial of voting representation in Congress and full local self-government for veterans and their families who are District of Columbia residents, and calling for statehood for the District of Columbia through the enactment of H.R. 51, particularly in light of the service of District of Columbia veterans in every American war.
U.S. House of Representatives
2020-11-05
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

IV116th CONGRESS2d SessionH. RES. 1210IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESNovember 5, 2020Ms. Norton submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Reform, and in addition to the Committees on Veterans' Affairs, and Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concernedRESOLUTIONRecognizing the service of all District of Columbia veterans, condemning the denial of voting representation in Congress and full local self-government for veterans and their families who are District of Columbia residents, and calling for statehood for the District of Columbia through the enactment of H.R. 51, particularly in light of the service of District of Columbia veterans in every American war.Whereas, on November 11, our Nation observes Veterans Day, a Federal holiday commemorating the men and women who served and sacrificed for their country;Whereas the service and sacrifice of all American veterans must be recognized;Whereas the service of approximately 30,000 residents of the District of Columbia in the Armed Forces is unparalleled because they served without voting representation in Congress and full local self-government;Whereas residents of the District of Columbia fought to create the United States, fighting for the Revolutionary War slogan of no taxation without representation, and have served in every war fought by the United States since;Whereas 635 District of Columbia residents were casualties of World War I, a casualty figure greater than that of 3 different States during that war;Whereas 3,575 District of Columbia residents were casualties of World War II, a casualty figure greater than that of 4 different States during that war;Whereas 547 District of Columbia residents were casualties of the Korean war, a casualty figure greater than that of 8 different States during that war;Whereas 243 District of Columbia residents were casualties of the Vietnam war, a casualty figure greater than that of 10 different States during that war;Whereas almost 200,000 District of Columbia residents have served in the military since World War I;Whereas residents of the District of Columbia, including active duty servicemembers, National Guard members, reservists, and veterans, continue to be denied voting representation in the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as full local self-government;Whereas H.R. 51, the Washington, DC Admission Act, would grant full and equal voting rights in Congress as well as unimpeded democratic control over local affairs to the District of Columbia by making it the 51st State; andWhereas H.R. 51 was passed by the House of Representatives on June 26, 2020: Now, therefore, be itThat the House of Representatives recognizes the service of all District of Columbia veterans, condemns the denial of voting representation in Congress and full local self-government for veterans and their families who are District of Columbia residents, and calls for statehood for the District of Columbia through the enactment of H.R. 51, particularly in light of the service of District of Columbia veterans in every American war.


		II
		Calendar No. 248
		110th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		S. 1110
		[Report No. 110–115]
		IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED
		  STATES

			April 16, 2007
			Mr. Hatch (for himself
			 and Mr. Bennett) introduced the following
			 bill; which was read twice and referred to the
			 Committee on Energy and Natural
			 Resources

			June 28, 2007
			Reported by Mr.
			 Bingaman, without amendment

		A BILL
		To amend the Reclamation Projects
		  Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 to provide for the conjunctive use of
		  surface and ground water in Juab County, Utah.

		1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the
			 Juab County Surface and Ground Water
			 Study and Development Act of 2007.
		2.Conjunctive use of surface and ground
			 water, central utah projectSection 202(a)(2) of the Reclamation
			 Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (Public Law 102–575; 106
			 Stat. 4609) is amended by inserting Juab, after
			 Davis,.

		June 28, 2007
		Reported without amendment


114 HR 6473 IH: To express the sense of Congress that information security is critical to the economic security of the United States and to direct the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information to submit to Congress a report on the costs of information security.
U.S. House of Representatives
2016-12-07
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

I114th CONGRESS2d SessionH. R. 6473IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESDecember 7, 2016Mr. Upton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and CommerceA BILLTo express the sense of Congress that information security is critical to the economic security of
			 the United States and to direct the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for
			 Communications and Information to submit to Congress a report on the costs
			 of information security.

 1.Sense of Congress on information securityIt is the sense of Congress that— (1)information is vital to all industries of the United States for domestic and international commerce;
 (2)the modern United States economy relies increasingly on digital information systems; and (3)information security is therefore critical to the economic security of the United States and should be protected in a manner that continues to promote economic growth.
			2.NTIA report on costs of information security to United States economy
 (a)In generalNot later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information shall submit to Congress a report on the direct and indirect costs of information security to the economy of the United States. In preparing such report, the Assistant Secretary shall use existing commercial indices and other publicly available information.
 (b)Required considerationsThe report required by subsection (a) shall contain an estimate of the costs described in such subsection. In preparing such estimate, the Assistant Secretary shall consider costs that include the cost of—
 (1)keeping information systems secure; (2)actions necessary to mitigate compromise of information systems;
 (3)measures used to hedge against such compromise; and (4)economic loss or harm caused by such compromise.
 3.DefinitionsIn this Act: (1)Information securityThe term information security means protecting information and information systems from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, or destruction in order to provide—
 (A)integrity, which means guarding against improper information modification or destruction, and includes ensuring information nonrepudiation and authenticity;
 (B)confidentiality, which means preserving authorized restrictions on access and disclosure, including means for protecting personal privacy and proprietary information;
 (C)availability, which means ensuring timely and reliable access to and use of information; and (D)authentication, which means utilizing digital credentials to assure the identity of users and validate their access.
 (2)Information systemThe term information system means any equipment or interconnected system or subsystems of equipment that is used in the automatic acquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception of data or information, and includes—
 (A)networks and computers and other network-enabled devices; (B)ancillary equipment;
 (C)software, firmware, and related procedures; (D)services, including support services; and
 (E)related resources.


116 HRES 63 IH: Recognizing the Dominican community’s presence and contributions to Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood.
U.S. House of Representatives
2019-01-22
text/xml
EN
Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

IV116th CONGRESS1st SessionH. RES. 63IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESJanuary 22, 2019Mr. Espaillat submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and ReformRESOLUTIONRecognizing the Dominican community’s presence and contributions to Hamilton Heights, Washington
			 Heights, and Inwood.

 Whereas historically Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood have had the highest concentration of residents of Dominican descent in New York City, making it the center of Dominican culture in the United States;
 Whereas the neighborhood continues to be an iconic hub and cultural center for Dominicans, epitomizing the fusion of upper Manhattan and Dominican culture;
 Whereas referring to Washington Heights and Inwood as Wahi is perpetuating the rebranding and erasure of the community’s identity to appeal to an incoming wave;
 Whereas the cultural legacy of the Dominican community in the neighborhood must be upheld to ensure it does not disappear;
 Whereas Dominicans have been an integral part of the vibrant Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood community since the 1960s, in all areas including activism, advocacy, art, culture, literature, sports, business, and government;
 Whereas Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood have the highest population of Dominican immigrants in New York City, and Dominicans make up 63 percent of the immigrant population;
 Whereas, in 1613, Juan Rodriguez, a man who migrated from the island of Hispaniola, which is now known as the Dominican Republic and Haiti, was the first immigrant, the first Black person, the first merchant, the first Latino, and the first Dominican to have resided in metropolitan New York;
 Whereas Juan Pablo Duarte, the founding father of the Dominican Republic, has been immortalized in the neighborhood by the renaming of St. Nicholas Avenue to Juan Pablo Duarte Boulevard from 170th to 193rd Streets;
 Whereas small businesses in Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood continue to be fueled by Dominican entrepreneurs and loyal patrons, creating a sense of community within local shops and restaurants;
 Whereas Dyckman Street restaurants have witnessed a renaissance creatively fusing Dominican cuisine with different cultures, such as Japanese and Italian, and local staples, such as 809 Bar and Grill, Mamajuana, La Nueva España, and La Casa Del Mofongo, continue to attract patrons from the tri-State area to dine on traditional Dominican fare and visit the lively neighborhood;
 Whereas Dominican vendors continue to serve the public with fresh fruits and foods from Dominican culture in La Plaza de Las Americas and the newly opened Uptown Plaza in Inwood, and line the sidewalks between Broadway and Audubon Avenue, a tradition that embodies the hard-working immigrant spirit of the neighborhood;
 Whereas the National Supermarket Association and the Bodega Association of the United States promote the creation of jobs and sustainable economic growth in inner cities and Latino communities that have been overlooked by large chains, such as Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood;
 Whereas professional associations, such as Dominicans on Wall Street (DOWS), the Association of Dominican-American Supervisors and Administrators (ADASA), the New York Dominican Officers Organization (NYDO), Dominican Bar Association (DBA), Dominican Medical Association (DMA), and the Dominican Medical-Dental Society (DMDS), highlight the contributions of professional Dominicans nationwide to the development of their communities;
 Whereas the New York Yankees, an all-American baseball team, had its beginnings in Washington Heights, baseball continues to be one of the main sports in the neighborhood, and Dominican baseball players have brought great pride and recognition to the sport;
 Whereas three-time Most Valuable Player (MVP) Alex Rodriguez and four-time Major League Baseball All-Star Dellin Betances of the New York Yankees, were born in Washington Heights, and Manny Ramirez, the award-winning MVP and twelve-time All-Star baseball player, moved from the Dominican Republic to New York City where he attended George Washington High School in Washington Heights and became a baseball prodigy;
 Whereas the Dominican Republic has won six medals at the Olympics, including Pedro Nolasco’s bronze medal in boxing at the 1984 Summer Olympics and, in 2004, Félix Sánchez’s gold medal in the 400 meter hurdles;
 Whereas Dominican cultural and educational activists organized to reverse inequities in public schools within the area, and developed Gregorio Luperon High School for Science and Mathematics to meet the needs of immigrant Spanish-speaking adolescents and to create an inclusive learning environment;
 Whereas six schools in the area have been named after historic Dominican figures: I.S. 218 Salome Urena, P.S. 132 Juan Pablo Duarte School, Gregorio Luperon High School for Science and Mathematics, Mirabal Sisters Campus, Professor Juan Bosch Public School, and P.S. 8 Luis Belliard;
 Whereas the Dominican Studies Institute of the City University of New York (CUNY DSI) located in Hamilton Heights, founded by Dr. Silvio Torres-Saillant and directed by the renowned Dominican sociologist Dr. Ramona Hernández, is the first university-based research institute in the United States dedicated to the study of people of Dominican descent in the United States and other parts of the world;
 Whereas the area boasts of vibrant cultural centers and nonprofit organizations founded and enriched by Dominican activists;
 Whereas the Centro Civico Cultural Dominicano, a nonprofit community organization, continues to build on the invaluable contributions of Dominicans by engaging and empowering Dominican and Hispanic communities locally;
 Whereas the Dominican Women’s Development Center has been a vital resource to the Washington Heights and Inwood communities for over 25 years, providing comprehensive services to marginalized women and families, and serves as a haven for the artistic and activist expression of the community’s youth;
 Whereas Dominican native Normandia Maldonado had a long history of activism in Washington Heights where she cofounded the Instituto Duartiano of the United States in 1966, the Dominican Day Parade, Inc., in 1983 with Miguel Amaro, and the Centro Cultural Ballet Quisqueya in 1967, all of which have helped the community with necessary resources and fostered a connection with Dominican cultural roots through folklore dances and celebrations;
 Whereas Centro Cultural Deportivo Dominicano, a social club founded in 1966, remains a longstanding pillar of the local community, where the sound of traditional merengue tipico continues to expand the cultural roots of the Dominican immigrant experience;
 Whereas Alianza Dominicana was a leading Dominican organization in Washington Heights and employed about 350 individuals, who provided support to victims of domestic violence, the elderly, children with special needs, along with alcoholism and drug treatment programs, and represented the families of the Flight 587 tragedy;
 Whereas the Dominican community was heavily involved in the advocacy and restoration efforts to bring local parks back to life in the 1990s from their state of neglect and vandalism, such as High Bridge Park, Inwood Hill Park, Riverside Park, and Fort Tryon Park;
 Whereas the legacy of upper Manhattan is being upheld by Dominican artists and artists born to immigrant Dominican parents in Washington Heights, who personify the blending of dynamic cultures that make up the neighborhood’s identity;
 Whereas Dominican-American artists Lucia Hierro and M. Tony Peralta have both been recognized internationally for their thought-provoking work exploring the Dominican-American experience in intersecting areas of class, culture, identity, and gender;
 Whereas Dominican theater artist Mino Lora cofounded the People’s Theater Project, which provides creative youth development programs for children growing up in the immigrant communities of upper Manhattan;
 Whereas the story of Alexander Hamilton, founding father of Hamilton Heights, was highlighted by Washington Heights native and second-generation Puerto Rican Lin-Manuel Miranda in the critically acclaimed Broadway show Hamilton;
 Whereas Lin-Manuel Miranda conceived In the Heights, the Tony award-winning musical set in Washington Heights, which incorporated salsa and merengue with rap and hip-hop, blending them with more conventional Broadway tropes, to successfully portray the multicultural and Dominican influence in the neighborhood;
 Whereas Alianza Dominicana Cultural Center serves as a hub for local artists who enrich northern Manhattan through art and the celebration of Dominican and Latin American culture, and this organization promotes literary, performing, and visual arts programs in Washington Heights and Inwood that foster the artistic development of the neighborhood’s youth;
 Whereas Cayena Publications is a publishing firm based in Washington Heights and founded by Mary Ely Peña-Gratereaux that shines a light on the immigrant experience by supporting literary works that project a positive representation of Dominicans and other Latinos in the United States;
 Whereas author and activist Angie Cruz is a native of Washington Heights whose books, Soledad and Let It Rain Coffee, highlight the issues of working-class life, gender, and race in New York City; Whereas the Dominican Film Festival in New York showcases filmmakers from 21 countries including the Dominican Republic who reflect the city’s diverse and multicultural population;
 Whereas the Juan Pablo Duarte Foundation encourages academic excellence via scholarships, along with pride and collaboration within the community by hosting the annual El Carnaval Del Boulevard on St. Nicholas Avenue from 181st to 188th Streets;
 Whereas Semana Dominicana en Estados Unidos (Dominican Week in the United States) has been celebrated for 25 years, highlighting the Dominican and United States ties socially and culturally, in addition to economic, commerce, and academic collaboration;
 Whereas the Dominican Day Parade in New York City has celebrated the vibrant Dominican heritage through history, traditions, and music since its beginnings in 1982 on Audubon Avenue, and now attracts thousands of people who gather to enjoy the reverence of Dominican culture on Avenue of the Americas;
 Whereas Dominican Americans have earned their place in local and Federal Government, where they have fought to uphold the rights and liberties of New York residents and the Nation overall;
 Whereas Guillermo Linares became the first Dominican elected to public office in New York City in 1991, who also served as President Bill Clinton’s Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanic Americans;
 Whereas Adriano Espaillat is the first Dominican immigrant to be elected to the New York State Assembly in 1996, and the first formerly undocumented person elected to the United States Congress in 2016, representing New York’s 13th Congressional District which is predominantly Dominican-American;
 Whereas Rolando Acosta was elected as the first Dominican-American New York State Supreme Court Justice in New York County in 2002;
 Whereas Judge Faviola Soto, who was born and raised in Hamilton Heights, was appointed as the first Dominican judge in New York in 1993, and was the first Hispanic to sit in the Court of Claims in 2006;
 Whereas the character of Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood is changing, as the area is undergoing cultural expulsion brought on by gentrification, as evidenced by the massive increase in average income in recent years;
 Whereas the forces of gentrification have meant that more high-income people have begun moving into Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood while simultaneously longtime residents have been pushed out, as proven by the fact that there were significantly fewer Hispanic residents in these neighborhoods in 2015;
 Whereas gentrification has meant that upper Manhattan is significantly less affordable, and that Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood have seen the biggest rent increases in all of New York City;
 Whereas high rent is a significant burden on low-income Dominican families, who are also being pushed out of the neighborhoods that they have called home for generations;
 Whereas longtime businesses, such as bodegas, have also been forced out of Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood due to unaffordable rents and the new influx of chain stores;
 Whereas Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood are defined as the 10031, 10032, 10033, 10034, and 10040; and
 Whereas referring to Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood as Quisqueya Heights, as it has been colloquially referred to by the community, honors the contributions of Dominicans to this area, and reinforces the identity of the neighborhood: Now, therefore, be it

 That the House of Representatives— (1)supports the renaming of Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood to Quisqueya Heights in collaboration with local officials to recognize the area as the cultural hub for Dominican Americans across the Nation;
 (2)supports the engagement with Google, Wikipedia, Global Positioning System applications, post offices, Metropolitan Transportation Authority maps, and tourist maps to recognize Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood as Quisqueya Heights;
 (3)supports the fight against the gentrification of the neighborhood that is threatening the identity of Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood;
 (4)opposes the rebranding of the Washington Heights, and Inwood neighborhoods to Wahi; (5)recognizes the Dominican community’s contributions to Hamilton Heights, Washington Heights, and Inwood; and
 (6)honors the long-standing history and rich contributions of Dominican-American elected officials, artists, small business and bodega owners, writers, and trailblazers.