110 HR 2244 IH: Geriatric Assessment and Chronic Care Coordination Act of 2007
U.S. House of Representatives
2007-05-09
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
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 2244
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 9, 2007
Mr. Gene Green of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 concerned

A BILL
To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide Medicare beneficiaries with access to geriatric assessments and chronic care coordination services, and for other purposes.

1.Short title; table of contents
(a)Short TitleThis Act may be cited as the Geriatric Assessment and Chronic Care Coordination Act of 2007.
(b)Table of ContentsThe table of contents of this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Medicare coverage of geriatric assessments.
Sec. 4. Medicare coverage of chronic care coordination services.
Sec. 5. Outreach activities regarding geriatric assessments and chronic care coordination services under the Medicare program.
Sec. 6. Study and report on geriatric assessments and chronic care coordination services under the Medicare program.
Sec. 7. Study and report on best practices for Medicare chronic care coordination.
Sec. 8. Rule of construction.
2.FindingsCongress makes the following findings:
(1)The Medicare program must be redesigned to provide high-quality, cost-effective care to the growing population of elderly individuals with multiple chronic conditions.
(2)According to the Congressional Budget Office, approximately 43 percent of Medicare costs can be attributed to 5 percent of Medicare’s most costly beneficiaries.
(3)Currently, 78 percent of the Medicare population has at least 1 chronic condition, and 2/3 have more than 1 chronic condition. The 20 percent of beneficiaries with 5 or more chronic conditions account for 2/3 of all Medicare spending. In addition, the large baby boomer generation is moving toward retirement and Medicare eligibility.
(4)The prevalence of chronic conditions increases with age: 74 percent of the 65- to 69-year-old group has at least 1 chronic condition, while 86 percent of the 85 years and older group has at least 1 chronic condition. Similarly, just 14 percent of the 65- to 69-year-old group has 5 or more chronic conditions, while 28 percent of the 85 years and older group has 5 or more chronic conditions.
(5)There is a strong pattern of increasing utilization as the number of conditions increase. Fifty-five percent of Medicare beneficiaries with 5 or more conditions experienced an inpatient hospital stay compared to 5 percent of those with 1 condition or 9 percent of those with 2 conditions.
(6)In terms of physician visits, the average Medicare beneficiary has over 15 physician visits annually and sees 6 different physicians annually.
(7)When Alzheimer’s disease or other form of dementia are present along with 1 or more other chronic conditions, utilization also increases. For example, in 2000, total average per person Medicare expenditures for those with congestive heart failure and Alzheimer’s or dementia were 47 percent higher than for those with congestive heart failure and no dementia.
(8)Research conducted in the United States and internationally indicate that the delivery of higher quality health care, increased efficiency, and cost-effectiveness are the result of systems in which patients are linked with a physician or another qualified health professional who coordinates their care.
(9)The current Medicare program does not reward physicians for integrating and coordinating health care because these services are not explicitly recognized and distinctly paid for. Instead, physicians are incentivized to provide episodic care and to generate more individual patient visits to the doctor’s office and hospital for separately reimbursed tests and procedures.
(10)The chronic care model established by this Act includes several elements that are effective in managing chronic disease, including—
(A)linkages with community resources;
(B)health care system changes that reward quality chronic care;
(C)support for patient self-management of chronic disease;
(D)practice redesign;
(E)evidence-based clinical practice guidelines; and
(F)clinical information systems, such as electronic medical records and continuity of care records.
(11)Financial incentives within the Medicare program should be realigned as part of a comprehensive system change. The Medicare program should be restructured to reimburse physicians and other qualified health professionals for the cost of coordinating care.
(12)The provisions of, and amendments made by, this Act are intended to—
(A)create savings to the Medicare program;
(B)establish a process to identify those Medicare beneficiaries most likely to benefit from having a provider coordinate their health care needs; and
(C)establish a payment under the Medicare program for—
(i)the assessment of those health care needs; and
(ii)the activities required to coordinate those health care needs.
3.Medicare coverage of geriatric assessments
(a)Coverage of geriatric assessments
(1)In generalSection 1861(s)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(s)(2)) is amended—
(A)in subparagraph (Z), by striking and at the end;
(B)in subparagraph (AA), by adding and at the end; and
(C)by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

(BB)geriatric assessments (as defined in subsection (ccc)(1));.
(2)Conforming amendments
(A)Section 1862(a)(7) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395y(a)(7)) is amended by striking or (K) and inserting (K), or (BB).
(B)Clauses (i) and (ii) of section 1861(s)(2)(K) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(s)(2)(K)) are each amended by striking subsection (ww)(1) and inserting subsections (ww)(1) and (ccc)(1).
(b)Geriatric Assessments DefinedSection 1861 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsections:

(ccc)Geriatric Assessment
(1)The term geriatric assessment means each of the following:
(A)An assessment of the clinical status, functional status, social and environmental functioning, and need for caregiving of a geriatric assessment eligible individual (as defined in subsection (ddd)). The assessment shall include a comprehensive history and physical examination and assessments of the following domains using standardized validated clinical tools:
(i)Comprehensive review of medications and the individual's adherence to the medication regimen.
(ii)Measurement of affect, cognition and executive function, mobility, balance, gait, risk of falling, and sensory function.
(iii)Social functioning, environmental needs, and caregiver resources and needs.
(iv)Any other domain determined appropriate by the Secretary.
(B)Subsequent assessments, which may not be conducted more frequently than annually, unless the subsequent assessment is medically necessary due to a significant change in the condition of the geriatric assessment eligible individual.
(C)The development of a written care plan based on the results of the assessment under subparagraph (A) (and any subsequent assessment under subparagraph (B)). The care plan shall detail identified problems, outline therapies, assign responsibility for actions, and indicate whether the individual is likely to benefit from chronic care coordination services (as defined in subsection (eee)(1)). If the individual is determined likely to benefit from chronic care coordination services, the care plan shall also provide the basis for the chronic care coordination plan to be developed by the chronic care manager pursuant to subsection (eee).
(2)A geriatric assessment may only be conducted by—
(A)a physician;
(B)a practitioner described in section 1842(b)(18)(C)(i) under the supervision of a physician; or
(C)any other provider that meets such conditions as the Secretary may specify.
(ddd)Geriatric Assessment Eligible Individual
(1)Subject to paragraph (3), the term geriatric assessment eligible individual means an individual identified by the Secretary as eligible for a geriatric assessment.
(2)In identifying individuals under paragraph (1), the following rules shall apply:
(A)The individual must have at least 1 of the following present:
(i)Multiple chronic conditions.
(ii)Dementia, as defined in the most recent Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, and at least 1 chronic condition.
(iii)Any other factor identified by the Secretary.
(B)
(i)The individual, as determined by the Secretary—
(I)must have aggregate medical costs under this title in the top 10 percent of all applicable individuals during the previous 36 months; or
(II)is likely to incur costs under this title in the top 10 percent of all applicable individuals during the current or subsequent calendar year.
(ii)The determination under clause (i)(II) of future costs shall be based on the medical condition of the individual, the individual's past cost to the program under this title, and other factors as identified by the Secretary.
(iii)The individual meets such additional criteria (if any) as the Secretary establishes under subparagraph (C).
(C)
(i)If the Secretary estimates that the total number of applicable individuals that would be geriatric assessment eligible individuals in a year (but for this subparagraph) exceeds 10 percent of the total number of applicable individuals in the year, the Secretary shall establish and apply under subparagraph (B)(iii) such additional criteria as is designed to eliminate such excess.
(ii)The Secretary shall consult with physicians, physician groups, organizations representing individuals with chronic conditions and older adults, and other stakeholders in identifying any additional criteria under clause (i).
(D)For purposes of this paragraph, the term applicable individual means an individual enrolled for benefits under part B but not enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan or a plan under section 1876.
(3)The term geriatric assessment eligible individual shall not include the following individuals:
(A)An individual who is receiving hospice care under this title.
(B)An individual who is residing in a skilled nursing facility, a nursing facility (as defined in section 1919), or any other facility identified by the Secretary.
(C)An individual medically determined to have end-stage renal disease.
(D)An individual enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan or a plan under section 1876.
(E)An individual enrolled in a PACE program under section 1894.
(F)Any other categories of individuals determined appropriate by the Secretary.
(4)For purposes of this subsection, the term chronic condition means a condition, such as dementia, that lasts or is expected to last 1 year or longer, limits what an individual can do, and requires ongoing care..
(c)Payment and Elimination of Cost-Sharing
(1)Payment and elimination of coinsuranceSection 1833(a)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l(a)(1)) is amended—
(A)in subparagraph (N), by inserting other than geriatric assessments (as defined in section 1861(ccc)(1)) after (as defined in section 1848(j)(3));
(B)by striking and before (V); and
(C)by inserting before the semicolon at the end the following: , and (W) with respect to geriatric assessments (as defined in section 1861(ccc)(1)), the amount paid shall be 100 percent of the lesser of the actual charge for the services or the amount determined under the payment basis determined under section 1848.
(2)Payment under physician fee scheduleSection 1848(j)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w–4(j)(3)) is amended by inserting (2)(BB), after (2)(AA),.
(3)Elimination of coinsurance in outpatient hospital settings
(A)Exclusion from OPD fee scheduleSection 1833(t)(1)(B)(iv) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l(t)(1)(B)(iv)) is amended by striking and diagnostic mammography and inserting , diagnostic mammography, or geriatric assessments (as defined in section 1861(ccc)(1)).
(B)Conforming amendmentsSection 1833(a)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l(a)(2)) is amended—
(i)in subparagraph (F), by striking and at the end;
(ii)in subparagraph (G)(ii), by striking the comma at the end and inserting ; and; and
(iii)by inserting after subparagraph (G)(ii) the following new subparagraph:

(H)with respect to geriatric assessments (as defined in section 1861(ccc)(1)) furnished by an outpatient department of a hospital, the amount determined under paragraph (1)(W),.
(4)Elimination of deductibleThe first sentence of section 1833(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l(b)) is amended—
(A)by striking and before (8); and
(B)by inserting before the period the following: , and (9) such deductible shall not apply with respect to geriatric assessments (as defined in section 1861(ccc)(1)).
(d)Frequency LimitationSection 1862(a)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395y(a)(1)) is amended—
(1)by striking and at the end of subparagraph (M);
(2)by striking the semicolon at the end of subparagraph (N) and inserting , and; and
(3)by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

(O)in the case of geriatric assessments (as defined in section 1861(ccc)(1)), which are performed more frequently than is covered under such section;.
(e)Exception to Limits on Physician ReferralsSection 1877(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395nn(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

(6)Geriatric assessmentsIn the case of a designated health service, if the designated health service is a geriatric assessment (as defined in section 1861(ccc)(1)) and furnished by a physician..
(f)RulemakingThe Secretary of Health and Human Services shall define such terms, establish such procedures, and promulgate such regulations as the Secretary determines necessary to implement the amendments made by, and the provisions of, this section, including the establishment of additional domains under subsection (ccc)(1)(A)(iv) of section 1861 of the Social Security Act, as added by subsection (b). In promulgating such regulations, the Secretary shall consult with physicians, physician groups and organizations, and organizations representing individuals with chronic conditions and older adults.
(g)Effective DateThe amendments made by this section shall apply to assessments furnished on or after January 1, 2008.
4.Medicare coverage of chronic care coordination services
(a)Part B coverage of chronic care coordination services
(1)In generalSection 1861(s)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(s)(2)), as amended by section 3(a)(1), is amended—
(A)in subparagraph (AA), by striking and at the end;
(B)in subparagraph (BB), by adding and at the end; and
(C)by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

(CC)chronic care coordination services (as defined in subsection (eee));.
(2)Conforming amendments
(A)Section 1862(a)(7) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395y(a)(7)), as amended by section 3(a)(2)(A), is amended by striking or (BB) and inserting (BB), or (CC).
(B)Clauses (i) and (ii) of section 1861(s)(2)(K) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(s)(2)(K)), as amended by section 3(a)(2)(B), are each amended by striking subsections (ww)(1) and (ccc) and inserting subsections (ww)(1), (ccc), and (eee).
(b)Services DescribedSection 1861 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x), as amended by section 3(b), is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

(eee)Chronic Care Coordination Services; Chronic Care Manager; Chronic Care Eligible Individual
(1)The term chronic care coordination services means services that are furnished to a chronic care eligible individual (as defined in paragraph (3)) by a single chronic care manager (as defined in paragraph (2)) chosen by the individual under a plan of care prescribed by such chronic care manager for the purpose of chronic care and dementia coordination, which may include any of the following services:
(A)The development of an initial plan of care (based on the results of a geriatric assessment, as defined in subsection ccc)), and subsequent appropriate revisions to that plan of care.
(B)The management of, and referral for, medical and other health services, including interdisciplinary care conferences and management with other providers.
(C)The monitoring and management of medications.
(D)Patient education and counseling services.
(E)Family caregiver education and counseling services.
(F)Self-management services, including health education and risk appraisal to identify behavioral risk factors through self-assessment.
(G)Providing access by telephone with physicians and other appropriate health care professionals, including 24-hour availability of such professionals for emergencies.
(H)Management with the principal nonprofessional caregiver in the home.
(I)Managing and facilitating transitions among health care professionals and across settings of care, including the following:
(i)Pursuing the treatment option elected by the individual.
(ii)Including any advance directive executed by the individual in the medical file of the individual.
(J)Information about, and referral to, hospice care, including patient and family caregiver education and counseling about hospice care, and facilitating transition to hospice care when elected.
(K)Information about, referral to, and management with, community services.
(L)Such additional services for which payment would not otherwise be made under this title that the Secretary may specify that encourage the receipt of, or improve the effectiveness of, the services described in the preceding subparagraphs.
(2)
(A)For purposes of this subsection, the term chronic care manager means an individual or entity that—
(i)is—
(I)a physician;
(II)a practitioner described in clause (i) or (iv) of section 1842(b)(18)(C) under the supervision of a physician; or
(III)any other provider that meets such conditions as the Secretary may specify; and
(ii)has entered into a chronic care coordination agreement with the Secretary.
(B)
(i)For purposes of subparagraph (A)(ii), each chronic care coordination agreement shall meet the requirements described in subparagraph (C) and shall—
(I)subject to clause (ii), be entered into for a period of 3 years and may be renewed if the Secretary is satisfied that the chronic care manager continues to meet such terms and conditions as the Secretary may require; and
(II)contain such other terms and conditions as the Secretary may require.
(ii)Each chronic care coordination agreement shall provide for the termination of such agreement prior to such 3-year period in the case where the chronic care manager—
(I)is no longer able to provide chronic care services; or
(II)does not meet such terms and conditions as the Secretary may require.
(C)
(i)Subject to clause (ii), the requirements of this subparagraph are met if the agreement requires the chronic care manager to perform, or provide for the performance of, the following services:
(I)Advocating for, and providing ongoing support, oversight, and guidance with respect to the implementation of a plan of care that provides an integrated, coherent, and cross-disciplined plan for ongoing medical care that is developed in partnership with the chronic care eligible individual and all other physicians and other care providers and agencies (including home health agencies) providing care to the chronic care eligible individual.
(II)Using evidence-based medicine and clinical decision support tools to guide decision making at the point of care and on the basis of specific patient factors.
(III)Using health information technology, including, where appropriate, remote monitoring and patient registries, to monitor and track the health status of patients and to provide patients with enhanced and convenient access to health care services.
(IV)Encouraging patients to engage in the management of their own health through education and support systems.
(V)Incorporating family caregivers into the chronic care planning process.
(ii)The Secretary may modify the services required under the agreement under clause (i), including by requiring different services or services in addition to those described in subclauses (I) through (V) of such clause.
(D)The Secretary shall adopt procedures which exempt providers in rural areas from providing 1 or more of the services otherwise required to be provided under subparagraph (C) or modify such requirements for such providers. In establishing such procedures, the Secretary shall ensure that such exemptions and modifications do not impact the quality of chronic care coordination services furnished by such providers.
(3)For purposes of this subsection, the term chronic care eligible individual means a geriatric assessment eligible individual (as defined in subsection (ddd)) who has undergone a geriatric assessment (as defined in subsection (ccc)(1)) which determined that the individual would benefit from chronic care coordination..
(c)Payment and Elimination of Cost-Sharing
(1)Payment and elimination of coinsuranceSection 1833(a)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l(a)(1)), as amended by section 3(c)(1), is amended—
(A)in subparagraph (N), by inserting or chronic care coordination services (as defined in section 1861(eee)) after other than geriatric assessments (as defined in section 1861(ccc)(1));
(B)by striking and before (W); and
(C)by inserting before the semicolon at the end the following: , and (X) with respect to chronic care coordination services (as defined in section 1861(eee)), the amount paid shall be 100 percent of the amount determined under section 1848(m).
(2)Payment
(A)In generalSection 1848 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w–4) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

(m)Payment for chronic care coordination services
(1)Establishment
(A)In generalThe Secretary shall establish a monthly care coordination payment amount under this section for chronic care coordination services (as defined in paragraph (1) of section 1861(eee)(1)) furnished to a chronic care eligible individual (as defined in paragraph (3) of such section) by a chronic care manager (as defined in paragraph (2) of such section 1861).
(B)RequirementsIn establishing payment amounts under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall—
(i)take into account the time required of the chronic care manager in providing the care coordination services to chronic care eligible individuals and the costs associated with the practice-level health information technologies and systems incurred by the chronic care manager in providing such services; and
(ii)ensure that such payments do not result in a reduction in payments for office visits or other evaluation and management services that would otherwise be allowable.
(2)CodeUnder the conditions set forth in this section, the Secretary shall develop a care coordination payment code for chronic care coordination services and a value for such code.
(3)Separate payments from payments for geriatric assessmentsPayments for chronic care coordination services shall be made separately from payments for geriatric assessments (as defined in section 1861(ccc)(1)) and other services for which payment is made under this title..
(B)Conforming amendmentSection 1848(j)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w–4(j)(3)), as amended by section 3(c)(2)), is amended by inserting (2)(CC), after (2)(BB),.
(3)Elimination of coinsurance in outpatient hospital settings
(A)Exclusion from OPD fee scheduleSection 1833(t)(1)(B)(iv) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l(t)(1)(B)(iv)), as amended by section 3(c)(3)(A), is amended by striking or geriatric assessments (as defined in section 1861(ccc)(1)) and inserting geriatric assessments (as defined in section 1861(ccc)(1)), or chronic care coordination services (as defined in section 1861(eee)(1)).
(B)Conforming amendmentsSection 1833(a)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l(a)(2)), as amended by section 3(c)(3)(B), is amended—
(i)in subparagraph (G)(ii), by striking and at the end;
(ii)in subparagraph (H), by striking the comma at the end and inserting ; and; and
(iii)by inserting after subparagraph (H) the following new subparagraph:

(I)with respect to chronic care coordination services (as defined in section 1861(eee)(1)) furnished by an outpatient department of a hospital, the amount determined under section 1848(m),.
(4)Elimination of deductibleParagraph (9) of section 1833(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l(b)), as added by section 3(c)(4), is amended by inserting or chronic care coordination services (as defined in section 1861(eee)(1)) after geriatric assessments (as defined in section 1861(ccc)(1)).
(d)Application of Limits on BillingSection 1842(b)(18)(C) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395u(b)(18)(C)) is amended by adding at the end the following new clause:

(vii)A chronic care manager (as defined in section 1861(eee)(2)) that is not a physician..
(e)Exception to Limits on Physician ReferralsSection 1877(b)(6) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395nn(b)(6)), as amended by section 3(e), is amended to read as follows:

(6)Geriatric assessments and chronic care coordination servicesIn the case of a designated health service, if the designated health service is—
(A)a geriatric assessment or a chronic care coordination service (as defined in subsections (ccc)(1) or (eee)(1) of section 1861, respectively); and
(B)provided by a physician or a chronic care manager (as defined in section 1861(eee)(2))..
(f)RulemakingThe Secretary of Health and Human Services shall define such terms, establish such procedures, and promulgate such regulations as the Secretary determines necessary to implement the amendments made by, and the provisions of, this section. In promulgating such regulations, the Secretary shall consult with physicians, physician groups and organizations, and organizations representing individuals with chronic conditions and older adults.
(g)Effective DateThe amendments made by this section shall apply to chronic care coordination services furnished on or after January 1, 2008.
5.Outreach activities regarding geriatric assessments and chronic care coordination services under the Medicare programThe Secretary of Health and Human Services shall conduct outreach activities to individuals likely to be eligible to receive coverage of geriatric assessments (as defined in subsection (ccc) of section 1861 of the Social Security Act, as added by section 3) under the Medicare program and individuals likely to be eligible to receive coverage of chronic care coordination services (as defined in subsection (eee) of such section 1861, as added by section 4) under the Medicare program, to inform such individuals about the availability of such benefits under the Medicare program.
6.Study and report on geriatric assessments and chronic care coordination services under the Medicare program
(a)StudyThe Secretary of Health and Human Services shall enter into a contract with an entity to conduct a study on—
(1)the effectiveness of the coverage of geriatric assessments and chronic care coordination services under the Medicare program (under the amendments made by sections 3 and 4) on improving the quality of care provided to Medicare beneficiaries with chronic conditions, including dementia; and
(2)the impact of such geriatric assessments and care coordination services on reducing expenditures under title XVIII of the Social Security Act, including reduced expenditures that may result from—
(A)reducing preventable hospital admissions;
(B)more appropriate use of pharmaceuticals; and
(C)reducing duplicate or unnecessary tests.
(b)ReportNot later than 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the entity conducting the study under subsection (a) shall submit to Congress and the Secretary of Health and Human Services a report on the study, together with recommendations for such legislation or administrative action as such entity determines appropriate.
(c)Authorization of appropriationsThere are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section.
7.Study and report on best practices for Medicare chronic care coordination
(a)StudyThe Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, shall conduct a study of the following issues:
(1)The effectiveness of pay-for-performance programs to serve Medicare beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions, including dementia.
(2)The cost-effectiveness of chronic care coordination under the Medicare program.
(3)Whether the quality measures used for making payments under part B of the Medicare program, including the measures developed under subsection (k) of section 1848 of the Social Security Act (as added by section 101 of division B of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006, Public Law 109–432), improve the quality of care provided to Medicare beneficiaries with multiple chronic illnesses, including dementia.
(b)ReportNot later than 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall submit to Congress a report on the study conducted under subsection (a) that contains—
(1)recommendations on the best quality indicators for monitoring the chronic care coordination of the conditions of Medicare beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions, including dementia; and
(2)such other recommendations for legislation or administrative action as the Secretary determines appropriate.
8.Rule of constructionNothing in this Act, or in the amendments made by this Act, shall be construed as requiring an individual to receive a geriatric assessment (as defined in section 1861(ccc)(1) of the Social Security Act, as added by section 3(b)) or chronic care coordination services (as defined in section 1861(eee)(1) of such Act, as added by section 4(b)).


116 HRES 1203 IH: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives supporting the Republic of Artsakh at all levels of civil society and government and recognizing the people of Artsakh’s inalienable right to self-determination.
U.S. House of Representatives
2020-10-23
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. 1203IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESOctober 23, 2020Mr. Pallone (for himself, Mr. Bilirakis, Mr. Schiff, Ms. Speier, Mr. McGovern, Ms. Clark of Massachusetts, Mr. Cárdenas, Mr. Costa, Mrs. Napolitano, Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York, Mrs. Lawrence, Mr. Sherman, Mr. Cicilline, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Sires, Ms. Brownley of California, Ms. Sánchez, Mr. Krishnamoorthi, Mr. Espaillat, Mr. Danny K. Davis of Illinois, Ms. Eshoo, Mr. Khanna, Ms. Lofgren, Ms. Titus, Ms. Meng, Mr. Pascrell, Mr. Suozzi, Mr. Ted Lieu of California, Ms. Bass, and Mr. Langevin) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign AffairsRESOLUTIONExpressing the sense of the House of Representatives supporting the Republic of Artsakh at all levels of civil society and government and recognizing the people of Artsakh’s inalienable right to self-determination.Whereas peace, stability, and democracy in the Caucasus region are in the political, security, and economic interests of the United States and are matters of international concern;Whereas the United States considers any effort to determine the future of the Republic of Artsakh, formerly the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh, by other than peaceful means, including acts of aggression, blockades, or threats against civil aviation, a threat to peace;Whereas the United States remains committed to the negotiations under the auspices of the Co-Chairs of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s (OSCE) Minsk Group negotiations toward a durable and democratic resolution of outstanding status and security issues related to the Artsakh Republic;Whereas the Artsakh Republic was one of three parties to the 1994 cease-fire that ended major military hostilities between Artsakh and Azerbaijan, and remains committed to a negotiated, non-violent resolution;Whereas the Artsakh Republic took part in OSCE negotiations until 1998, when Azerbaijan blocked its democratically elected representatives from full and direct participation in negotiations regarding its future status and security;Whereas, in response to Azerbaijan aggression against the Armenian people during the 1990s, the United States Congress adopted section 907 of the Freedom Support Act, which states: United States assistance under this or any other Act (other than assistance under title V of this Act) may not be provided to the Government of Azerbaijan until the President determines, and so reports to the Congress, that the Government of Azerbaijan is taking demonstrable steps to cease all blockades and other offensive uses of force against Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh;Whereas Azerbaijan, aided by Turkish forces and military supplies, launched a large-scale military offensive against the Line-of-Contact separating Artsakh and Azerbaijan on September 27, 2020, that was in clear violation of the 1994 cease-fire;Whereas Turkish-supported mercenaries were recruited specifically for the purposes of fighting on behalf Azerbaijan in the September 27, 2020, outbreak of violence, and Turkish F–16 fighter jets are suspected of aiding the indiscriminate bombing of large civilian population centers like Stepanakert and Shoushi that have endangered the lives of thousands of innocent civilians and displaced thousands more;Whereas the September 27, 2020, military offensive by Azerbaijan represents its third large-scale attack on Artsakh since the signing of the 1994 cease-fire, and the bombastic rhetoric from Turkish President Erdogan and Azerbaijani President Aliyev has clearly shown they do not desire a peaceful outcome of the conflict that results in ethnic Armenians remaining in the Karabakh region;Whereas the Artsakh Republic has developed democratic institutions, fostered a pluralist political system, and, over the past quarter century, held parliamentary and Presidential elections that have been rated as free and fair by international observers, despite the constant threat of military incursion by Azerbaijani forces;Whereas international recognition of a country’s right to self-determination is the only way to ensure its people will be able to voice their legitimate concerns and lobby for the peaceful settlement of conflicts on the world stage;Whereas the Artsakh Republic, along with the United States, Armenia, and the OSCE, support cease-fire monitoring proposals to strengthen the 1994 cease-fire, including—(1)an agreement from all sides to not deploy snipers, heavy arms, or new weaponry along the line of contact;(2)the placement of OSCE-monitored, advanced gunfire-locator systems and sound-ranging equipment to determine the source of attacks along the line of contact; and(3)the deployment of additional OSCE observers along the line of contact to better monitor the cease-fire;Whereas current Department of State policies and practices place self-imposed restrictions on travel and communications between the United States and Artsakh, limiting oversight of United States taxpayer-funded assistance programs and discouraging the open dialogue and discourse that can contribute to a peaceful resolution of Artsakh-related status and security issues; andWhereas open dialogue and communications contribute to greater international understanding and facilitate more effective conflict resolution: Now, therefore, be itThat the House of Representatives—(1)condemns the September 27, 2020, military offensive launched by Azerbaijani and Turkish-backed forces on Artsakh;(2)calls upon all parties involved in the conflict to withdraw to the initial positions as of September 27, 2020, to honor any negotiated cease-fire, to halt any attacks on civilian populations, and allow unfettered access for humanitarian and emergency aid to civilians in need of such assistance;(3)urges the President of the United States to follow the congressional intent of section 907 of the Freedom Support Act and withhold any further assistance to Azerbaijan until they end military operations against Artsakh;(4)affirms that the only peaceful, long-lasting resolution to this conflict will come from international recognition of the Republic of Artsakh;(5)upholds its commitment to supporting actions that encourage visits and communication between officials from the United States and Artsakh at all levels, including cabinet-level national security officials, general officers, and other executive branch officials, to travel to Artsakh and openly and directly communicate with their Artsakh counterparts;(6)encourages open communication, meetings, and other direct contacts between officials of Artsakh and the executive and legislative branches of the United States Government, representatives of State and local governments, and representatives of American civil society; and(7)calls for the full and direct participation of the democratically elected Government of the Republic of Artsakh in all OSCE and other negotiations regarding its future.


113 HR 3879 IH: To make permanent the Payments in Lieu of Taxes program.
U.S. House of Representatives
2014-01-15
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.

I113th CONGRESS2d SessionH. R. 3879IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESJanuary 15, 2014Mrs. Kirkpatrick (for herself, Mr. Polis, Mr. Garcia, and Mr. Enyart) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural ResourcesA BILLTo make permanent the Payments in Lieu of Taxes program.1.Payments in lieu of taxesSection 6906 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking of fiscal years 2008 through 2013 and inserting fiscal year.


		II
		110th CONGRESS
		1st Session
		S. 415
		IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

			January 29, 2007
			Mr. Brownback (for
			 himself, Mr. Inhofe,
			 Mr. Burr, Mr.
			 Sessions, Mr. DeMint,
			 Mr. Roberts, Mr. Grassley, Mr.
			 Chambliss, Mr. Thune,
			 Mr. Bunning, Mr. Kyl, and Mr.
			 Allard) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and
			 referred to the Committee on the
			 Judiciary

		A BILL
		To amend the Revised Statutes of the United
		  States to prevent the use of the legal system in a manner that extorts money
		  from State and local governments, and the Federal Government, and inhibits such
		  governments’ constitutional actions under the first, tenth, and fourteenth
		  amendments.

		1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the
			 Veterans’ Memorials, Boy Scouts,
			 Public Seals, and Other Public Expressions of Religion Protection Act of
			 2007.
		2.Limitations on
			 certain lawsuits against State and local officials
			(a)Civil action for
			 deprivation of rightsSection 1979 of the Revised Statutes of the
			 United States (42
			 U.S.C. 1983) is amended—
				(1)by inserting
			 (a) before the first sentence; and
				(2)by adding at the
			 end the following:

						(b)The remedies with respect to a claim under
				this section are limited to injunctive and declaratory relief where the
				deprivation consists of a violation of a prohibition in the Constitution
				against the establishment of religion, including, but not limited to, a
				violation resulting from—
							(1)a veterans’ memorial’s containing religious
				words or imagery;
							(2)a public building’s containing religious
				words or imagery;
							(3)the presence of religious words or imagery
				in the official seals of the several States and the political subdivisions
				thereof; or
							(4)the chartering of Boy Scout units by
				components of States and political subdivisions, and the Boy Scouts’ using
				public buildings of States and political
				subdivisions.
							.
				(b)Attorney’s
			 feesSection 722(b) of the Revised Statutes of the United States
			 (42 U.S.C.
			 1988(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
			 However, no fees shall be awarded under this subsection with respect to
			 a claim described in subsection (b) of section nineteen hundred and seventy
			 nine..
			3.Limitations on
			 certain lawsuits against the United States and federal officials
			(a)In
			 generalNotwithstanding any other provision of law, a court shall
			 not award reasonable fees and expenses of attorneys to the prevailing party on
			 a claim of injury consisting of the violation of a prohibition in the
			 Constitution against the establishment of religion brought against the United
			 States or any agency or any official of the United States acting in his or her
			 official capacity in any court having jurisdiction over such claim, and the
			 remedies with respect to such a claim shall be limited to injunctive and
			 declaratory relief.
			(b)DefinitionAs
			 used in this section, the term a claim of injury consisting of the
			 violation of a prohibition in the Constitution against the establishment of
			 religion includes, but is not limited to, a claim of injury resulting
			 from—
				(1)a veterans’
			 memorial’s containing religious words or imagery;
				(2)a Federal
			 building’s containing religious words or imagery;
				(3)the presence of
			 religious words or imagery in the official seal of the United States and in its
			 currency and official Pledge; or
				(4)the chartering of
			 Boy Scout units by components of the Armed Forces of the United States and by
			 other public entities, and the Boy Scouts’ using Department of Defense and
			 other public installations.
				4.Effective
			 dateThis Act and the
			 amendments made by this Act take effect on the date of the enactment of this
			 Act and apply to any case that—
			(1)is pending on such
			 date of enactment; or
			(2)is commenced on or
			 after such date of enactment.


117 S691 IS: Global Trade Accountability Act
U.S. Senate
2021-03-10
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.

II117th CONGRESS1st SessionS. 691IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATESMarch 10, 2021Mr. Lee (for himself, Mr. Moran, and Mr. Paul) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on FinanceA BILLTo provide for congressional review of the imposition of duties and other trade measures by the executive branch, and for other purposes.1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Global Trade Accountability Act.2.Congressional review of unilateral trade actions(a)In generalChapter 5 of title I of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2191 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:155.Congressional review of unilateral trade actions(a)Unilateral trade action defined(1)In generalIn this section, the term unilateral trade action means any of the following actions taken with respect to the importation of an article pursuant to a provision of law specified in paragraph (2):(A)A prohibition on importation of the article.(B)The imposition of or an increase in a duty applicable to the article.(C)The imposition or tightening of a tariff-rate quota applicable to the article.(D)The imposition or tightening of a quantitative restriction on the importation of the article.(E)The suspension, withdrawal, or prevention of the application of trade agreement concessions with respect to the article.(F)Any other restriction on importation of the article.(2)Provisions of law specifiedThe provisions of law specified in this paragraph are the following:(A)Section 122.(B)Chapter 1 of title II.(C)Title III.(D)Section 406.(E)Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1338).(F)Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. 1862).(G)Section 103(a) of the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (19 U.S.C. 4202(a)).(H)The Trading with the Enemy Act (50 U.S.C. 4301 et seq.).(I)The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.).(J)Any provision of law enacted to implement a trade agreement to which the United States is a party.(K)Any provision of a trade agreement to which the United States is a party.(3)Exception for technical corrections to Harmonized Tariff ScheduleA technical correction to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States shall not be considered a unilateral trade action for purposes of this section.(b)Congressional approval requiredA unilateral trade action may not take effect unless—(1)the President submits to Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States a report that includes—(A)a description of the proposed unilateral trade action;(B)the proposed effective period for the action;(C)an economic cost-benefit analysis of the action, including an assessment of—(i)whether the action is in the national economic interest of the United States; and(ii)the macroeconomic effects of the action on—(I)employment in the United States;(II)the gross domestic product of the United States; and(III)revenues and expenditures of the Federal Government; and(D)a list of articles that will be affected by the action by subheading number of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States; and(2)a joint resolution of approval is enacted pursuant to subsection (d) with respect to the action.(c)Report of Comptroller GeneralNot later than 30 days after the submission of the report required by subsection (b)(1) with respect to a proposed unilateral trade action, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report on the proposed action that includes an assessment of the compliance of the President with the provision of law specified in subsection (a)(2) pursuant to which the action would be taken.(d)Procedures for joint resolution of approval(1)Joint resolution of approval definedFor purposes of this subsection, the term joint resolution of approval means a joint resolution of either House of Congress that—(A)states that Congress approves an action proposed by the President in a report submitted under subsection (b)(1); and(B)describes the action being approved by Congress.(2)IntroductionDuring the period of 45 days after a House of Congress receives a report under subsection (b)(1) with respect to a unilateral trade action, a joint resolution of approval may be introduced by any Member of that House.(3)Committee consideration(A)ReferralA joint resolution of approval introduced in the House of Representatives shall be referred to the Committee on Ways and Means and a joint resolution of approval introduced in the Senate shall be referred to the Committee on Finance.(B)ConsiderationThe Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee on Finance may, in considering a joint resolution of approval, hold such hearings and meetings and solicit such testimony as the Committee considers appropriate.(C)Reporting(i)In generalSubject to subparagraph (D), the Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee on Finance may, at any time after receiving a joint resolution of approval, report the resolution favorably or unfavorably.(ii)Subsequent resolutionsIf a subsequent joint resolution of approval relating to the same unilateral trade action proposed in the same report submitted under subsection (b)(1) is referred to the Committee on Ways and Means or the Committee on Finance after the first such resolution is reported or discharged, the subsequent resolution shall not be reported under this subparagraph.(iii)Placement on calendarA joint resolution of approval reported by the Committee on Ways and Means or the Committee on Finance shall lie over one legislative day and then be placed on the appropriate calendar.(D)Discharge(i)In generalIf the Committee on Ways and Means or the Committee on Finance has not reported a joint resolution of approval by the date that is 15 days after the resolution is referred to the committee, the resolution shall be automatically discharged from the committee and placed on the appropriate calendar.(ii)Prohibition on motions to recommitA motion to recommit a joint resolution of approval shall not be in order.(iii)Subsequent resolutionsIf a subsequent joint resolution of approval relating to the same unilateral trade action proposed in the same report submitted under subsection (b)(1) is referred to the Committee on Ways and Means or the Committee on Finance after the first such resolution is reported or discharged, the subsequent resolution shall not be discharged under this subparagraph.(4)Floor consideration in SenateIn the Senate:(A)Motion to proceed(i)TimingA motion to proceed to a joint resolution of approval is in order at any time after the resolution is placed on the calendar.(ii)Motion by any SenatorAny Senator may move to proceed to a joint resolution of approval.(iii)PrivilegeA motion to proceed to the consideration of the joint resolution of approval is privileged, except that this clause shall apply only to a motion to proceed to a joint resolution of approval reported or discharged from the Committee on Finance under paragraph (3) or to the first joint resolution of approval placed on the calendar after passage in the House of Representatives.(iv)DebateDebate on a motion to proceed to a joint resolution of approval is limited to not more than 5 hours, equally divided between Senators favoring and Senators opposing the resolution.(v)Motion not amendableThe motion to proceed to the joint resolution of approval is not amendable. A motion to reconsider is not in order. A motion to table is not in order.(vi)Other motions not in orderAfter a motion to proceed to a joint resolution of approval is agreed to, motions to postpone or to consider other business are not in order.(B)Motions and appealsAll motions and appeals relating to a joint resolution of approval shall be decided by the Senate without debate.(5)Consideration in House of RepresentativesIn the House of Representatives, if any committee to which a joint resolution of approval has been referred has not reported it to the House at the end of 10 calendar days after its introduction, such committee shall be discharged from further consideration of the joint resolution, and it shall be placed on the appropriate calendar. On Thursdays it shall be in order at any time for the Speaker to recognize a Member who favors passage of a joint resolution that has appeared on the calendar for at least 3 calendar days to call up that joint resolution for immediate consideration in the House without intervention of any point of order. When so called up, a joint resolution shall be considered as read and shall be debatable for 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and the previous question shall be considered as ordered to its passage without intervening motion. It shall not be in order to reconsider the vote on passage. If a vote on final passage of the joint resolution has not been taken on or before the close of the 10th calendar day after the resolution is reported by the committee or committees to which it was referred, or after such committee or committees have been discharged from further consideration of the resolution, such vote shall be taken on that day.(6)Receipt of resolution from other houseIf, before passing a joint resolution of approval, one House receives from the other a joint resolution of approval from the other House, then—(A)the joint resolution of the other House shall not be referred to a committee and shall be deemed to have been discharged from committee on the day it is received; and(B)the procedures set forth in paragraph (4) or (5), as applicable, shall apply in the receiving House to the joint resolution received from the other House to the same extent as such procedures apply to a joint resolution of the receiving House.(7)Rules of House of Representatives and SenateThis subsection is enacted by Congress—(A)as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House of Representatives and the Senate, respectively, and as such is deemed a part of the rules of each House, respectively, and the rules provided for in this section supersede other rules only to the extent that they are inconsistent with such other rules; and(B)with the full recognition of the constitutional right of either House to change the rules provided for in this section (so far as relating to the procedures of that House) at any time, in the same manner, and to the same extent as any other rule of that House.(e)Report by the United States International Trade CommissionNot later than 12 months after the date of a unilateral trade action taken pursuant to this section, the United States International Trade Commission shall submit to Congress a report on the effects of the action on the United States economy, including a comprehensive assessment of the economic effects of the action on producers and consumers in the United States..(b)Clerical amendmentThe table of contents for the Trade Act of 1974 is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 154 the following:Sec. 155. Congressional review of unilateral trade actions..


113 HRES 562 EH: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives with respect to enhanced relations with the Republic of Moldova and support for Moldova's territorial integrity.
U.S. House of Representatives
2014-07-25
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
113th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. RES. 562
In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

July 25, 2014

RESOLUTION
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives with respect to enhanced relations with the Republic of Moldova and support for Moldova's territorial integrity.

Whereas the United States has enjoyed good relations with the Republic of Moldova since the Republic of Moldova's independence in 1991;
Whereas since the Republic of Moldova's independence, the United States has provided financial assistance to support the people of Moldova's efforts to build a prosperous European democracy;
Whereas the United States and the Republic of Moldova further strengthened their partnership through the launching of a Strategic Dialogue on March 3, 2014;
Whereas the Republic of Moldova is due to sign an Association Agreement containing comprehensive free trade provisions with the European Union on June 27, 2014;
Whereas the United States Government supports the democratic aspirations of the people of the Republic of Moldova and their expressed desire to deepen their association with the European Union;
Whereas in a judgment in 2004, the European Court of Human Rights found that Transnistria was set up with the support of the Russian Federation and considered it under the effective authority or at least decisive influence of Russia;
Whereas the United States supports the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova and on that basis participates as an observer in the 5+2 negotiations to find a comprehensive settlement that will provide a special status for the separatist region of Transnistria within Moldova;
Whereas the leaders of the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova requested to postpone the 5+2 round of talks scheduled to take place in April 2014;
Whereas the Government of the Russian Federation banned the import of Moldovan wine in 2013 and has threatened to ban Moldovan agricultural products, curtail the supply of energy resources to Moldova, and impose stricter labor migration policies on the people of Moldova;
Whereas the Government of the Russian Federation maintains a contingent of Russian troops and a stockpile of Russian military equipment and ammunition within the Moldovan region of Transnistria;
Whereas the Government of Russia has been actively issuing Russian passports to the residents of the Transnistria region;
Whereas the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and the Government of Moldova have called upon the Government of the Russian Federation to remove its troops from the territory of the Republic of Moldova;
Whereas authorities in the Republic of Moldova's Transnistria region have restricted access to the region by OSCE Mission to Moldova monitors, preventing the Mission from providing impartial reporting on the security situation in the region;
Whereas the House of Representatives and the Senate both passed by an overwhelming majority, and the President signed into law, S. 2183, providing for a United States international broadcasting programming surge to counter misinformation from Russian-supported news outlets and ensuring that Russian-speaking populations in Ukraine and Moldova have access to independent news and information; and
Whereas Moldova has been a valued and reliable partner in promoting global security by participating in U.N. peacekeeping missions in Liberia, Cote d'Ivoire, Sudan, and Georgia: Now, therefore, be it

That the House of Representatives—
(1)reaffirms that it is the policy of the United States to support the sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova and the inviolability of its borders by other nation-states;
(2)supports the Strategic Dialogue as a means to strengthen relations between the Republic of Moldova and the United States and enhance the democratic, economic, rule of law, and security reforms already being implemented by the Republic of Moldova;
(3)encourages the President and the Department of State to enhance United States cooperation with the Government of Moldova and civil society organizations and focus assistance on justice sector reform, anti-corruption efforts, strengthening democratic institutions, domestic energy development, diversification of energy supplies and energy efficiency, as well as promoting trade and investment opportunities;
(4)encourages the President to expedite the implementation of Public Law 113–96, especially for populations in Ukraine and Moldova;
(5)affirms the Republic of Moldova's sovereign right to determine its own partnerships free of external coercion and pressure, and affirms Moldova's right to associate with the European Union or any regional organization;
(6)calls upon the Government of Russia to fulfill its commitments made at the OSCE's Istanbul summit in 1999 and to withdraw its military forces and munitions from within the internationally recognized territory of the Republic of Moldova;
(7)calls upon the Government of Russia to refrain from economic threats and pressure against Moldova and to cease any and all actions that support separatist movements on the territory of Moldova;
(8)supports constructive engagement and confidence-building measures between the Government of Moldova and the authorities in the Transnistria region in order to secure a peaceful resolution to the conflict;
(9)supports efforts to resolve the Transnistria issue through a comprehensive settlement that affirms Moldova's sovereignty and territorial integrity, while providing a special status for the Transnistrian region within Moldova;
(10)urges officials in the Transnistrian region to allow OSCE Mission to Moldova monitors unrestricted access to the region;
(11)urges all parties to refrain from unilateral actions that may undermine efforts to achieve a peaceful resolution, as well as the agreements already reached, and encourages leaders of the Transnistrian region to resume negotiations toward a political settlement; and
(12)affirms that lasting stability and security in Europe is a key priority for the United States and that these can only be achieved if the territorial integrity and sovereignty of all European countries is respected.

Karen L. Haas,Clerk.


115 S3533 IS: Wood-Pawcatuck Watershed Wild and Scenic River Act.
U.S. Senate
2018-10-01
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.

		II
		115th CONGRESS2d Session
		S. 3533
		IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

			October 1 (legislative day, September 28), 2018
			Mr. Reed (for himself, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Blumenthal, and Mr. Murphy) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

		A BILL
		To amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate certain river segments within the
			 Wood-Pawcatuck watershed as components of the National Wild and Scenic
			 Rivers System, and for other purposes.

		1.Short title
 This Act may be cited as the Wood-Pawcatuck Watershed Wild and Scenic River Act..
		2.Wood-Pawcatuck watershed wild and scenic river segments
 (a)DesignationSection 3(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1274(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:

 (214)Wood-pawcatuck watershed, Rhode Island and ConnecticutThe following river segments within the Wood-Pawcatuck watershed, to be administered by the Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with the Wood-Pawcatuck Wild and Scenic Rivers Stewardship Council:
 (A)The approximately 11-mile segment of the Beaver River from its headwaters in Exeter and West Greenwich, Rhode Island, to its confluence with the Pawcatuck River in Richmond, Rhode Island, as a scenic river.
 (B)The approximately 3-mile segment of the Chipuxet River from the Kingstown Road Bridge, South Kingstown, Rhode Island, to its outlet in Worden Pond, as a wild river.
 (C)The approximately 9-mile segment of the Green Fall River from its headwaters in Voluntown, Connecticut, to its confluence with the Ashaway River in Hopkinton, Rhode Island, as a scenic river.
 (D)The approximately 3-mile segment of the Ashaway River from its confluence with the Green Fall River to its confluence with the Pawcatuck River in Hopkinton, Rhode Island, as a recreational river.
 (E)The approximately 3-mile segment of the Pawcatuck River from the Worden Pond outlet in South Kingstown, Rhode Island, to the South County Trail Bridge, Charlestown and South Kingstown, Rhode Island, as a wild river.
 (F)The approximately 4-mile segment of the Pawcatuck River from South County Trail Bridge, Charlestown and South Kingstown, Rhode Island, to the Carolina Back Road Bridge in Richmond and Charlestown, Rhode Island, as a recreational river.
 (G)The approximately 21-mile segment of the Pawcatuck River from Carolina Back Road Bridge in Richmond and Charlestown, Rhode Island, to the confluence with Shunock River in Stonington, Connecticut, as a scenic river.
 (H)The approximately 8-mile segment of the Pawcatuck River from the confluence with Shunock River in Stonington, Connecticut, to the mouth of the river between Pawcatuck Point in Stonington, Connecticut, and Rhodes Point in Westerly, Rhode Island, as a recreational river.
 (I)The approximately 11-mile segment of the Queen River from its headwaters in Exeter and West Greenwich, Rhode Island, to the Kingstown Road Bridge in South Kingstown, Rhode Island, as a scenic river.
 (J)The approximately 5-mile segment of the Usquepaugh River from the Kingstown Road Bridge to its confluence with the Pawcatuck River in South Kingstown, Rhode Island, as a wild river.
 (K)The approximately 8-mile segment of the Shunock River from its headwaters in North Stonington, Connecticut, to its confluence with the Pawcatuck River as a recreational river.
 (L)The approximately 13-mile segment of the Wood River from its headwaters in Sterling and Voluntown, Connecticut, and Exeter and West Greenwich, Rhode Island, to the Arcadia Road Bridge in Hopkinton and Richmond, Rhode Island, as a wild river.
 (M)The approximately 11-mile segment of the Wood River from the Arcadia Road Bridge in Hopkinton and Richmond, Rhode Island, to the confluence with the Pawcatuck River in Charlestown, Hopkinton, and Richmond, Rhode Island, as a recreational river..
			(b)Management of river segments
 (1)DefinitionsIn this subsection: (A)Covered tributaryThe term covered tributary means—
 (i)each of Assekonk Brook, Breakheart Brook, Brushy Brook, Canochet Brook, Chickasheen Brook, Cedar Swamp Brook, Fisherville Brook, Glade Brook, Glen Rock Brook, Kelly Brook, Locke Brook, Meadow Brook, Pendleton Brook, Parris Brook, Passquisett Brook, Phillips Brook, Poquiant Brook, Queens Fort Brook, Roaring Brook, Sherman Brook, Taney Brook, Tomaquag Brook, White Brook, and Wyassup Brook within the Wood-Pawcatuck watershed; and
 (ii)any other perennial stream within the Wood-Pawcatuck watershed. (B)River segmentThe term river segment means a river segment designated by paragraph (214) of section 3(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1274(a)) (as added by subsection (a)).
 (C)SecretaryThe term Secretary means the Secretary of the Interior. (D)Stewardship PlanThe term Stewardship Plan means the plan entitled the Wood-Pawcatuck Wild and Scenic Rivers Stewardship Plan for the Beaver, Chipuxet, Green Fall-Ashaway, Pawcatuck, Queen-Usquepaugh, Shunock, and Wood Rivers  and dated June 2018, which takes a watershed approach to the management of the river segments.
					(2)Wood-pawcatuck wild and scenic rivers stewardship plan
 (A)In generalThe Secretary, in cooperation with the Wood-Pawcatuck Wild and Scenic Rivers Stewardship Council, shall manage the river segments in accordance with—
 (i)the Stewardship Plan; and (ii)any amendment to the Stewardship Plan that the Secretary determines is consistent with this subsection.
 (B)Watershed approachIn furtherance of the watershed approach to resource preservation and enhancement described in the Stewardship Plan, the covered tributaries are recognized as integral to the protection and enhancement of the river segments.
 (C)Requirements for comprehensive management planThe Stewardship Plan shall be considered to satisfy each requirement for a comprehensive management plan required under section 3(d) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1274(d)).
 (3)Cooperative agreementsTo provide for the long-term protection, preservation, and enhancement of each river segment, in accordance with sections 10(e) and 11(b)(1) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1281(e), 1282(b)(1)), the Secretary may enter into cooperative agreements (which may include provisions for financial or other assistance from the Federal Government) with—
 (A)the States of Connecticut and Rhode Island; (B)political subdivisions of the States of Connecticut and Rhode Island, including—
 (i)the towns of North Stonington, Sterling, Stonington, and Voluntown, Connecticut; and
 (ii)the towns of Charlestown, Exeter, Hopkinton, North Kingstown, Richmond, South Kingstown, Westerly, and West Kingstown, Rhode Island;
 (C)the Wood-Pawcatuck Wild and Scenic Rivers Stewardship Council; and (D)any appropriate nonprofit organization, as determined by the Secretary.
 (4)Relation to national park systemNotwithstanding section 10(c) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1281(c)), each river segment shall not be—
 (A)administered as a unit of the National Park System; or (B)subject to the laws (including regulations) that govern the administration of the National Park System.
					(5)Land management
 (A)Zoning ordinancesThe zoning ordinances adopted by the towns of North Stonington, Sterling, Stonington, and Voluntown, Connecticut, and Charlestown, Exeter, Hopkinton, North Kingstown, Richmond, South Kingstown, Westerly, and West Greenwich, Rhode Island (including any provision of the zoning ordinances relating to the conservation of floodplains, wetlands, and watercourses associated with any river segment), shall be considered to satisfy the standards and requirements described in section 6(c) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1277(c)).
 (B)VillagesFor purposes of section 6(c) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1277(c)), each town described in subparagraph (A) shall be considered to be a village.
					(C)Acquisition of land
 (i)Limitation of authority of SecretaryWith respect to each river segment, the Secretary may only acquire parcels of land— (I)by donation; or
 (II)with the consent of the owner of the parcel of land. (ii)Prohibition relating to the acquisition of land by condemnationIn accordance with 6(c) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1277(c)), with respect to each river segment, the Secretary may not acquire any parcel of land by condemnation.


		III
		110th CONGRESS
		2d Session
		S. RES. 721
		IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED
		  STATES

			December 8
			 (legislative day, November 20), 2008
			Mr. Brownback (for
			 himself and Mr. Roberts) submitted the
			 following resolution; which was referred to the
			 Committee on the
			 Judiciary

		RESOLUTION
		Recognizing and honoring the Smith Center
		  High School football team.

		Whereas
			 the citizens of Kansas are truly proud of the Smith Center High School football
			 team for capturing the team’s fifth State football championship title after
			 finishing an undefeated season;
		Whereas
			 Smith Center has won 67 consecutive games, which is the third-longest winning
			 streak among high school football teams in the Nation, and which breaks the
			 State record;
		Whereas
			 Smith Center set a national record by scoring 72 first-quarter points in a
			 playoff game in 2007;
		Whereas, in the 2007 season, Smith Center
			 outscored its opponents 844–20;
		Whereas
			 head football coach Roger Barta has provided consistent leadership for the
			 team, has led Smith Center to win 7 State titles, and was named national high
			 school football coach of the year by the U.S. Army All-American Bowl Selection
			 Committee;
		Whereas
			 Smith Center players provide an excellent example to our Nation’s youth by
			 signing a pledge to stay away from drugs, alcohol, and tobacco, and by
			 demonstrating outstanding determination and teamwork; and
		Whereas
			 the members of the Smith Center High School football team include: Ethan
			 Eastes, Clay Pickel, Colt Rogers, Aaron McNary, Joe Osburn, Truitt Kuhlmann,
			 Alex Hobelmann, Trevor Rempe, Travis Rempe, Kris Lehmann, Brock Baxter, Shawn
			 Stansbury, Garrett Kuhlmann, Matt Atwood, Taylor Rippe, Tracy Hudson, Trey
			 Molzahn, Aaron Sellars, Marshall McCall, Cole McDowell, Dereck McNary, Chase
			 McDonald, William Overmiller, Jon Osburn, Nate Fiester, Monroe Schmidt, Joel
			 Osburn, Kaden Roush, Brit Nixon, Van Tucker, Logan Tuxhorn, Dillon Corbett,
			 Grady Brooks, Cole Conaway, Nathan Cox, Louis Frazier, Jesse Roush, Spencer
			 VanderGiesen, Zachary Herdt, Trenton Terrill, Bryce Standley, Cody Tucker, Josh
			 McDowell, Kale Terrill, Kelly Wiig, Jake Fischer, Curtis Favinger, Collin
			 Duntz, Johny Troy, Billie Stokesbury, Josh Nixon, Justin Nixon, Anden Hughes,
			 Spencer Kirchhoff, Jace Winder, and Kalen Mace: Now, therefore, be it

		That the Senate—
			(1)congratulates the Smith Center High School
			 football team, including the players, head coach Roger Barta, and the coaching
			 staff, on a victorious season; and
			(2)thanks the team for the great honor it has
			 brought to Smith Center and to the State of Kansas.


114 S19 IS: Federal Debt Management Act of 2015
U.S. Senate
2015-01-06
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.

II114th CONGRESS1st SessionS. 19IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATESJanuary 6, 2015Mr. Vitter introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental AffairsA BILLTo appropriately manage the debt of the United States by limiting the use of extraordinary
			 measures.1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the
		  Federal Debt Management Act of 2015.2.Debt management(a)Civil Service Retirement and Disability FundSection 8348 of title 5, United States Code, is amended—(1)by striking subsections (j) and (k); and(2)in subsection (l)—(A)by striking (l)(1) The Secretary and all that follows through (2) Whenever and inserting (j) Whenever; and(B)by striking public debt limit and inserting limitation imposed by section 3101(b) of title 31.(b)Thrift Savings FundSection 8438 of title 5, United States Code, is amended—(1)by striking subsection (g); and(2)in subsection (h)—(A)by striking (h)(1) The Secretary and all that follows through (2) Whenever and inserting (g) Whenever;  and(B)by striking public debt limit and inserting limitation imposed by section 3101(b) of title 31.(c)Stabilization fundSection 5302(a)(1) of title 31, United States Code, is amended—(1)in the first sentence, by striking , and for investing in obligations of the United States Government those amounts in the fund the
			 Secretary of the Treasury, with the approval of the President, decides are
			 not required at the time to carry out this section; and(2)by inserting before the second sentence the following: The Secretary of the Treasury shall invest in obligations of the United States Government any
			 amounts in the stabilization fund that the Secretary, with the approval of
			 the President, decides are not required at the time to carry out this
			 section..(d)ProhibitionThe Secretary of the Treasury may not suspend the investing of amounts or the issuance of
			 obligations for any fund or account for purposes of preventing the public
			 debt of the United States from exceeding the limitation imposed by section
			 3101(b) of title 31, United States Code.(e)Savings provisions(1)Civil Service Retirement and Disability FundNotwithstanding the amendments made by subsection (a),	paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) of subsection
			 (j) and subsection (l)(1) of section 8348 of title 5, United States Code,
			 as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act,  shall
			 apply to any debt issuance suspension period (as defined under section
			 8348(j)(5) of such title) that is in effect on the date of enactment of
			 this Act.(2)Thrift Savings FundNotwithstanding the amendments made by subsection (b),	paragraphs  (2), (3), and (4) of subsection
			 (g) and subsection (h)(1) of section 8438 of title 5, United States Code,
			 as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act,  shall
			 apply to any debt issuance suspension period (as defined under section
			 8438(g)(6) of such title) that is in effect on the date of enactment of
			 this Act.3.Information regarding Daily Treasury StatementsNot later than 24 hours after publishing a Daily Treasury Statement, or any successor thereto, the
			 Secretary of the Treasury shall submit to the Committee on Finance of the
			 Senate and the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives
			 a report that—(1)provides all cash flow and debt transaction information used in preparing the Daily Treasury
			 Statement; and(2)includes forecasts for the cash flow and debt transactions of the Federal Government.


115 S2759 IS: EAGLES Act of 2018
U.S. Senate
2018-04-25
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.

		II
		115th CONGRESS2d Session
		S. 2759
		IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

			April 25, 2018
			Mr. Grassley (for himself, Mr. Rubio, Mr. Nelson, and Mr. Hatch) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

		A BILL
		To amend title 18, United States Code, to reauthorize and expand the National Threat Assessment
			 Center of the Department of Homeland Security.

		1.Short title
 This Act may be cited as the EAGLES Act of 2018.
		2.Findings; sense of Congress
 (a)FindingsCongress finds the following: (1)On February 14, 2018, 17 individuals lost their lives in a senseless and violent attack on Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland Florida, a school whose mascot is the eagle.
 (2)These individuals lived lives of warmth, joy, determination, service, and love, and their loss is mourned by the Nation.
 (3)The shooter in that attack exhibited patterns of behavior that were alarming and that should have alerted law enforcement and other Federal, State, and local officials.
 (4)The attack on Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School was preventable. (5)Lives were saved because of the brave and exemplary conduct of many students, teachers, and staff at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, including several of the victims of the attack.
 (6)The National Threat Assessment Center (referred to in this Act as the Center) was established in 1998 to conduct research on various types of targeted violence. (7)Studies conducted by the Center on targeted school violence, in particular, have shown that—
 (A)most incidents were planned in advance; (B)the attackers’ behavior gave some indication that the individual was planning, or at least contemplating, an attack;
 (C)most attackers had already exhibited a pattern of behavior that was of concern to other people in their lives; and
 (D)prior to the attack, someone associated with the attacker, such as a family member or peer, knew the attack was to likely to occur.
 (8)Through their research, the Center developed the threat assessment model for responding to indicators of targeted violence, which includes a three-step process—
 (A)identifying individuals who are exhibiting behaviors that indicate they are planning an attack on a school;
 (B)assessing whether the individual poses a threat to the school, based on articulable facts; and (C)managing the threat the individual may pose to the school.
 (9)The threat assessment model works most effectively when all the relevant parties, including school officials, local law enforcement, and members of the community, are part of a comprehensive protocol to identify, assess, and manage a potential threat to the school.
 (10)The primary goal of threat assessment programs in schools should be to prevent violent conduct, with an emphasis on early intervention, treatment, and care of individuals exhibiting behaviors associated with targeted violence.
 (11)Early intervention, treatment, and prevention of violent behavior is an effective way to prevent violent conduct that would harm others and necessitate disciplinary action, including criminal penalties.
 (12)The parties involved need the appropriate training and tools to establish the appropriate mechanisms for implementing this type of approach.
 (b)Sense of congressIt is the sense of Congress that a fact-based threat assessment approach, involving school officials, local law enforcement, and members of the community, is one of the most effective ways to prevent targeted violence in schools, and is a fitting memorial to those who lost their lives in the February 14, 2018, attack on Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and those who heroically acted to preserve the lives of their friends, students, and colleagues.
			3.Reauthorization and expansion of the national threat assessment center of the Department of
			 Homeland Security
 (a)In generalChapter 203 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding the following:  3056B.Functions of the National Threat Assessment Center of the United States Secret Service (a)In generalThere is established a National Threat Assessment Center (in this section referred to as the Center), to be operated by the United States Secret Service, at the direction of the Secretary of Homeland Security.
 (b)FunctionsThe functions of the Center shall include the following: (1)Training in the area of best practices on threat assessment.
 (2)Consultation on complex threat assessment cases or programs. (3)Research on threat assessment and the prevention of targeted violence, consistent with evidence-based standards and existing laws and regulations.
 (4)Facilitation of information sharing on threat assessment and the prevention of targeted violence among agencies with protective or public safety responsibilities, as well as other public or private entities.
 (5)Development and implementation of evidence-based programs to promote the standardization of Federal, State, and local threat assessments, best practices in investigations involving threats, and the prevention of targeted violence.
 (c)Safe school initiativeIn carrying out the functions described in subsection (b), the Center shall establish a national program on targeted school violence prevention, focusing on the following activities:
 (1)ResearchThe Center shall— (A)conduct evidence-based research into targeted school violence and school threat assessment; and
 (B)publish the findings of the Center on the public website of the United States Secret Service.
								(2)Training
 (A)In generalThe Center shall offer training courses on targeted school violence prevention to agencies with protective or public safety responsibilities, as well as other public or private entities, including public school districts and schools.
 (B)DevelopmentTraining programs developed by the Center shall use best practices in school threat assessment, such as data produced through experimental, quasi-experimental, and non-experimental research.
 (C)PlanNot later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this section, the Center shall establish a plan to offer its training and other educational resources to public or private entities within each State.
 (3)Coordination with other Federal agenciesTo the extent practicable, the Center shall develop research and training programs under this section in coordination with the Department of Justice and Department of Education.
 (4)Consultation with entities outside the Federal GovernmentThe Center is authorized to consult with State and local educational, law enforcement, and mental health officials and private entities, in the development of research and training programs under this section.
 (5)Contracting servicesIn carrying out the functions under subsection (b), and subject to the requirements of other applicable Federal law, the Director of the Secret Service may enter into contracts with public and private entities to assist in conducting research and training.
 (6)Interactive websiteThe Center may create an interactive website to disseminate information and data on evidence-based practices in targeted school violence prevention.
 (d)Hiring of additional personnelThe Director of the Secret Service may hire additional personnel to comply with the requirements of this section.
 (e)Authorization of appropriationsThere are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the functions of the Center— (1)$5,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; and
 (2)$10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2019 through 2022. (f)Report to CongressNot later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this section, the Director of the Secret Service shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a report on actions taken by the United States Secret Service to implement provisions of this section, which shall include—
 (1)the number of employees hired (on a full-time equivalent basis); (2)the number of individuals in each State trained in school threat assessment;
 (3)the number of school districts in each State trained in school threat assessment or targeted school violence prevention;
 (4)information on Federal, State, and local agencies trained or otherwise assisted by the Center; (5)formal evaluation indicating whether the training and other assistance provided by the Center is effective;
 (6)a formal evaluation indicating whether the training and other assistance provided by the Center was implemented by the school;
 (7)a summary of the Center’s research activities and findings; and (8)a strategic plan for disseminating the Center’s educational and training resources to each State.
 (g)DefinitionsIn this section— (1)the term evidence-based—
 (A)means a program that demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such program is likely to improve relevant outcomes; and
 (B)includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of the program; and (2)the term State means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
 (h)No funds To provide firearms trainingNone of the funds authorized to be appropriated under this section may be used to train any person in the use of a firearm.
 (i)No effect on other lawsNothing in this section may be construed to preclude or contradict any other provision of law authorizing training in the use of firearms..
			(b)Technical and conforming amendments
 (1)Section 4 of the Presidential Threat Protection Act of 2000 (18 U.S.C. 3056 note), is repealed. (2)The table of sections for chapter 203 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 3056A the following:
					3056B. Functions of the National Threat Assessment Center of the United States Secret Service..


115 S1233 IS: Rail Shipper Fairness Act of 2017
U.S. Senate
2017-05-25
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.

II115th CONGRESS1st SessionS. 1233IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATESMay 25, 2017Ms. Baldwin (for herself and Mr. Franken) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and TransportationA BILLTo improve the efficiency and reliability of rail transportation by reforming the Surface
			 Transportation Board, and for other purposes.

 1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Rail Shipper Fairness Act of 2017.
		2.Improving rail service
 (a)Common carrier obligationsSection 11101(a) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting , as necessary for the efficient and reliable transportation based on the shipper’s reasonable service requirements, after the transportation or service.
 (b)Emergency service ordersSection 11123(b) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:  (4)The Board may issue emergency service orders that include shipments moving under contract if such shipments are part of a regional service order issued in accordance with this section..
 (c)ReportsSection 11145(a) of such title is amended— (1)in paragraph (1), by striking and at the end;
 (2)by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); and (3)by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:

 (2)reports, service plans, or other documents that cover shipments moving under contract if such shipments are part of a general report, service plan, or other document that generally covers the geographic area or commodity; and.
 (d)Equitable relief; damagesSection 11704 of such title is amended— (1)in subsection (a), by inserting or subjected to inadequate or deficient service after injured;
 (2)by amending subsection (b) to read as follows:  (b)A rail carrier providing transportation subject to the jurisdiction of the Board under this part is liable—
 (1)for damages sustained by a person as a result of an act or omission of that carrier in violation of this part;
 (2)to a person for amounts charged to that person that exceed the applicable rate for the transportation; and
 (3)to a person for damages or equitable relief as a result of inadequate or deficient service in violation of this part.; and
 (3)in subsection (c), by adding at the end the following:  (3)The Board may order a rail carrier to pay damages or to provide equitable relief, as appropriate, to a person subjected to inadequate or deficient service as a result of a violation of this part by that carrier..
 (e)Civil penaltiesSection 11901 of such title is amended— (1)in subsection (a), by striking $5,000 and inserting $25,000;
 (2)in subsection (c), by striking $5,000 and inserting $25,000; and (3)in subsection (e), by striking $100 each place such term appears and inserting $1,000.
				3.Improving rail competition
 (a)Rail transportation policySection 10101 of title 49, United States Code, is amended— (1)by redesignating paragraphs (14) and (15) as paragraphs (15) and (16), respectively; and
 (2)by inserting after paragraph (13) the following:  (14)to provide for and promote the protection of the shipping public;.
 (b)RatesSection 10705 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:  (d)Shippers may obtain rates to or from any interchange points of two or more rail carriers..
 (c)Market dominanceSection 10707 of such title is amended— (1)in subsection (a)—
 (A)by striking In this section, market dominance means and inserting the following:  (a)In this section:
 (1)effective competition only includes modes of transportation with existing and supporting infrastructure; and (2)market dominance means; and
 (2)in subsection (b)— (A)by inserting A rail carrier could have market dominance even in circumstances in which a shipper is served by two carriers. after the rate applies.; and
 (B)by striking rate or transportation and inserting rate for transportation. (d)Terminal facilitiesSection 11102(c) of such title is amended to read as follows:

 (c)(1)Except as provided in paragraph (2), the Board shall require a Class I rail carrier to enter into a competitive switching agreement if a shipper or receiver, or a group of shippers or receivers, files a petition with the Board that demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the Board, that—
 (A)the facilities of the shipper or receiver for whom such switching is sought are served by rail only by a single, Class I rail carrier; and
 (B)subject to paragraph (3), there is, or can be a working interchange between— (i)the Class I rail carrier serving the shipper or receiver for whom such switching is sought; and
 (ii)another rail carrier within a reasonable distance of the facilities of such shipper or receiver. (2)Competitive switching may not be imposed under this subsection if—
 (A)either rail carrier between which such switching is to be established demonstrates that the proposed switching is not feasible or is unsafe; or
 (B)the presence of reciprocal switching will unduly restrict the ability of a rail carrier to serve its own shippers.
 (3)The requirement set forth in paragraph (1)(B) is satisfied if each facility of the shipper or receiver for which competitive switching is sought is—
 (A)within the boundaries of a terminal of the Class I rail carrier; or (B)within a 100-mile radius of an interchange between the Class I rail carrier and another carrier at which rail cars are regularly switched..
			4.Improving reasonable rate standards
 (a)Benchmark-Based rate reasonableness standardSection 10701(d) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:  (4)(A)Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this paragraph, the Board shall initiate a rulemaking proceeding to develop a methodology for determining the reasonableness of challenged rail rates based on competitive rate benchmarking that predicts a competitive rate level based upon econometric models.
 (B)Rather than utilizing its existing Three-Benchmark Methodology, the Board shall develop a methodology that considers competitive markets or a proxy of such markets.
 (C)In determining the reasonableness of a challenged rate under the new benchmarking methodology developed under this paragraph, the Board shall presume that a rate above the benchmark rate level is unreasonable unless the rail carrier proves that the margin above the competitive rate benchmark is necessary to allow the rail carrier to earn adequate revenues.
 (D)Relief under the new benchmarking method shall have no monetary limit, but any rate prescription set by the Board shall remain in effect not less than 5 years.
 (E)The Board’s rulemaking under this paragraph shall set a standard procedural schedule for such cases, subject to necessary adjustments in particular adjudications, which may not exceed 365 days.
						.
 (b)Stand-Alone cost casesSection 10702 of such title is amended— (1)by inserting (a) before A rail carrier; and
 (2)by adding at the end the following:  (b)(1)The Board shall prohibit a rail carrier providing transportation subject to the jurisdiction of the Board under this part to change the challenged rate for providing such transportation to rail customers while a maximum reasonable rate case brought by such rail customers is pending before the Board.
 (2)A rail customer may file a maximum reasonable rate case with the Board after the date that is 2 years before the date on which a common carrier shipment rate is anticipated to begin.
 (3)The Board may not use cross-subsidy tests in deciding stand-alone cost cases.
 (4)The Board shall use a market-based revenue divisions methodology in deciding stand-alone cost cases.
 (5)In a stand-alone cost case, if the Board determines that the rail carrier is revenue adequate, the rail carrier shall have the burden of proof to demonstrate that the railroad carrier is charging a reasonable rate..
 (c)Conforming amendmentSection 10704 of such title is amended— (1)by striking subsection (c); and
 (2)by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (c). (d)Market dominanceSection 10707 of such title, as amended by section 3(c), is further amended—
 (1)in subsection (d)(1)(B), by adding at the end the following A shipper may introduce movement-specific Uniform Rail Costing System cost calculations.; and (2)by adding at the end the following:

 (e)In making a determination under this section, the Board may not utilize a qualitative analysis in which the Board attempts to identify any feasible transportation alternatives that could be used by the shipper..
 5.Protections from unreasonable practicesSection 10701 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:  (e)(1)A rail carrier providing transportation subject to the jurisdiction of the Board under this part may not use an index when establishing fuel surcharges.
 (2)Any fuel surcharges imposed by the rail carrier shall be directly accounted for by changes to the carrier’s actual fuel prices. The carrier’s fuel surcharge may not be greater than the amount necessary to recover the carrier’s incremental fuel cost increases.
 (3)The Board is authorized to require any rail carrier to report actual fuel prices as necessary to carry out the purposes of this subsection.
 (4)A shipper may challenge a fuel surcharge as an unreasonable practice under section 10702(2) if such charges, as applied to that shipper, exceed the carrier’s incremental fuel costs..
		6.Revenue adequacy
 (a)Elimination of revenue adequacy testSection 10704(a) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by striking paragraph (3). (b)Railroad cost of capitalSection 10704(a) of such title, as amended by subsection (a), is further amended by adding at the end the following:

 (3)In calculating a rail carrier’s cost of capital, the Board shall multiply the value of the capital by the sum of—
 (A)the current annual yield on a 10-year United States Treasury Bond; and (B)a prospective market risk premium, which shall not exceed 5 percent per year..


109 HCON 165 IH: Calling for the immediate release of all political prisoners in Cuba, including Mr. Jose Daniel Ferrer Garcia, and for other purposes.
U.S. House of Representatives
2005-05-24
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.

IV
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. CON. RES. 165
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 24, 2005
Mr. Andrews submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Calling for the immediate release of all political prisoners in Cuba, including Mr. Jose Daniel Ferrer Garcia, and for other purposes.

Whereas Mr. Jose Daniel Ferrer Garcia, a pro-democracy activist in Cuba, was arrested and jailed during the March 2003 crackdown on Cuban dissidents for his outspoken leadership in the Cuban democracy movement;
Whereas Mr. Jose Daniel Ferrer Garcia is the regional coordinator for the Christian Liberation Movement in Santiago Province and, through this leadership position, he has mobilized many Cuban youth for democratic change, and has focused on accomplishing the movement’s chief objective: to unite citizens that are willing to defend and promote human rights and achieve changes in the Cuban society through peaceful means;
Whereas as documented by Amnesty International, Mr. Jose Daniel Ferrer Garcia has joined the ranks of thousands of political prisoners being held in Cuba’s abysmal prisons;
 Whereas some of these prisoners are being held merely for expressing their frustration with the Cuban Government’s refusal to provide better health care and improve prison conditions;
 Whereas in 1999, the Cuban Government adopted the Law for the Protection of National Independence and the Economy of Cuba, also known as Law Number 88 or the Gag Law;
 Whereas the Cuban Government uses its food rationing system to promote tyranny and control the Cuban populace;
 Whereas in cases in which the Cuban Government is unable to establish grounds for long prison terms for political dissidents, these dissidents are continually harassed, detained for short periods of time, subject to their phones being tapped, and otherwise under constant surveillance;
 Whereas foreign dignitaries are seldom allowed by the Cuban Government to meet with Cuban political dissidents; and
 Whereas Cuban dictator Fidel Castro continues to deny that the Cuban Government holds any political prisoners: Now, therefore, be it

That—
(1)it is the sense of the Congress that the embargo of Cuba should not be lifted until the Cuban Government agrees to decriminalize free speech, association, and movement, and other elements crucial to the development of democracy and the protection of fundamental human rights; and
(2)the Congress calls on the Cuban Government—
(A)to immediately release all political prisoners in Cuba, including Mr. Jose Daniel Ferrer Garcia;
(B)to eliminate all of Cuba’s criminal laws that unnecessarily restrict the fundamental human rights to freedom of speech, association, and movement; and
(C)to respect fundamental human rights and immediately schedule free multiparty and internationally supervised elections.