110 HRES 240 EH: Urging all member countries of the International Commission of the International Tracing Service (ITS) who have yet to ratify the May 2006 Amendments to the 1955 Bonn Accords Treaty, to expedite the ratification process to allow for open access to the Holocaust archives located at Bad Arolsen, Germany.
U.S. House of Representatives
2007-04-25
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.

IV
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. RES. 240
In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

April 25, 2007

RESOLUTION
Urging all member countries of the International Commission of the International Tracing Service (ITS) who have yet to ratify the May 2006 Amendments to the 1955 Bonn Accords Treaty, to expedite the ratification process to allow for open access to the Holocaust archives located at Bad Arolsen, Germany.

Whereas the International Tracing Service (ITS) archives located in Bad Arolsen, Germany, which are administered by the International Committee of the Red Cross, contain an estimated 50,000,000 records on the fates of some 17,500,000 individual victims of Nazi war crimes;
Whereas the ITS archives at Bad Arolsen remain the largest closed Holocaust-era archives in the world; while access to individual records can be requested by Holocaust survivors and their descendants, many who have requested information in the past have reported facing significant delays and even unresponsiveness; furthermore, the records remain inaccessible to researchers and research institutions;
Whereas the 1955 Bonn Accords, the treaty governing the administration of the ITS, established an International Commission of 11 member countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, the United Kingdom, and the United States) charged with overseeing the administration of the ITS Holocaust archives;
Whereas following years of delay, in May 2006 in Luxembourg, the International Commission of the ITS agreed upon amendments to the Bonn Accords which would allow researchers to use the archives and would allow each Commission member country to receive digitized copies of archive materials and make the records available to researchers under the respective national laws relating to archives and privacy;
Whereas the May 2006 Amendments to the Bonn Accords require each of the 11 members of the International Commission to ratify the amendments before open access to the Holocaust archives is permitted;
Whereas although the final signature was affixed to the amendments in October 2006, only 4 out of the 11 Commission member countries (the United States, Israel, Poland, and the Netherlands) have ratified the amendments to date;
Whereas the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum has for years been working tirelessly to provide public access to the materials in the Bad Arolsen archives;
Whereas on March 8, 2007, representatives from the 11 member countries of the International Commission of the ITS met in the Netherlands and reviewed the current ratification status of each country and the ratification process in its entirety;
Whereas it is a moral and humanitarian imperative to permit public access to the millions of Holocaust records housed at Bad Arolsen;
Whereas it is essential that Holocaust researchers obtain access now, while survivors are living, so that the researchers can benefit in their scholarly work from the insights of eyewitnesses;
Whereas in the Holocaust’s aftermath, there have been far too many instances of survivors and heirs of Holocaust victims being refused their moral and legal right to information—for restitution purposes, slave labor compensation, and personal closure;
Whereas opening the historic records is a vital contribution to the world’s collective memory and understanding of the Holocaust and efforts to ensure that the anti-Semitism that made such horrors possible is never again permitted to take hold;
Whereas anti-Semitism has seen a resurgence in recent years; as recently as December 2006, the President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, held the second Holocaust denial conference in Tehran in one year; and
Whereas in light of this conference, President Ahmadinejad’s anti-Semitic rhetoric, and a resurgence of anti-Semitism in part of the world, the opening of the archives at Bad Arolsen could not be more urgent: Now, therefore, be it

That the House of Representatives—
(1)commends in the strongest terms all countries that have to date ratified the amendments to the Bonn Accords to allow for open access to the Holocaust archives of the International Tracing Service (ITS) located at Bad Arolsen, Germany;
(2)commends those countries that have committed to expedite the process of releasing the archives and expects those countries to abide by their commitments;
(3)strongly urges all countries that have to yet to ratify the amendments to abide by their treaty obligations made in May 2006 and to expedite the ratification of these amendments;
(4)strongly urges all Commission members to consider the short time left to Holocaust survivors and unanimously consent to open the ITS archives should all countries not ratify the amendments by May 2007;
(5)expresses the hope that bureaucratic and diplomatic processes will not further delay this process; and
(6)refuses to forget the murder of 6,000,000 Jews and more than 5,000,000 other victims during the Holocaust by Nazi perpetrators and their collaborators.

Lorraine C. Miller,Clerk.


 HR 6338 ENR: To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 4233 West Hillsboro Boulevard in Coconut Creek, Florida, as the
U.S. House of Representatives
0
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
One Hundred Tenth Congress of the United States of America At the Second SessionBegun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, the third day of January, two thousand and eight
H. R. 6338

AN ACT
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 4233 West Hillsboro Boulevard in Coconut Creek, Florida, as the Army SPC Daniel Agami Post Office Building.

1.Army SPC Daniel Agami Post Office Building
(a)DesignationThe facility of the United States Postal Service located at 4233 West Hillsboro Boulevard in Coconut Creek, Florida, shall be known and designated as the Army SPC Daniel Agami Post Office Building.
(b)ReferencesAny reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the Army SPC Daniel Agami Post Office Building.
 Speaker of the House of Representatives.Vice President of the United States and President of the Senate.


116 HR 6683 IH: Relief for America's Small Farmers Act
U.S. House of Representatives
2020-05-01
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.

I116th CONGRESS2d SessionH. R. 6683IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESMay 1, 2020Mr. Sean Patrick Maloney of New York (for himself, Mr. Delgado, Ms. Pingree, Mr. Welch, and Mr. Malinowski) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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 provide loan forgiveness for certain borrowers of Department of Agriculture direct farm loans, and for other purposes.1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Relief for America's Small Farmers Act.2.Direct farm loan forgiveness(a)DefinitionsIn this section:(1)Eligible borrowerThe term eligible borrower means a borrower of an eligible loan that is actively engaged in farming (within the meaning of section 1001A of the Food Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1308–1)) with respect to a farming operation—(A)for which the eligible loan was made; and(B)the average annual adjusted gross income for the previous 5-year period of which is not more than $300,000.(2)Eligible loanThe term eligible loan means a loan made before March 19, 2020, that is—(A)a direct farm ownership loan under subtitle A of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1922 et seq.);(B)a direct operating loan under subtitle B of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1941 et seq.); or(C)an emergency loan under subtitle C of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1961 et seq.).(3)SecretaryThe term Secretary means the Secretary of Agriculture.(b)Loan forgiveness(1)In generalNot later than 1 year after the date on which the Secretary receives an application under paragraph (2), subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the Secretary shall cancel the obligation to repay the balance of principal and interest due as of the date of enactment of this Act on an eligible loan for the eligible borrower.(2)ApplicationsTo be eligible for cancellation under paragraph (1), not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, an eligible borrower shall submit to the Secretary an application, which shall cover all eligible loans for which the eligible borrower is seeking cancellation.(3)LimitationsThe total amount cancelled under paragraph (1) with respect to a farming operation shall be not more than $250,000.(4)ConditionThe cancellation of an obligation under paragraph (1) shall be subject to the condition that the applicable eligible borrower shall continue to be actively engaged in farming (within the meaning of section 1001A of the Food Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1308–1)) for the 2-year period beginning on the date on which the Secretary cancels the obligation under that paragraph.(c)EffectAn eligible borrower that receives cancellation of an obligation with respect to an eligible loan under subsection (b)(1) shall not be determined to be ineligible for any loan under subtitle A, B, or C of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1922 et seq.) because of that cancellation.(d)TaxabilityFor purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, any amount which (but for this subsection) would be includible in gross income of the eligible borrower by reason of forgiveness described in subsection (b) shall be excluded from gross income.


		I
		112th CONGRESS
		2d Session
		H. R. 5885
		IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

			June 1, 2012
			Mr. Bishop of New
			 York (for himself and Mr.
			 Israel) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
			 Committee on Natural
			 Resources

		A BILL
		To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
		  Management Act to add New York to the New England Fishery Management Council,
		  and for other purposes.

		1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the
			 New York Fair Fishing Act of
			 2012.
		2.Addition of New
			 York to New England Fishery Management CouncilSection 302(a)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens
			 Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1852(a)(1)(A)) is
			 amended—
			(1)by inserting
			 New York, after New Hampshire,;
			(2)by striking
			 except and inserting except New York and
			 except;
			(3)by striking
			 18 and inserting 21; and
			(4)by striking
			 12 and inserting 14.


116 HR 317 IH: To amend the Public Health Service Act to establish a health insurance Federal Invisible Risk Sharing Program.
U.S. House of Representatives
2021-01-13
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.

I117th CONGRESS1st SessionH. R. 317IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESJanuary 13, 2021Mr. Schweikert (for himself and Mr. Fortenberry) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and CommerceA BILLTo amend the Public Health Service Act to establish a health insurance Federal Invisible Risk Sharing Program.1.Health Insurance Federal Invisible Risk Sharing ProgramThe Public Health Service Act is amended by adding at the end the following new title:XXXIVHealth Insurance Federal Invisible Risk Sharing Program3401.Establishment of Federal Invisible Risk Sharing Program(a)In generalThere is established a Federal Invisible Risk Sharing Program (in this section referred to as the Program), to be administered by the Secretary, acting through the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (in this section referred to as the Administrator), to provide payments to health insurance issuers with respect to claims for eligible individuals for the purpose of lowering premiums for health insurance coverage offered in the individual market.(b)Funding(1)AppropriationsFor the purpose of providing funding for the Program there is appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $15,000,000,000 for the period beginning on January 1, 2022, and ending on December 31, 2031. Such funds shall be available to the Secretary for such purpose in such amounts and at such times during such period as specified by the Secretary.(2)Additional fundingIn addition to amounts appropriated under paragraph (1), out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, there shall be appropriated to the Secretary for each year (after 2022) during the period specified in paragraph (1), for purposes of carrying out the Program, an amount equal to the amount by which the actual sum of the premium assistance credits calculated for all taxpayers under section 36B(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for the previous year was less than the projected sum of the premium assistance credits calculated for all taxpayers under such section for such previous year. Amounts appropriated pursuant to the previous sentence shall remain available until expended.(3)LimitationAmounts appropriated under this subsection for 2022 through 2031 shall be subject to the requirements contained in Public Law 116–94 for funds for programs authorized under sections 330 through 340 of the Public Health Service Act. (c)Operation of program(1)In generalThe Administrator shall establish, after consultation with health care consumers, health insurance issuers, State insurance commissioners, and other stakeholders and after taking into consideration high cost health conditions and other health trends that generate high cost, parameters for the operation of the Program consistent with this section. (2)Expediting initial operation(A)Deadline for initial operationNot later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this title, the Administrator shall establish sufficient parameters to specify how the Program will operate for plan year 2022.(B)Secretarial discretionTo ensure the operation of the Program in plan year 2022, notwithstanding paragraph (1), the Secretary may in lieu of basing eligibility for participation in the Program on the parameters described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (d) and without consultation described in paragraph (1), base such eligibility on dollar amounts of claims and specify actuarial values to be applied for such amounts.(3)State operation of program(A)In generalThe Administrator shall establish a process for a State to operate the Program in such State beginning with plan year 2024.(B)Immediate waiversSuch process shall allow a State that, as of March 1, 2021, had in place a fully established high risk sharing pool or fully established reinsurance program (as defined by the Secretary) to continue to operate such pool or program and not have the Program administered by the Secretary under this section apply to such State.(d)Details of programThe parameters for the Program shall include the following:(1)Eligible individualsA definition for eligible individuals.(2)Standards for qualification(A)Automatic qualificationThe identification of health conditions that automatically qualify individuals as eligible individuals.(B)Voluntary qualificationA process under which health insurance issuers may voluntarily qualify individuals, who do not automatically qualify under subparagraph (A), as eligible individuals.(3)Percentage of insurance premiums to be appliedThe percentage of the premiums paid, to health insurance issuers for health insurance coverage by eligible individuals, that shall be collected and deposited to the credit (and available for the use) of the Program.(4)Attachment dollar amount and payment proportionThe dollar amount of claims for eligible individuals after which the Program will provide payments to health insurance issuers and the proportion of such claims above such dollar amount that the Program will pay. .


114 SRES 68 IS: Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the January 24, 2015, attacks carried out by Russian-backed rebels on the civilian population in Mariupol, Ukraine, and the provision of lethal and non-lethal military assistance to Ukraine.
U.S. Senate
2015-02-04
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.

		III
		114th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		S. RES. 68
		IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

			February 4, 2015
			Mr. Johnson (for himself and Mrs. Shaheen) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

		RESOLUTION
		Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the January 24, 2015, attacks carried out by
			 Russian-backed rebels on the civilian population in Mariupol, Ukraine, and
			 the provision of lethal and non-lethal military assistance to Ukraine.

 Whereas Russian-backed rebels continue to expand their campaign in Ukraine, which has already claimed more than 5,000 lives and generated an estimated 1,500,000 refugees and internally displaced persons;Whereas, on January 23, 2015, Russian rebels pulled out of peace talks with Western leaders;Whereas, on January 24, 2015, the Ukrainian port city of Mariupol received rocket fire from territory in the Donetsk region controlled by rebels;Whereas, on January 24, 2015, Alexander Zakharchenko, leader of the Russian-backed rebel Donetsk People’s Republic, publicly announced that his troops had launched an offensive against Mariupol;Whereas Mariupol is strategically located on the Sea of Azov and is a sea link between Russian-occupied Crimea and Russia, and could be used to form part of a land bridge between Crimea and Russia;Whereas the indiscriminate attack on Mariupol killed 30 people, including 2 children, and wounded 102 in markets, homes, and schools;Whereas any group that fires rockets knowingly into a civilian population is committing war crimes and is in violation of international humanitarian law;Whereas, even after the Russian Federation and the Russian-backed rebels signed a ceasefire agreement called the Minsk Protocol in September 2014, NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander, General Philip Breedlove, reported in November 2014 the movement of Russian troops, Russian artillery, Russian air defense systems, and Russian combat troops into Ukraine;Whereas, on January 24, 2015, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg stated, For several months we have seen the presence of Russian forces in eastern Ukraine, as well as a substantial increase in Russian heavy equipment such as tanks, artillery, and advanced air defense systems. Russian troops in eastern Ukraine are supporting offensive operations with command and control systems, air defense systems with advanced surface-to-air missiles, unmanned aerial systems, advanced multiple rocket launcher systems, and electronic warfare systems.;Whereas, on January 25, 2015, after Russian-backed rebels attacked Mariupol, European Council President Donald Tusk wrote, Once again appeasement encourages the aggressor to greater acts of violence; time to step up our policy based on cold facts, not illusions.;Whereas, on November 19, 2014, at a Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate confirmation hearing, Deputy National Security Adviser Anthony Blinken stated that the provision of defensive lethal assistance to the Government of Ukraine remains on the table. It’s something we’re looking at.;Whereas the Ukraine Freedom Support Act (Public Law 113–272), which was passed by Congress unanimously and signed into law by the President on December 18, 2014, states that it is the policy of the United States to further assist the Government of Ukraine in restoring its sovereignty and its territorial integrity to deter the Government of the Russian Federation from further destabilizing and invading Ukraine and other independent countries in Central and Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia; andWhereas the Ukraine Freedom Support Act authorizes $350,000,000 in fiscal years 2015–2017 for the President to provide the Government of Ukraine with defense articles, defense services, and military training for the purpose of countering offensive weapons and reestablishing the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, including anti-tank and anti-armor weapons; crew weapons and ammunition; counter-artillery radars; fire control and guidance equipment; surveillance drones; and secure command and communications equipment: Now, therefore, be it

 That the Senate—(1)condemns the attack on Mariupol by Russian-backed rebels;(2)urges the President to provide lethal and non-lethal military assistance to Ukraine as unanimously supported by Congress in the Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014 (Public Law 113–272);(3)calls on the United States, its European allies, and the international community to continue to apply economic and other forms of pressure on the Russian Federation, especially in the form of sanctions, if the Government of the Russian Federation continues to refuse to cease its aggression in Ukraine;(4)calls on the Government of the Russian Federation to immediately end its support for the rebels in eastern Ukraine, allow Ukraine to regain control of its internationally recognized borders, and withdraw its military presence in eastern Ukraine; and(5)expresses solidarity with the people of Ukraine regarding the humanitarian crisis in their country and the destruction caused by the military, financial, and ideological support of the Government of the Russian Federation for the rebels in eastern Ukraine.


113 S737 IS: Basel III Impact Study Act
U.S. Senate
2013-04-16
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.

		II
		113th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		S. 737
		IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

			April 16, 2013
			Mr. Shelby introduced
			 the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the
			 Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
			 Affairs

		A BILL
		To require the Federal banking agencies to conduct a
		  quantitative impact study on the cumulative effect of the Basel III framework
		  devised by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision before issuing final
		  rules amending the agencies’ general risk-based capital requirements for
		  determining risk-weighted assets, as proposed in the Advanced Approaches
		  Risk-Based Capital Rules Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Standardized
		  Approach for Risk-Weighted Assets Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and the
		  Implementation of Basel III, Minimum Regulatory Capital Ratios Notice of
		  Proposed Rulemaking issued in June 2012, and for other purposes.

		1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the
			 Basel III Impact Study
			 Act.
		2.Study
			 requiredThe Office of the
			 Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
			 System, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (in this Act referred to
			 as the Federal banking agencies) shall conduct the study and
			 issue the report to Congress required by section 3 prior to issuing any final
			 rule amending general risk-based capital requirements for—
			(1)revising the
			 advanced-approaches risk-based capital requirements, as proposed in the
			 Advanced Approaches Risk-Based Capital Rule of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
			 issued in June 2012 and published in the Federal Register on August 30, 2012
			 (in this Act referred to as the Advanced Approach NPR);
			(2)determining
			 risk-weighted assets, as proposed in the Standardized Approach for
			 Risk-Weighted Assets Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued in June 2012 and
			 published in the Federal Register on August 30, 2012 (in this Act referred to
			 as the Standardized Approach NPR); and
			(3)determining
			 minimum regulatory capital ratios, as proposed in the Regulatory Capital,
			 Implementation of Basel III, Minimum Regulatory Capital Ratios, Capital
			 Adequacy, Transition Provisions, and Prompt Corrective Action Notice of
			 Proposed Rulemaking issued in June 2012 and published in the Federal Register
			 on August 30, 2012 (in this Act referred to as the Basel III NPR
			 and collectively with the Advanced Approach NPR and the Standardized Approach
			 NPR, the NPRs).
			3.Study and
			 report
			(a)Study
				(1)In
			 generalThe Federal banking agencies shall jointly conduct a
			 quantitative impact study of the effect of the NPRs on the minimum regulatory
			 capital requirements of insured depository institutions and insured depository
			 institution holding companies.
				(2)Scope of
			 StudyAs part of the study required by this subsection, the
			 Federal banking agencies shall—
					(A)determine current
			 capital levels (as of December 31, 2012) at financial institutions covered by
			 such report;
					(B)separately
			 identify specific provisions in—
						(i)the
			 Basel III framework devised by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (in
			 this Act referred to as the Basel III provisions); and
						(ii)the Dodd-Frank
			 Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and of amendments made by that
			 Act (in this Act referred to as the Dodd-Frank provisions, and
			 collectively with the Basel III provisions, referred to as the
			 identified provisions) which shall include from the Dodd-Frank
			 Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and the amendments made by that
			 Act—
							(I)section 115
			 (regarding enhanced supervision and prudential standards);
							(II)section 165
			 (regarding enhanced supervision and prudential standards);
							(III)section 166
			 (regarding early remediation requirements);
							(IV)section 171
			 (regarding leverage and risk-based capital requirements);
							(V)section 619
			 (regarding prohibitions on proprietary trading and certain relationships with
			 hedge funds and private equity funds);
							(VI)section 939
			 (regarding the removal of statutory references to credit ratings);
							(VII)section 941
			 (regarding regulation of credit risk retention and exemption of qualified
			 residential mortgages); and
							(VIII)section 1412
			 (regarding safe harbor and rebuttable presumptions for qualified mortgages);
			 and
							(C)estimate and
			 evaluate the impact of such identified provisions on affected United States
			 institutions in accordance with this section.
					(3)Contents of
			 studyThe Federal banking agencies shall—
					(A)in conducting the
			 study required by this section, determine and estimate the likely cumulative
			 impact of the NPRs and the identified provisions on required regulatory capital
			 levels, capital quality, asset quality, and risk management at covered United
			 States financial institutions; and
					(B)based on such
			 findings, provide an assessment regarding—
						(i)changes to
			 required capital levels in the aggregate, per asset class and institution size
			 based on the Basel III provisions, the Dodd-Frank provisions, and separately,
			 on the identified provisions;
						(ii)the
			 aggregate increase or decrease of total risk-weighted asset levels for the
			 institutions to which the Advanced Approach NPR and the Standardized Approach
			 NPR would be applicable based on their size and asset class;
						(iii)whether the NPRs
			 and identified provisions will cause capital levels at covered institutions to
			 fluctuate with more frequency or by greater amounts than the current rules and
			 indicate what, if any, safety and soundness issues such fluctuations raise for
			 financial institutions or the financial system, including a determination of
			 whether such fluctuations will make the United States financial system more or
			 less safe than the current rules;
						(iv)whether the NPRs
			 and the identified provisions will result in the discontinuation of the use of
			 certain risk management tools by covered financial institutions and the impact
			 on the safety and soundness of financial institutions and the financial
			 system;
						(v)the
			 cumulative impact that the NPRs and the identified provisions will have
			 on—
							(I)the United States
			 economic growth, in general, and specifically, on the Gross Domestic
			 Product;
							(II)availability and
			 cost of credit in low- and moderate-income areas; and
							(III)availability
			 and cost of residential mortgages, home equity lines of credit, auto loans,
			 student loans, and commercial loans, including small business credit;
							(vi)the
			 variance in required capital levels, assets, and asset quality between
			 institutions that implement the advanced approaches or approaches to risk
			 weighting of assets, as proposed in the Advanced Approaches NPR, and those that
			 use the standardized approach, as proposed in the Standardized Approach NPR,
			 and the impact on competition between entities using different approaches;
			 and
						(vii)historical
			 probability of default and loss given default of residential mortgage loans and
			 the proposed risk weightings in the Standardized Approach NPR, and whether such
			 proposed risk weightings are appropriately and fairly calibrated.
						(4)Voluntary
			 participationIn carrying out the study required by this section,
			 the Federal banking agencies—
					(A)shall rely on
			 data available to the agencies through call reports and other data gathering
			 processes already employed by the Federal banking agencies; and
					(B)may seek input
			 and participation from insured depository institutions and insured depository
			 institution holding companies, provided that such request shall not impose
			 undue burden on participating institutions and that participation in the study
			 by any insured depository institutions or insured depository institution
			 holding companies shall be voluntary.
					(b)Report
				(1)In
			 generalNot later than 9 months after the date of enactment of
			 this Act, the Federal banking agencies shall issue a report to the Committee on
			 Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on
			 Financial Services of the House of Representatives on the results of the study
			 required by subsection (a).
				(2)ContentsThe
			 Federal banking agencies shall include the methodologies and assumptions used
			 in the study, as well as the required elements of the study listed in
			 subsection (a) in the report required in this subsection.
				4.Competitive
			 equalitySection 908(a)(1) of
			 the International Lending Supervision Act of 1983 (12 U.S.C. 3907(a)(1)) is
			 amended by adding at the end the following: Each appropriate Federal
			 banking agency shall, consistent with safety and soundness, seek to ensure that
			 any differences in rules implementing the capital standards required under this
			 section or other provisions of Federal law for banking institutions, savings
			 associations, bank holding companies, and savings and loan holding companies do
			 not give competitive advantages to any class or group of such institutions,
			 associations, or companies, unless required by other Federal law, and do not
			 undermine any requirements for enhanced supervision and prudential standards
			 required by section 115 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
			 Protection Act (12 U.S.C. 5325)..


117 HR 2377 IH: Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order Act of 2021
U.S. House of Representatives
2021-04-08
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.

I117th CONGRESS1st SessionH. R. 2377IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESApril 8, 2021Mrs. McBath (for herself, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Thompson of California, Ms. Jackson Lee, Ms. Bass, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Mr. Cicilline, Mr. Lieu, Mr. Raskin, Ms. Dean, Ms. Garcia of Texas, Mr. Neguse, Mrs. Beatty, Ms. Clark of Massachusetts, Mr. Evans, Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York, Ms. Moore of Wisconsin, Mr. Danny K. Davis of Illinois, Mr. DeSaulnier, Ms. Wilson of Florida, Mr. Gallego, Mr. Schneider, Mrs. Trahan, Mrs. Watson Coleman, Ms. Houlahan, Ms. Newman, Miss Rice of New York, Ms. Adams, Mr. Ruppersberger, Mr. Pascrell, Mr. Cooper, Mr. Auchincloss, Mr. Carson, Mr. García of Illinois, Mr. Brown, Ms. Pressley, Mr. Meeks, Mrs. Demings, Mr. Schrader, Mr. Crow, Mr. Beyer, Mr. Crist, and Ms. Sherrill) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the JudiciaryA BILLTo authorize the issuance of extreme risk protection orders.1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order Act of 2021.2.Extreme risk protection orders(a)In generalChapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:932.Extreme risk protection orders(a)DefinitionsIn this section—(1)the term designated law enforcement officer means a law enforcement officer, designated by a United States marshal, who agrees to receive firearms, ammunition, and permit, as applicable, surrendered under subsection (f);(2)the term Director means the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts;(3)the term ex parte extreme risk protection order or ex parte order means an extreme risk protection order issued under subsection (c);(4)the term extreme risk protection order means an order issued by a Federal court that enjoins an individual from purchasing, possessing, or receiving, in or affecting interstate and foreign commerce, a firearm or ammunition;(5)the term family or household member, with respect to a respondent, means any—(A)parent, spouse, sibling, or child related by blood, marriage, or adoption to the respondent;(B)dating partner of the respondent;(C)individual who has a child in common with the respondent, regardless of whether the individual has—(i)been married to the respondent; or(ii)lived together with the respondent at any time;(D)individual who resides or has resided with the respondent during the past year;(E)domestic partner of the respondent;(F)individual who has a legal parent-child relationship with the respondent, including a stepparent-stepchild and grandparent-grandchild relationship; and(G)individual who is acting or has acted as the legal guardian of the respondent;(6)the term law enforcement officer means any officer, agent, or employee of the Federal Government or a State government, unit of local government, or Indian tribe (as defined in section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5304)) authorized—(A)by law or by a government agency to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, or investigation of any violation of criminal law; or(B)by law to supervise sentenced criminal offenders;(7)the term long-term extreme risk protection order or long-term order means an extreme risk protection order issued under subsection (d);(8)the term mental health agency means an agency of a State or local government or its contracted agency that is responsible for mental health services or co-occurring mental health and substance abuse services; and(9)the term national instant criminal background check system means the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (34 U.S.C. 40901).(b)Petition(1)In generalA family or household member of the applicable individual, or a law enforcement officer, may submit to an appropriate district court of the United States a petition requesting that the court issue an ex parte extreme risk protection order or long-term extreme risk protection order with respect to an individual.(2)No feesA court may not charge a petitioner any fee for filing a petition under paragraph (1).(3)ConfidentialityA petitioner who is a law enforcement officer may provide the identity of the petitioner's sources, and any identifying information, to the court under seal.(c)Ex parte orders(1)Timing(A)In generalExcept as provided in subparagraph (B), a court that receives a petition for an ex parte order under subsection (b) shall grant or deny the petition on the date on which the petition is submitted.(B)Late petitionsIf a court receives a petition for an ex parte order submitted under subsection (b) too late in the day to permit effective review, the court shall grant or deny the petition on the next day of judicial business at a time early enough to permit the court to file an order with the clerk of the court during that day.(2)Evidence requiredBefore issuing an ex parte order, a court shall require that the petitioner submit a signed affidavit, sworn to before the court, that—(A)explains why the petitioner believes that the respondent poses a risk of imminent personal injury to himself or herself, or another individual, by purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm or ammunition; and(B)describes the interactions and conversations of the petitioner with—(i)the respondent; or(ii)another individual, if the petitioner believes that information obtained from that individual is credible and reliable.(3)Standard for issuance of orderA court may issue an ex parte order only upon a finding of probable cause to believe that—(A)the respondent poses a risk of imminent personal injury to himself or herself, or another individual, by purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm or ammunition; and(B)the order is necessary to prevent the injury described in subparagraph (A).(4)DurationAn ex parte order shall expire on the earlier of—(A)the date that is 14 days after the date of issuance; or(B)the date on which the court determines whether to issue a long-term order with respect to the respondent.(d)Long-Term orders(1)Hearing requiredIf a court receives a petition for an extreme risk protection order for a respondent under subsection (b), the court shall hold a hearing to determine whether to issue a long-term order with respect to the respondent either—(A)(i)except as provided in clause (ii), not later than 72 hours after the court issues an ex parte order with respect to the respondent; or(ii)if the court issues an ex parte order with respect to the respondent but the order is not served on the respondent within 72 hours of the issuance, not later than 72 hours after the order is served on the respondent; or(B)if the respondent waives the right to a hearing under subparagraph (A) or the court does not issue an ex parte order, not later than 14 days after the date on which the court receives the petition.(2)Notice and opportunity to be heard(A)In generalThe court shall provide the respondent with notice and the opportunity to be heard at a hearing under this subsection, sufficient to protect the due process rights of the respondent.(B)Right to counsel(i)In generalAt a hearing under this subsection, the respondent may be represented by counsel who is—(I)chosen by the respondent; and(II)authorized to practice at such a hearing.(ii)Court-provided counselIf the respondent is financially unable to obtain representation by counsel, the court, at the request of the respondent, shall ensure to the extent practicable that the respondent is represented by an attorney for the Legal Services Corporation with respect to the petition.(3)Burden of proof; standardAt a hearing under this subsection, the petitioner—(A)shall have the burden of proving all material facts; and(B)shall be required to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that—(i)the respondent poses a risk of personal injury to himself or herself, or another individual, during the period to be covered by the proposed extreme risk protection order, by purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm or ammunition; and(ii)the order is necessary to prevent the injury described in clause (i).(4)IssuanceUpon a showing of clear and convincing evidence under paragraph (3), the court shall issue a long-term order with respect to the respondent that shall be in effect for a period of not more than 180 days.(5)DenialIf the court finds that there is not clear and convincing evidence to support the issuance of a long-term order, the court shall dissolve any ex parte order then in effect with respect to the respondent.(6)Renewal(A)Notice of scheduled expirationThirty days before the date on which a long-term order is scheduled to expire, the court that issued the order shall—(i)notify the petitioner and the respondent that the order is scheduled to expire; and(ii)advise the petitioner and the respondent of the procedures for seeking a renewal of the order under this paragraph.(B)PetitionIf a family or household member of the respondent, or a law enforcement officer, believes that the conditions under paragraph (3)(B) continue to apply with respect to a respondent who is subject to a long-term order, the family or household member or law enforcement officer may submit to the court that issued the order a petition for a renewal of the order.(C)HearingA court that receives a petition submitted under subparagraph (B) shall hold a hearing to determine whether to issue a renewed long-term order with respect to the respondent.(D)Applicable proceduresThe requirements under paragraphs (2) through (5) shall apply to the consideration of a petition for a renewed long-term order submitted under subparagraph (B) of this paragraph.(E)IssuanceUpon a showing by clear and convincing evidence that the conditions under paragraph (3)(B) continue to apply with respect to the respondent, the court shall issue a renewed long-term order with respect to the respondent.(e)Factors To considerIn determining whether to issue an extreme risk protection order, a court—(1)shall consider factors including—(A)recent threats or acts of violence by the respondent directed toward other individuals;(B)recent threats or acts of violence by the respondent directed toward himself or herself;(C)recent acts of cruelty to animals by the respondent; and(D)evidence of—(i)recent criminal offenses by the respondent that involve controlled substances or alcohol; or(ii)ongoing abuse of controlled substances or alcohol by the respondent; and(2)may consider other factors, including—(A)the reckless use, display, or brandishing of a firearm by the respondent;(B)a history of violence or attempted violence by the respondent against other individuals; and(C)prior involuntary confinement of the respondent in a hospital for individuals with psychiatric disabilities.(f)Relinquishment of firearms and ammunition(1)Order of surrenderUpon issuance of an ex parte order or long-term order, the court shall order the respondent to surrender all firearms and ammunition that the respondent possesses or owns, in or affecting interstate commerce, as well as any permit authorizing the respondent to purchase or possess firearms (including a concealed carry permit), to—(A)the United States Marshals Service; or(B)a designated law enforcement officer.(2)Surrender and removal(A)Manner of service(i)Personal serviceExcept as provided in clause (ii), a United States marshal or designated law enforcement officer shall serve an extreme risk protection order on a respondent by handing the order to the respondent.(ii)Alternative serviceIf the respondent cannot reasonably be located for service as described in clause (i), an extreme risk protection order may be served on the respondent in any manner authorized under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.(B)RemovalExcept as provided in subparagraph (C), a United States marshal or designated law enforcement officer serving an extreme risk protection order personally on the respondent shall—(i)request that all firearms and ammunition, in or affecting interstate commerce, as well as any permit authorizing the respondent to purchase or possess firearms (including a concealed carry permit), that the respondent possesses or owns—(I)be immediately surrendered to the United States marshal or designated law enforcement officer; or(II)at the option of the respondent, be immediately surrendered and sold to a federally licensed firearms dealer; and(ii)take possession of all firearms and ammunition described in clause (i) that are not sold under subclause (II) of that clause, as well as any permit described in that clause, that are—(I)surrendered;(II)in plain sight; or(III)discovered pursuant to a lawful search.(C)Alternative surrenderIf a United States marshal or designated law enforcement officer is not able to personally serve an extreme risk protection order under subparagraph (A)(i), or is not reasonably able to take custody of the firearms, ammunition, and permits under subparagraph (B), the respondent shall surrender the firearms, ammunition, and permits in a safe manner to the control of a United States marshal or designated law enforcement officer not later than 48 hours after being served with the order.(3)Receipt(A)IssuanceAt the time of surrender or removal under paragraph (2), a United States marshal or designated law enforcement officer taking possession of a firearm, ammunition, or a permit pursuant to an extreme risk protection order shall—(i)issue a receipt identifying all firearms, ammunition, and permits that have been surrendered or removed; and(ii)provide a copy of the receipt issued under clause (i) to the respondent.(B)FilingNot later than 72 hours after service of an order under paragraph (2)(A), the United States marshal who served the order or designated another law enforcement officer to do so shall—(i)file the original receipt issued under subparagraph (A) of this paragraph with the court that issued the extreme risk protection order; and(ii)ensure that the United States Marshals Service retains a copy of the receipt.(C)Designated law enforcement officerIf a designated law enforcement officer issues a receipt under subparagraph (A), the officer shall submit the original receipt and a copy of the receipt to the appropriate United States marshal to enable the United States marshal to comply with subparagraph (B).(4)ForfeitureIf a respondent knowingly attempts, in violation of an extreme risk protection order, to access a firearm, ammunition, or a permit that was surrendered or removed under this subsection, the firearm, ammunition, or permit shall be subject to seizure and forfeiture under section 924(d).(g)Return of firearms and ammunition(1)NoticeIf an extreme risk protection order is dissolved, or expires and is not renewed, the court that issued the order shall order the United States Marshals Service to—(A)confirm, through the national instant criminal background check system and any other relevant law enforcement databases, that the respondent may lawfully own and possess firearms and ammunition; and(B)(i)if the respondent may lawfully own and possess firearms and ammunition, notify the respondent that the respondent may retrieve each firearm, ammunition, or permit surrendered by or removed from the respondent under subsection (f); or(ii)if the respondent may not lawfully own or possess firearms and ammunition, notify the respondent that each firearm, ammunition, or permit surrendered by or removed from the respondent under subsection (f) will be returned only when the respondent demonstrates to the United States Marshals Service that the respondent may lawfully own and possess firearms and ammunition.(2)ReturnIf an extreme risk protection order is dissolved, or expires and is not renewed, and the United States Marshals Service confirms under paragraph (1)(A) that the respondent may lawfully own and possess firearms and ammunition, the court that issued the order shall order the entity that possesses each firearm, ammunition, or permit surrendered by or removed from the respondent under subsection (f) to return those items to the respondent.(h)Return of firearms and ammunition improperly receivedIf a court, in a hearing under subsection (d), determines that a firearm or ammunition surrendered by or removed from a respondent under subsection (f) is owned by an individual other than the respondent, the court may order the United States marshal or designated law enforcement officer in possession of the firearm or ammunition to transfer the firearm or ammunition to that individual if—(1)the individual may lawfully own and possess firearms and ammunition; and(2)the individual will not provide the respondent with access to the firearm or ammunition.(i)Penalty for false reporting or frivolous petitionsAn individual who knowingly submits materially false information to the court in a petition for an extreme risk protection order under this section, or who knowingly files such a petition that is frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation, shall be fined not less than $1,000, in addition to any other penalty authorized by law, as the court deems necessary to deter such abuse of process.(j)Model policy(1)In generalThe Director shall draft a model policy to maximize the accessibility of extreme risk protection orders.(2)ContentsIn drafting the model policy under paragraph (1), the Director shall—(A)ensure that State and local law enforcement officers and members of the public without legal training are able to easily file petitions for extreme risk protection orders;(B)prescribe outreach efforts by employees of the district courts of the United States to familiarize relevant law enforcement officers and the public with the procedures for filing petitions, either—(i)through direct outreach; or(ii)in coordination with—(I)relevant officials in the executive or legislative branch of the Federal Government; or(II)with State and local officials;(C)prescribe policies for allowing the filing of petitions and prompt adjudication of petitions on weekends and outside of normal court hours;(D)prescribe policies for coordinating with law enforcement agencies to ensure the safe, timely, and effective service of extreme risk protection orders and relinquishment of firearms, ammunition, and permits, as applicable; and(E)identify governmental and non-governmental resources and partners to help officials of the district courts of the United States coordinate with civil society organizations to ensure the safe and effective implementation of this section.(k)Reporting(1)Individual reports(A)In generalNot later than 2 court days after the date on which a court issues or dissolves an extreme risk protection order under this section or an extreme risk protection order expires without being renewed, the court shall notify—(i)the Attorney General;(ii)each relevant mental health agency in the State in which the order is issued; and(iii)State and local law enforcement officials in the jurisdiction in which the order is issued, including the national instant criminal background check system single point of contact for the State of residence of the respondent, where applicable.(B)FormatA court shall submit a notice under subparagraph (A) in an electronic format, in a manner prescribed by the Attorney General.(C)Update of databasesAs soon as practicable and not later than 5 days after receiving a notice under subparagraph (A), the Attorney General shall update the background check databases of the Attorney General to reflect the prohibitions articulated in the applicable extreme risk protection order.(2)Annual reportsNot later than 1 year after the date of enactment of the Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order Act of 2021, and annually thereafter, the Director shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a report that includes, with respect to the preceding year—(A)the number of petitions for ex parte orders filed, as well as the number of such orders issued and the number denied;(B)the number of petitions for long-term orders filed, as well as the number of such orders issued and the number denied;(C)the number of petitions for renewals of long-term orders filed, as well as the number of such orders issued and the number denied; and(D)the number of cases in which a court has issued a penalty for false reporting or frivolous petitions..(b)Technical and conforming amendments(1)Table of sectionsThe table of sections for chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:932. Extreme risk protection orders..(2)ForfeitureSection 924(d)(3) of title 18, United States Code, is amended—(A)in subparagraph (E), by striking and at the end;(B)in subparagraph (F), by striking the period at the end and inserting ; and; and(C)by adding at the end the following:(G)any attempt to violate an extreme risk protection order issued under section 932..3.Brady Act prohibitorsSection 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended—(1)in subsection (d)—(A)in paragraph (8), by striking or at the end;(B)in paragraph (9), by striking the period at the end and inserting ; or; and(C)by inserting after paragraph (9) the following:(10)is subject to a court order that prohibits the person from purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm or ammunition.; and(2)in subsection (g)—(A)in paragraph (8), by striking or at the end;(B)in paragraph (9), by striking the comma at the end and inserting ; or; and(C)by inserting after paragraph (9) the following:(10)who is subject to a court order that prohibits the person from purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm or ammunition,.4.SeverabilityIf any provision of this Act or any amendment made by this Act, or any application of such provision or amendment to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of the provisions of this Act and the amendments made by this Act and the application of the provision or amendment to any other person or circumstance shall not be affected.5.PreemptionNothing in this Act or an amendment made by this Act shall be construed to preempt any State law or policy.