[House Report 108-803]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
108th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 108-803
_______________________________________________________________________
Union Calendar No. 488
REPORT ON THE ACTIVITY
of the
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
for the
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
January 3, 2005.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
One Hundred Eighth Congress
JOE BARTON, Texas, Chairman
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan
RALPH M. HALL, Texas Ranking Member
MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
FRED UPTON, Michigan EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
CLIFF STEARNS, Florida RICK BOUCHER, Virginia
PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
CHRISTOPHER COX, California SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia BART GORDON, Tennessee
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina PETER DEUTSCH, Florida
ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia ANNA G. ESHOO, California
BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming BART STUPAK, Michigan
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland
JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona GENE GREEN, Texas
CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING, KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri
Mississippi, Vice Chairman TED STRICKLAND, Ohio
VITO FOSSELLA, New York DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
STEVE BUYER, Indiana LOIS CAPPS, California
GEORGE RADANOVICH, California MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania
CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania TOM ALLEN, Maine
MARY BONO, California JIM DAVIS, Florida
GREG WALDEN, Oregon JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
LEE TERRY, Nebraska HILDA L. SOLIS, California
MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas
MIKE ROGERS, Michigan
DARRELL E. ISSA, California
C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho
JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
----------
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Washington, DC, January 3, 2005.
Hon. Jeff Trandahl,
Clerk, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Trandahl: Pursuant to clause 1(d) of Rule XI of
the Rules of the House of Representatives, I present herewith a
report on the activity of the Committee on Energy and Commerce
for the 108th Congress, including the Committee's review and
study of legislation with its jurisdiction and the oversight
activities undertaken by the Committee.
Sincerely,
Joe Barton, Chairman.
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Jurisdiction..................................................... 1
Rules for the Committee.......................................... 2
Members and Organization......................................... 21
Legislative and Oversight Activity............................... 27
Full Committee................................................... 29
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection......... 33
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality........................... 59
Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials.............. 85
Subcommittee on Health........................................... 101
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet.............. 177
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations..................... 201
Oversight Plan for the 108th Congress............................ 225
Appendix I--Legislative Summary.................................. 293
Appendix II--Public Laws......................................... 295
Appendix III--Publications of the Committee...................... 297
Union Calendar No. 488
108th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 108-803
======================================================================
REPORT ON THE ACTIVITY OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE FOR THE
108TH CONGRESS
January 3, 2005.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Barton , from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
ACTIVITY OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE, 108TH CONGRESS
The jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce,
as prescribed by Clause 1(f) of Rule X of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, is as follows:
(1) Biomedical research and development.
(2) Consumer affairs and consumer protection.
(3) Health and health facilities (except health care
supported by payroll deductions).
(4) Interstate energy compacts.
(5) Interstate and foreign commerce generally.
(6) Exploration, production, storage, supply, marketing,
pricing, and regulation of energy resources, including all
fossil fuels, solar energy, and other unconventional or
renewable energy resources.
(7) Conservation of energy resources.
(8) Energy information generally.
(9) The generation and marketing of power (except by
federally chartered or Federal regional power marketing
authorities); reliability and interstate transmission of, and
ratemaking for, all power; and siting of generation facilities
(except the installation of interconnections between Government
waterpower projects).
(10) General management of the Department of Energy and
management and all functions of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
(11) National energy policy generally.
(12) Public health and quarantine.
(13) Regulation of the domestic nuclear energy industry,
including regulation of research and development reactors and
nuclear regulatory research.
(14) Regulation of interstate and foreign communications.
(15) Travel and tourism.
The committee shall have the same jurisdiction with respect
to regulation of nuclear facilities and of use of nuclear
energy as it has with respect to regulation of non-nuclear
facilities and of use of non-nuclear energy.
In addition, clause 3(c) of Rule X of the Rules of the
House of Representatives provides that the Committee on Energy
and Commerce shall review and study on a continuing basis laws,
programs, and Government activities relating to nuclear and
other energy and nonmilitary nuclear energy research and
development including the disposal of nuclear waste.
Rules for the Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of
Representatives, 108th Congress
Rule 1. General Provisions.
(a) Rules of the Committee. The Rules of the House are the
rules of the Committee on Energy and Commerce (hereinafter the
``Committee'') and its subcommittees so far as is applicable,
except that a motion to recess from day to day, and a motion to
dispense with the first reading (in full) of a bill or
resolution, if printed copies are available, is nondebatable
and privileged in the Committee and its subcommittees.
(b) Rules of the Subcommittees. Each subcommittee of the
Committee is part of the Committee and is subject to the
authority and direction of the Committee and to its rules so
far as applicable. Written rules adopted by the Committee, not
inconsistent with the Rules of the House, shall be binding on
each subcommittee of the Committee.
Rule 2. Time and Place of Meetings.
(a) Regular Meeting Days. The Committee shall meet on the
fourth Tuesday of each month at 10 a.m., for the consideration
of bills, resolutions, and other business, if the House is in
session on that day. If the House is not in session on that day
and the Committee has not met during such month, the Committee
shall meet at the earliest practicable opportunity when the
House is again in session. The chairman of the Committee may,
at his discretion, cancel, delay, or defer any meeting required
under this section, after consultation with the ranking
minority member.
(b) Additional Meetings. The chairman may call and convene,
as he considers necessary, additional meetings of the Committee
for the consideration of any bill or resolution pending before
the Committee or for the conduct of other Committee business.
The Committee shall meet for such purposes pursuant to that
call of the chairman.
(c) Vice Chairmen; Presiding Member. The chairman shall
designate a member of the majority party to serve as vice
chairman of the Committee, and shall designate a majority
member of each subcommittee to serve as vice chairman of each
subcommittee. The vice chairman of the Committee or
subcommittee, as the case may be, shall preside at any meeting
or hearing during the temporary absence of the chairman. If the
chairman and vice chairman of the Committee or subcommittee are
not present at any meeting or hearing, the ranking member of
the majority party who is present shall preside at the meeting
or hearing.
(d) Open Meetings and Hearings. Except as provided by the
Rules of the House, each meeting of the Committee or any of its
subcommittees for the transaction of business, including the
markup of legislation, and each hearing, shall be open to the
public including to radio, television and still photography
coverage, consistent with the provisions of Rule XI of the
Rules of the House.
Rule 3. Agenda.
The agenda for each Committee or subcommittee meeting
(other than a hearing), setting out the date, time, place, and
all items of business to be considered, shall be provided to
each member of the Committee at least 36 hours in advance of
such meeting.
Rule 4. Procedure.
(a)(1) Hearings. The date, time, place, and subject matter
of any hearing of the Committee or any of its subcommittees
shall be announced at least one week in advance of the
commencement of such hearing,unless the Committee or
subcommittee determines in accordance with clause 2(g)(3) of Rule XI of
the Rules of the House that there is good cause to begin the hearing
sooner.
(2)(A) Meetings. The date, time, place, and subject matter
of any meeting (other than a hearing) scheduled on a Tuesday,
Wednesday, or Thursday when the House will be in session, shall
be announced at least 36 hours (exclusive of Saturdays,
Sundays, and legal holidays except when the House is in session
on such days) in advance of the commencement of such meeting.
(B) Other Meetings. The date, time, place, and subject
matter of a meeting (other than a hearing or a meeting to which
subparagraph (A) applies) shall be announced at least 72 hours
in advance of the commencement of such meeting.
(b)(1) Requirements for Testimony. Each witness who is to
appear before the Committee or a subcommittee shall file with
the clerk of the Committee, at least two working days in
advance of his or her appearance, sufficient copies, as
determined by the chairman of the Committee or a subcommittee,
of a written statement of his or her proposed testimony to
provide to members and staff of the Committee or subcommittee,
the news media, and the general public. Each witness shall, to
the greatest extent practicable, also provide a copy of such
written testimony in an electronic format prescribed by the
chairman. Each witness shall limit his or her oral presentation
to a brief summary of the argument. The chairman of the
Committee or of a subcommittee, or the presiding member, may
waive the requirements of this paragraph or any part thereof.
(2) Additional Requirements for Testimony. To the greatest
extent practicable, the written testimony of each witness
appearing in a non-governmental capacity shall include a
curriculum vitae and a disclosure of the amount and source (by
agency and program) of any federal grant (or subgrant thereof)
or contract (or subcontract thereof) received during the
current fiscal year or either of the two preceding fiscal years
by the witness or by an entity represented by the witness.
(c) Questioning Witnesses. The right to interrogate the
witnesses before the Committee or any of its subcommittees
shall alternate between majority and minority members. Each
member shall be limited to 5 minutes in the interrogation of
witnesses until such time as each member who so desires has had
an opportunity to question witnesses. No member shall be
recognized for a second period of 5 minutes to interrogate a
witness until each member of the Committee present has been
recognized once for that purpose. While the Committee or
subcommittee is operating under the 5-minute rule for the
interrogation of witnesses, the chairman shall recognize in
order of appearance members who were not present when the
meeting was called to order after all members who were present
when the meeting was called to order have been recognized in
the order of seniority on the Committee or subcommittee, as the
case may be.
(d) Explanation of Subcommittee Action. No bill,
recommendation, or other matter reported by a subcommittee
shall be considered by the full Committee unless the text of
the matter reported, together with an explanation, has been
available to members of the Committee for at least 36 hours.
Such explanation shall include a summary of the major
provisions of the legislation, an explanation of the
relationship of the matter to present law, and a summary of the
need for the legislation. All subcommittee actions shall be
reported promptly by the clerk of the Committee to all members
of the Committee.
(e) Opening Statements. Opening statements by members at
the beginning of any hearing or markup of the Committee or any
of its subcommittees shall be limited to 5 minutes each for the
chairman and ranking minority member (or their respective
designee) of the Committee or subcommittee, as applicable, and
3 minutes each for all other members. With the consent of the
Committee, prior to the recognition of the first witness for
testimony, any Member, when recognized for an opening
statement, may completely defer his or her three-minute opening
statement and instead use those three minutes during the
initial round of witness questioning.
Rule 5. Waiver of Agenda, Notice, and Layover Requirements.
Requirements of rules 3, 4(a)(2), and 4(d) may be waived by
a majority of those present and voting (a majority being
present) of the Committee or subcommittee, as the case may be.
Rule 6. Quorum.
Testimony may be taken and evidence received at any hearing
at which there are present not fewer than two members of the
Committee or subcommittee in question. A majority of the
members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum for the
purposes of reporting any measure or matter, of authorizing a
subpoena, or of closing a meeting or hearing pursuant to clause
2(g) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House (except as provided
in clause 2(g)(2)(A) and (B)). For the purposes of taking any
action other than those specified in the preceding sentence,
one-third of the members of the Committee or subcommittee shall
constitute a quorum.
Rule 7. Official Committee Records.
(a)(1) Journal. The proceedings of the Committee shall be
recorded in a journal which shall, among other things, show
those present at each meeting, and include a record of the vote
on any question on which a record vote is demanded and a
description of the amendment, motion, order, or other
proposition voted. A copy of the journal shall be furnished to
the ranking minority member.
(2) Record Votes. A record vote may be demanded by one-
fifth of the members present or, in the apparent absence of a
quorum, by any one member. No demand for a record vote shall be
made or obtained except for the purpose of procuring a record
vote or in the apparent absence of a quorum. The result of each
record vote in any meeting of the Committee shall be made
available in the Committee office for inspection by the public,
as provided in Rule XI, clause 2(e) of the Rules of the House.
(b) Archived Records. The records of the Committee at the
National Archives and Records Administration shall be made
available for public use in accordance with Rule VII of the
Rules of the House. The chairman shall notify the ranking
minority member of any decision, pursuant toclause 3 (b)(3) or
clause 4 (b) of the Rule, to withhold a record otherwise available, and
the matter shall be presented to the Committee for a determination on
the written request of any member of the Committee. The chairman shall
consult with the ranking minority member on any communication from the
Archivist of the United States or the Clerk of the House concerning the
disposition of noncurrent records pursuant to clause 3(b) of the Rule.
Rule 8. Subcommittees.
There shall be such standing subcommittees with such
jurisdiction and size as determined by the majority party
caucus of the Committee. The jurisdiction, number, and size of
the subcommittees shall be determined by the majority party
caucus prior to the start of the process for establishing
subcommittee chairmanships and assignments.
Rule 9. Powers and Duties of Subcommittees.
Each subcommittee is authorized to meet, hold hearings,
receive testimony, mark up legislation, and report to the
Committee on all matters referred to it. Subcommittee chairmen
shall set hearing and meeting dates only with the approval of
the chairman of the Committee with a view toward assuring the
availability of meeting rooms and avoiding simultaneous
scheduling of Committee and subcommittee meetings or hearings
whenever possible.
Rule 10. Reference of Legislation and Other Matters.
All legislation and other matters referred to the Committee
shall be referred to the subcommittee of appropriate
jurisdiction within two weeks of the date of receipt by the
Committee unless action is taken by the full committee within
those two weeks, or by majority vote of the members of the
Committee, consideration is to be by the full Committee. In the
case of legislation or other matter within the jurisdiction of
more than one subcommittee, the chairman of the Committee may,
in his discretion, refer the matter simultaneously to two or
more subcommittees for concurrent consideration, or may
designate a subcommittee of primary jurisdiction and also refer
the matter to one or more additional subcommittees for
consideration in sequence (subject to appropriate time
limitations), either on its initial referral or after the
matter has been reported by the subcommittee of primary
jurisdiction. Such authority shall include the authority to
refer such legislation or matter to an ad hoc subcommittee
appointed by the chairman, with the approval of the Committee,
from the members of the subcommittee having legislative or
oversight jurisdiction.
Rule 11. Ratio of Subcommittees.
The majority caucus of the Committee shall determine an
appropriate ratio of majority to minority party members for
each subcommittee and the chairman shall negotiate that ratio
with the minority party, provided that the ratio of party
members on each subcommittee shall be no less favorable to the
majority than that of the full Committee, nor shall such ratio
provide for a majority of less than two majority members.
Rule 12. Subcommittee Membership.
(a) Selection of Subcommittee Members. Prior to any
organizational meeting held by the Committee, the majority and
minority caucuses shall select their respective members of the
standing subcommittees.
(b) Ex Officio Members. The chairman and ranking minority
member of the Committee shall be ex officio members with voting
privileges of each subcommittee of which they are not assigned
as members and may be counted for purposes of establishing a
quorum in such subcommittees.
Rule 13. Managing Legislation on the House Floor.
The chairman, in his discretion, shall designate which
member shall manage legislation reported by the Committee to
the House.
Rule 14. Committee Professional and Clerical Staff Appointments.
(a) Delegation of Staff. Whenever the chairman of the
Committee determines that any professional staff member
appointed pursuant to the provisions of clause 9 of Rule X of
the House of Representatives, who is assigned to such chairman
and not to the ranking minority member, by reason of such
professional staff member's expertise or qualifications will be
of assistance to one or more subcommittees in carrying out
their assigned responsibilities, he may delegate such member to
such subcommittees for such purpose. A delegation of a member
of the professional staff pursuant to this subsection shall be
made after consultation with subcommittee chairmen and with the
approval of the subcommittee chairman or chairmen involved.
(b) Minority Professional Staff. Professional staff members
appointed pursuant to clause 9 of Rule X of the House of
Representatives, who are assigned to the ranking minority
member of the Committee and not to the chairman of the
Committee, shall be assigned to such Committee business as the
minority party members of the Committee consider advisable.
(c) Additional Staff Appointments. In addition to the
professional staff appointed pursuant to clause 9 of Rule X of
the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee
shall be entitled to make such appointments to the professional
and clerical staff of the Committee as may be provided within
the budget approved for such purposes by the Committee. Such
appointee shall be assigned to such business of the full
Committee as the chairman of the Committee considers advisable.
(d) Sufficient Staff. The chairman shall ensure that
sufficient staff is made available to each subcommittee to
carry out its responsibilities under the rules of the
Committee.
(e) Fair Treatment of Minority Members in Appointment of
Committee Staff. The chairman shall ensure that the minority
members of the Committee are treated fairly in appointment of
Committee staff.
(f) Contracts for Temporary or Intermittent Services. Any
contract for the temporary services or intermittent service of
individual consultants or organizations to make studies or
advise the Committee or its subcommittees with respect to any
matter within their jurisdiction shall be deemed to have been
approved by a majority of the members ofthe Committee if
approved by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee.
Such approval shall not be deemed to have been given if at least one-
third of the members of the Committee request in writing that the
Committee formally act on such a contract, if the request is made
within 10 days after the latest date on which such chairman or
chairmen, and such ranking minority member or members, approve such
contract.
Rule 15. Supervision, Duties of Staff.
(a) Supervision of Majority Staff. The professional and
clerical staff of the Committee not assigned to the minority
shall be under the supervision and direction of the chairman
who, in consultation with the chairmen of the subcommittees,
shall establish and assign the duties and responsibilities of
such staff members and delegate such authority as he determines
appropriate.
(b) Supervision of Minority Staff. The professional and
clerical staff assigned to the minority shall be under the
supervision and direction of the minority members of the
Committee, who may delegate such authority as they determine
appropriate.
Rule 16. Committee Budget.
(a) Preparation of Committee Budget. The chairman of the
Committee, after consultation with the ranking minority member
of the Committee and the chairmen of the subcommittees, shall
for the 108th Congress prepare a preliminary budget for the
Committee, with such budget including necessary amounts for
professional and clerical staff, travel, investigations,
equipment and miscellaneous expenses of the Committee and the
subcommittees, and which shall be adequate to fully discharge
the Committee's responsibilities for legislation and oversight.
Such budget shall be presented by the chairman to the majority
party caucus of the Committee and thereafter to the full
Committee for its approval.
(b) Approval of the Committee Budget. The chairman shall
take whatever action is necessary to have the budget as finally
approved by the Committee duly authorized by the House. No
proposed Committee budget may be submitted to the Committee on
House Administration unless it has been presented to and
approved by the majority party caucus and thereafter by the
full Committee. The chairman of the Committee may authorize all
necessary expenses in accordance with these rules and within
the limits of the Committee's budget as approved by the House.
(c) Monthly Expenditures Report. Committee members shall be
furnished a copy of each monthly report, prepared by the
chairman for the Committee on House Administration, which shows
expenditures made during the reporting period and cumulative
for the year by the Committee and subcommittees, anticipated
expenditures for the projected Committee program, and detailed
information on travel.
Rule 17. Broadcasting of Committee Hearings.
Any meeting or hearing that is open to the public may be
covered in whole or in part by radio or television or still
photography, subject to the requirements of clause 4 of Rule XI
of the Rules of the House. The coverage of any hearing or other
proceeding of the Committee or any subcommittee thereof by
television, radio, or still photography shall be under the
direct supervision of the chairman of the Committee, the
subcommittee chairman, or other member of the Committee
presiding at such hearing or other proceeding and may be
terminated by such member in accordance with the Rules of the
House.
Rule 18. Comptroller General Audits.
The chairman of the Committee is authorized to request
verification examinations by the Comptroller General of the
United States pursuant to Title V, Part A of the Energy Policy
and Conservation Act (Public Law 94-163), after consultation
with the members of the Committee.
Rule 19. Subpoenas.
The Committee, or any subcommittee, may authorize and issue
a subpoena under clause 2(m)(2)(A) of Rule XI of the House, if
authorized by a majority of the members of the Committee or
subcommittee (as the case may be) voting, a quorum being
present. Authorized subpoenas may be issued over the signature
of the chairman of the Committee or any member designated by
the Committee, and may be served by any person designated by
such chairman or member. The chairman of the Committee may
authorize and issue subpoenas under such clause during any
period for which the House has adjourned for a period in excess
of 3 days when, in the opinion of the chairman, authorization
and issuance of the subpoena is necessary to obtain the
material set forth in the subpoena. The chairman shall report
to the members of the Committee on the authorization and
issuance of a subpoena during the recess period as soon as
practicable but in no event later than one week after service
of such subpoena.
Rule 20. Travel of Members and Staff.
(a) Approval of Travel. Consistent with the primary expense
resolution and such additional expense resolutions as may have
been approved, travel to be reimbursed from funds set aside for
the Committee for any member or any staff member shall be paid
only upon the prior authorization of the chairman. Travel may
be authorized by the chairman for any member and any staff
member in connection with the attendance of hearings conducted
by the Committee or any subcommittee thereof and meetings,
conferences, and investigations which involve activities or
subject matter under the general jurisdiction of the Committee.
Before such authorization is given there shall be submitted to
the chairman in writing the following: (1) the purpose of the
travel; (2) the dates during which the travel is to be made and
the date or dates of the event for which the travel is being
made; (3) the location of the event for which the travel is to
be made; and (4) the names of members and staff seeking
authorization.
(b) Approval of Travel by Minority Members and Staff. In
the case of travel by minority party members and minority party
professional staff for the purpose set out in (a), the prior
approval, not only of the chairman but also of the ranking
minority member, shall be required. Such prior authorization
shall be given by the chairman only upon the representationby
the ranking minority member in writing setting forth those items
enumerated in (1), (2), (3), and (4) of paragraph (a).
Clauses 2 and 4 or Rule XI and Clauses 2 and 3 of Rule XIII of the
Rules of the House of Representatives for the 108th Congress
JANUARY 7, 2003
RULE XI: PROCEDURES OF COMMITTEES AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Clause 2: Committee Rules
Adoption of written rules
2. (a)(1) Each standing committee shall adopt written rules
governing its procedure. Such rules--
(A) shall be adopted in a meeting that is open to the
public unless the committee, in open session and with a
quorum present, determines by record vote that all or
part of the meeting on that day shall be closed to the
public;
(B) may not be inconsistent with the Rules of the
House or with those provisions of law having the force
and effect of Rules of the House; and
(C) shall in any event incorporate all of the
succeeding provisions of this clause to the extent
applicable.
(2) Each committee shall submit its rules for publication
in the Congressional Record not later than 30 days after the
committee is elected in each odd-numbered year.
Regular meeting days
(b) Each standing committee shall establish regular meeting
days for the conduct of its business, which shall be not less
frequent than monthly. Each such committee shall meet for the
consideration of a bill or resolution pending before the
committee or the transaction of other committee business on all
regular meeting days fixed by the committee unless otherwise
provided by written rule adopted by the committee.
Additional and special meetings
(c)(1) The chairman of each standing committee may call and
convene, as he considers necessary, additional and special
meetings of the committee for the consideration of a bill or
resolution pending before the committee or for the conduct of
other committee business, subject to such rules as the
committee may adopt. The committee shall meet for such purpose
under that call of the chairman.
(2) Three or more members of a standing committee may file
in the offices of the committee a written request that the
chairman call a special meeting of the committee. Such request
shall specify the measure or matter to be considered.
Immediately upon the filing of the request, the clerk of the
committee shall notify the chairman of the filing of the
request. If the chairman does not call the requested special
meeting within three calendar days after the filing of the
request (to be held within seven calendar days after the filing
of the request) a majority of the members of the committee may
file in the offices of the committee their written notice that
a special meeting of the committee will be held. The written
notice shall specify the date and hour of the special meeting
and the measure or matter to be considered. The committee shall
meet on that date and hour. Immediately upon the filing of the
notice, the clerk of the committee shall notify all members of
the committee that such special meeting will be held and inform
them of its date and hour and the measure or matter to be
considered. Only the measure or matter specified in that notice
may be considered at that special meeting.
Temporary absence of chairman
(d) A member of the majority party on each standing
committee or subcommittee thereof shall be designated by the
chairman of the full committee as the vice chairman of the
committee or subcommittee, as the case may be, and shall
preside during the absence of the chairman from any meeting. If
the chairman and vice chairman of a committee or subcommittee
are not present at any meeting of the committee or
subcommittee, the ranking majority member who is present shall
preside at that meeting.
Committee records
(e)(1)(A) Each committee shall keep a complete record of
all committee action which shall include--
(i) in the case of a meeting or hearing transcript, a
substantially verbatim account of remarks actually made
during the proceedings, subject only to technical,
grammatical, and typographical corrections authorized
by the person making the remarks involved; and
(ii) a record of the votes on any question on which a
record vote is demanded.
(B)(i) Except as provided in subdivision (B)(ii) and
subject to paragraph (k)(7), the result of each such record
vote shall be made available by the committee for inspection by
the public at reasonable times in its offices. Information so
available for public inspection shall include a description of
the amendment, motion, order, or other proposition, the name of
each member voting for and each member voting against such
amendment, motion, order, or proposition, and the names of
those members of the committee present but not voting.
(ii) The result of any record vote taken in executive
session in the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct may
not be made available for inspection by the public without an
affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the committee.
(2)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (B), all committee
hearings, records, data, charts, and files shall be kept
separate and distinctfrom the congressional office records of
the member serving as its chairman. Such records shall be the property
of the House, and each Member, Delegate, and the Resident Commissioner
shall have access thereto.
(B) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, other
than members of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct,
may not have access to the records of that committee respecting
the conduct of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
officer, or employee of the House without the specific prior
permission of that committee.
(3) Each committee shall include in its rules standards for
availability of records of the committee delivered to the
Archivist of the United States under rule VII. Such standards
shall specify procedures for orders of the committee under
clause 3(b)(3) and clause 4(b) of rule VII, including a
requirement that nonavailability of a record for a period
longer than the period otherwise applicable under that rule
shall be approved by vote of the committee.
(4) Each committee shall make its publications available in
electronic form to the maximum extent feasible.
Prohibition against proxy voting
(f) A vote by a member of a committee or subcommittee with
respect to any measure or matter may not be cast by proxy.
Open meetings and hearings
(g)(1) Each meeting for the transaction of business,
including the markup of legislation, by a standing committee or
subcommittee thereof (other than the Committee on Standards of
Official Conduct or its subcommittees) shall be open to the
public, including to radio, television, and still photography
coverage, except when the committee or subcommittee, in open
session and with a majority present, determines by record vote
that all or part of the remainder of the meeting on that day
shall be in executive session because disclosure of matters to
be considered would endanger national security, would
compromise sensitive law enforcement information, would tend to
defame, degrade, or incriminate any person, or otherwise would
violate a law or rule of the House. Persons, other than members
of the committee and such noncommittee Members, Delegates,
Resident Commissioner, congressional staff, or departmental
representatives as the committee may authorize, may not be
present at a business or markup session that is held in
executive session. This subparagraph does not apply to open
committee hearings, which are governed by clause 4(a)(1) of
rule X or by subparagraph (2).
(2)(A) Each hearing conducted by a committee or
subcommittee (other than the Committee on Standards of Official
Conduct or its subcommittees) shall be open to the public,
including to radio, television, and still photography coverage,
except when the committee or subcommittee, in open session and
with a majority present, determines by record vote that all or
part of the remainder of that hearing on that day shall be
closed to the public because disclosure of testimony, evidence,
or other matters to be considered would endanger national
security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement
information, or would violate a law or rule of the House.
(B) Notwithstanding the requirements of subdivision (A), in
the presence of the number of members required under the rules
of the committee for the purpose of taking testimony, a
majority of those present may--
(i) agree to close the hearing for the sole purpose
of discussing whether testimony or evidence to be
received would endanger national security, would
compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or
would violate clause 2(k)(5); or
(ii) agree to close the hearing as provided in clause
2(k)(5).
(C) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not be
excluded from nonparticipatory attendance at a hearing of a
committee or subcommittee (other than the Committee on
Standards of Official Conduct or its subcommittees) unless the
House by majority vote authorizes a particular committee or
subcommittee, for purposes of a particular series of hearings
on a particular article of legislation or on a particular
subject of investigation, to close its hearings to Members,
Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner by the same procedures
specified in this subparagraph for closing hearings to the
public.
(D) The committee or subcommittee may vote by the same
procedure described in this subparagraph to close one
subsequent day of hearing, except that the Committee on
Appropriations, the Committee on Armed Services, and the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and the
subcommittees thereof, may vote by the same procedure to close
up to five additional, consecutive days of hearings.
(3) The chairman of each committee (other than the
Committee on Rules) shall make public announcement of the date,
place, and subject matter of a committee hearing at least one
week before the commencement of the hearing. If the chairman of
the committee, with the concurrence of the ranking minority
member, determines that there is good cause to begin a hearing
sooner, or if the committee so determines by majority vote in
the presence of the number of members required under the rules
of the committee for the transaction of business, the chairman
shall make the announcement at the earliest possible date. An
announcement made under this subparagraph shall be published
promptly in the Daily Digest and made available in electronic
form.
(4) Each committee shall, to the greatest extent
practicable, require witnesses who appear before it to submit
in advance written statements of proposed testimony and to
limit their initial presentations to the committee to brief
summaries thereof. In the case of a witness appearing in a
nongovernmental capacity, a written statement of proposed
testimony shall include a curriculum vitae and a disclosure of
the amount and source (by agency and program) of each Federal
grant (or subgrant thereof) or contract (or subcontract
thereof) received during the current fiscal year or either of
the two previous fiscal years by the witness or by an entity
represented by the witness.
(5)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (B), a point of
order does not lie with respect to a measure reported by a
committee on the groundthat hearings on such measure were not
conducted in accordance with this clause.
(B) A point of order on the ground described in subdivision
(A) may be made by a member of the committee that reported the
measure if such point of order was timely made and improperly
disposed of in the committee.
(6) This paragraph does not apply to hearings of the
Committee on Appropriations under clause 4(a)(1) of rule X.
Quorum requirements
(h)(1) A measure or recommendation may not be reported by a
committee unless a majority of the committee is actually
present.
(2) Each committee may fix the number of its members to
constitute a quorum for taking testimony and receiving
evidence, which may not be less than two.
(3) Each committee (other than the Committee on
Appropriations, the Committee on the Budget, and the Committee
on Ways and Means) may fix the number of its members to
constitute a quorum for taking any action other than one for
which the presence of a majority of the committee is otherwise
required, which may not be less than one-third of the members.
Limitation on committee sittings
(i) A committee may not sit during a joint session of the
House and Senate or during a recess when a joint meeting of the
House and Senate is in progress.
Calling and questioning of witnesses
(j)(1) Whenever a hearing is conducted by a committee on a
measure or matter, the minority members of the committee shall
be entitled, upon request to the chairman by a majority of them
before the completion of the hearing, to call witnesses
selected by the minority to testify with respect to that
measure or matter during at least one day of hearing thereon.
(2)(A) Subject to subdivisions (B) and (C), each committee
shall apply the five-minute rule during the questioning of
witnesses in a hearing until such time as each member of the
committee who so desires has had an opportunity to question
each witness.
(B) A committee may adopt a rule or motion permitting a
specified number of its members to question a witness for
longer than five minutes. The time for extended questioning of
a witness under this subdivision shall be equal for the
majority party and the minority party and may not exceed one
hour in the aggregate.
(C) A committee may adopt a rule or motion permitting
committee staff for its majority and minority party members to
question a witness for equal specified periods. The time for
extended questioning of a witness under this subdivision shall
be equal for the majority party and the minority party and may
not exceed one hour in the aggregate.
Hearing procedures
(k)(1) The chairman at a hearing shall announce in an
opening statement the subject of the hearing.
(2) A copy of the committee rules and of this clause shall
be made available to each witness on request.
(3) Witnesses at hearings may be accompanied by their own
counsel for the purpose of advising them concerning their
constitutional rights.
(4) The chairman may punish breaches of order and decorum,
and of professional ethics on the part of counsel, by censure
and exclusion from the hearings; and the committee may cite the
offender to the House for contempt.
(5) Whenever it is asserted by a member of the committee
that the evidence or testimony at a hearing may tend to defame,
degrade, or incriminate any person, or it is asserted by a
witness that the evidence or testimony that the witness would
give at a hearing may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate
the witness--
(A) notwithstanding paragraph (g)(2), such testimony
or evidence shall be presented in executive session if,
in the presence of the number of members required under
the rules of the committee for the purpose of taking
testimony, the committee determines by vote of a
majority of those present that such evidence or
testimony may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate
any person; and
(B) the committee shall proceed to receive such testimony
in open session only if the committee, a majority being
present, determines that such evidence or testimony will not
tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate any person.
In either case the committee shall afford such person an
opportunity voluntarily to appear as a witness, and receive and
dispose of requests from such person to subpoena additional
witnesses.
(6) Except as provided in subparagraph (5), the chairman
shall receive and the committee shall dispose of requests to
subpoena additional witnesses.
(7) Evidence or testimony taken in executive session, and
proceedings conducted in executive session, may be released or
used in public sessions only when authorized by the committee,
a majority being present.
(8) In the discretion of the committee, witnesses may
submit brief and pertinent sworn statements in writing for
inclusion in the record. The committee is the sole judge of the
pertinence of testimony and evidence adduced at its hearing.
(9) A witness may obtain a transcript copy of his testimony
given at a public session or, if given at an executive session,
when authorized by the committee.
Supplemental, minority, or additional views
(l) If at the time of approval of a measure or matter by a
committee (other than the Committee on Rules) a member of the
committee gives notice of intention to file supplemental,
minority, or additional views forinclusion in the report to the
House thereon, that member shall be entitled to not less than two
additional calendar days after the day of such notice (excluding
Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays except when the House is in
session on such a day) to file such views, in writing and signed by
that member, with the clerk of the committee.
Power to sit and act; subpoena power
(m)(1) For the purpose of carrying out any of its functions
and duties under this rule and rule X (including any matters
referred to it under clause 2 of rule XII), a committee or
subcommittee is authorized (subject to subparagraph (3)(A))--
(A) to sit and act at such times and places within
the United States, whether the House is in session, has
recessed, or has adjourned, and to hold such hearings
as it considers necessary; and
(B) to require, by subpoena or otherwise, the
attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the
production of such books, records, correspondence,
memoranda, papers, and documents as it considers
necessary.
(2) The chairman of the committee, or a member designated
by the chairman, may administer oaths to witnesses.
(3)(A)(i) Except as provided in subdivision (A)(ii), a
subpoena may be authorized and issued by a committee or
subcommittee under subparagraph (1)(B) in the conduct of an
investigation or series of investigations or activities only
when authorized by the committee or subcommittee, a majority
being present. The power to authorize and issue subpoenas under
subparagraph (1)(B) may be delegated to the chairman of the
committee under such rules and under such limitations as the
committee may prescribe. Authorized subpoenas shall be signed
by the chairman of the committee or by a member designated by
the committee.
(ii) In the case of a subcommittee of the Committee on
Standards of Official Conduct, a subpoena may be authorized and
issued only by an affirmative vote of a majority of its
members.
(B) A subpoena duces tecum may specify terms of return
other than at a meeting or hearing of the committee or
subcommittee authorizing the subpoena.
(C) Compliance with a subpoena issued by a committee or
subcommittee under subparagraph (1)(B) may be enforced only as
authorized or directed by the House.
Clause 4: Audio and Visual Coverage of Committee Proceedings
Audio and visual coverage of committee proceedings
4. (a) The purpose of this clause is to provide a means, in
conformity with acceptable standards of dignity, propriety, and
decorum, by which committee hearings or committee meetings that
are open to the public may be covered by audio and visual
means--
(1) for the education, enlightenment, and information
of the general public, on the basis of accurate and
impartial news coverage, regarding the operations,
procedures, and practices of the House as a legislative
and representative body, and regarding the measures,
public issues, and other matters before the House and
its committees, the consideration thereof, and the
action taken thereon; and
(2) for the development of the perspective and
understanding of the general public with respect to the
role and function of the House under the Constitution
as an institution of the Federal Government.
(b) In addition, it is the intent of this clause that radio
and television tapes and television film of any coverage under
this clause may not be used, or made available for use, as
partisan political campaign material to promote or oppose the
candidacy of any person for elective public office.
(c) It is, further, the intent of this clause that the
general conduct of each meeting (whether of a hearing or
otherwise) covered under authority of this clause by audio or
visual means, and the personal behavior of the committee
members and staff, other Government officials and personnel,
witnesses, television, radio, and press media personnel, and
the general public at the hearing or other meeting, shall be in
strict conformity with and observance of the acceptable
standards of dignity, propriety, courtesy, and decorum
traditionally observed by the House in its operations, and may
not be such as to--
(1) distort the objects and purposes of the hearing
or other meeting or the activities of committee members
in connection with that hearing or meeting or in
connection with the general work of the committee or of
the House; or
(2) cast discredit or dishonor on the House, the
committee, or a Member, Delegate, or Resident
Commissioner or bring the House, the committee, or a
Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner into
disrepute.
(d) The coverage of committee hearings and meetings by
audio and visual means shall be permitted and conducted only in
strict conformity with the purposes, provisions, and
requirements of this clause.
(e) Whenever a hearing or meeting conducted by a committee
or subcommittee is open to the public, those proceedings shall
be open to coverage by audio and visual means. A committee or
subcommittee chairman may not limit the number of television or
still cameras to fewer than two representatives from each
medium (except for legitimate space or safety considerations,
in which case pool coverage shall be authorized).
(f) Each committee shall adopt written rules to govern its
implementation of this clause. Such rules shall contain
provisions to the following effect:
(1) If audio or visual coverage of the hearing or
meeting is to be presented to the public as live
coverage, that coverage shall be conducted and
presented without commercial sponsorship.
(2) The allocation among the television media of the
positions or the number of television cameras permitted
by a committee or subcommittee chairman in a hearing or
meeting room shall be in accordance with fair and
equitable procedures devised by the Executive Committee
of the Radio and Television Correspondents' Galleries.
(3) Television cameras shall be placed so as not to
obstruct in any way the space between a witness giving
evidence or testimony and any member of the committee
or the visibility of that witness and that member to
each other.
(4) Television cameras shall operate from fixed
positions but may not be placed in positions that
obstruct unnecessarily the coverage of the hearing or
meeting by the other media.
(5) Equipment necessary for coverage by the
television and radio media may not be installed in, or
removed from, the hearing or meeting room while the
committee is in session.
(6)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (B),
floodlights, spotlights, strobelights, and flashguns
may not be used in providing any method of coverage of
the hearing or meeting.
(B) The television media may install additional
lighting in a hearing or meeting room, without cost to
the Government, in order to raise the ambient lighting
level in a hearing or meeting room to the lowest level
necessary to provide adequate television coverage of a
hearing or meeting at the current state of the art of
television coverage.
(7) In the allocation of the number of still
photographers permitted by a committee or subcommittee
chairman in a hearing or meeting room, preference shall
be given to photographers from Associated Press Photos
and United Press International Newspictures. If
requests are made by more of the media than will be
permitted by a committee or subcommittee chairman for
coverage of a hearing or meeting by still photography,
that coverage shall be permitted on the basis of a fair
and equitable pool arrangement devised by the Standing
Committee of Press Photographers.
(8) Photographers may not position themselves between
the witness table and the members of the committee at
any time during the course of a hearing or meeting.
(9) Photographers may not place themselves in
positions that obstruct unnecessarily the coverage of
the hearing by the other media.
(10) Personnel providing coverage by the television
and radio media shall be currently accredited to the
Radio and Television Correspondents' Galleries.
(11) Personnel providing coverage by still
photography shall be currently accredited to the Press
Photographers' Gallery.
(12) Personnel providing coverage by the television
and radio media and by still photography shall conduct
themselves and their coverage activities in an orderly
and unobtrusive manner.
RULE XIII: CALENDARS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
Clause 2: Filing and Printing of Reports
2. (a)(1) Except as provided in subparagraph (2), all
reports of committees (other than those filed from the floor as
privileged) shall be delivered to the Clerk for printing and
reference to the proper calendar under the direction of the
Speaker in accordance with clause 1. The title or subject of
each report shall be entered on the Journal and printed in the
Congressional Record.
(2) A bill or resolution reported adversely shall be laid
on the table unless a committee to which the bill or resolution
was referred requests at the time of the report its referral to
an appropriate calendar under clause 1 or unless, within three
days thereafter, a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
makes such a request.
(b)(1) It shall be the duty of the chairman of each
committee to report or cause to be reported promptly to the
House a measure or matter approved by the committee and to take
or cause to be taken steps necessary to bring the measure or
matter to a vote.
(2) In any event, the report of a committee on a measure
that has been approved by the committee shall be filed within
seven calendar days (exclusive of days on which the House is
not in session) after the day on which a written request for
the filing of the report, signed by a majority of the members
of the committee, has been filed with the clerk of the
committee. The clerk of the committee shall immediately notify
the chairman of the filing of such a request. This subparagraph
does not apply to a report of the Committee on Rules with
respect to a rule, joint rule, or order of business of the
House, or to the reporting of a resolution of inquiry addressed
to the head of an executive department.
(c) All supplemental, minority, or additional views filed
under clause 2(l) of rule XI by one or more members of a
committee shall be included in, and shall be a part of, the
report filed by the committee with respect to a measure or
matter. When time guaranteed by clause 2(l) of rule XI has
expired (or, if sooner, when all separate views have been
received), the committee may arrange to file its report with
the Clerk not later than one hour after the expiration of such
time. This clause and provisions of clause 2(l) of rule XI do
not preclude the immediate filing or printing of a committee
report in the absence of a timely request for the opportunity
to file supplemental, minority, or additional views as provided
in clause 2(l) of rule XI.
Clause 3: Contents of Reports
Content of reports
3. (a)(1) Except as provided in subparagraph (2), the
report of a committee on a measure or matter shall be printed
in a single volume that--
(A) shall include all supplemental, minority, or
additional views that have been submitted by the time
of the filing of the report; and
(B) shall bear on its cover a recital that any such
supplemental, minority, or additional views (and any
material submitted under paragraph (c)(3)) are included
as part of the report.
(2) A committee may file a supplemental report for
the correction of a technical error in its previous
report on a measure or matter. A supplemental report
only correcting errors in the depiction of record votes
under paragraph (b) may be filed under this
subparagraph and shallnot be subject to the requirement
in clause 4 concerning the availability of reports.
(b) With respect to each record vote on a motion to report
a measure or matter of a public nature, and on any amendment
offered to the measure or matter, the total number of votes
cast for and against, and the names of members voting for and
against, shall be included in the committee report. The
preceding sentence does not apply to votes taken in executive
session by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.
(c) The report of a committee on a measure that has been
approved by the committee shall include, separately set out and
clearly identified, the following:
(1) Oversight findings and recommendations under
clause 2(b)(1) of rule X.
(2) The statement required by section 308(a) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, except that an
estimate of new budget authority shall include, when
practicable, a comparison of the total estimated
funding level for the relevant programs to the
appropriate levels under current law.
(3) An estimate and comparison prepared by the
Director of the Congressional Budget Office under
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 if
timely submitted to the committee before the filing of
the report.
(4) A statement of general performance goals and
objectives, including outcome--related goals and
objectives, for which the measure authorizes funding.
(d) Each report of a committee on a public bill or
public joint resolution shall contain the following:
(1) A statement citing the specific powers granted to
Congress in the Constitution to enact the law proposed
by the bill or joint resolution.
(2)(A) An estimate by the committee of the costs that
would be incurred in carrying out the bill or joint
resolution in the fiscal year in which it is reported
and in each of the five fiscal years following that
fiscal year (or for the authorized duration of any
program authorized by the bill or joint resolution if
less than five years);
(B) a comparison of the estimate of costs described
in subdivision (A) made by the committee with any
estimate of such costs made by a Government agency and
submitted to such committee; and (C) when practicable,
a comparison of the total estimated funding level for
the relevant programs with the appropriate levels under
current law.
(3)(A) In subparagraph (2) the term ``Government
agency'' includes any department, agency,
establishment, wholly owned Government corporation, or
instrumentality of the Federal Government or the
government of the District of Columbia.
(B) Subparagraph (2) does not apply to the Committee
on Appropriations, the Committee on House
Administration, the Committee on Rules, or the
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, and does
not apply when a cost estimate and comparison prepared
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office
under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974 has been included in the report under paragraph
(c)(3).
(e)(1) Whenever a committee reports a bill or joint
resolution proposing to repeal or amend a statute or part
thereof, it shall include in its report or in an accompanying
document--
(A) the text of a statute or part thereof that is
proposed to be repealed; and
(B) a comparative print of any part of the bill or
joint resolution proposing to amend the statute and of
the statute or part thereof proposed to be amended,
showing by appropriate typographical devices the
omissions and insertions proposed.
(2) If a committee reports a bill or joint resolution
proposing to repeal or amend a statute or part thereof with a
recommendation that the bill or joint resolution be amended,
the comparative print required by subparagraph (1) shall
reflect the changes in existing law proposed to be made by the
bill or joint resolution as proposed to be amended.
MEMBERSHIP AND ORGANIZATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
(Ratio 31-26)
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
JOE BARTON, Texas, Chairman \4\
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan W. J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California \3\
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts RALPH M. HALL, Texas \1\
RICK BOUCHER, Virginia MICHAREL BILIRAKIS, Florida
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York FRED UPTON, Michigan
FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey CLIFF STEARNS, Florida
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio
BART GORDON, Tennessee JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania
PETER DEUTSCH, Florida \5\
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois CHRISTOPHER COX, California
ANNA G. ESHOO, California NATHAN DEAL, Georgia
BART STUPAK, Michigan RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky
ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia
GENE GREEN, Texas BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming
KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
TED STRICKLAND, Ohio HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico
DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona
LOIS CAPPS, California CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING,
MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania Mississippi
CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana Vice Chairman
TOM ALLEN, Maine VITO FOSSELLA, New York
JIM DAVIS, Florida STEVE BUYER, Indiana
JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois GEORGE RADANOVICH, California
HILDA L. SOLIS, California CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire
CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
MARY BONO, California
GREG WALDEN, Oregon
LEE TERRY, Nebraska
MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey
MIKE ROGERS, Michigan
DARRELL E. ISSA, California
C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho
JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma \2\
*Representative Ernie Fletcher (R-KY) resigned as a Member of the House
of Representatives on December 8, 2003.
*Representative Roy Blunt (R-MO) resigned from the Committee on Energy
and Commerce on January 28, 2004.
\1\ Representative Ralph Hall (R-TX) resigned from the Democratic
caucus on January 5, 2004. He was elected to the Committee on Energy
and Commerce for the 108th Congress on January 28, 2004, pursuant to H.
Res. 505, which passed the House on January 28, 2004.
\2\ Representative John Sullivan (R-OK) was elected to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce for the 108th Congress on January 28, 2004,
pursuant to H. Res. 505, which passed the House on January 28, 2004.
\3\ Representative W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin (R-LA) resigned as Chairman of
the Committee on Energy and Commerce on February 15, 2004.
\4\ Representative Joe Barton (R-TX) was elected Chairman of the
Committee on Energy and Commerce on February 26, 2004.
\5\ Representative James C. Greenwood resigned as Chairman of the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on July 21, 2004.
SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERSHIPS AND JURISDICTION
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection
(Ratio 16-13)
CLIFF STEARNS, Florida, Chairman
JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois FRED UPTON, Michigan
CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
PETER DEUTSCH, Florida JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois Vice Chairman
BART STUPAK, Michigan GEORGE RADANOVICH, California
GENE GREEN, Texas CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire
KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
TED STRICKLAND, Ohio MARY BONO, California
DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado LEE TERRY, Nebraska
JIM DAVIS, Florida MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan DARRELLE E. ISSA, California
(ex officio) C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho
JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma
JOE BARTON, Texas
(ex officio)
Jurisdiction: Interstate and foreign commerce, including all trade
matters within the jurisdiction of the full committee; regulation of
commercial practices (the FTC), including sports-related matters;
consumer affairs and consumer protection, including privacy matters
generally; consumer product safety (the CPSC); and product liability;
and motor vehicle safety; and, regulation of travel, tourism, and time.
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
(Ratio 18-15)
RALPH HALL, Texas, Chairman
RICK BOUCHER, Virginia CHRISTOPHER COX, California
TOM ALLEN, Maine RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia
FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio Vice Chairman
ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico
GENE GREEN, Texas JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona
KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING,
TED STRICKLAND, Ohio Mississippi
LOIS CAPPS, California VITO FOSSELLA, New York
MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania GEORGE RADANOVICH, California
CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana MARY BONO, California
JIM DAVIS, Florida GREG WALDEN, Oregon
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan MIKE ROGERS, Michigan
(ex officio) DARRELL E. ISSA, California
C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho
JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma
JOE BARTON, Texas
(ex officio)
Jurisdiction: National energy policy generally; fossil energy,
renewable energy resources and synthetic fuels; energy conservation;
energy information; energy regulation and utilization; utility issues
and regulation of nuclear facilities; interstate energy compacts;
nuclear energy and waste; the Clean Air Act; and, all laws, programs,
and government activities affecting such matters.
Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials
(Ratio 16-13)
PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio, Chairman
PHILDA L. SOLIS, California RALPH M. HALL, Texas
FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania
ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico
LOIS CAPPS, California VITO FOSSELLA, New York
MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania Vice Chairman
TOM ALLEN, Maine STEVE BUYER, Indiana
JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois GEORGE RADANOVICH, California
CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire
PETER DEUTSCH, Florida JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois MARY BONO, California
BART STUPAK, Michigan LEE TERRY, Nebraska
GENE GREEN, Texas MIKE ROGERS, Michigan
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan DARRELL E. ISSA, California
(ex officio) C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho
JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma
JOE BARTON, Texas
(ex officio)
Jurisdiction: Environmental protection in general, including the Safe
Drinking Water Act and risk assessment matters; solid waste, hazardous
waste and toxic substances, including Superfund and RCRA; mining, oil,
gas, and coal combustion wastes; and, noise pollution control.
Subcommittee on Health
(Ratio 18-15)
MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida,
Chairman
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio RALPH M. HALL, Texas
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California FRED UPTON, Michigan
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania
FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey NATHAN DEAL, Georgia
BART GORDON, Tennessee RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
ANNA G. ESHOO, California ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky
BART STUPAK, Michigan CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York Vice Chairman
GENE GREEN, Texas BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming
TED STRICKLAND, Ohio JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico
LOIS CAPPS, California JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona
CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING,
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois Mississippi
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan STEVE BUYER, Indiana
(ex officio) JOESPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey
MIKE ROGERS, Michigan
JOE BARTON, Texas
(ex officio)
Jurisdiction: Public health and quarantine; hospital construction;
mental health and research; biomedical programs and health protection
in general, including Medicaid and national health insurance; food and
drugs; and, drug abuse.
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
(Ratio 18-15)
FRED UPTON, Michigan, Chairman
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida
ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland CLIFF STEARNS, Florida
KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri Vice Chairman
MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio
JIM DAVIS, Florida CHRISTOPHER COX, California
CHARLES A GONZALEZ, Texas NATHAN DEAL, Georgia
RICK BOUCHER, Virginia ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming
BART GORDON, Tennessee JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
PETER DEUTSCH, Florida HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING,
ANNA G. ESHOO, California Mississippi
BART STUPAK, Michigan VITO FOSSELLA, New York
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York STEVE BUYER, Indiana
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire
(ex officio) MARY BONO, California
GREG WALDEN, Oregon
LEE TERRY, Nebraska
JOE BARTON, Texas
(ex officio)
Jurisdiction: Interstate and foreign telecommunications including, but
not limited to all telecommunication and information transmission by
broadcast, radio, wire, microwave, satellite, or other mode.
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
(Ratio 9-7)
JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania,
Chairman
PETER DEUTSCH, Florida MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida
DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado CLIFF STEARNS, Florida
TOM ALLEN, Maine RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California GREG WALDEN, Oregon
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts Vice Chairman
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey
(ex officio) MIKE ROGERS, Michigan
JOE BARTON, Texas
(ex officio)
Jurisdiction: Responsibility for oversight of agencies, departments,
and programs within the jurisdiction of the full committee, and for
conducting investigations within such jurisdiction.
COMMITTEE STAFF
C. H. ``Bud'' Albright, Jr., Staff
Director
James D. Barnette, Deputy Staff
Director/General Counsel
Andy Black, Deputy Staff Director
for Policy
Lawrence A. Neal, Deputy Staff
Director for Communications
David L. Cavicke, Chief Counsel
for Commerce
Charles M. Clapton, Chief Counsel
for Health
Mark W. Menezes, Chief Counsel for
Energy and Environment
Mark A. Paoletta, Chief Counsel
for Oversight and Investigations
Howard Waltzman, Chief Counsel for
Telecommunications
Michael Abraham, Legislative Clerk
Kelli Andrews, Counsel
Melissa Bartlett, Counsel
Kurt W. Bilas, Counsel
Judy L. Borger, Professional Staff
Member
Margaret E. Caravelli, Counsel
William Carty, Legislative Clerk
Dwight Cates, Professional Staff
Member
Kelly Cole, Counsel
Brad Conway, Counsel
Anthony Cooke, Counsel
William Cooper, Counsel
Julie Cordell, Professional Staff
Member
Gerald Couri, Policy Coordinator
Heather Couri, Associate
Eugenia Edwards, Legislative Clerk
Thomas Feddo, Counsel
Joseph B. Fortson, IV, Counsel
Neil R. Freid, Counsel
Chad Grant, Staff Assistant
Michael Green, Staff Assistant
Jeanne M. Haggerty, Policy
Coordinator
Billy Harvard, Legislative Clerk
Thomas Hassenboehler, Counsel
Rebecca Hemard, Counsel
Elizabeth Hill, Staff Assistant
Eric M. Hutchins, Energy Assistant
Shannon Jacquot, Counsel
Cheryl Jaeger, Professional Staff
Member
Jaylyn Jensen, Senior Legislative
Analyst
Samantha Jordan, Press Secretary
Nandan Kenkeremath, Senior Counsel
Peter E. Kielty, Legislative Clerk
Chris Leahy, Policy Coordinator
Ryan Long, Professional Staff
Member
Clayton Matheson, Research Analyst
Brian McCullough, Professional
Staff Member
Jean McGinley, Director of
Information Technology
Lisa Miller, Deputy Communications
Director
Audrey Murdoch, Assistant to the
Administrative Coordinator
Anh Nguyen, Staff Assistant
Will Nordwind, Policy Coordinator
William D. O'brien, Legislative
Analyst for Health Policy
Joseph P. Patterson, Jr., Printer
Maryam S. Sabbaghian, Counsel
Jerome Sikorski, Archivist
Robert E. Simison, Professional
Staff Member
Alan M. Slobodin, Deputy Chief
Counsel for Oversight and
Investigations
Amos Snead, Press Assistant
Andrew L. Snowdon, Counsel
Peter Spencer, Professional Staff
Member
Elizabeth Stack, Policy
Coordinator
Anthony M. Sullivan, Comptroller
Ryan Thompson, Assistant to the
Chairman
Jon Tripp, Deputy Communications
Director
Jacqueline L. Walker, Director of
External Affairs
Linda Walker, Administrative and
Human Resources Coordinator
Minority Staff
Reid P. F. Stuntz, Minority Staff
Director and Chief Counsel
David R. Schooler, Minority Deputy
Staff Director and General Counsel
Sharon E. Davis, Chief Minority
Clerk
Candace E. Butler, Deputy Chief
Minority Clerk/LAN Administrator
Jonathan J. Cordone, Minority
Counsel
Angela Davis-West, Minority
Secretary
Jeffrey M. Donofrio, Minority
Research Assistant
Peter J. Filon, Minority Counsel
John P. Ford, Minority Counsel
Richard A. Frandsen, Senior
Minority Counsel
Michael L. Goo, Minority Counsel
Ashley R. Groesbeck, Minority
Research Assistant
Amy B. Hall, Minority Professional
Staff Member
Robert T. Hall, Minority Staff
Assistant
Bruce Harris, Minority
Professional Staff Member
Voncille Trotter Hines, Minority
Research Assistant
Edith Holleman, Minority Counsel
Carla R. V. Hultberg, Assistant
Minority Clerk/Assistant LAN
Administrator
Purvee Kemph, Minority Counsel
Raymond R. Kent, Jr., Minority
Finance Assistant
Christopher Knauer, Minority
Investigator
Jessica A. McNiece, Minority
Research Assistant
David W. Nelson, Minority
Investigator/Economist
Bettina Poirier, Minority Counsel
Gregg Rothschild, Minority Counsel
Jodi Seth, Minority Press
Secretary
Sue D. Sheridan, Senior Minority
Counsel
Bridgett E. Taylor, Minority
Professional Staff Member
David A. Vogel, Minority Staff
Assistant
Counsuela M. Washington, Senior
Minority Counsel
LEGISLATIVE AND OVERSIGHT ACTIVITY OF THE COMMITTEE
During the 108th Congress, 1114 bills and resolutions were
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The Full
Committee reported 49 measures to the House (not including
conference reports). 55 measures regarding issues within the
Committee's jurisdiction were enacted into law.
In areas as diverse as health, telecommunications, energy,
and the environment, the Committee made great strides towards
the goal of creating a more effective, less expensive, and more
accountable government that better serves all Americans.
The following is a summary of the legislative and oversight
activities of the Committee on Energy and Commerce during the
108th Congress. This report includes a summary of the
activities taken by the Committee to implement its Oversight
Plan for the 108th Congress, which was submitted by the
Committee under clause 2(d) of rule X. In addition, pursuant to
clause 1(d)(3) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, this reports contains a summary of any
additional oversight activities undertaken by the Committee and
the recommendations made or actions taken thereon.
Committee on Energy and Commerce
FULL COMMITTEE
(Ratio 31-26)
JOE BARTON, Texas, Chairman
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan W. J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California 3
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts RALPH M. HALL, Texas 1
RICK BOUCHER, Virginia MICHAREL BILIRAKIS, Florida
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York FRED UPTON, Michian
FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey CLIFF STEARNS, Florida
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio
BART STUPAK, Michigan CHRISTOPHER COX, California
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York NATHAN DEAL, Georgia
ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
GENE GREEN, Texas ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky
KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia
TED STRICKLAND, Ohio BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming
DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
LOIS CAPSS, California HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico
MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona
CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING,
TOM ALLEN, Maine Mississippi, Vice Chairman
JIM DAVIS, Florida VITO FOSSELLA, New York
JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois STEVE BUYER, Indiana
HILDA SOLIS, California GEORGE RADANOVICH, California
CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
MARY BONO, California
GREG WALDEN, Oregon
LEE TERRY, Nebraska
MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey
MIKE ROGERS, Michigan
DARRELLE ISSA, California
C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho
JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma
2
Oversight Activities
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION BRIEFING ON DO-NOT-CALL REGISTRY
On January 8, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
held a briefing on the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) request
for authorization to collect fees to fund a national do-not-
call registry. The focus of the briefing was to review the
FTC's funding of the registry, the source of funding for the
registry, and how to best achieve the national rollout of the
national do-not-call list. The Committee was briefed by the
Federal Trade Commission.
A REVIEW OF THE ADMINISTRATION'S FY2004 HEALTH CARE PRIORITIES
On February 12, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
held an oversight hearing to examine the President's proposed
FY 2004 budget for the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS). The hearing focused on Administration's proposed budget
for the two entitlement programs, Medicare and Medicaid. In
addition, the hearingprovided the Administration with the
opportunity to discuss its budget plans for supporting healthy
communities by funding programs and initiatives that improve access to
critical health care services and improve quality, as well as funding
for bioterrorism preparedness and biomedical research. The HHS
Secretary was the sole witness at the hearing.
NATURAL GAS SUPPLY AND DEMAND ISSUES
On June 10, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce held
an oversight hearing on domestic natural gas supply and demand
issues. The hearing examined the projected natural gas supply
and demand imbalance and its affect on prices. Witnesses
included representatives from the Energy Information
Administration, state regulators, industry representatives and
analysts, and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board.
BLACKOUT 2003: HOW DID IT HAPPEN AND WHY?
On September 3 and 4, 2003, the Committee on Energy and
Commerce held two oversight hearings investigating the causes
of the August 14, 2003, electricity blackout, the largest in
the nation's history. Approximately 62,000 MW of customer load
was lost, affecting an area in eight states and Canada with
roughly 50 million people. Witnesses testifying on the first
day included the Secretary of the Department of Energy, the
Governor of Ohio, the Governor of Michigan, the Mayor of
Detroit, representatives from Federal, regional, and state
regulatory agencies, and representatives of the North American
Electric Reliability Council (NERC) and two regional
reliability councils; the East-Central Area Reliability Council
(ECAR) and the Northeast Power Coordinating Council (NPCC).
Witnesses testifying on the second day included officials from
six companies directly affected by the blackouts, the
independent system operators and the regional transmission
operator in the region of the blackout, industry analysts and
officers, consumer advocacy groups, and the investment
community.
MANAGING BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH TO PREVENT AND CURE DISEASE IN THE 21ST
CENTURY: MATCHING NIH POLICY WITH SCIENCE
On October 2, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
held a joint oversight hearing with the Senate Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, on the organizational
structure of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The
hearing focused on how the current organizational structure of
NIH impacts the management of the agency, priority setting, and
the advancement of science. Testimony was received from both
the current and past Director of the NIH, as well as a
representative of the National Academy of Sciences.
A REVIEW OF THE ADMINISTRATION'S FY2005 HEALTH CARE PRIORITIES
On March 10, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
held an oversight hearing to examine the President's proposed
FY 2005 budget for the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS). The hearing focused on the Administration's budget
requirements for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
($482.1 billion, an increase of $29.1 billion from FY 2004
request). The hearing also provided the Administration with the
opportunity to discuss its budget plans for other priorities,
including: additional programs for health care access (i.e.,
community health centers, health savings accounts, and health
care tax credits); bioterrorism preparedness and biomedical
research; fighting AIDS; food and drug reforms; additional
programs supporting public health; and initiatives concerning
marriage, children, and healthy family development. The HHS
Secretary was the sole witness at the hearing.
THE STATE OF U.S. INDUSTRY
On March 24, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
held an oversight hearing on the state of U.S. industry. The
hearing focused on the challenges facing American manufacturing
with a specific review of the Department of Commerce's plan to
promote manufacturing. Specifically, the hearing addressed
plans to create the conditions for economic growth and
manufacturing investment; lower the cost of manufacturing in
the United States; invest in innovation, strengthen education,
retraining, and economic diversification; promote open markets;
and enhance government's focus on manufacturing
competitiveness. The sole witness was the Secretary of
Commerce.
FY2005 BUDGET PRIORITIES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
On April 1, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce held
an oversight hearing to examine the Department of Energy's
budget request for fiscal year 2005. The sole witness was the
Secretary of the Department of Energy.
Hearings Held
The Do-Not-Call List Authorization.--Oversight briefing on
the Do-Not-Call List Authorization. Briefing held on January 8,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-1.
A Review of the Administration FY2004 Health Care
Priorities.--Oversight hearing on a Review of the
Administration FY2004 Health Care Priorities. Hearing held on
February 12, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-8.
Natural Gas Supply and Demand Issues.--Oversight hearing on
Natural Gas Supply and Demand Issues. Hearing held on June 10,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-26.
Blackout 2003: How Did it Happen and Why?--Oversight
hearing on Blackout 2003: How Did it Happen and Why? Hearing
held on September 3, 2003 and September 4, 2003. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-54.
Managing Biomedical Research to Prevent and Cure Disease in
the 21st Century: Matching NIH Policy with Science.--Joint
oversight hearing with the Senate Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions on Managing Biomedical Research
to Prevent and Cure Disease in the 21st Century: Matching NIH
Policy with Science. Hearing held on October 2, 2003. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-56.
A Review of the Administration's FY2005 Health Care
Priorities.--Oversight hearing on a Review of the
Administration's FY2005 Health Care Priorities. Hearing held on
March 10, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-100.
The State of U.S. Industry.--Oversight hearing on the State
of U.S. Industry. Hearing held on March 24, 2004. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-79.
FY2005 Budget Priorities for the Department of Energy.--
Oversight hearing on FY2005 Budget Priorities for the
Department of Energy. Hearing held on April 1, 2004. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-80.
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection
(Ratio 16-13)
CLIFF STEARNS, Florida, Chairman
JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois FRED UPTON, Michigan
CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
PETER DEUTSCH, Florida JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois Vice Chairman
BART STUPAK, Michigan GEORGE RADANOVICH, California
GENE GREEN, Texas CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire
KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
TED STRICKLAND, Ohio MARY BONO, California
DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado LEE TERRY, Nebraska
JIM DAVIS, Florida MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan DARRELL E. ISSA, California
(ex officio) C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho
JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma
JOE BARTON, Texas
(ex officio)
Jurisdiction: Interstate and foreign commerce, including all trade
matters within the jurisdiction of the full committee; regulation of
commercial practices (the FTC), including sports-related matters;
consumer affairs and consumer protection, including privacy matters
generally; consumer product safety (the CPSC); and product liability;
and motor vehicle safety; and, regulation of travel, tourism, and time.
Legislative Activities
DO-NOT-CALL IMPLEMENTATION ACT
Public Law 108-10 (H.R. 395)
A bill to authorize the Federal Trade Commission to collect
fees for the implementation and enforcement of a ``do-not-
call'' registry, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 395, the ``Do-Not-Call Implementation Act,''
authorizes the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to promulgate
regulations establishing fees sufficient to implement and
enforce provisions relating to the ``do-not-call'' registry of
the Telemarketing Sales Rule promulgated under the Telephone
Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act, allows such fees to be
collected for FY 2003 through 2007, and directs the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) to issue a final rule pursuant
to a rulemaking proceeding begun under the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act and coordinate with the FTC to maximize
consistency with the FTC's ``do-not-call'' rule.
Legislative History
On January 8, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
held a briefing on the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) request
for authorization to collect fees to fund a national do-not-
call registry. The focus of the briefing was to review the
FTC's funding of the registry, the source of funding for the
registry, and how to best achieve the national rollout of the
national do-not-call list. The Committee was briefed by the
Federal Trade Commission.
On January 28, 2003, H.R. 395 was introduced in the House
by Mr. Tauzin and was referred to the House Committee on Energy
and Commerce.
On January 29, 2003, the Full Committee met in open markup
session and ordered H.R. 395 reported to the House by voice
vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 395 to
the House on February 11, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-8).
On February 12, 2003, the House considered H.R. 395 under a
previous order of the House, and passed the bill by a vote of
418 yeas to 7 nays.
H.R. 395 was received in the Senate, read twice,
considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment
by unanimous consent on February 13, 2003.
On February 27, 2003, H.R. 395 was presented to the
President and on March 11, 2003, was signed by the President
(Public Law 108-10).
RATIFICATION OF DO-NOT-CALL REGISTRY
Public Law 108-82 (H.R. 3161)
To ratify the authority of the Federal Trade Commission to
establish a do-not-call registry.
Summary
H.R. 3161 declares that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
is authorized under the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and
Abuse Prevention Act to implement and enforce a national do-
not-call registry and ratifies the do-not-call registry
provision of the Telemarketing Sales Rule, which were
promulgated by the Federal Trade Commission, effective March
31, 2003.
Legislative History
H.R. 3161 was introduced in the House by Mr. Tauzin on
September 24, 2003 and was referred to the Committee on Energy
and Commerce.
On September 25, 2003 the House considered H.R. 3161
pursuant to a previous order, and passed the House by a vote of
412 yeas to 8 nays.
On September 25, 2003, H.R. 3161 was received in the
Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed
without amendment by a vote of 95 yeas to 0 nays.
On September 29, 2003, H.R. 3161 was presented to and
signed by the President (Public Law 108-82).
FAIRNESS TO CONTACT LENS CONSUMERS ACT
Public Law 108-164 (H.R. 3140, H.R. 2221)
To provide for availability of contact lens prescriptions
to patients, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 3140 requires a contact lens prescriber to provide
patients with a copy of their contact lens prescription,
whether or not requested by the patient, and verify the
prescription's accuracy, or make necessary corrections, to a
contact lens seller or any person designated by the patient. It
also prohibits a prescriber from requiring patients to purchase
contact lenses from the prescriber, charging an additional fee
for a copy of the prescription, requiring the patient to sign a
waiver, and disclaiming liability or responsibility for the
accuracy of the eye examination. H.R. 3140 also allows a seller
to fill a prescription for contact lenses only when a seller
receives a contact lens prescription directly or by facsimile,
a seller verifies a prescription by direct communication with
the prescriber, or the prescriber fails to respond to the
seller within eight business hours after being contacted by the
seller with the prescription information.
Legislative History
H.R. 3140 was introduced in the House by Mr. Burr on
September 23, 2003, and was referred to the Committee on Energy
and Commerce.
On September 24, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer Protection met in open markup session and approved
H.R. 3140 for full Committee consideration, without amendment,
by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Full Committee met on October 1, 2003, in open markup
session and ordered reported H.R. 3140, as amended, by a voice
vote, a quorum being present.
On October 15, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
reported H.R. 3140 to the House, amended (H. Rpt. 108-318).
The House considered H.R. 3140, as amended, on November 19,
2003, under suspension of the rules and passed H.R. 3140 by a
vote of 406 yeas to 12 nays.
On November 20, 2003, H.R. 3140 was received in the Senate,
read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without
amendment by unanimous consent.
H.R. 3140 was presented to the President on November 26,
2003, and on December 6, 2003, the President signed H.R. 3140
(Public Law 108-164).
CONTROLLING THE ASSUALT OF NON-SOLICITED PORNOGRAPHY AND MARKETING ACT
OF 2003
Public Law 108-187 (S. 877, H.R. 2214, H.R. 2515)
To regulate interstate commerce by imposing limitations and
penalties on the transmission of unsolicited commercial
electronic mail via the Internet.
Summary
S. 877 prohibits certain predatory and abusive practices
used to send commercial email and provides consumers with the
ability to more easily identify and opt-out of receiving other
unwanted commercial e-mail. The legislation provides
enforcement tools to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the
Department of Justice (DOJ), other Federal regulators, States
Attorneys General and bona fide Internet service providers
(ISP) to enforce compliance with the Act.
Legislative History
S. 877 was introduced in the Senate by Senator Burns and
six cosponsors on April 10, 2003. The bill was referred to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
On June 19, 2003, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation ordered S. 877 reported to the Senate, as
amended. On July 16, 2003, the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation reported S. 877 to the Senate (S. Rpt. 108-
102).
The Senate passed S. 877, as amended, by a vote of 97 yeas
to 0 nays on October 22, 2003.
On October 24, 2003, S. 877 was received by the House and
held at the desk. On November 22, 2003, S. 877 was considered
under suspension of the rules and passed the House, as amended,
by a vote of 392 yeas to 5 nays.
On November 25, 2003, the Senate concurred in the House
amendment with an amendment by unanimous consent.
On December 8, 2003, the House agreed, by unanimous
consent, to the Senate amendment to the House amendment.
S. 877 was presented to the President on December 11, 2003.
On December 16, 2003, the President signed S. 877 (Public Law
No. 108-187).
THE SPORTS AGENT RESPONSIBILITY AND TRUST ACT
Public Law 108-304 (H.R. 361)
To designate certain conduct by sports agents relating to
the signing of contracts with student athletes as unfair and
deceptive acts or practices to be regulated by the Federal
Trade Commission.
Summary
H.R. 361 prohibits an athlete agent from: (1) recruiting or
soliciting a student athlete to enter into an agency contract
by giving false or misleading information or providing anything
of value to the athlete or anyone associated with the athlete
before entering into such contract; (2)entering into an agency
contract with a student athlete without providing the required
disclosure document; or, (3) predating or postdating an agency
contract.
H.R. 361 also requires certain disclosures be made. An
athlete agent, in conjunction with entering into an agency
contract, must provide to the athlete (or to the athlete's
parent or legal guardian if the student athlete is under age
18) a separate disclosure document that includes notice that if
the athlete agrees orally or in writing to be represented by an
agent, he or she may lose eligibility to compete as a student
athlete. The legislation requires both the student athlete and
the agent to notify the athletic director of the athlete's
educational institution that the athlete has entered into an
agency contract within 72 hours or before the athlete's next
athletic event, whichever occurs first.
The bill treats a violation of this Act as an unfair or
deceptive act or practice under the Federal Trade Commission
Act. Authorizes civil actions by State Attorneys General. It
also grants educational institutions the right to bring a civil
action against an athlete agent for damages caused by a
violation of this Act.
Finally, H.R. 361 expresses the sense of Congress that
states should enact the Uniform Athlete Agents Act of 2000
drafted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform
State Laws.
Legislative History
H.R. 361 was introduced in the House on January 27, 2003,
by Mr. Gordon and referred to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
The Full Committee met in open markup session to consider
H.R. 361 on January 29, 2004, and ordered H.R. 361 reported to
the House by voice vote, a quorum being present. On March 5,
2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 361 to
the House (H. Rpt. 108-24, Part I.)
On March 5, H.R. 361 was referred sequentially to the House
Committee on the Judiciary for a period ending not later than
June 1, 2003, for consideration of such provisions of the bill
as fall within the jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to
clause 1(k), rule X.
On May 20, 2003, the House Committee on Judiciary was
granted an extension for further consideration ending not later
than June 2, 2003.
On May 21, 2003, the Committee on the Judiciary considered
H.R. 361 in a markup session and ordered it to be reported, as
amended, by voice vote. The Committee on the Judiciary reported
H.R. 361, as amended, on June 2, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-24, Part
II).
On June 4, 2003 H.R. 361 was considered under suspension of
the rules and passed the House, as amended, by voice vote.
H.R. 361 was received in the Senate and read twice and
referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation on June 5, 2003.
On September 9, 2004 the Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation was discharged from further
consideration by unanimous consent and H.R. 361 passed the
Senate by unanimous consent.
H.R. 361 was presented to the President on September 16,
2004. On September 24, 2004, the President signed H.R. 361
(Public Law 108-304).
NORMAN Y. MINETA RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS REORGANIZATION ACT
Public Law 108-426 (H.R. 5163)
To amend title 49, United States Code, to provide the
Department of Transportation a more focused research
organization with an emphasis on innovative technology, and for
other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 5163, the ``Norman Y. Mineta Research and Special
Programs Reorganization Act,'' reorganizes the Department of
Transportation to create a Research and Innovative Technology
Administration that will coordinate and manage research and
development programs for the various agencies within the
Department of Transportation and establishes the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
Legislative History
H.R. 5163 was introduced in the House by Mr. Young (AK) on
September 29, 2004, and was referred to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce, and the Committee on Science,
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.
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported
H.R. 5163 to the House on October 6, 2004, by voice vote (H.
Rpt. 108-749).
The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure exchanged correspondence on
H.R. 5163 on October 6, 2004.
The House considered H.R. 5163, as amended, on October 7,
2004, under suspension of the rules and passed H.R. 5163 by a
voice vote.
On October 7, 2004, H.R. 5163 was received in the Senate
and read twice.
H.R. 5163 passed the Senate by unanimous consent on
November 16, 2004.
On November 19, 2004, H.R. 5163 was presented to the
President and was signed by the President on November 30, 2004
(Public Law 108-426).
DIGITAL MEDIA CONSUMERS' RIGHTS ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 107)
To amend the Federal Trade Commission Act to provide that
the advertising or sale of a mislabeled copy-protected music
disc is an unfair method of competition and an unfair and
deceptive act or practice, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 107 amends section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission
Act and makes it an unfair and deceptive act or practice to
advertise or sell mislabeled copy-protected compact disks. It
also clarifies that it is not a violation of the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to manufacture, import, or make
available any technology that is primarily designed or produced
for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that
controls access to a protected work or restricts the ability to
use copyrightable material in an infringing way if the person
is acting solely in the furtherance of scientific research into
technological protection measures. Section 5(b)(1) restores
fair use under Section 1201(c) of the DMCA by clarifying that
it is not a violation of the DMCA to circumvent a technological
measure to access or use a work if the circumvention does not
result in an infringement of the copyright in the work.
Legislative History
H.R. 107 was introduced in the House by Mr. Boucher and
three cosponsors on January 7, 2003. The bill was referred to
the Committee on Energy and Commerce and to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
On May 12, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held a hearing on The Digital Media
Consumers' Rights Act of 2003. The hearing focused on the
tension between attempts by content owners to protect and
control the use of their works by means of technology, enabled
by the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act (DMCA), and the consumer's use of technology to
make use of content under fair use. The hearing also explored
legislation that would make it an unfair and deceptive act or
practice in commerce to introduce into commerce or to advertise
the sale of, a prerecorded digital music disc that is
mislabeled or falsely or deceptively advertised. The Committee
heard testimony from Members of Congress, two professors of
Intellectual Property law, representatives from the
Intellectual Property content industry, representatives from
the consumer electronics industry, a former Member of Congress
and music mixing enthusiast, a representative from the American
Library Association, a representative from a public policy
think tank, and a representative from a consumer group.
No further action was taken in the 108th Congress.
AMERICAN SPIRIT FRAUD PREVENTION ACT
(H.R. 346)
To amend the Federal Trade Commission Act to increase civil
penalties for violations involving certain proscribed acts or
practices that exploit popular reaction to an emergency or
major disaster declared by the President, and to authorize the
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to seek civil penalties for such
violations in actions brought under section 13 of that Act.
Summary
H.R. 346 amends the Federal Trade Commission Act to double
civil penalties imposed for committing unfair or deceptive acts
or practices if such acts or practices exploit popular reaction
during a presidentially declared emergency or disaster period,
and directs a court to impose a monetary civil penalty on a
person found in an action seeking a temporary restraining order
or preliminary injunction to have committed such a violation
during such period.
Legislative History
H.R. 346 was introduced in the House by Mr. Bass on January
27, 2003, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On January 29, 2003, the Full Committee met in open markup
session and ordered H.R. 346 reported to the House by a voice
vote.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 346 to
the House on February 4, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-5).
The House considered H.R. 346 on February 12, 2003, under
suspension of the rules, and passed H.R. 346 by a vote of 422
yeas to 1 nay.
On February 13, 2003, H.R. 346 was received in the Senate
and read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.
No further action was taken on H.R. 346 in the 108th
Congress.
FAIRNESS TO CONTACT LENS CONSUMERS ACT
(H.R. 2221, H.R. 3140)
To provide for availability of contact lens prescriptions
to patients, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 2221 requires a ``prescriber'' (a person permitted
under state law to issue prescriptions for contact lenses) to
provide to the patient a copy of the patient's contact lens
prescription free of charge and declares that a contact lens
prescription shall expire: on the date specified by the law of
the state involved, if that date is one year or more after the
issue date of the prescription; or not less than one year after
the issue date of the prescription, if such state law specifies
no date or a date that is less than one year after the date of
the prescription. The bill also permits an exception in either
instance for a patient's ocular health and prohibitsadvertising
that lenses for which a prescription is required may be obtained
without a prescription a prescriber from issuing certain waivers.
Legislative History
H.R. 2221 was introduced into the House by Mr. Burr on May
22, 2003, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On September 9, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer Protection held a hearing on H.R. 2221. The focus
of the hearing was to learn about the competitive problems
arising from the dispensing and sale of contact lenses. The
Subcommittee received from government witnesses, ocular trade
associations, industry representatives, and consumer protection
groups.
No further action was taken on H.R. 2221 in the 108th
Congress.
SECURELY PROTECT YOURSELF AGAINST CYBER TRESPASS ACT
(H.R. 2929)
To protect users of the Internet from unknowing
transmission of their personally identifiable information
through spyware programs.
Summary
H.R. 2929 prohibits unfair or deceptive behavior related to
spyware. The bill also requires an opt-in be included in
software that monitors web usage or collects personally
identifiable information and uses that information to deliver
advertising to the consumer. Violations of the SPY ACT are
enforceable by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) as if any
violation of the Act were an unfair or deceptive act or
practice under the FTC Act. The Act provides for enhanced
penalties under the FTC Act.
Legislative History
H.R. 2929 was introduced in the House by Ms. Bono and one
cosponsor on July 25, 2003. The bill was referred to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection held an oversight hearing on spyware on April 29,
2004. The Subcommittee received testimony from the Federal
Trade Commission, a consumer's group, an Internet service
provider, and a technology company.
On June 17, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection met in open markup session and approved
H.R. 2929, as amended, for Full Committee consideration, by a
voice vote, a quorum being present. On June 24, 2004, the
Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open markup session and
ordered H.R. 2929 reported to the House, as amended, by a
recorded vote of 45 yeas to 4 nays, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 2929 to
the House, amended, on July 20, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-619).
On October 5, 2004, H.R. 2929 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules. The bill passed the House, as
amended, by a vote of 399 yeas and 1 nay.
The bill was received in the Senate on October 6, 2004.
No further action was taken on H.R. 2929 in the 108th
Congress.
INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 3143)
To enhance Federal Trade Commission enforcement against
cross-border fraud and deception.
Summary
H.R. 3143 amends the Federal Trade Commission Act to (1)
improve the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) ability to share
confidential information with foreign law enforcement agencies;
(2) clarify its authority to take action in cross-border cases;
and, (3) expand its ability, in cooperation with the Department
of Justice, to use additional staff and financial resources in
pursuing foreign litigation. At present, the FTC is prohibited
by statute from sharing information it obtains pursuant to a
Civil Investigative Demand (CID) with its foreign counterparts.
The legislation permits it to share with foreign law enforcers
compelled or confidential information in consumer protection
cases, to the same extent allowed with domestic law enforcement
agencies. This will assist foreign law enforcers to prosecute
fraud and deception directed at United States citizens. It will
also allow the FTC to obtain foreign information needed to
fight fraud and deception. H.R. 3143 sets forth the
Commission's ability to obtain consumer redress in cross-border
cases by clarifying its authority to take action in such cases,
and expanding its ability to use foreign counsel to pursue
assets offshore.
Legislative History
On September 17, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer protection held a hearing on a Committee Print
entitled H.R. ------, The International Consumer Protection
Act. The Subcommittee received testimony from the Chairman of
the FTC, a credit card company and consumer protection groups.
Mr. Stearns and one cosponsor introduced H.R. 3143 in the
House on September 23, 2003. The bill was referred to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On September 24, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer Protection met in open markup session to consider
H.R 3143. The Subcommittee approved H.R 3143 for Full Committee
consideration, without amendment, by voice vote, a quorum being
present.
The Full Committee met in open markup session on October 1,
2003, to consider H.R. 3143. The Committee ordered H.R 3143
reported to the House, without amendment, by a voice vote, a
quorum being present.
On July 22, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
reported H.R. 3143 to the House (H. Rpt. 108-635, Part I).
On July 22, 2004, H.R. 3143 was referred jointly and
sequentially to the Committee on Financial Services for a
period ending not later than October 1, 2004 for consideration
of such provisions of the bill as fall within the jurisdiction
of that committee pursuant to clause 1(g), rule X; the
Committee on International Relations for a period ending not
later than October 1, 2004 for consideration of such provisions
of the bill as fall within the jurisdiction of that committee
pursuant to clause 1(j), rule X; and, the Committee on the
Judiciary for a period ending not later than October 1, 2004
for consideration of such provisions of the bill as fall within
the jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to clause 1(k),
rule X.
On October 1, 2004, the Committee on Financial Services,
Committee on International Relations, and the Committee on the
Judiciary were granted an extension for further consideration
ending not later than November 19, 2004.
On November 16, 2004 the Committee on the Judiciary
reported H.R. 3143 to the House (H. Rpt. 108-635, Part II).
On November 19, 2004, the Committee on Financial Services,
Committee on International Relations, and the Committee on the
Judiciary were granted an extension for further consideration
ending not later than November 22, 2004.
On November 22, 2004, the Committee on Financial Services
and the Committee on International Relations were granted an
extension for further consideration ending not later than
December 10, 2004.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3143 in the 108th
Congress.
DATABASE AND COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION MISAPPROPRIATION ACT
(H.R. 3261, H.R. 3872)
To prohibit the misappropriation of databases.
Summary
H.R. 3261 prohibits the misappropriation of databases,
including compilations of factual information. In 1991, the
Supreme Court in Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Ser.
Co, 499 U.S. 340 (1991), rejected the ``sweat of the brow''
doctrine which some courts used to confer copyright protection
of factual information. H.R. 3261 was introduced in response to
the Feist decision and uses the Commerce Clause of the United
States Constitution instead of the Copyright Clause to protect
compilations of factual information.
Legislative History
H.R. 3261 was introduced in the House by Mr. Coble and five
cosponsors on October 8, 2003. The bill was referred to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
protection held a joint hearing with the Committee on the
Judiciary's Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and
Intellectual Property on a discussion draft of what would
become H.R. 3261 on September 23, 2003. The Subcommittee
received testimony from the United States Copyright Office, the
Chamber of Commerce, a software industry representative and a
representative from the National Research Council.
On October 16, 2003, the Subcommittee on Courts, the
Internet, and Intellectual Property met in open markup session
to consider H.R. 3261. The Subcommittee approved H.R. 3261 for
Full Committee consideration, with amendment, by a recorded
vote of 10 yeas and 3 nays, a quorum being present.
On January 21, 2004, the Committee on the Judiciary met in
open markup session to consider H.R. 3261. The Committee
ordered H.R. 3261 reported, as amended, by a recorded vote of
16 yeas and 7 nays, a quorum being present.
The Committee on the Judiciary reported H.R. 3261 to the
House, as amended, on February 11, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-421, Part
I).
The House Committee on Energy and Commerce received a
sequential referral of H.R. 3261 on February 11, 2004, for a
period ending not later than March 12, 2004.
On March 3, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met
in open markup session and ordered H.R. 3261 unfavorably
reported to the House, as amended, by voice vote, a quorum
being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3261
unfavorably to the House, as amended, on March 11, 2004 (H.
Rpt. 108-421, Part II).
No further action was taken on H.R. 3261 in the 108th
Congress.
TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT: A LEGACY FOR USERS
(H.R. 3550, S. 1072)
To authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety
programs, and transit programs, and for other purposes.
Summary
S. 1072 provides for a reauthorization of the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), including a
number of rulemakings requiring NHTSA to enact additional
automobile safety standards.
Legislative History
H.R. 3550 was introduced by Mr. Young (AK) on November 20,
2003, and referred to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
On March 24, 2004, the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 3550
to be reported, as amended, by voice vote. On March 29, 2004,
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported
H.R. 3550 to the House (H. Rpt.108-452, Part I).
On March 29, 2004, H.R. 3550 was referred jointly and
sequentially to the Committees on Education and the Workforce,
Energy and Commerce, Judiciary, Resources, and Science for a
period ending not later than March 29, 2004 for consideration
of such provisions of the bill and amendment as fall within the
jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to clause 1, rule X.
On March 29, 2004, the Committees on Education and the
Workforce, Energy and Commerce, Judiciary, Resources, and
Science were discharged from further consideration of the bill.
On April 1, 2004, H.R. 3550 was considered in the House
pursuant to H. Res. 593. The bill passed the House, as amended,
by vote of 357 yeas and 65 nays on April 2, 2004.
On April 8, 2004, H.R. 3550 was received in the Senate. The
bill was read twice, and placed on the Senate Legislative
Calendar under General Orders on April 22, 2004.
On May 19, 2004, the Senate struck all after the enacting
clause of H.R. 3550, inserted in lieu thereof the provisions of
S.1072, and passed the bill, as amended, by unanimous consent.
The Senate insisted on its amendment and requested a
conference with the House on May 19, 2004 and on May 20, 2004,
appointed conferees.
The House disagreed to the Senate amendment, agreed to the
Senate's request to go to conference on June 3, 2004, and
appointed conferees. The Speaker appointed conferees from the
Committee on Energy and Commerce for consideration of
provisions in the House bill and Senate amendment relating to
Clean Air Act provisions of transportation planning contained
in sec. 6001 of the House bill, and secs. 3005 and 3006 of the
Senate amendment; and secs. 1202, 1824, 1828, and 5203 of the
House bill, and secs. 1501, 1511, 1522, 1610-1619, 3016, 3023,
4108, 4151, 4152, 4155-4159, 4162, 4172, 4173, 4424, 4481,
4482, 4484, 4662, 8001, and 8002 of the Senate amendment, and
modifications committed to conference, Messrs. Barton,
Pickering, and Dingell.
The Conference Committee met on June 9, June 23, and July
7, July 20, and July 22, 2004.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3550 in the 108th
Congress.
STOCK OPTION ACCOUNTING REFORM ACT
(H.R. 3574)
To require the mandatory expensing of stock options granted
to executive officers, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 3574 amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to
require an issuer of registered securities to expense the fair
value of stock options granted after December 31, 2004, to
individuals serving as Chief Executive Officer of the issuer
and the four most highly compensated executive officers, other
than the Chief Executive Officer. The bill also amends the
Securities Act of 1933 to prohibit the Securities and Exchange
Commission from recognizing as ``generally accepted'' any
accounting principle relating to the expensing of stock options
unless the standard meets certain computation requirements and
the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of Labor have
studied and reported on the economic impact of mandatory
expensing of employee stock options. The bill also provides for
expanded disclosure of employee stock option plans.
Legislative History
H.R. 3574 was introduced in the House of Representatives by
Mr. Baker and seven cosponsors on November 21, 2003. The bill
was referred to the Committee on Financial Services.
On June 15, 2004, the Committee on Financial Services
ordered H.R 3574 reported to the House, as amended, by a vote
of 45 yeas to 13 nays.
The Committee on Financial Services reported H.R. 3574 to
the House on July 15, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-609, Part I).
On July 15, 2004, H.R. 3574 was referred sequentially to
the Committee on Energy and Commerce for a period ending not
later than July 16, 2004 for consideration of such provisions
of the bill and amendment as fall within the jurisdiction of
that committee pursuant to clause 1(f), rule X.
The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
protection held a hearing on accounting for stock options on
July 8, 2004, in anticipation of the sequential referral. On
July 16, 2004, the Committee and Energy and Commerce was
discharged from further consideration of H.R. 3574.
On July 20, 2004, the House considered H.R. 3754 under the
provisions of H. Res. 725, and passed H.R. 3754, as amended, by
a vote of 312 yeas to 111 nays.
On July 21, 2004, the bill was received in the Senate. On
September 7, 2004, H.R. 2574 was referred to the Committee on
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
No further action was taken in the 108th Congress.
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE REFORM ACT
(H.R. 3825)
To amend title 36, United States Code, to amend the Federal
charter of the United States Olympic Committee, and for other
purposes.
Summary
H.R. 3825 makes changes to the governance structure of the
United States Olympic Committee (USOC) by eliminating the
Executive Committee and reducing the 123 person board of
directors to nine elected voting members in addition to the
three sitting US IOC members. The elected members will consist
of: five independent directors; two directors nominated by the
Athlete's Advisory Council; and two directors nominated by the
National Governing Bodies Council). H.R. 3825 further specifies
the weighting of votes and procedures for deciding matters that
result in a tied vote.
H.R. 3825 creates an Olympic Assembly representing the USOC
membership and provides for a Liaison between the Board and
Assembly. The legislation also provides Paralympic sports
representation on the Board. H.R. 3825 delineates the
responsibilities of the CEO regarding the operations of the
organization and provides the Board with responsibility for
oversight of the CEO
Further, H.R. 3825 requires a compliance program to be
established and maintained at the executive level.
Additionally, the legislation requires Secretary of Commerce to
conduct a study of the economic impact of hosting the Olympics
in the United States. H.R. 3825 also authorizes the Secretary
of Commerce to make grants to state and local tourism boards
(in the event the US hosts the Olympics or Pan American games)
for the promotion of tourism related to the games.
Legislative History
The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection held two oversight hearings on the USOC. The first
hearing was held March 19, 2003, and addressed a number of
issues related to the structure of the USOC and its effect on
the USOC's ability to fulfill its mission. Witnesses testifying
at the hearing included current and former US Olympic athletes,
including two Members of the 108th Congress, as well as current
and former representatives of the USOC, the current head of the
Athlete's Advisory Committee, the head of the National
Governing Bodies Council and a member of the board of
directors.
The Subcommittee held a second oversight hearing on July
16, 2003, to examine the recommendations to reform the USOC put
forth by the USOC's internal Task Force on Governance and
Ethics and a second set of recommendations proposed by the
Independent Commission of the USOC. Witnesses included members
of both groups as well as a representative of Disabled Sports
USA.
On February 24, 2004, Mr. Stearns introduced as H.R. 3825,
which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in
addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period
to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection met in open markup session on February 25, 2004, to
consider an original Committee Print, which contained identical
text to H.R. 3825. The Subcommittee approved the Committee
Print for Full Committee consideration by voice vote, a quorum
being present.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3825 in the 108th
Congress.
CONSUMER ACCESS TO INFORMATION ACT OF 2004
(H.R. 3872, H.R. 3261)
To prohibit the misappropriation of certain databases while
ensuring consumer access to factual information.
Summary
H.R. 3872 makes the misappropriation of a database an
unfair method of competition and an unfair and deceptive act or
practice under Section 5 of the FTC Act. The definition of
misappropriation codifies the five-factor test in NBA v.
Motorola, 105 F.3d 841(2nd Cir. 1997), based on INS v. AP 39
S.Ct. 68 (1918). The legislation provides a limitation on
liability for providers of interactive computer services for
making available content that is provided by another
information content provider. The bill also provides an
exclusion for securities market data.
Legislative History
On February 25, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer Protection met in open markup session and approved
a Committee Print entitled ``the Consumer Access to Information
Act'' for Full Committee consideration, without amendment, by a
voice vote, a quorum being present.
H.R. 3872 was introduced in the House by Mr. Stearns and 18
cosponsors on March 2, 2004. The bill was referred to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On March 3, 2004, the Full Committee met in open markup
session and ordered H.R. 3872 reported to the House by a voice
vote, a quorum being present.
On May 16, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
reported H.R. 3872 to the House (H. Rpt. 108-437).
No further action was taken on H.R. 3872 in the 108th
Congress.
HONORING FORD MOTOR COMPANY ON ITS 100 YEAR ANNIVERSARY
(H. Res. 100)
Recognizing the 100th anniversary year of the founding of
the Ford Motor Company, which has been a significant part of
the social, economic, and cultural heritage of the United
States and many other nations and a revolutionary industrial
and global institution, and congratulating the Ford Motor
Company for its achievements.
Summary
H. Res. 100 recognizes the 100th anniversary year of the
founding of the Ford Motor Company and congratulates the Ford
Motor Company for its achievements.
Legislative History
H. Res. 100 was introduced into the House by Mr. McCotter
on February 25, 2003, and was referred to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
H. Res. 100 was considered in the House by unanimous
consent on May 21, 2003, and passed, as amended, without
objection.
NATION'S BUSINESSES AND BUSINESS OWNERS COMMENDED FOR THEIR SUPPORT OF
OUR TROOPS
(H. Res. 201)
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that
our Nation's businesses and business owners should be commended
for their support of our troops and their families as they
serve our country in many ways, especially in these days of
increased engagement of our military in strategic locations
around our Nation and around the world.
Summary
H. Res. 201 expresses the sense of Congress that the
businesses that establish the backbone of our Nation in times
of peace and rise to a greater standard of resolve in times of
challenge do so by carrying on the good work of commerce,
industry, and innovation and by steadfastly supporting the
members of our military and their families. The resolution also
expresses the sense of Congress that business owners deserve
commendation and sincere expression of gratitude.
Legislative History
H. Res. 201 was introduced in the House by Mr. Rogers on
April 11, 2003. The resolution was referred to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
On April 30, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met
in open markup session and ordered H. Res. 201 reported to the
House by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
On June 4, 2003, H. Res. 201 was considered by the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a vote of
410 yeas to 0 nays, with 7 Members voting present
HONORING HARLEY-DAVIDSON MOTOR COMPANY ON ITS 100 YEAR ANNIVERSARY
(H. Res. 296)
Recognizing the 100th anniversary of the founding of the
Harley-Davidson Motor Company, which has been a significant
part of the social, economic, and cultural heritage of the
United States and many other nations and a leading force for
product and manufacturing innovation throughout the 20th
century.
Summary
H. Res. 296 recognizes the 100th anniversary of the
founding of the Harley-Davidson Motor Company.
Legislative History
H. Res. 296 was introduced into the House by Mr. Kleczka on
June 24, 2003, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On July 9, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection met in open markup session and forwarded H.
Res. 296 to the Full Committee by voice vote, a quorum being
present.
The Full Committee met in open markup session and ordered
H. Res. 296 reported to the House on July 9, 2003, by voice
vote, a quorum being present.
The House considered H. Res. 296 on July 14, 2003, under
suspension of the rules, and passed H. Res. 296 by voice vote.
NATIONAL MANUFACTURING WEEK
(H. Res. 516)
Supporting the goals of National Manufacturing Week,
congratulating manufacturers and their employees for their
contributions to growth and innovation, and recognizing the
challenges facing the manufacturing sector.
Summary
H. Res. 516 summarizes many of the benefits that are
realized in this country as a direct result of the U.S.
manufacturing industry. H. Res. 516 expresses the sense of the
House of Representatives supporting the goals of national
manufacturing week, congratulating manufacturers and their
employees for their contributions to growth and innovation, and
recognizing the challenges facing the manufacturing sector.
Legislative History
Mr. Gillmor introduced H. Res. 516 in the House on February
4, 2004, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce. The Resolution was subsequently referred to the
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection on
February 24, 2004.
On April 22, 2004, the Full Committee met in open markup
session and ordered H. Res. 516 reported to the House, as
amended, by voice vote, a quorum being present. On April 27,
2004 the Committee onEnergy and Commerce reported H. Res. 516
to the House, amended (H. Rpt. 108-471).
No further action was taken on H. Res. 516 in the 108th
Congress.
HONORING U.S. CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE
(H. Con. Res. 215)
Honoring and congratulating chambers of commerce for their
efforts that contribute to the improvement of communities and
the strengthening of local and regional economies.
Summary
H. Con. Res. 215 honors and congratulates the chambers of
commerce around the country for their efforts that contribute
to the improvement of their communities and the strengthening
of their local and regional economies.
Legislative History
H. Con. Res. 215 was introduced in the House by Mr.
Knollenberg on June 11, 2003, and was referred to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce.
On July 9, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection met in open markup session to consider H.
Con. Res. 215 and forwarded it to the Full Committee by voice
vote, a quorum being present.
On July 14, 2003, the House considered H. Con. Res. 215
under suspension of the rules and passed it by voice vote.
On July 14, 2003, H. Con. Res. 215 was received in the
Senate and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 215 in the
108th Congress.
Oversight Activities
A REVIEW OF FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD ACTIONS POST-ENRON AND
WORLDCOM
On March 4, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on Financial
Accounting Standards Board (FASB) actions post-Enron and
Worldcom. The hearing focused on actions of the FASB to improve
financial reporting. The sole witness was the Chairman of the
FASB.
DOES THE U.S. OLYMPIC COMMITTEE'S STRUCTURE IMPEDE ITS MISSION?
The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection held an oversight hearing on March 19, 2003, to
examine issues related to the structure of the United States
Olympic Committee (USOC) and their effect on the USOC's ability
to fulfill its mission. The hearing focused on the USOC
governance and the division of labor between paid staff and
volunteers. Witnesses testifying at the hearing included
current and former U.S. Olympic athletes, including two Members
of the 108th Congress, as well as current and former
representatives of the USOC, the current head of the Athlete's
Advisory Committee, the head of the National Governing Bodies
Council and a member of the board of directors.
TRAVEL AND TOURISM IN AMERICA TODAY
On April 30, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing entitled ``Travel
and Tourism in America Today'' to examine the state of travel
and tourism in the United States. The focus of this hearing was
to examine ways the United States can grow and expand its
tourism economy. The Subcommittee received testimony from
travel and tourism industry representatives and business
associations.
TRADE IN SERVICES AND E-COMMERCE: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SINGAPORE AND
CHILE FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS
On May 8, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held a hearing on the Significance of the
Singapore and Chile Free Trade Agreements. The hearing focused
on services and e-commerce provisions of the trade agreements.
The Committee heard testimony from representatives from the
Office of the United States Trade Representative, the
Department of Commerce, various trade associations, a labor
union, and a policy group.
TOBACCO ADVERTISING AND REGULATION
On June 3, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing entitled ``Can
Tobacco Cure Smoking? A Review of Tobacco Harm Reduction'' to
examine whether smokeless tobacco can reduce the negative
health effects of smoking in the United States. The
Subcommittee received testimony from the Chairman of the
Federal Trade Commission, the U.S. Surgeon General, tobacco and
pharmaceutical representatives, anti-smoking groups, and
academic professors.
THE REAUTHORIZATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
On June 11, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held a hearing on the Reauthorization of
the Federal Trade Commission (FTC): Positioning the Commission
for the Twenty-First Century. The hearing focused on the FTC's
mission, agency requested changes to its mandate, and
implementation of recently passedlaws enforced by the FTC. The
Committee heard testimony from the FTC Chairman and Commissioners.
LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS TO COMBAT SPAM
On July 9, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held a joint hearing with the Subcommittee
on Telecommunications and the Internet on legislative efforts
to combat Spam. The hearing focused on anti-spam legislative
proposals in the 108th Congress. Witnesses included the
Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection of the Federal
Trade Commission, representatives from Internet Service
Providers, representatives from electronic commerce companies,
a Senior Counsel for a State Attorney General, and a
representative from a consumer group.
LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS TO REFORM THE U.S. OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection held an oversight hearing on July 16, 2003, to
examine the recommendations to reform the USOC put forth by the
USOC's internal Task Force on Governance and Ethics and a
second set of recommendations proposed by the Independent
Commission of the USOC. The hearing focused on how each set of
proposals would affect USOC governance. Witnesses testifying at
the hearing included members of both groups as well as a
representative of Disabled Sports USA.
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD DERIVATIVE ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
On July 22, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held a hearing on Financial Accounting
Standards Boards (FASB) derivative accounting standards. The
hearing examined the application of accounting standards to
derivatives, particularly Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities. It also examined the application of FAS 133 by
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to their respective derivatives
transactions and hedging activities. The Subcommittee received
testimony from a member of FASB, an executive officer from
Freddie Mac, a representative from a think tank, and an
accounting professor.
ISSUES RELATING TO EPHEDRA CONTAINING DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS
The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection held an oversight hearing on July 24, 2003 to
examine the issues related to ephedrine containing products and
their consumption by athletes. The hearing focused on the
policies of professional and collegiate sports organization
related to ephedrine products as well as the Federal Trade
Commission's (FTC) enforcement of the advertising practices of
ephedrine manufacturers and distributors. Witnesses testifying
at the hearing included representatives from the NCAA, U.S.
professional sports and professional player associations.
THE DATABASE AND COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION MISAPPROPRIATION ACT OF
2003
On September 23, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer Protection held a joint hearing with the Judiciary
Committee's Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and
Intellectual Property on the Database and Collections of
Information Misappropriation Act of 2003. The hearing focused
on the need for database protection legislation and legislative
language of the Database and Collections of Information
Misappropriation Act of 2003. Witnesses included the United
States Copyright Office and industry and scientific research
representatives.
FREDDIE MAC: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS ISSUES RAISED IN THE DOTY REPORT
On September 25, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer Protection held a hearing on Freddie Mac and
accounting issues raised by the Doty report. The hearing
focused on the report prepared for the directors of Freddie Mac
on certain accounting matters and considered the accounting
matters raised in the report as a case study for broader issues
with the formation and application of accounting standards. The
Subcommittee received testimony from the author of the report
to the Board of Directors of Freddie Mac, a forensic accountant
who assisted in the preparation of the report, and an expert on
accounting issues.
E-COMMERCE: ONLINE WINE SALES
On October 30, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer Protection held a hearing on E-Commerce: The Case
of Online Wine Sales and Direct Shipment. The hearing focused
on state restrictions to interstate commerce involving the sale
of wine. Witnesses included a representative from the Federal
Trade Commission and representatives from the wine industry.
CYBERSECURITY AND CONSUMER DATA
On November 19, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer Protection held a hearing on Cyber-security and
Consumer Data. The hearing focused on the risks and costs of
cyber-security threats and efforts to respond to those threats.
The witnesses included the Federal Trade Commission, e-commerce
companies, and various types of computer-related companies with
an interest in Internet security.
FREDDIE MAC'S ACCOUNTING RESTATEMENT
On January 28, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer Protection held a hearing on Freddie Mac's
Accounting Restatement. The hearing focused on the Supplemental
Report to the Board of Directors of the Federal Home Loan
Mortgage Corporation, Freddie Mac, and the report prepared by
their regulator, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise
Oversight (OFHEO). Witnesses included the Director of OFHEO and
the Chief Financial Officer of Freddie Mac.
COLLEGE RECRUITING: ARE STUDENT ATHLETES BEING PROTECTED?
On March 11, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing to examine NCAA
rules governing the recruiting of college athletes and the
enforcement of those rules by member universities and the NCAA.
The impetus for the hearing was the media reported allegations
of misconduct and possible criminal violations that occurred at
various college and university campuses. Witnesses included
representatives from the NCAA, the University of Colorado,
Vanderbilt University, and the founder of a private
organization specializing in counseling student athletes.
REAUTHORIZATION OF THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
On March 18, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing entitled
``Reauthorization of the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration,'' to examine issues relating to the
reauthorization of NHTSA. The focus of the hearing was to
review NHTSA's regulatory priorities and to examine how those
priorities were being achieved. The Subcommittee received
testimony from government witnesses, industry representatives,
trade associations, and consumer protection groups.
U.S.-CHINA TRADE: PREPARATIONS FOR THE JOINT COMMISSION ON COMMERCE AND
TRADE
On March 31, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held a hearing on U.S.-China trade and the
preparations for the Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade.
The U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT)
was established in 1983 as a forum for high-level discussions
on bilateral trade issues and a vehicle for promoting
commercial relations between China and the United States. The
hearing examined the main issues that would be discussed at the
joint session including intellectual property protection and
piracy in China, non-tariff barriers to U. S. manufacturing
products in China, and labor and environmental issues in China.
Witnesses included the Deputy U.S. Trade Representative, as
well as representatives from the games, music, and movie
industries, representatives from the manufacturing industry,
and a representative from a labor union.
SPYWARE
On April 29, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held a hearing on Spyware. The hearing
focused on problems associated with Spyware, efforts to protect
computer users against Spyware, and possible legislative and
regulatory solutions. The Committee received testimony from the
Federal Trade Commission, a consumer group, a developer of
operating systems, and an Internet Service Provider.
ONLINE PORNOGRAPHY
On May 6, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held a hearing on Online Pornography:
Closing the Doors on Pervasive Smut. The hearing focused on the
extent of the availability of pornographic material on the
Internet and on peer-to-peer networks, the deceptive means used
to distribute pornography, Federal laws to stop illegal
activity, and tools to reduce inadvertent exposure. The
Committee heard testimony from the Federal Trade Commission,
the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Government Accountability
Office, a representative from the peer-to-peer industry, a
representative from a children's advocacy group, a
representative from the National Center for Missing & Exploited
Children, an academic with expertise in distributed computing,
and a housing director from a public University.
SUPPORTING OUR INTERCOLLEGIATE STUDENT ATHLETES: PROPOSED NCAA REFORMS
On May 18, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on actions taken
by the National Collegiate Athletic Association to address
recruiting practices of potential student athletes. The hearing
was in response to numerous reports of alleged behavior--
including possible criminal violations--that occurred at
colleges and universities. Contemporaneous with the media
reports of those incidents, the NCAA formed a task force to
examine current practices, guidelines, and rules and offer
recommendations to the NCAA. The hearing examined the
recommendations of the task force as well as broader issues
that were affecting the enforcement of rules and the
accountability of universities, athletic departments, and the
student athletes.
TRAVEL, TOURISM, AND HOMELAND SECURITY: IMPROVING BOTH WITHOUT
SACRIFICING EITHER
The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection held an oversight hearing on June 23, 2004, to
examine the status and implementation of security improvements
and their effectiveness. The hearing focused on strengths and
weakness of new security measures and suggested improvements.
Witnesses included a representative from the Department of
Homeland Security, representatives from travel and tourism
companies and associations, and a labor union.
FASB PROPOSAL ON STOCK OPTION EXPENSING
On July 8, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held a hearing on the Financial Accounting
Standards Board (FASB) proposal on stock option expensing. The
hearing focused on the FASB's proposal on the accounting
treatment for stock options and the impact of Federal
legislation on the proposal. The Committee heard testimony from
the Government Accountability Office, the FASB, as well as
industry representatives.
RADIO FREQUENCY IDENTIFICATION (RFID) TECHNOLOGY: WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS
FOR COMMERCE, SECURITY, AND THE CONSUMER
On July 14, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing to examine issues
related to the development, implementation, and use of RFID
technology. The hearing focused on the technology of RFID and
its implications for commercial uses. Witnesses included
representatives from industry technology groups, companies
using RFID, and public interest groups.
EXAMINING PROFESSIONAL BOXING: ARE FURTHER REFORMS NEEDED?
The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection held an oversight hearing on professional boxing on
September 9, 2004. The hearing examined problems facing the
industry and boxers. Witnesses who testified included Muhammad
Ali, a representative from the Association of Boxing
Commissions, a representative of the Pennsylvania State boxing
commission, a representative of an international professional
boxing sanctioning organization, an attorney and manager for a
former world heavyweight champion, and an attorney with
industry experience.
REPAIRING THE 21ST CENTURY CAR
The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection held an oversight hearing on September 22, 2004, to
examine issues related to the consumer choice and access to
information necessary to repair their cars. The hearing focused
on the status of industry initiatives to make vehicle repair
information available on a timely and consistent basis.
Witnesses testifying at the hearing included representatives
from auto manufactures, industry groups, and independent repair
shops.
PROTECTING THE PRIVACY OF CONSUMERS' SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS
On September 28, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer Protection held a hearing on Protecting the
Privacy of Consumers' Social Security Numbers. The hearing
focused on identity theft and the integrity of social security
numbers as well as legislative efforts to protect the integrity
of social security numbers. The Subcommittee heard testimony
from the Federal Trade Commission, the United States Government
Accountability Office, and a consumer advocacy group.
CHILD PRODUCT SAFETY
On October 6, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer Protection held a hearing on Child Product Safety.
The hearing focused on whether current consumer product safety
standards and the existing authority and resources of the
Consumer Produce Safety Commission are sufficient to protect
children. Witnesses included the Chairman of the U.S. Consumer
Product Safety Commission, child product safety activists, a
representative from the toy industry, and a representative from
a consumer advocacy group.
Hearings Held
A Review of FASB Actions Post-Enron and WorldCom.--
Oversight hearing on a Review of FASB Actions Post-Enron and
WorldCom. Hearing held on March 4, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number
108-17.
Does the U.S. Olympic Committee's Organizational Structure
Impede its Mission?--Oversight hearing on Does the U.S. Olympic
Committee's Organizational Structure Impede its Mission?
Hearing held on March 19, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-5.
Travel and Tourism in America Today.--Oversight hearing on
Travel and Tourism in America Today. Hearing held on April 30,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-15.
Trade in Services and E-Commerce: The Significance of the
Singapore and Chile Free Trade Agreements.--Oversight hearing
on Trade in Services and E-Commerce: The Significance of the
Singapore and Chile Free Trade Agreements. Hearing held on May
8, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-19.
Can Tobacco Cure Smoking?--A Review of Tobacco Harm
Reduction.--Oversight hearing on Can Tobacco Cure Smoking?--A
Review of Tobacco Harm Reduction. Hearing held on June 3, 2003.
PRINTED, Serial Number 108-31.
The Reauthorization of the Federal Trade Commission:
Positioning the Commission for the Twenty-First Century.--
Oversight hearing on the Reauthorization of the Federal Trade
Commission: Positioning the Commission for the Twenty-First
Century. Hearing held on June 11, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number
108-30.
Legislative Efforts to Combat Spam.--Joint oversight
hearing with the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the
Internet on Legislative Efforts to Combat Spam. Hearing held on
July 9, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-35.
Legislative Efforts to Reform the U.S. Olympic Committee.--
Oversight hearing on Legislative Efforts to Reform the U.S.
Olympic Committee. Hearing held on July 16, 2003. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-39.
FASB Derivative Accounting Standards.--Oversight hearing on
FASB Derivative Accounting Standards. Hearing held on July 22,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-37.
Issues Relating to Ephedra-containing Dietary
Supplements.--Joint oversight hearing with the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations on Issues Relating to Ephedra-
containing Dietary Supplements. Hearing held on July 24, 2003.
PRINTED, Serial Number 108-43.
Fairness to Contact Lens Consumers Act.--Hearing on H.R.
2221, Fairness to Contact Lens Consumers Act. Hearing held on
September 9, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-41.
International Consumer Protection Act of 2003.--Hearing on
H.R. 3143, International Consumer Protection Act of 2003.
Hearing held on September 17, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-
45.
The Database and Collections of Information
Misappropriation Act of 2003.--Joint oversight hearing held
with the Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts,
Internet, and Intellectual Property on The Database and
Collections of Information Misappropriation Act of 2003.
Hearing held on September 23, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-
46.
Freddie Mac: Accounting Standards Issues Raised in the Doty
Report.--Oversight hearing on Freddie Mac: Accounting Standards
Issues Raised in the Doty Report. Hearing held on September 25,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-48.
E-Commerce: The Case of Online Wine Sales and Direct
Shipment.--Oversight hearing on E-Commerce: The Case of Online
Wine Sales and Direct Shipment. Hearing held on October 30,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-51.
Cybersecurity & Consumer Data: What's at Risk for the
Consumer?--Oversight hearing on Cybersecurity & Consumer Data:
What's at Risk for the Consumer? Hearing held on November 19,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-52.
Freddie Mac's Accounting Restatement: Are Accounting
Standards Working?--Oversight hearing on Freddie Mac's
Accounting Restatement: Are Accounting Standards Working?
Hearing held on January 28, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-
105.
College Recruiting: Are Student Athletes Being Protected?--
Oversight hearing on College Recruiting: Are Student Athletes
Being Protected? Hearing held on March 11, 2004. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-64.
Reauthorization of the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration.--Oversight hearing on Reauthorization of the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Hearing held on
March 18, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-71.
U.S.-China Trade: Preparations for the Joint Commission on
Commerce and Trade.--Oversight hearing on U.S.- China Trade:
Preparations for the Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade.
Hearing held on March 31, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-74.
Spyware: What You Don't Know Can Hurt You.--Oversight
hearing on Spyware: What You Don't Know Can Hurt You. Hearing
held on April 29, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-89.
Online Pornography: Closing the Doors on Pervasive Smut.--
Oversight hearing on Online Pornography: Closing the Doors on
Pervasive Smut. Hearing held on May 6, 2004. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-90.
The Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act of 2003.--Hearing
on H.R. 107, the Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act of 2003.
Hearing held on May 12, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-109.
Supporting Our Intercollegiate Student-Athletes: Proposed
NCAA Reforms.--Oversight hearing on Supporting Our
Intercollegiate Student-Athletes: Proposed NCAA Reforms.
Hearing held on May 18, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-91.
Travel, Tourism, and Homeland Security: Improving Both
without Sacrificing Either.--Oversight hearing on Travel,
Tourism, and Homeland Security: Improving Both without
Sacrificing Either. Hearing held on June 23, 2004. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-96.
FASB Proposals on Stock Option Expensing.--Oversight
hearing on FASB Proposals on Stock Option Expensing. Hearing
held on July 8, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-99.
Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Technology: What the
Future Holds for Commerce, Security, and the Consumer.--
Oversight hearing on Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)
Technology: What the Future Holds for Commerce, Security, and
the Consumer. Hearing held on July 14, 2004. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-108.
Examining Professional Boxing: Are Further Reforms
Needed?--Oversight hearing on Examining Professional Boxing:
Are Further Reforms Needed? Hearing held on September 9, 2004.
PRINTED, Serial Number 108-127.
Repairing the 21st Century Car: Is Technology Locking the
Consumer Out?--Oversight hearing on Repairing the 21st Century
Car: Is Technology Locking the Consumer Out? Hearing held on
September 22, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-120.
Protecting the Privacy of Consumers' Social Security
Number.--Oversight hearing on Protecting the Privacy of
Consumers' Social Security Number. Hearing held on September
28, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-128.
Child Product Safety: Do Current Standards Provide Enough
Protection?--Oversight hearing on Child Product Safety: Do
Current Standards Provide Enough Protection? Hearing held on
October 6, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-129.
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
(Ratio 18-15)
RALPH HALL, Texas, Chairman
RICK BOUCHER, Virginia CHRISTOPHER COX, California
TOM ALLEN, Maine RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia
FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio Vice Chairman
ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico
GENE GREEN, Texas JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona
KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING,
TED STRICKLAND, Ohio Mississippi
LOIS CAPPS, California VITO FOSSELLA, New York
MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania GEORGE RADANOVICH, California
CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana MARY BONO, California
JIM DAVIS, Florida GREG WALDEN, Oregon
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan MIKE ROGERS, Michigan
(ex officio) DARRELL E. ISSA, California
C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho
JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma
JOE BARTON, Texas
(ex officio)
Jurisdiction: National energy policy generally; fossil energy,
renewable energy resources and synthetic fuels; energy conservation;
energy information; energy regulation and utilization; utility issues
and regulation of nuclear facilities; interstate energy compacts;
nuclear energy and waste; the Clean Air Act; and, all laws, programs,
and government activities affecting such matters.
Legislative Activities
CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS BILL
Public Law 108-7 (H. J. Res. 2)
(Energy Provisions)
Making consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2003, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.J. Res. 2 includes a 17-month extension of Price-Anderson
Act indemnification authority for Nuclear Regulatory Commission
licensees expiring on December 31, 2003. In addition, the
resolution has a Bonneville Power Administration (BPA)
provision, which provides a dramatic increase in BPA's
borrowing authority. H.J. Res. 2 also contains a permanent
authorization for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
Legislative History
H.J. Res. 2 was introduced in the House by Mr. Young (FL)
on January 7, 2003. The bill was referred solely to the
Committee on Appropriations.
On January 8, 2003, H.J. Res. 2 was considered in the House
under the provisions of H. Res. 15, and passed the House by
voice vote.
On January 9, 2003, H.J. Res. 2 was received in the Senate,
read the first time, and placed on the Senate Legislative
Calendar under Read the First Time. On January 10, 2003, H.J.
Res. 2 was read the second time and placed on Senate
Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
H.J. Res. 2 passed the Senate, with an amendment, by a vote
of 69 yeas and 29 nays.
On January 23, 2003, the Senate insisted on its amendment
to H.J. Res. 2, requested a conference with the House, and
appointed conferees. On January 29, 2003, the House disagreed
to the Senate amendment to H.J. Res. 2, agreed to a conference
with the Senate, and appointed conferees.
The conference committee met on February 10, 2003, and
February 11, 2003. The conference report was filed on February
13, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-10).
Pursuant to H. Res. 71, on February 13, 2003, the House
agreed to the conference report to accompany H.J. Res. 2 by a
vote of 338 yeas and 83 nays. The Senate agreed to the
conference report by a vote of 76 yeas and 20 nays.
H.J. Res. 2 was presented to the President on February 19,
2003, and on February 20, 2003, the bill was signed by the
President (Public Law 108-7).
TO REINSTATE AND EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION
OF A HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT IN THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Public Law 108-12 (H.R. 397, S. 220)
To reinstate and extend the deadline for commencement of
construction of a hydroelectric project in the State of
Illinois.
Summary
H.R. 397 authorizes the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, upon licensee request, to: (1) reinstate the
license for construction of a specified hydroelectric project
in the State of Illinois; and, (2) extend the time required to
commence project construction for three consecutive two-year
periods beyond the date that is four years after the date of
issuance of the license.
Legislative History
Mr. Shimkus introduced H.R. 397 in the House on January 28,
2003. The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On January 29, 2003, the Full Committee met in open markup
session to consider H.R. 397 and ordered the bill reported to
the Houseby a voice vote, a quorum being present. On February
4, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 397 to the
House (H. Rept.108-6).
H.R. 397 was considered in the House under suspension of
the rules on February 11, 2003, and passed the House by voice
vote.
On February 12, 2003, H.R. 397 was received in the Senate,
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
On March 12, 2003, Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power ordered H.R. 397 to
be reported, without amendment, favorably. On March 19, 2003,
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources reported H.R. 397
to the Senate (S. Rpt. 108-27).
H.R. 397 was placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under
General Orders, and on April 7, 2003, passed the Senate,
without amendment, by unanimous consent.
H.R. 397 was presented to the President on April 10, 2003,
and on April 22, 2003, the bill was signed by the President
(Public Law 108-12).
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004
Public Law 108-136 (H.R. 1588, S. 1050)
(Energy Provisions)
To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2004 for
military activities of the Department of Defense, for military
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of
Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year
for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 1588 amends the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to alter the
requirements for the performance of personnel security
investigations for certain Department of Energy and Nuclear
Regulatory Commission personnel, and authorizes appropriations
for FY 2004 for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.
Legislative History
H.R. 1588 was introduced by Mr. Hunter, by request, on
April 3, 2003, and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
There was an exchange of correspondence between the
Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Armed
Services on May 16, 2003.
On May 16, 2003, the Committee on Armed Services reported
H.R. 1588 to the House, as amended (H. Rpt. 108-106).
H.R. 1588 was considered in the House pursuant to H. Res.
245 and H. Res. 247, and on May 22, 2003, the House passed H.R.
1588, amended, by a vote of 361 yeas and 68 nays.
H.R. 1588 was received in the Senate on June 2, 2003. On
June 4, 2003, the bill was laid before Senate by unanimous
consent. The Senate struck all after the enacting clause of
H.R. 1588, inserted in lieu thereof the provisions of S.1050,
and passed the bill, as amended, by voice vote.
On June 4, 2003, the Senate insisted on its amendment,
requested a conference with the House, and appointed conferees.
The House disagreed to the Senate amendment, agreed to the
Senate's request to go to conference on July 16, 2003, and
appointed conferees. The Speaker appointed conferees from the
Committee on Energy and Commerce for consideration of secs.
601, 3113, 3201, and 3517 of the House bill, and secs. 601,
701, 852, 3151, and 3201 of the Senate amendment, and
modifications committed to conference, Messrs. Tauzin, Barton,
and Dingell.
On July 22, 2003 the conference committee met, and the
conference report was filed on November 7, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-
354).
Pursuant to H. Res. 437, on November 7, 2003, the House
agreed to the conference report by vote of 362 yeas and 40
nays, 2 voting present.
On November 12, 2003, the Senate agreed to the conference
report by a vote of 95 yeas and 3 nays.
H.R. 1588 was presented to, and signed by the President on
November 24, 2003 (Public Law 108-136).
HEALTHY FORESTS RESTORATION ACT OF 2003
Public Law 108-148 (H.R. 1904)
An act to improve the capacity of the Secretary of
Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to conduct
hazardous fuels reduction projects on National Forest System
lands and Bureau of Land Management lands aimed at protecting
communities, watersheds, and certain other at-risk lands from
catastrophic wildfire, to enhance efforts to protect watersheds
and address threats to forest and rangeland health, including
catastrophic wildfire, across the landscape, and for other
purposes.
Summary
Title III of H.R. 1904 amends the Cooperative Forestry
Assistance Act of 1978 to permit the Secretary of Agriculture,
acting through the Forest Service (and, where appropriate,
through the Cooperative State Research, Education, and
Extension Service), to provide assistance to State foresters
and State officials, or to Cooperative Extension officials at
land grant colleges and universities and specified
institutions, for the purpose of expanding State forest
capacities and activities to address watershed issues on non-
Federal forested lands and potentially forested lands. Directs
the Secretary to: (1) develop, with relevant parties, a program
of technical assistance to protect water quality; and, (2)
establish a watershed forestry cost-share program. Authorizes
appropriations.
The bill also requires the Secretary of Agriculture, acting
through the Chief of the Forest Service, to provide assistance
to Indian tribes for the purpose of expanding tribal
stewardship capacities through tribalforestry best management
practices to improve watershed health. Authorizes appropriations.
Legislative History
H.R. 1904 was introduced by Mr. McInnis on May 1, 2003, and
referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to
the Committee on Resources, 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.
The Committee on Agriculture reported H.R. 1904 to the
House on May 9, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-96, Part I).
On May 9, 2003, the bill was referred sequentially to the
Committee on the Judiciary for a period ending not later than
May 16, 2003 for consideration of such provisions of the bill
as fall within the jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to
clause 1(k), rule X.
On May 16, 2003, the Committee on the Judiciary reported
H.R. 1904 to the House (H. Rpt. 108-96, Part II).
On May 20, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce and
the Committee on Agriculture exchanged correspondence.
H.R. 1904 was considered in the House pursuant to H. Res.
239, and on May 20, 2003, the House passed the bill, as
amended, by a vote of 256 yeas and 170 nays.
H.R. 1904 was received in the Senate on May 21, 2003, read
twice, and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,
and Forestry.
On October 30, 2003, H.R. 1904 passed the Senate, with an
amendment and an amendment to the Title, by a vote of 80 yeas
and 14 nays.
On November 6, 2003, the House disagreed to the Senate
amendments and requested a conference and appointed conferees.
On November 20, 2003, the Senate insisted on its amendment
to H.R. 1904, agreed to a conference with the House, and
appointed conferees.
On November 20, 2003, the conference report was filed (H.
Rpt. 108-386). The House considered and agreed to the
conference report, pursuant to H. Res. 457, on November 21,
2003, by a vote of 286 yeas and 140 nays.
The Senate agreed to the conference report by unanimous
consent on November 21, 2003.
The bill was presented to the President on December 2,
2003, and on December 3, 2003, the bill was signed by the
President (Public Law 108-148).
VISION 100--CENTURY OF AVIATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT
Public Law 108-176 (H.R. 2115, S. 824)
To amend title 49, United States Code, to reauthorize
programs for the Federal Aviation Administration, and for other
purposes.
Summary
Section 521 of H.R. 2115 directs the Secretary and the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to
agree jointly on how to assure that airport sponsors receive
appropriate emission credits for carrying out air quality
projects at certain airports.
The provision directs the Secretary to carry out a pilot
program under which airport sponsors may use airport planning
and development and noise compatibility planning and program
funds to retrofit existing eligible airport ground support
equipment that burns conventional fuels to achieve lower
emissions utilizing emission control technologies certified or
verified by the EPA.
The section also makes eligible for airport development
project funds: (1) work necessary to construct or modify
airport facilities to provide low-emission fuel systems, gate
electrification, and other related air quality improvements at
a commercial service airport provided the airport is located in
an air quality nonattainment or maintenance area, and such
project will result in an airport receiving appropriate
emission credits; and, (2) the conversion of vehicles and
ground support equipment owned by a commercial service airport
to low-emission technology or acquisition for use at such
airport vehicles and ground support equipment that include low-
emission technology provided the airport is located in an air
quality nonattainment area or a maintenance area, and such
project will result in an airport receiving appropriate
emission credits.
In addition, the section declares that the cost is
allowable for a project for acquiring for use at a commercial
service airport vehicles and certain ground support equipment
owned by a airport that include low-emission technology, if the
total costs allowed for such project are not more than the
incremental cost of equipping such vehicles or equipment with
low-emission technology. This section also defines ``low-
emission technology'' as technology for vehicles and equipment
whose emission performance is the best achievable under EPA
emission standards, relying exclusively on alternative fuels
that are substantially non-petroleum based, but not excluding
hybrid systems or natural gas powered vehicles.
In S. 824, section 508 makes eligible for airport
development project funds a sponsor or operator of a public-use
airport located in an air quality nonattainment or maintenance
area that undertakes: (1) work necessary to construct or modify
airport facilities to provide low-emission fuel systems, gate
electrification, and other related air quality improvements at
the airport; or, (2) a project for the acquisition or
conversion of airport-owned vehicles and ground support
equipment to low-emission technology. S. 824 also requires the
project also to result in an airport receiving appropriate
emission credits. The bill defines ``low-emission technology''
to mean technology: (1) for new vehicles and equipment whose
emission performance is best achievable under standards
established by the EPA; and, (2) that relies exclusively on
alternative fuels that are substantially non-petroleum based
(but not excluding hybrid systems).
The section also directs the Secretary and the
Administrator of the EPA to agree jointly on how to assure that
airport sponsors receiveappropriate emission credits for
carrying out air quality projects at certain airports.
In addition, the provision directs the Secretary to carry
out a pilot program under which airport sponsors may use
airport planning and development and noise compatibility
planning and program funds to retrofit existing eligible
airport ground support equipment that burns conventional fuels
to achieve lower emissions utilizing emission control
technologies certified or verified by the EPA.
Legislative History
H.R. 2115 was introduced by Mr. Young (AK) on May 15, 2003
and referred to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure exchanged correspondence on
June 6, 2003.
Pursuant to H. Res. 265, the House considered H.R. 2115 on
June 11, 2003, and passed the bill by a vote of 418 yeas and 8
nays.
On June 12, 2003, H.R. 2115 was received in the Senate,
read twice, and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under
General Orders.
On June 12, 2003, the bill was considered in the Senate by
unanimous consent. The Senate struck all after the enacting
clause of H.R. 2115, inserted in lieu thereof the provisions of
S. 824, and passed the bill, as amended, by a vote of 94 ayes
and 0 nays. The Senate insisted on its amendment to H.R. 2115,
requested a conference with the House, and appointed conferees.
The House disagreed to the Senate amendment, agreed to the
Senate's request to go to conference on July 15, 2003, and
appointed conferees. The Speaker appointed conferees from the
Committee on Energy and Commerce for consideration of sec. 521
of the House bill and sec. 508 of the Senate amendment, and
modifications committed to conference, Messrs. Tauzin, Barton,
and Dingell.
On July 24, 2003, the Conference Committee met, and the
conference report (H. Rpt. 108-240) was filed on July 25, 2003.
On September 24, 2003, pursuant to H. Res. 377, the conference
report was recommitted to the Conference Committee.
The conference report (H. Rpt. 108-334) was filed on
October 29, 2003. The House considered and agreed to the
conference report, pursuant to H. Res. 442, on October 30,
2003, by a vote of 211 yeas and 207 nays.
The Senate agreed to conference report by unanimous consent
on November 21, 2003.
H.R. 2115 was presented to the President on December 2,
2003, and on December 12, 2003, was signed by the President
(Public Law 108-176).
SOUTHERN UTE AND COLORADO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION
ACT OF 2003
Public Law 108-336 (S. 551)
A bill to provide for the implementation of air quality
programs developed in accordance with an Intergovernmental
Agreement between the Southern Ute Indian Tribe and the State
of Colorado concerning Air Quality Control on the Southern Ute
Indian Reservation, and for other purposes.
Summary
S. 551 authorizes the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency to treat the Southern Ute Indian Tribe as a
State for purposes of implementing and enforcing air quality
control programs for their Reservation, as developed in the
Intergovernmental Agreement.
Legislative History
S. 551 was introduced by Senator Campbell on March 6, 2003,
read twice and referred to the Senate Committee on Environment
and Public Works.
On November 19, 2003, the Committee on Environment and
Public Works reported the bill with an amendment (S. Rpt. 108-
201). S. 551 was place on Senate Legislative Calendar under
General Orders.
S. 551 passed the Senate, amended, by unanimous consent on
November 21, 2003.
On November 25, 2003, S. 551 was received in the House, and
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in
addition to the Committee on Resources, 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.
The Committee on Resources reported S. 551 to the House on
September 30, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-712, Part I).
On September 30, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
met in open markup session and ordered S. 551 reported to the
House, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported S. 551 to the
House on October 4, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-712, Part II).
The House considered S. 551 under suspension of the rules,
and passed the bill by voice vote on October 4, 2004.
S. 551 was presented to the President on October 7, 2004,
and signed by the President on October 18, 2004 (Public Law
108-336).
TAPOCO PROJECT LICENSING ACT OF 2004
Public Law 108-343 (H.R. 4667, S. 2319)
To authorize and facilitate hydroelectric power licensing
of the Tapoco Project, and for other purposes.
Summary
The bill instructs the Secretary of the Interior to engage
in a simultaneous specified land exchange with Alcoa Power
Generating Inc.
Legislative History
H.R. 4667 was introduced in the House by Mr. Duncan on June
23, 2004, and referred to the Committee on Resources, and in
addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period
to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
On September 30, 2004 the Committee on Energy and Commerce
met in open markup session and ordered the bill reported to the
House by voice vote, a quorum being present. The Committee on
Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 4667 to the House (H. Rpt.
108-721, Part I) on October 4, 2004.
No further action was taken on H.R. 4667.
S. 2319 was introduced by Senator Alexander on April 19,
2004, read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources. The Committee held a hearing on the bill on
April 27, 2004, and on June 16, 2004 met in open markup
session, and ordered the bill reported with an amendment in the
nature of a substitute favorably. The bill was reported to the
Senate with an amendment in the nature of a substitute (S. Rpt.
108-299), and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under
General Orders.
On September 15, 2004, S. 2319 passed the Senate, with an
amendment, by unanimous consent.
On September 17, 2004, the bill was received in the House
and held at the desk, and on October 4, 2004, the bill was
considered under suspension of the rules and passed the House
by voice vote.
S. 2319 was presented to the President on October 7, 2004,
and on October 18, 2004, the bill was signed by the President
(Public Law 108-343).
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FY 2005 AUTHORIZATION BILL
Public Law 108-375 (H.R. 4200, S. 2400)
(Energy Provisions)
To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2005 for
military activities of the Department of Defense, for military
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of
Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year
for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 4200 includes a two-year extension of Price-Anderson
Act indemnification authorities for Department of Energy (DOE)
contractors expiring on December 31, 2006.
The bill also includes a provision to provide that certain
radioactive wastes from reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel
stored at DOE sites in South Carolina and Idaho may be disposed
of as low level wastes.
Legislative History
On April 22, 2004, Mr. Hunter introduced H.R. 4200 by
request, and the bill was referred to the House Committee on
Armed Services.
There was an exchange of correspondence between the
Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Armed
Services on May 14, 2004.
On May 14, 2004, the Committee on Armed Service reported
H.R. 2400 to the House, amended (H. Rpt. 108-491).
H.R. 4200 was considered in the House on May 19 and 20,
2004, under the provisions of H. Res. 648. The bill passed the
House by vote of 391 yeas and 34 nays.
On June 23, 2004, the bill passed the Senate with an
amendment by unanimous consent. The Senate insisted on its
amendment, asked for a conference, and appointed conferees.
The House disagreed to the Senate amendment on September
28, 2004, agreed to a conference agreed and appointed
conferees. The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee
on Energy and Commerce for consideration of secs. 596, 601,
3111, 3131, 3133 and 3201 of the House bill, and secs. 321-323,
716, 720, 1084-1089, 1091, 2833, 3116, 3119, 3141, 3142, 3145,
3201, and 3503 of the Senate amendment, and modifications
committed to conference, Messrs. Barton, Upton, and Dingell.
A conference was held on September 29, 2004, and on October
8, 2004 the conference report was filed (H. Rpt. 108-767).
On October 8, 2004, H. Res. 843, providing for the
consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 4200,
passed the House by voice vote. Then, on October 9, 2004, the
conference report was considered in the House under the
provisions of H. Res. 843. The conference report passed the
House by a vote of 359 yeas and 14 nays.
Senate agreed to conference report by unanimous consent on
October 9, 2004.
On October 21, 2004, the bill was presented to President,
and was signed by the President on October 28, 2004 (Public Law
108-375).
ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 6, H.R. 1644, H.R. 4503)
To enhance energy conservation and research and
development, to provide for security and diversity in the
energy supply for the American people, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 6, as agreed to in conference, includes a wide variety
of provisions intended to increase domestic energy supply and
encourage energy efficiency. The bill is based largely on
energy legislation that was passed in differing forms by the
House and Senate in the 107th Congress (H.R. 4), but ultimately
not enacted.
On electricity issues, the bill would, in part, provide for
incentive-based transmission rates, allow transmission owners
in certain instances with Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) approval to exercise the right of eminent domain to site
new transmission lines, and give new, but limited, authority to
FERC over municipal and cooperative transmission systems. In
addition, H.R. 6 would repeal the Public Utility Holding
Company Act (PUHCA) and give FERC and state public utility
commissions access to books and records, prospectively repeal
the mandatory purchase requirement of the Public Utility
Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA), and establish market
transparency rules.
H.R. 6 establishes an electric reliability organization to
develop and enforce reliability standards for the bulk
transmission system. The bill also provides for a system to
improve transparency of electricity markets, prohibits round
trip trades, and increases civil and criminal penalties for
violations of the Federal Power Act.
H.R. 6 includes a renewable fuel standard (RFS) that would
require the blending of 2.7 billion gallons of renewable fuel
with gasoline in 2005. Most of this would be met with ethanol,
but other renewable fuels, including biodiesel, would qualify.
The required volume of blended fuel would rise to 5 billion
gallons annually by 2015. H.R. 6 would amend the Clean Air Act
by eliminating the oxygen content requirement for reformulated
gasoline. In addition, H.R. 6 would provide safe harbor
protection for renewable fuel, as defined by section 211(o)(1)
of the Clean Air Act, and fuel containing MTBE.
H.R. 6 also provides new federal authorities and
requirements for the federal leaking underground storage tank
program. Among other items, it requires onsite inspections of
underground storage tanks every three years, establishes
operator-training programs where they do not already exist, and
institutes a specific new funding category to clean up tank-
related releases of oxygenated fuel additives in gasoline, like
MTBE.
H.R. 6 would reauthorize the Price-Anderson Act nuclear
liability system through December 31, 2023. Under Price-
Anderson, commercial reactor accident damages are paid through
a combination of private-sector insurance and a nuclear
industry self-insurance system. Price-Anderson also authorizes
the Department of Energy (DOE) to indemnify its nuclear
contractors.
H.R. 6 would direct DOE to set efficiency standards within
three years for ``standby mode'' energy use by battery chargers
and external power supplies, as well as standards for other
appliances. The bill also would require progressive annual
reductions in energy use by federal buildings from FY2001
levels, culminating in a 20% reduction by FY2014.
H.R. 6 also provides a statutory framework for the
expedited approval, construction, and initial operation of an
Alaska natural gas transportation project as an alternative to
the Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Act of 1976, which
remains in effect; establishes a process for providing access
to the pipeline in order to promote competition in the
exploration, development, and production of Alaska natural gas;
and, prohibits a pipeline route that would be constructed from
Prudhoe Bay, under the Beaufort Sea, into Canada.
H.R. 6 also authorizes the expansion of the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve capacity from 700 million to one billion
barrels.
The bill provides incentives through cost sharing to
improve and bring to market new clean coal technologies, and
also provides authorization for new programs to develop
hydrogen fuel infrastructure. In addition, the bill also
provides incentives for the development of renewable energy
sources such as hydroelectric and geothermal.
H.R. 6 provides authorizations for DOE's fossil fuel
program for existing and new coal-based research and
development, and provides authorization for the Secretary of
Energy to carry out the Clean Coal Power Initiative, which will
provide funding to those projects that can demonstrate advanced
coal-based power generating technologies that achieve
significant reductions in emissions, and where at least 60
percent of this authorization will be used for projects related
to coal-based gasification technology.
H.R. 6 amends procedures for the relicensing of
hydroelectric dams.
Finally, H.R. 6 launches a program to support hydrogen-
powered automobiles on the road by 2020, along with the
necessary infrastructure to provide for the safe delivery of
hydrogen fuels.
Legislative History
On March 19, 2003, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality met in open markup session and approved a Committee
Print for Full Committee consideration, as amended, by a record
vote of 21 yeas and 9 nays. On April 1, April 2, and April 3,
2003, the Full Committee met in open markup session and ordered
a Committee Print reported to the House, as amended, by a
record vote of 36 yeas and 17 nays. A unanimous consent request
by Mr. Tauzin to allow a report to be filed on a bill to be
introduced, and that the actions of the Committee be deemed as
action on that bill, was agreed to by unanimous consent.
H.R. 1644 was introduced by Mr. Barton on April 7, 2003,
and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in
addition to the Committees on Science, Resources, Education and
the Workforce, and Transportation and Infrastructure, 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.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce filed a report on H.R.
1644, pursuant to the unanimous consent request, on April 8,
2003 (H. Rpt. 108-65, Part I).
On April 8, 2003, H.R. 1644 was referred sequentially to
the Committee on the Judiciary for a period ending not later
than April 9, 2003 for consideration of such provisions of the
bill and amendment as fall within the jurisdiction of that
committee pursuant to clause 1(k), rule X.
On April 9, 2003, H.R. 1644 was referred sequentially to
the Committee on Government Reform for a period ending not
later than April 9, 2003, for consideration of such provisions
of the bill and amendment as fall within the jurisdiction of
that committee pursuant to clause 1(h), rule X.
On April 9, 2003, the Committees on Science, Resources,
Education and the Workforce, Transportation and Infrastructure,
Judiciary, and Government Reform were discharged from further
consideration of the bill.
All Committees were discharged from further consideration
of the bill on April 9, 2003, and no further action on H.R.
1644 was taken in 108th Congress.
However, on April 7, 2003, Mr. Tauzin introduced H.R. 6,
which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and
in addition to the Committees on Science, Ways and Means,
Resources, Education and the Workforce, Transportation and
Infrastructure, Financial Services, and Agriculture, 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. As introduced, H.R. 6
contained provisions that were substantially similar to
provisions in H.R. 1644, as well as H.R. 238, and H.R. 1531.
On April 10, 2003, H.R. 6 was considered in the House
pursuant to H. Res. 189. The bill passed the House, as amended,
by a vote of 247 yeas and 175 nays on April 11, 2003.
H.R. 6 was received in the Senate on April 29, 2003. On May
5, 2003, the bill was read the first time and placed on the
Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time. H.R. 6
was read the second time and placed on the Senate Legislative
Calendar under General Orders on May 6, 2003.
On July 31, 2003, H.R. 6 passed the Senate with an
amendment by a record vote of 84 yeas and 14 nays. In addition,
the Senate insisted upon its amendment, requested a conference
with the House, and appointed conferees.
On September 4, 2003, the House disagreed to the Senate
amendment and agreed to go to conference. On September 5, 2003,
the Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on Energy
and Commerce for consideration of the House bill and Senate
amendment, and modifications committed to conference.
The Conference Committee met on September 5, 2003, and the
conference report was filed on November 18, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-
375).
The House considered and agreed to the conference report,
pursuant to H. Res. 443, on November 18, 2003, by a vote of 246
yeas and 180 nays.
On November 21, 2003, a motion for cloture on the
conference report was not invoked in the Senate by a vote of 57
yeas and 40 nays.
No further action on H.R. 6 was taken in 108th Congress.
Subsequently, H.R. 4503 was introduced by Mr. Barton on
June 3, 2004, and referred to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Science, Ways
and Means, Resources, Education and the Workforce,
Transportation and Infrastructure, Financial Services,
Agriculture, and the Budget, 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. The text of H.R. 4503 was substantially
similar to the text of the conference report to accompany H.R.
6 which was pending in the Senate.
On June 14, 2004, H.R. 4503 was considered in the House
pursuant to H. Res. 671. The bill passed the House by a vote of
244 yeas and 178 nays on June 15, 2004.
H.R. 4503 was received in the Senate on June 17, 2004.
No further action was taken on H.R. 4503 in the 108th
Congress.
TO EXTEND CERTAIN HYDRO-ELECTRIC LICENSES IN THE STATE OF ALASKA.
(H.R. 337)
To extend certain hydro-electric licenses in the State of
Alaska.
Summary
H.R. 337 instructs the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, upon licensee request, to: (1) issue an order
staying a specified hydroelectric license in the State of
Alaska; (2) lift such stay, but not later than six years after
the date that it receives written notice that construction of
the Swan-Tyee transmission line is completed; (3) make the
effective date of the license the date on which the stay is
lifted; and, (4) extend the time during which such licensee is
required to commence project construction for not more than one
two-year time period.
Legislative History
H.R. 337 was introduced by Mr. Young (AK) on January 27,
2003, and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On January 29, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 337 reported to the
House by a voice vote, a quorum being present. On February 4,
2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 337 to
the House (H. Rpt. 108-4).
H.R. 337 was considered by the House under suspension of
the rules on February 11, 2003, and passed the House by voice
vote.
On February 12, 2003, H.R. 337 was received in the Senate.
On February 24, 2003, H.R. 337 was read twice and referred to
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
No further action on H.R. 337 was taken in 108th Congress.
FOREIGN RELATIONS AUTHORIZATION ACT, FY 2004-2005
(H.R. 1950)
To establish the Millennium Challenge Account to provide
increased support for certain developing countries; to
authorize the expansion of the Peace Corps; to authorize
appropriations for the Department of State for fiscal years
2004 and 2005; and to authorize appropriations under the Arms
Export Control Act and the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for
security assistance for fiscal years 2004 and 2005.
Summary
H.R. 1950, as reported by the Committee on International
Relations, contained section 730, which was a ``Sense of
Congress on Climate Change'' that ``the United States should
demonstrate international leadership and responsibility in
reducing the health, environmental, and economic risks posed by
climate change,'' through several actions: (1) taking
responsible action to ensure significant and meaningful
reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases from all sectors;
(2) creating flexible mechanisms such as tradable credits for
emissions reductions and carbon sequestration; (3)
participating in international negotiations, including making
proposals that have the objective of obtaining U.S.
participation in a future binding climate change treaty in a
manner consistent with the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change (UNFCCC), that protects the economic
interests of the United States, and that recognizes the shared
international responsibility for addressing climate change,
including developing country participation; and, (5)
establishing in the House and Senate bipartisan observer groups
to monitor any international negotiations on climate change.
Legislative History
H.R. 1950 was introduced by Mr. Hyde on May 5, 2003, and
referred to the Committee on International Relations.
On May 8, 2003, the Committee on International Relations
met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 1950 to be
reported, as amended, by a record vote of 42 yeas and 3 nays.
On May 16, 2003, the Committee on International Relations
reported H.R. 1950 to the House (H. Rpt. 108-105, Part I).
On May 16, 2003, H.R. 1950 was referred jointly and
sequentially to the Committees on Armed Services, Energy and
Commerce, and Judiciary for a period ending not later than June
13, 2003, for consideration of such provisions of the bill and
amendment as fall within the jurisdiction of that committee
pursuant to clause 1(k), rule X
On June 9, 2003, the Committees on Armed Services, Energy
and Commerce and Judiciary were granted an extension for
further consideration ending not later than June 16, 2003.
The Committee on International Relations filed a
supplemental report (H. Rpt. 108-105, Part II) on June 12,
2003.
On June 16, 2003, the Committees on Armed Services and
Energy and Commerce were granted an extension for further
consideration ending not later than July 11, 2003.
On July 9, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met
in open markup session and ordered H.R. 1950 to be reported
without recommendation, as amended, by voice vote. The
Committee deleted section 730 of the bill, as reported by the
Committee on International Relations.
On July 11, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
reported H.R. 1950, without recommendation, to the House, as
amended (H. Rpt. 108-105, Part IV).
On July 15, 2003, H.R. 1950 was considered in the House
pursuant to H. Res. 316. The bill passed the House, as amended,
by a roll call vote of 382 yeas and 42 nays on July 16, 2003.
H.R. 1950 was received in the Senate, read twice, and
placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar on July 17, 2003.
No further action on H.R. 1950 was taken in 108th Congress.
NUCLEAR WASTE FINANCING ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 3429)
To improve the funding mechanism for the Department of
Energy Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program, and for
other purposes.
Summary
Nuclear Waste Financing Act of 2003 requires that,
beginning in FY 2005, and through the end of FY 2010, the
receipts, proceeds, and recoveries realized by the Secretary of
Energy relating to contracts for transportation and disposal of
high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel shall be
credited to the Nuclear Waste Fund as offsetting collections.
The bill also prescribes implementation procedures,
including adjustments to the levels of budgetary resources from
offsetting collections and preservation of the corpus of the
Fund.
Legislative History
H.R. 3429 was introduced by Mr. Shimkus on November 4,
2003, and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On March 4, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality held a hearing on H.R. 3429. The Subcommittee received
testimony from three Members of Congress, representatives of
the Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, the National
Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, the Nuclear
Energy Institute and Bechtel SAIC, LLC.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3429 in the 108th
Congress.
TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT: A LEGACY FOR USERS
(H.R. 3550, S. 1072)
To authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety
programs, and transit programs, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 3550 amends the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
Improvement Program to allow funds to be used to improve
transportation systems management and operation.
H.R 3550 amends the Clean Air Act to require the
appropriate metropolitan planning organization to redetermine,
by a certain deadline, the conformity of existing
transportation plans and programs within a State Implementation
Plan for national primary and secondary ambient air quality
standards, and provides for regular updates of conformity
determinations in nonattainment and maintenance areas. Further,
the bill allows areas to opt to shorten time horizons for
conformity determinations from 20 years to the later of: 10
years, the relevant attainment date for an area, or one year
following the completion of a significant project contained in
the plan. It also allows for the substitution of transportation
control measures without triggering a conformity determination
under certain conditions and provides that a transportation
plan, or program shall not be considered to have lapsed until 1
year following the otherwise applicable date for a
determination.
The bill also amends the Federal-Aid Highways program to
declare advanced truck stop electrification systems eligible
for funding under the surface transportation program and under
the congestion mitigation and air quality improvement program.
In addition, the bill modifies the surface transportation
environment and planning cooperative research program to direct
the Secretary to make it a collaborative, public-private
surface transportation environment and planning cooperative
program.
H.R. 3550 also amends Federal transportation law to provide
a common transportation planning program administered by the
Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit
Administration.
Legislative History
H.R. 3550 was introduced by Mr. Young (AK) on November 20,
2003, and referred to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
On March 24, 2004, the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 3550
to be reported, as amended, by voice vote. On March 29, 2004,
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported
H.R. 3550 to the House (H. Rpt. 108-452, Part I).
On March 29, 2004, H.R. 3550 was referred jointly and
sequentially to the Committees on Education and the Workforce,
Energy and Commerce, Judiciary, Resources, and Science for a
period ending not later than March 29, 2004 for consideration
of such provisions of the bill and amendment as fall within the
jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to clause 1, rule X.
On March 29, 2004, the Committees on Education and the
Workforce, Energy and Commerce, Judiciary, Resources, and
Science were discharged from further consideration of the bill.
On April 1, 2004, H.R. 3550 was considered in the House
pursuant to H. Res. 593. The bill passed the House, as amended,
by vote of 357 yeas and 65 nays on April 2, 2004.
On April 8, 2004, H.R. 3550 was received in the Senate. The
bill was read twice, and placed on the Senate Legislative
Calendar under General Orders on April 22, 2004.
On May 19, 2004, the Senate struck all after the enacting
clause of H.R. 3550, inserted in lieu thereof the provisions of
S.1072, and passed the bill, as amended, by unanimous consent.
The Senate insisted on its amendment and requested a
conference with the House on May 19, 2004 and on May 20, 2004,
appointed conferees.
The House disagreed to the Senate amendment, agreed to the
Senate's request to go to conference on June 3, 2004, and
appointed conferees. The Speaker appointed conferees from the
Committee on Energy and Commerce for consideration of
provisions in the House bill and Senate amendment relating to
Clean Air Act provisions of transportation planning contained
in sec. 6001 of the House bill, and secs. 3005 and 3006 of the
Senate amendment; and secs. 1202, 1824, 1828, and 5203 of the
House bill, and secs. 1501, 1511, 1522, 1610-1619, 3016, 3023,
4108, 4151, 4152, 4155-4159, 4162, 4172, 4173, 4424, 4481,
4482, 4484, 4662, 8001, and 8002 of the Senate amendment, and
modifications committed to conference, Messrs. Barton,
Pickering, and Dingell.
The Conference Committee met on June 9, June 23, and July
7, July 20, and July 22, 2004.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3550 in the 108th
Congress.
TO RECLASSIFY FEES PAID INTO THE NUCLEAR WASTE FUND AS OFFSETTING
COLLECTIONS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
(H.R. 3981)
Summary
H.R. 3981 requires that fees collected by the Secretary of
Energy and deposited into the Nuclear Waste Fund shall be
credited to the Fund as offsetting collections beginning
October 1, 2004, and continuing through September 30, 2009, not
to exceed the amounts annually appropriated during that period
from the Fund. Sets a maximum amount for FY 2005 at $576
million.
The bill also authorizes necessary appropriations from the
Fund to the extent that the level of budgetary resources from
offsetting collections is insufficient to implement activities
under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 for a fiscal year.
In addition, H.R. 3981 instructs the Secretary to report to
Congress biennially regarding the Fund's adequacy (including an
assessment of whether current unexpended balances in the Fund,
if made fully available to the Secretary, would affect annual
fee determinations), and requires the report also to recommend
whether this Act should be extended beyond its current
expiration date of September 30, 2009, and whether alternative
approaches may be necessary to access unexpended balances in
the Fund.
Legislative History
H.R. 3981 was introduced by Mr. Barton on March 17, 2004,
and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On March 25, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality held a hearing on H.R. 3981. The Subcommittee received
testimony from three Members of Congress, representatives of
the Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, the National
Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, the Nuclear
Energy Institute and Bechtel SAIC, LLC.
On June 16, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality met in open markup session and approved H.R. 3981 for
Full Committee consideration, as amended, by voice vote, a
quorum being present. On June 24, 2004, the Full Committee met
in open markup session and ordered H.R. 3981 reported to the
House (H. Rpt. 108-594), amended, by a roll call vote of 29
yeas and 19 nays, a quorum being present.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3981 in the 108th
Congress.
UNITED STATES REFINERY REVITALIZATION ACT OF 2004
(H.R. 4517)
To provide incentives to increase refinery capacity in the
United States.
Summary
H.R. 4517 authorizes the Secretary of Energy to designate
as a Refinery Revitalization Zone, any area that has
experienced mass layoffs at manufacturing facilities; or
contains an idle refinery and has an unemployment rate of at
least 20% above the national average.
The bill provides that, upon request of an applicant that
seeks Federal authorization related to siting and operation of
a refinery within a Refinery Revitalization Zone, the
Department of Energy will be the lead agency for coordinating
all applicable Federal authorizations and related environmental
reviews of the facility. The Secretary of Energy and the heads
of all Federal agencies of relevant jurisdiction are required
to enter into Memoranda of Understanding for the purpose of
ensuring a timely and coordinated review of the application
throughout the process.
The bill is designed to ensure compliance with all
applicable Federal, state, and local environmental regulations
by specifying that best available control technology, as
appropriate, be used on all refineries located within a
refinery revitalization zone.
Legislative History
H.R. 4517 was introduced by Mr. Barton on June 4, 2004, and
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On June 16, 2004, H.R. 4517 was considered in the House
pursuant to H. Res. 671. The bill passed the House by a vote of
239 yeas and 192 nays on June 16, 2004.
H.R. 4517 was received in the Senate, read twice, and
referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works on
June 17, 2004.
No further action was taken on H.R. 4517 in the 108th
Congress.
THE GASOLINE PRICE REDUCTION ACT OF 2004
(H.R. 4545)
To amend the Clean Air Act to reduce the proliferation of
boutique fuels, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 4545 gives the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, in consultation with the Secretary of
Energy, waiver authority with respect to fuels and fuel
additives in the event of a significant supply disruption. When
approving State Implementation Plans, the Administrator may
give a preference to either of 3 fuel types, reformulated
gasoline as set forth in the statute, gasoline having a Reid
Vapor Pressure (RVP) of 7.0 psi for the high ozone season, or
gasoline having a RVP of 7.8 psi for the high ozone season.
The bill prohibits the Administrator from having any
authority to approve any fuel or fuel additive if the effect of
such approval would be to increase the total number of fuels
and fuel additives approved in all State implementation plans
nationwide prior to June 1, 2004.
The bill also requires the Administrator, in cooperation
with the Secretary of Energy, to undertake a study to determine
the effects of State Implementation Plans on air quality, on
the number of fuel blends, on fuel availability, and on fuel
costs. The results are to be reported to the Congress, with
recommendations as to legislative changes to the preferred list
of fuels. If the recommendations are to increase the number of
preferred fuels, the total preferred fuels shall not exceed 10
fuels.
Legislative History
H.R. 4545 was introduced by Mr. Blunt on June 14, 2004, and
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On June 15, 2004, H.R. 4545 was considered under suspension
of the rules.
On June 16, 2004, the motion to suspend the rules and pass
H.R. 4545 was not agreed to by a vote of 236 yeas and 194 nays.
No further action was taken on H.R. 4545 in the 108th
Congress.
NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY DEVELOPMENT GROUP TASK FORCE RESOLUTION OF
INQUIRY
(H. Res. 745)
Of inquiry requesting the President of the United States to
provide certain information to the House of Representatives
respecting the National Energy Policy Development Group.
Summary
H. Res. 745 requests the President to furnish the House of
Representatives information respecting the National Energy
Policy Development Group Task Force.
Legislative History
H. Res. 745 was introduced by Mr. Dingell on July 22, 2004,
and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On September 15, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
met in open markup session, and ordered the resolution to be
reported unfavorably by a roll call vote of 30 yeas and 22
nays, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H. Res. 745
adversely to the House on September 23, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-697).
No further action was taken on H. Res. 745 in the 108th
Congress.
Oversight Activities
COMPREHENSIVE NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY
On March 5, 12 and 13, 2003, the Subcommittee on Energy and
Air Quality held a series of hearings on a comprehensive
national energy policy. The hearings addressed issues of
nuclear energy, wholesale electricity policy matters, energy
efficiency and conservation. Witnesses testifying on the first
day of hearings included the Deputy Secretary of the Department
of Energy, the Chairman and two Commissioners of the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, the Chairman of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, as well as representatives of the
nuclear power industry, consumer groups, nuclear safety
experts, and advocates for energy efficiency and conservation.
The second day of hearings included representatives from the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's office of Energy
Projects, the hydroelectric industry, and environmental
advocates. On the final day of hearings, the Subcommittee heard
testimony from state regulators, government representatives,
consumer advocates, industrial consumers, environmental
advocates, industry representatives, and analysts.
UNITED NATIONS OIL FOR FOOD PROGRAM
On May 14, 2003, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
held a hearing on the United Nations Oil for Food Program, its
effect on oil markets, and whether it should be continued.
Witnesses included representatives from the Energy Information
Agency, Center for Strategic and International Studies, and the
James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice
University.
The Subcommittee also held a hearing on July 8, 2004, on
the United Nations Oil for Food program. The hearing updated
members on the investigations into the alleged improprieties
involving the Oil for Food Program. Witnesses included a Member
of Congress, a representative of the Government Accountability
Office, a journalist, and a former Deputy Undersecretary of the
Department of Defense.
THE HYDROGEN FUEL ECONOMY
On May 20, 2003, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
held a hearing on the Hydrogen Energy Economy. The hearing
focused on the potential for the use of hydrogen in both
stationary and transportation applications, specifically the
Administration's Freedom Car and Hydrogen Fuel Initiative. In
addition, the predicted benefits for the use of hydrogen as an
energy source as well as the challenges faced in make such a
substantial change to our nation's energy and equipment
infrastructure, and issues concerning the production,
distribution and safe utilization of hydrogen were considered.
Witnesses included Department of Energy, and industry
representatives.
METHYL BROMIDE UNDER THE CLEAN AIR ACT AND THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL
On June 3, 2003, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
held a hearing on the status of methyl bromide under the Clean
Air Act and the Montreal Protocol. The hearing examined the
utilization of methyl bromide in agricultural pre-plant
fumigation and other uses as well as the schedule for phase out
of methyl bromide and the existence of exemptions from this
phase out. Witnesses included representatives from the
Department of State, the Department of Energy, the
Environmental Protection Agency, industry representatives and
environmental advocates.
On July 21, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality held another hearing entitled Methyl Bromide: Update on
Achieving the Requirements of the Clean Air Act and Montreal
Protocol. The hearing focused on the current use of methyl
bromide in the U.S., alternatives to the use of methyl bromide,
the international process underway to implement the Montreal
Protocol, and the U.S. efforts to comply with the Montreal
Protocol. Witnesses included the Department of State, the
Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency,
industry and environmental advocates.
CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY
On June 24, 2003, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality held a hearing on the Future Options for Generation of
Electricity from Coal. The hearing addressed the status of new
technologies, and the improvements to existing technologies for
the future use of coal for electric generation. The hearing
also provided information on the current and projected cost,
reliability, and overall competitiveness of coal in the
marketplace. The first panel of witnesses included a
representative from the DOE and the utility sector, a well as a
coal producer. The second panel included an end user, a coal
technology manufacturer, an environmental advocate, a coal and
utility sector researcher, and a pollution control equipment
manufacturer.
THE CLEAR SKIES INITIATIVE: A MULTIPOLLUTANT APPROACH TO THE CLEAN AIR
ACT
On July 8, 2003, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
held a hearing on the President's Clear Skies Initiative. The
hearing addressed the basic framework and elements of the
Administration's Clear Skies Initiative, how this proposal
would change current law regarding the regulation of affected
facilities, and the anticipated costs and benefits of this
approach to controlling emissions of sulfur dioxide
(SO2), nitrous oxides (NOX) and mercury
(Hg) from affected facilities. The sole witness was the
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation of the
Environmental Protection Agency.
``BUMP-UP'' POLICY UNDER TITLE I OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT
On July 22, 2003, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality held a hearing on the ``Bump-Up'' Policy Under Title I
of the Clean Air Act. The hearing addressed the attainment date
extension policy issued by the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) in 1998, the current situation facing various
``nonattainment'' areas following court decisions invalidating
this policy, and the ability of the EPA, states and local areas
to address downwind attainment problems in the future.
Witnesses included representatives from Environmental
Protection Agency, state and local governments of New Jersey,
Georgia, Louisiana and Texas, and representatives of the
environmental community.
AIR QUALITY ISSUES IN THE COACHELLA VALLEY
On January 12, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality held a field hearing in Palm Desert, CA on air quality
issues in the Coachella Valley. The hearing reviewed efforts in
the Coachella Valley to meet National Ambient Air Quality
Standards and the unique circumstances presented by Southern
California geography, the desert environment and continuing
growth in the region. The hearing also addressed emissions of
particulate matter associated with natural conditions in the
valley as well as other activities and conditions, including
declining water levels in the Salton Sea. Witnesses included
representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency, local
government, stakeholders, and private businesses.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S YUCCA MOUNTAIN PROJECT
On March 25, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality held a hearing to review the Department of Energy's
Yucca Mountain Project. The hearing focused on the Department
of Energy's (DOE) progress toward submission of a license
application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to
develop Yucca Mountain as a long-term repository for the
disposal of radioactive waste, and legislation to reclassify
contributions to the Nuclear Waste Fund (NWF). Witnesses
included Members of Congress, representatives from the
Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a
state regulatory commission, the Nuclear Waste Technical Review
Board, and the nuclear industry.
CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AFFECTING THE READINESS OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF DEFENSE
On April 21, 2004, the Subcommittees on Energy and Air
Quality and Environment and Hazardous Materials held a joint
hearing on environmental issues affecting the readiness of the
Department of Defense. The hearing focused on several proposals
by the Department of Defense (DOD), which would either amend or
affect the operation of Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA) and the Clean Air Act (CAA). Witnesses included
representatives from the Department of Defense, the
Environmental Protection Agency, state regulators, and
environmental advocates.
ULTRADEEP WATER RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
On April 29, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality held a hearing on the benefits of ultradeep water
research and development. The hearing addressed the issue of
benefits that may accrue to the nation as a result of programs
that focus on the use of technology for exploring and producing
oil and natural gas in ultradeep waters. Witnesses included
Members of Congress, the Energy Information Agency, and
industry representatives and researchers.
ALASKA NATURAL GAS PIPELINE
On May 5, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
held a hearing on the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Status
Report. The hearing focused on status of the Alaska Natural Gas
Pipeline project and the probability of its being built.
Witnesses included a Member of Congress, the Chairman of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and industry
representatives.
REGIONAL ENERGY RELIABILITY AND SECURITY: DOE AUTHORITY TO ENERGIZE THE
CROSS SOUND CABLE
On May 19, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
held a hearing on the Department of Energy's authority to
energize the Cross Sound cable. The hearing addressed energy
security and reliability issues confronting the Northeast and
the authority of the Secretary of Energy to order operation of
the Cross Sound Cable. Witnesses included Members of Congress,
the Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the
Attorney General of the State of Connecticut, a representative
of the Department of Energy, a state regulator, an independent
system operator, and an electric industry representative.
PROPOSALS TO CONSOLIDATE OFFICES OF COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AT NNSA AND DOE
On July 13, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality held a hearing to review proposals to consolidate the
Offices of Counter Intelligence at National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) and Department of Energy. Witnesses
included the Administrator of NNSA and the National
Counterintelligence Executive.
U.S. REFINING INDUSTRY
On July 15, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality held a hearing on the status of the U.S. refining
industry. The hearing updated members on refining capacity,
gasoline prices, and the likelihood of building new domestic
refining capacity. Witnesses included representatives from the
Energy Information Agency, the Environmental Protection Agency,
the Government Accountability Office, the Federal Trade
Commission, industry representatives and analysts, a consumer
advocate, and an environmental advocate.
PIPELINE SAFETY
On July 20, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality held a hearing on pipeline safety. The hearing updated
the members on the implementation of the Pipeline Safety
Improvement Act of 2002, and presented views from various
stakeholders. Witnesses included representatives from the
Department of Transportation, the Government Accountability
Office, pipeline safety advocates and industry representatives.
Hearings Held
Comprehensive National Energy Policy.--Oversight hearing on
Comprehensive National Energy Policy. Hearings held on March 5,
2003, March 12, 2003, and March 13, 2003. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-7.
United Nations Oil for Food Program.--Oversight hearing on
United Nations Oil for Food Program. Hearing held on May 14,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-18.
The Hydrogen Energy Economy.--Oversight hearing on the
Hydrogen Energy Economy. Hearing held on May 20, 2003. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-21.
Status of Methyl Bromide under the Clean Air Act and the
Montreal Protocol.--Oversight hearing on Status of Methyl
Bromide under the Clean Air Act and the Montreal Protocol.
Hearing held on June 3, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-55.
Future Options for Generation of Electricity from Coal.--
Oversight hearing on the Future Options for Generation of
Electricity from Coal. Hearing held on June 24, 2003. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-32.
The Clear Skies Initiative: A Multipollutant Approach to
the Clean Air Act.--Oversight hearing on the Clear Skies
Initiative: A Multipollutant Approach to the Clean Air Act.
Hearing held on July 8, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-65.
``Bump-Up'' Policy Under Title I of the Clean Air Act.--
Oversight hearing on ``Bump-Up'' Policy Under Title I of the
Clean Air Act. Hearing held on July 22, 2003. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-62.
Air Quality Issues in the Coachella Valley.--Oversight
hearing on Air Quality Issues in the Coachella Valley. Hearing
held on January 12, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-61.
A Review of the Department of Energy's Yucca Mountain
Project, and Proposed Legislation to Alter the Nuclear Waste
Trust Fund.--Hearing on H.R. 3429, the Nuclear Waste Financing
Act of 2003, and H.R. 3981, to reclassify fees paid into the
Nuclear Waste Fund as offsetting collections, and for other
purposes. Hearing held on March 25, 2004. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-70.
Current Environmental Issues Affecting the Readiness of the
Department of Defense.--Joint oversight hearing with the
Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials on Current
Environmental Issues Affecting the Readiness of the Department
of Defense. Hearing held on April 21, 2004. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-119.
Ultradeep Water Research and Development: What Are the
Benefits?--Oversight hearing on Ultradeep Water Research and
Development: What Are the Benefits? Hearing held on April 29,
2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-77.
Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Status Report.--Oversight
hearing on Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Status Report. Hearing
held on May 5, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-82.
Regional Energy Reliability and Security: DOE Authority to
Energize the Cross Sound Cable.--Oversight hearing on Regional
Energy Reliability and Security: DOE Authority to Energize the
Cross Sound Cable. Hearing held on May 19, 2004. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-83.
United Nations Oil for Food Program.--Oversight hearing on
United Nations Oil for Food Program. Hearing held on July 8,
2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-106.
A Hearing to Review Proposals to Consolidate the Offices of
Counter Intelligence at NNSA and DOE.--Oversight hearing to
Review Proposals to Consolidate the Offices of Counter
Intelligence at NNSA and DOE. Hearing held on July 13, 2004.
NOT PRINTED.
The Status of the U.S. Refining Industry.--Oversight
hearing on The Status of the U.S. Refining Industry. Hearing
held on July 15, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-113.
Pipeline Safety.--Oversight hearing on Pipeline Safety.
Hearing held on July 20, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-111.
1Methyl Bromide: Update on Achieving the Requirements of
the Clean Air Act and the Montreal Protocol.--Oversight hearing
on Methyl Bromide: Update on Achieving the Requirements of the
Clean Air Act and the Montreal Protocol. Hearing held on July
21, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-118.
Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials
(Ratio 16-13)
PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio, Chairman
HILDA L. SOLIS, California RALPH M. HALL, Texas
FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania
ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico
LOIS CAPPS, California VITO FOSSELLA, New York
MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania Vice Chairman
TOM ALLEN, Maine STEVE BUYER, Indiana
JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois GEORGE RADANOVICH, California
CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire
PETER DEUTSCH, Florida JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois MARY BONO, California
BART STUPAK, Michigan LEE TERRY, Nebraska
GENE GREEN, Texas MIKE ROGERS, Michigan
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan DARRELL E. ISSA, California
(ex officio) C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho
JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma
JOE BARTON, Texas
(ex officio)
Jurisdiction: Environmental protection in general, including the Safe
Drinking Water Act and risk assessment matters; solid waste, hazardous
waste and toxic substances, including Superfund and RCRA; mining, oil,
gas, and coal combustion wastes; and noise pollution control.
Legislative Activities
CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS BILL
Public Law 108-7 (H.J. Res. 2)
(Environmental Provisions)
Making consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2003, and for other purposes.
Summary
Division M amends the Department of Defense Appropriations
Act, 2003 to authorize specified funds to settle disputed
takings of property adjacent to the Tooele Army Depot, Utah.
The Division also earmarks specified funds under such Act for
the disposal of obsolete vessels in the Maritime Administration
National Defense Reserve fleet. Requires a report from the
Secretaries of the Navy and Transportation to the congressional
defense committees concerning such vessels, and authorizes the
Secretary of the Air Force to transfer specified funds under
such Act to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the
acquisition of land at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada.
Legislative History
H.J. Res. 2 was introduced in the House by Mr. Young (FL)
on January 7, 2003. The bill was referred solely to the
Committee on Appropriations.
On January 8, 2003, H.J. Res. 2 was considered in the House
pursuant to H. Res. 15. The House passed the bill by voice
vote.
On January 9, 2003, H.J. Res. 2 was received in the Senate,
read the first time, and placed on the Senate Legislative
Calendar under Read the First Time. On January 10, 2003, H.J.
Res. 2 was read the second time and placed on Senate
Legislative Calendar.
On January 23, 2003, H.J. Res. 2 passed the Senate, with an
amendment, by a vote of 69 yeas and 29 nays.
On January 23, 2003, the Senate insisted on its amendment
to H.J. Res. 2, requested a conference with the House, and
appointed conferees. On January 29, 2003, the House disagreed
to the Senate amendment to H.J. Res. 2, agreed to a conference
with the Senate, and appointed conferees.
The Conference Committee met on February 10, 2003, and
February 11, 2003. The conference report (H. Rpt. 108-10) was
filed on February 13, 2003.
Pursuant to H. Res. 71, on February 13, 2003, the House
agreed to the conference report by a vote of 338 yeas and 83
nays. The Senate agreed to the conference report by a vote of
76 yeas and 20 nays.
H.J. Res. 2 was presented to the President on February 19,
2003, and on February 20, 2003, the bill was signed by the
President (Public Law 108-7).
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS
Public Law 108-11 (H.R. 1559, S. 762)
Making emergency wartime supplemental appropriations for
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, and for other
purposes.
Summary
Chapter 8 of H.R. 1559 makes technical corrections to
statements of the managers with respect to the Consolidated
Appropriations Resolution, 2003 and other specified Federal law
regarding certain appropriations to the Department of Housing
and Urban Development, Community Development Fund, and the
Environmental Protection Agency, State and tribal assistance
grants. The bill directs the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency to adjust each maximum annual pesticide
registration maintenance fee in a manner that maintenance fee
collections made to reach the level authorized in the
Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban
Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2003
(in the Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003) shall be
established in a specified proportion.
Legislative History
On April 2, 2003, H.R. 1559 was introduced by Mr. Young
(FL), and reported to the House by the Committee on
Appropriations (H. Rpt. 108-55).
On April 3, 2003, pursuant to H. Res. 172, the bill was
considered and passed by the House by a vote of 414 yeas and 12
nays.
H.R. 1559 was laid before the Senate by unanimous consent
on April 7, 2003.
The Senate struck all after the enacting clause the bill,
inserted in lieu thereof the provisions of S. 762, as amended,
and passed H.R. 1559 by unanimous consent. The Senate insisted
on its amendment and requested a conference with the House on
April 7, 2003, and appointed conferees.
The House disagreed to the Senate amendment, agreed to the
Senate's request to go to conference on April 8, 2003, and
appointed conferees.
On April 12, 2003, the conference report (H. Rpt. 108-76)
was filed.
On April 12, 2003, the House agreed to the conference
report by voice vote, and the Senate agreed to the conference
report by unanimous consent.
H.R. 1559 was presented to the President on April 15, 2003,
and signed by the President on April 16, 2003 (Public Law 108-
11).
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004
Public Law 108-136 (H.R. 1588, S. 1050)
(Environmental Provisions)
To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2004 for
military activities of the Department of Defense, for military
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of
Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year
for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.
Summary
Subtitle B of H.R. 1588 repeals the authority to use
environmental restoration account funds for the relocation of a
contaminated facility, but retains the authority to pay
relocation costs under cooperative agreements entered into up
to September 30, 2003.
The bill also authorizes the Secretary of the Navy to
include environmental protection equipment within salvage
facilities provided for public and private vessels and allows
claims for salvage services to include claims for environmental
protection services.
In addition, H.R. 1588 amends the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991 to repeal the authority
for a model program of environmental restoration at closed
military bases.
The bill directs the Secretary to conduct a study of the
impacts of the following activities at military installations
and operational ranges: (1) Civilian community encroachment;
(2) DOD compliance with State implementation plans for air
quality under the Clean Air Act; and, (3) DOD compliance with
the Solid Waste Disposal Act and the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980. Requires the Secretary to: (1) prepare a plan to respond
to encroachment issues affecting military installations and
operational ranges; and (2) report to the defense committees on
results of the impacts study.
H.R. 1588 limits Army responsibility for water consumption
impacts related to Fort Huachuca, Arizona. Recognizes the Upper
San Pedro Partnership, Arizona, and its efforts to establish a
collaborative water use management program in the Sierra Vista
Subwatershed regional aquifer in Arizona. Directs the Secretary
of the Interior to report to Congress: (1) On the water use
management and conservation measures needed to restore and
maintain the sustainable yield of such aquifer by and after
September 11, 2001; and, (2) annually on Partnership progress
toward achieving and maintaining such sustainable yield.
Expresses the sense of Congress that any future appropriations
to the Partnership should take into account whether it has met
its annual goals for overdraft reduction.
The bill also requires the Secretary to: (1) provide for an
epidemiological study of exposure to perchlorate in drinking
water; and, (2) provide for an independent review of the
effects of perchlorate on the human endocrine system.
Legislative History
H.R. 1588 was introduced by Mr. Hunter, by request, on
April 3, 2003 and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
There was an exchange of correspondence between the
Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Armed
Services on May 16, 2003.
On May 16, 2003, the Committee on Armed Services reported
H.R. 1588 to the House, as amended (H. Rpt. 108-106).
H.R. 1588 was considered in the House pursuant to H. Res.
245 and H. Res. 247, and on May 22, 2003, the House passed the
bill by a vote of 361 yeas and 68 nays.
H.R. 1588 was received in the Senate on June 2, 2003. On
June 4, 2003, the bill was laid before Senate by unanimous
consent. The Senate struck all after the enacting clause of
H.R. 1588, inserted in lieu thereof the provisions of S. 1050,
and passed the bill, as amended, by voice vote.
The Senate insisted on its amendment and requested a
conference with the House on June 4, 2003, and appointed
conferees.
The House disagreed to the Senate amendment, agreed to the
Senate's request to go to conference on July 16, 2003, and
appointed conferees. The Speaker appointed conferees from the
Committee on Energy and Commerce for consideration of secs.
601, 3113, 3201, and 3517 of the House bill, and secs. 601,
701, 852, 3151, and 3201 of the Senate amendment, and
modifications committed to conference, Messrs. Tauzin, Barton,
and Dingell.
On July 22, 2003, the conference committee met, and the
conference report was filed on November 7, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-
354).
Pursuant to H. Res. 437, on November 7, 2003, the House
agreed to the conference report by vote of 362 yeas and 40
nays, 2 voting present.
On November 12, 2004, the Senate agreed to the conference
report by a vote of 95 yeas and 3 nays on November 12, 2003.
H.R. 1588 was presented to and signed by the President on
November 24, 2003 (Public Law 108-136).
HEALTHY FORESTS RESTORATION ACT
Public Law 108-148 (H.R. 1904)
An act to improve the capacity of the Secretary of
Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to conduct
hazardous fuels reduction projects on National Forest System
lands and Bureau of Land Management lands aimed at protecting
communities, watersheds, and certain other at-risk lands from
catastrophic wildfire, to enhance efforts to protect watersheds
and address threats to forest and rangeland health, including
catastrophic wildfire, across the landscape, and for other
purposes.
Summary
Title III of H.R. 1904 amends the Cooperative Forestry
Assistance Act of 1978 to permit the Secretary of Agriculture,
acting through the Forest Service (and, where appropriate,
through the Cooperative State Research, Education, and
Extension Service), to provide assistance to State foresters
and State officials, or to Cooperative Extension officials at
land grant colleges and universities and specified
institutions, for the purpose of expanding State forest
capacities and activities to address watershed issues on non-
Federal forested lands and potentially forested lands. Directs
the Secretary to: (1) develop, with relevant parties, a program
of technical assistance to protect water quality; and (2)
establish a watershed forestry cost-share program. Authorizes
appropriations.
The bill also requires the Secretary of Agriculture, acting
through the Chief of the Forest Service, to provide assistance
to Indian tribes for the purpose of expanding tribal
stewardship capacities through tribal forestry best management
practices to improve watershed health. Authorizes
appropriations.
Legislative History
H.R. 1904 was introduced by Mr. McInnis on May 1, 2003, and
referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to
the Committee on Resources, 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. On May 9, 2003, the bill was referred
sequentially to the Committee on the Judiciary for a period
ending not later than May 16, 2003 for consideration of such
provisions of the bill as fall within the jurisdiction of that
committee pursuant to clause 1(k), rule X.
On May 20, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce and
the Committee on Agriculture exchanged correspondence.
H.R. 1904 was considered in the House pursuant to H. Res.
239, and on May 20, 2003, the House passed the bill, as
amended, by a vote of 256 yeas and 170 nays.
H.R. 1904 was received in the Senate on May 21, 2003, read
twice, and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,
and Forestry.
On July 31, 2003, H.R. 1904 passed the Senate, with an
amendment and an amendment to the title, by a vote of 80 yeas
and 14 nays.
On November 6, 2003, the House disagreed to the Senate
amendments and requested a conference and appointed conferees.
On November 20, 2003, the Senate insisted on its amendment
to H.R. 1904, agreed to a conference with the House, and
appointed conferees.
On November 20, 2003, the conference report was filed (H.
Rpt. 108-386). The House considered and agreed to the
conference report, pursuant to H. Res. 457, on November 21,
2003, by a vote of 286 yeas and 140 nays. The Senate agreed to
the conference report by unanimous consent on November 21,
2003.
The bill was presented to the President on December 2,
2003, and on December 3, 2003, the bill was signed by the
President (Public Law 108-148).
TO AMEND THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT TO REAUTHORIZE THE NEW YORK CITY
WATERSHED PROTECTION PROGRAM
Public Law 108-328 (H.R. 2771, S. 1425)
To amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to reauthorize the New
York City Watershed Protection Program.
Summary
H.R. 2771 reauthorizes the New York City Watershed
Protection Program. It strikes ``1997 through 2003'' in section
1443(d)(4) of the Safe Drinking Water Act and replaces it with
``2003 through 2010''.
Legislative History
H.R. 2771 was introduced by Mr. Fossella on July 17, 2003,
and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On April 2, 2004, the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials held a hearing on H.R. 2771. The
Subcommittee received testimony from two Members of Congress,
and a representative from Region II of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, the New York Department of Environmental
Conservation, the Catskill Watershed Corporation, and the
Natural Resources Defense Council.
On April 2, 2004, the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials met in open markup session and approved
H.R. 2771 for Full Committee consideration by a record vote of
19 yeas and 7 nays, a quorum being present. On April 22, 2004,
the Full Committee met in open markup session and ordered H.R.
2771 reported to the House by arecord vote of 40 yeas and 0
nays, a quorum being present. On April 28, 2004, the Committee on
Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 2771 to the House (H. Rpt. 108-476).
On May 5, 2004, H.R. 2771 was considered in the House under
suspension of the rules. The bill passed the House by voice
vote.
H.R. 2771 was received in the Senate on May 6, 2004, read
the first time and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar
under Read the First Time. On May 7, 2004, the bill was read
the second time and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar
under General Orders.
On September 30, 2004, H.R. 2771 passed the Senate without
amendment by unanimous consent.
H.R. 2771 was presented to the President on October 5,
2004, and on October 16, 2004, was signed by the President
(Public Law 108-328).
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FY 2005 AUTHORIZATION BILL
Public Law 108-375 (H.R. 4200, S. 2400)
(Environmental Provisions)
To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2005 for
military activities of the Department of Defense, for military
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of
Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year
for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.
Summary
The conference report to accompany H.R. 4200 authorizes the
Secretary to transfer specified Department of Defense (DOD)
Operation and Maintenance funds to a named account as
reimbursement to the Environmental Protection Agency for
certain environmental cleanup costs in connection with the
Moses Lake Wellfield Superfund Site, Washington.
The conference report to accompany H.R. 4200 also deems the
Defense Inspector General in compliance with certain
requirements under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 if the Inspector
General conducts periodic audits of payments, obligations,
reimbursements, and other uses from the Hazardous Substance
Superfund.
The conference report, in addition, requires the
Comptroller General to: (1) study drinking water contamination
and related health effects at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina; (2)
ensure study participation by other interested (affected)
parties; and, (3) report study results and recommendations to
the defense and appropriations committees.
The conference report to accompany H.R. 4200 also directs
the Comptroller General to study, and report to Congress on,
whether cost-effective technologies are available for the
cleanup of groundwater contamination at DOD installations in
lieu of traditional methods such as pump-and-treat.
Finally, the conference report to accompany H.R. 4200
includes a Sense of the Congress that DOD should: (1) work to
develop a national plan to remediate perchlorate contamination
of the environment resulting from DOD activities; (2) continue
any current remediation; (3) develop a remediation plan with
respect to contamination at levels that pose a hazard to human
health; and, (4) continue the process of evaluating and
prioritizing contamination sites without waiting for the
development of a Federal drinking water standard.
Legislative History
On April 22, 2004, Mr. Hunter introduced H.R. 4200 by
request, and the bill was referred to the House Committee on
Armed Services.
There was an exchange of correspondence between the
Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Armed
Services on May 14, 2004.
On May 14, 2004, the Committee on Armed Service reported
H.R. 2400 to the House, amended (H. Rpt. 108-491).
H.R. 4200 was considered in the House on May 19 and 20,
2004, under the provisions of H. Res. 648. The bill passed the
House by vote of 391 yeas and 34 nays.
On June 23, 2004, the bill passed the Senate with an
amendment by unanimous consent. The Senate insisted on its
amendment, asked for a conference, and appointed conferees.
The House disagreed to the Senate amendment on September
28, 2004, agreed to a conference agreed and appointed
conferees. The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee
on Energy and Commerce for consideration of secs. 596, 601,
3111, 3131, 3133 and 3201 of the House bill, and secs. 321-323,
716, 720, 1084-1089, 1091, 2833, 3116, 3119, 3141, 3142, 3145,
3201, and 3503 of the Senate amendment, and modifications
committed to conference, Messrs. Barton, Upton, and Dingell.
A conference was held on September 29, 2004, and on October
8, 2004 the conference report was filed (H. Rpt. 108-767).
On October 8, 2004, H. Res. 843, providing for the
consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 4200,
passed the House by voice vote. Then, on October 9, 2004, the
conference report was considered in the House under the
provisions of H. Res. 843. The conference report passed the
House by a vote of 359 yeas and 14 nays.
Senate agreed to conference report by unanimous consent on
October 9, 2004.
On October 21, 2004, the bill was presented to President,
and was signed by the President on October 28, 2004 (Public Law
108-375).
SOLID WASTE INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORTATION ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 382)
To authorize States to prohibit or impose certain
limitations on the receipt of foreign municipal solid waste,
and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 382 amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act to authorize
states to enact laws prohibiting or limiting the receipt and
disposal of municipal solid waste generated outside the United
States.
Legislative History
H.R. 382 was introduced by Mr. Rogers on January 27, 2003,
and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On July 23, 2003, the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials held a hearing on H.R. 382. The
Subcommittee received testimony from a Member of Congress, a
Senator, and representatives of the Environmental Protection
Agency, the Michigan State Senate, the New York City Council,
the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, the New York
City Department of Sanitation, the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection, the University of Michigan Law
School, the Lee County Council in South Carolina, the Ecology
Center, the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, a
former Assistant U.S. Trade Representative, and a Michigan
State Trooper/registered nurse.
While no further action was taken on H.R. 382 in the 108th
Congress, provisions of the bill were reported by the
Subcommittee on September 23, 2003, as part of H.R. 4940.
TO DIRECT THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY TO
CARRY OUT CERTAIN AUTHORITIES UNDER AN AGREEMENT WITH CANADA RESPECTING
THE IMPORTATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
(H.R. 411)
To direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency to carry out certain authorities under an agreement with
Canada respecting the importation of municipal solid waste, and
for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 411 amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act to prohibit
any person from importing, transporting, or exporting municipal
solid waste (MSW), for final disposal or incineration, in
violation of the Agreement Between the Government of the United
States of America and the Government of Canada Concerning the
Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Waste.
The bill also directs the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency to perform the functions of the
Designated Authority of the United States with respect to the
importation and exportation of MSW under the Agreement and to
implement and enforce the Agreement.
In addition, H.R. 411 sets forth factors for consideration
in the Administrator's determinations of whether to consent to
importation, and provides procedures for issuance of compliance
orders, assessment of civil penalties, and conduct of public
hearings.
Legislative History
H.R. 411 was introduced by Mr. Dingell on January 28, 2003,
and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On July 23, 2003, the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials held a hearing on H.R. 411. The
Subcommittee received testimony from a Member of Congress, a
Senator, and representatives of the Environmental Protection
Agency, the Michigan State Senate, the New York City Council,
the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, the New York
City Department of Sanitation, the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection, the University of Michigan Law
School, the Lee County Council in South Carolina, the Ecology
Center, the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, a
former Assistant U.S. Trade Representative, and a Michigan
State Trooper/registered nurse.
While no further action was taken on H.R. 411 in the 108th
Congress, provisions of the bill were reported by the
Subcommittee on September 23, 2003, as part of H.R. 4940.
SOLID WASTE INTERSTATE TRANSPORTATION ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 1730)
To impose certain limitations on the receipt of out-of-
State municipal solid waste, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 1730 allows a local government to automatically apply
a ban on out-of-state waste from coming into its community--
otherwise known as a presumptive ban--unless (1) the waste
facility already has an existing agreement to accept the waste
for disposal--a host community agreement, or (2) the state has
issued an existing permit or contract to accept out-of-state
waste. If the community had not signed a host community
agreement at the time the bill becomes law, they can still
avoid the presumptive ban by entering into a new host community
agreement and providing information on the waste capacity of
the landfill, how much out-of-state waste is anticipated to be
disposed in the landfill, and the environmental controls in
place at the land disposal facility.
H.R. 1730 also allows states and local governments to
limit, or freeze, the amount of waste received at each landfill
or incinerator to levels that may not exceed the amounts from
calendar year 1993 or subsequent years where a state required
records of waste imports to bekept or records of waste imports
were kept. Waste imports that are specifically authorized by a state
permit or existing host community agreement are exempt from the freeze
limitation. In addition, a state that has a comprehensive statewide
recycling program may freeze levels of imported waste to the amounts
received in 1995. Again, the host community agreement or an existing
state permit overrule this limitation.
Additionally, H.R. 1730 allows states' discretion in
issuing permits to cap, at not less than 20 percent, the amount
of out-of-state prospective municipal solid waste received.
States can also deny permits for new construction or major
modification to landfills or incinerators if a comprehensive
municipal solid waste plan exists and there is no regional need
for the facilities.
H.R. 1730 also permits the state to charge a fee not to
exceed $2 per ton on out-of-state waste for the recovery of
processing and disposing costs.
Finally, H.R. 1730 requires the General Accounting Office
to report to Congress each year for the next 3 years on
incidences of unauthorized shipments of medical, hazardous, or
radioactive wastes that inspectors or disposal facility
operators have found.
Legislative History
H.R. 1730 was introduced by Mr. Greenwood on April 10,
2003, and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On July 23, 2003, the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials held a hearing on H.R. 1730. The
Subcommittee received testimony from a Member of Congress, a
Senator, and representatives of the Environmental Protection
Agency, the Michigan State Senate, the New York City Council,
the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, the New York
City Department of Sanitation, the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection, the University of Michigan Law
School, the Lee County Council in South Carolina, the Ecology
Center, the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, a
former Assistant U.S. Trade Representative, and a Michigan
State Trooper/registered nurse.
While no further action was taken on H.R. 1730 in the 108th
Congress, provisions of the bill were reported by the
Subcommittee on September 23, 2003, as part of H.R. 4940.
TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT: A LEGACY FOR USERS
(H.R. 3550, S. 1072)
To authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety
programs, and transit programs, and for other purposes.
Summary
Title VIII of H.R. 3550 amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act
to direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and each agency head to implement fully all
procurement requirements and incentives, including Federal
procurement guidelines, that provide for the use of cement and
concrete incorporating recovered mineral component in cement or
concrete projects.
H.R. 3550 also requires each agency head to give priority
to achieving greater use of recovered mineral component in
cement or concrete projects for which recovered mineral
components historically have not been used or have been used
only minimally.
In addition, the bill instructs the Administrator of the
EPA, in cooperation with the Secretary of Transportation and
the Secretary of Energy, to study and report to Congress on the
extent to which current procurement requirements may realize
energy savings and environmental benefits attainable with
substitution of recovered mineral component in cement used in
cement or concrete projects, and it also instructs the
Administrator of the EPA to establish criteria (including an
evaluation of whether to establish a numerical standard for
concentration of lead and other hazardous substances) for the
safe and environmentally protective use of granular mine
tailings from the Tar Creek, Oklahoma Mining District, known as
``chat,'' for: (1) cement or concrete projects; and, (2)
transportation construction projects (including transportation
construction projects involving the use of asphalt) that are
carried out, in whole or in part, using Federal funds.
Legislative History
H.R. 3550 was introduced by Mr. Young (AK) on November 20,
2003, and referred to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
On March 24, 2004, the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 3550
to be reported, amended, by voice vote. On March 29, 2004, the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported H.R.
3550 to the House (H. Rpt. 108-452, Part I).
On March 29, 2004, H.R. 3550 was referred jointly and
sequentially to the Committees on Education and the Workforce,
Energy and Commerce, the Judiciary, Resources, and Science for
a period ending not later than March 29, 2004 for consideration
of such provisions of the bill and amendment as fall within the
jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to clause 1, rule X.
On March 29, 2004, the Committees on Education and the
Workforce, Energy and Commerce, the Judiciary, Resources, and
Science were discharged from further consideration of the bill.
On April 1, 2004, H.R. 3550 was considered in the House
pursuant to H. Res. 593. The bill passed the House, as amended,
by vote of 357 yeas and 65 nays on April 2, 2004.
On April 8, 2004, H.R. 3550 was received in the Senate. The
bill was read twice, and placed on the Senate Legislative
Calendar under General Orders on April 22, 2004.
On May 19, 2004, the Senate struck all after the enacting
clause of H.R. 3550, inserted in lieu thereof the provisions of
S. 1072, and passed the bill, as amended, by unanimous consent.
The Senate insisted on its amendment and requested a
conference with the House on May 19, 2004 and on May 20, 2004,
appointed conferees.
The House disagreed to the Senate amendment, agreed to the
Senate's request to go to conference on June 3, 2004, and
appointed conferees. The Speaker appointed conferees from the
Committee on Energy and Commerce for consideration of
provisions in the House bill and Senate amendment relating to
Clean Air Act provisions of transportation planning contained
in sec. 6001 of the House bill, and secs. 3005 and 3006 of the
Senate amendment; and secs. 1202, 1824, 1828, and 5203 of the
House bill, and secs. 1501, 1511, 1522, 1610-1619, 3016, 3023,
4108, 4151, 4152, 4155-4159, 4162, 4172, 4173, 4424, 4481,
4482, 4484, 4662, 8001, and 8002 of the Senate amendment, and
modifications committed to conference, Messrs. Barton,
Pickering, and Dingell.
The Conference Committee met on June 9, June 23, and July
7, July 20, and July 22, 2004.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3550 in the 108th
Congress.
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 2004
(H.R. 4940)
To amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to authorize local
governments and Governors to restrict receipt of out-of-State
and foreign municipal solid waste, to direct the Administrator
of the Environmental Protection Agency to carry out certain
authorities under an agreement with Canada respecting the
importation of municipal solid waste, and for other purposes.
Summary
The bill amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act to prohibit a
landfill or incinerator (facility) from receiving out-of-State
municipal solid waste unless the owner or operator of the
facility obtains explicit authorization from the affected local
government.
Legislative History
H.R. 4940 was introduced by Mr. Gillmor on July 22, 2004,
and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and
contained the contents of H.R. 382, H.R. 411, and H.R. 1730.
On September 23, 2004, the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials met in open markup session and ordered H.R.
4940 to be reported, as amended, by a roll call vote of 12 yeas
and 4 nays, a quorum being present.
No further action was taken on H.R. 4940 in the 108th
Congress.
Oversight Activities
EFFECTIVENESS OF LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLEANUP PROGRAMS
On March 5, 2003, the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials held a hearing on the effectiveness of
leaking underground storage tank cleanup programs. The hearing
examined the status of leaking underground storage tank
programs, the challenges they face, and options available to
address those concerns. Witnesses included representatives from
the Environmental Protection Agency, the General Accounting
Office and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources.
CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AFFECTING THE READINESS OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF DEFENSE
On April 21, 2004, the Subcommittees on Environment and
Hazardous Materials and Energy and Air Quality held a joint
hearing on environmental issues affecting the readiness of the
Department of Defense (DOD). The hearing focused on several
legislative proposals by the DOD, which would either amend or
affect the operation of Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA) and the Clean Air Act (CAA). Witnesses included
representatives from the Department of Defense, the
Environmental Protection Agency, state regulators, and
environmental advocates.
EPA'S RESOURCE CONSERVATION CHALLENGE
On May 20, 2004, the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials held a hearing on the Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) Resource Conservation Challenge
(RCC), in the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. The
RCC is a national effort to find flexible ways to conserve
resources through waste reduction and energy recovery. A
representative from EPA testified.
POPS, PIC, AND LRTAP: THE ROLE OF THE UNITED STATES AND DRAFT
LEGISLATION TO IMPLEMENT THESE INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS
On July 13, 2004, the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials held a hearing entitled POPs, PIC, and
LRTAP: the Role of the United States and Draft Legislation to
Implement These International Conventions. The hearing focused
on a discussion draft that contained options to bring the U.S.
into compliance with international agreements. Witnesses
included representatives from the Department of State, the
Environmental Protection Agency, industry, environmental
advocacy, public health advocacy, Georgetown University Law
Center, and Johns Hopkins University.
LEAD IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND THE PROVIDING OF SAFE DRINKING
WATER
On July 22, 2004, the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials held a hearing on the discovery of elevated
amounts of lead in drinking water in the District of Columbia,
and drinking water infrastructure needs related to the
providing of safe drinking water. Witnesses included
representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency,
District of Columbia, the Government Accountability Office,
environmental advocates, stakeholders, and industry
representatives.
CONTROLLING BIOTERROR: ASSESSING OUR NATION'S DRINKING WATER SECURITY
On September 30, 2004, the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials held a hearing entitled Controlling
Bioterror: Assessing Our Nation's Drinking Water Security. The
hearing focused on oversight of the Bioterrorism Act, and
options available to manage the vulnerability of the nation's
water supply and water quality systems to terrorist attack. A
representative from the Environmental Protection Agency and the
Government Accountability Office testified.
Hearings Held
The Effectiveness of Leaking Underground Storage Tank
Cleanup Programs.--Oversight hearing on the Effectiveness of
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Programs. Hearing held
on March 5, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-16.
Three Bills Pertaining to the Transport of Solid Waste:
Solid Waste International Transportation Act of 2003, To direct
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to
carry out certain authorities under an agreement with Canada
respecting the importation of municipal solid waste, and for
other purposes, and Solid Waste Interstate Transportation Act
of 2003.--Hearing on H.R. 382, the Solid Waste International
Transportation Act of 2003; H.R. 411, To direct the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to carry
out certain authorities under an agreement with Canada
respecting the importation of municipal solid waste, and for
other purposes; and, H.R. 1730, Solid Waste Interstate
Transportation Act of 2003. Hearing held on July 23, 2003.
PRINTED, Serial Number 108-33.
To amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to reauthorize the New
York City Watershed Protection Program.--Hearing on H.R. 2771,
to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to reauthorize the New
York City Watershed Protection Program. Hearing held on April
2, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-72.
Current Environmental Issues Affecting the Readiness of the
Department of Defense.--Joint oversight hearing with the
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality on Current Environmental
Issues Affecting the Readiness of the Department of Defense.
Hearing held on April 21, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-119.
EPA's Resource Conservation Challenge.--Oversight hearing
on EPA's Resource Conservation Challenge. Hearing held on May
20, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-81.
POPs, PIC, and LRTAP: The Role of the United States and
Draft Legislation to Implement These International
Conventions.--Oversight hearing on POPs, PIC, and LRTAP: The
Role of the United States and Draft Legislation to Implement
These International Conventions. Hearing held on July 13, 2004.
PRINTED, Serial Number 108-112.
Tapped Out? Lead in the District of Columbia and the
Providing of Safe Drinking Water.--Oversight hearing on Tapped
Out? Lead in the District of Columbia and the Providing of Safe
Drinking Water. Hearing held on July 22, 2004. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-97.
Controlling Bioterror: Assessing Our Nation's Drinking
Water Security.--Oversight hearing on Controlling Bioterror:
Assessing Our Nation's Drinking Water Security. Hearing held on
September 30, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-123.
Subcommittee on Health
(Ratio 18-15)
MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida,
Chairman
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio RALPH M. HALL, Texas
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California FRED UPTON, Michigan
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania
FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey NATHAN DEAL, Georgia
BART GORDON, Tennessee RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
ANNA G. ESHOO, California ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky
BART STUPAK, Michigan CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York Vice Chairman
GENE GREEN, Texas BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming
TED STRICKLAND, Ohio JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico
LOIS CAPPS, California JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona
CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING,
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois Mississippi
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan STEVE BUYER, Indiana
(ex officio) JOESPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey
MIKE ROGERS, Michigan
JOE BARTON, Texas
(ex officio)
Jurisdiction: Public health and quarantine; hospital construction;
mental health and research; biomedical programs and health protection
in general, including Medicaid and national health insurance; food and
drugs; and, drug abuse.
Legislative Activities
CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION, 2003
Public Law 108-7 (H.J. Res. 2)
(Health Provisions)
A joint resolution making consolidated appropriations for
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, and for other
purposes.
Summary
H.J. Res. 2 contains provisions that extend through June
30, 2003, activities under part A of title IV of the Social
Security Act (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families). It also
amends title XVIII of the Social Security Act (SSA) (Medicare)
with regard to payments for physicians services. The resolution
increases payment for large urban hospitals for inpatient
hospital services for discharges. The resolution also continues
activities authorized under SSA title XIX (Medicaid) for
medical assistance and State coverage of Medicare cost-sharing
for certain low-income Medicare beneficiaries.
Legislative History
H.J. Res. 2 was introduced in the House by Mr. Young on
January 7, 2003 and was referred to the House Committee on
Appropriations.
H.J. Res. 2 was considered in the House under the
provisions of H. Res. 15, and passed by the House by voice vote
on January 8, 2003.
The bill was received in the Senate on January 9, 2003,
read the first time and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar
under Read the First Time.
On January 10, 2003 H.J. Res. 2 was read the second time
and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
H.J. Res. 2 was considered in the Senate on January 15, 16,
17, 21, 22, and 23, 2003. The bill passed by the Senate, as
amended, by a vote of 69 yeas and 29 nays on January 23, 2003.
The Senate insisted on its amendment, asked for a conference,
and appointed conferees.
On January 29, 2003 the House disagreed to the Senate
amendment, agreed to a conference, and the Speaker appointed
conferees with additional conferees appointed on February 4,
2003.
The conference was held February 10 and 11, 2003, and on
February 13, 2003, a conference report was filed (H. Rpt. 108-
10).
On February 13, 2003 the House considered the conference
report to accompany H.J. Res. 2 pursuant to the provisions of
H. Res. 71. The House passed the conference report by a vote of
338 yeas and 83 nays.
On February 13, 2003, the Senate agreed to the conference
report by a vote of 76 yeas and 20 nays.
The joint resolution was presented to the President on
February 19, 2003 and was signed by the President on February
20, 2003 (Public Law 108-7).
EMERGENCY WARTIME SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2003
Public Law 108-11 (H.R. 1559, S. 762)
(Health Provisions)
To make emergency wartime supplemental appropriations for
the fiscal year 2003, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 1559 makes emergency wartime supplemental
appropriation for FY2003 for a number of agencies. It also
eliminates the authority for the $5 million of Public Health
and Social Services Emergency Fund appropriations earmarked for
the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to remain
available until expended.
Legislative History
On April 2, 2003, H.R. 1559 was introduced by Mr. Young
(FL), and reported to the House by the Committee on
Appropriations (H. Rpt. 108-55).
On April 3, 2003, pursuant to H. Res. 172, the bill was
considered and passed by the House, amended, by a vote of 414
yeas and 12 nays.
H.R. 1559 was laid before the Senate by unanimous consent
on April 7, 2003. The Senate struck all after the enacting
clause the bill, inserted in lieu thereof the provisions of S.
762, as amended, and passed H.R. 1559 by unanimous consent.
The Senate insisted on its amendment and requested a
conference with the House on April 7, 2003, and appointed
conferees.
On April 8, 2003, the House disagreed to the Senate
amendment, agreed to a conference, and appointed conferees.
On April 12, 2003 the conference committee met, and the
conference report (H. Rpt. 108-76) was filed.
On April 12, 2003 the House agreed to the conference report
by voice vote, and the Senate agreed to the conference report
by unanimous consent.
H.R. 1559 was presented to the President on April 15, 2003,
and signed by the President on April 16, 2003 (Public Law 108-
11).
SMALLPOX EMERGENCY PERSONNEL PROTECTION ACT OF 2003
Public Law 108-20 (H.R. 1770, H.R. 1463)
To provide benefits for certain individuals with injuries
resulting from administration of a smallpox vaccine, and for
other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 1770 creates a compensation program for certain
covered individuals who volunteer to take small pox vaccine but
have injuries resulting from such vaccination. Covered
individuals include health care workers, law enforcement
officers, firefighters, security personnel, emergency medical
personnel, and other public safety personnel, and those who
contract the virus from those above. The legislation is a step
toward ensuring the broad acceptance of voluntary vaccination
by public safety personnel.
Legislative History
Mr. Burr introduced H.R. 1770 on April 11, 2003. The bill
was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and
in addition to the Committees on Education and the Workforce,
and the Committee on the Judiciary.
On April 11, 2003, H.R. 1770 was considered in the House by
unanimous consent, and passed the House without objection.
On April 11, 2003 the Senate passed H.R. 1170 by unanimous
consent.
H.R. 1770 was presented to the President on April 24, 2003.
The President signed the bill on April 30, 2003 (Public Law
108-20).
WELFARE REFORM EXTENSION ACT OF 2003
Public Law 108-40 (H.R. 2350)
To reauthorize the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
block grant program through fiscal year 2003, and for other
purposes.
Summary
H.R. 2350 contains three provisions that fall within the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The bill
amends the Social Security Act: (1) title XI to reauthorize and
extend at the current levels and under the same conditions
associated matching grants for the territories and child
welfare demonstration authority; (2) title V (Maternal and
Child Health Services) for the same with respect to continuance
of abstinence education funding; and, (3) title XIX (Medicaid)
for the same with respect to continuance of transitional
medical assistance.
Legislative History
H.R. 2350 was introduced in the House by Mr. Herger on June
5, 2003, and referred to the Committees on Ways and Means and
Energy and Commerce.
On June 11, 2003, H.R. 2350 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules, and passed the House by a vote
of 406 yeas and 6 nays.
On June 27, 2003, the bill passed the Senate by unanimous
consent.
On June 30, 2003, H.R. 2350 was presented to and signed by
the President (Public Law 108-40).
AUTOMATIC DEFIBRILLATION IN ADAM'S MEMORY ACT
Public Law 108-41 (H.R. 389)
To authorize state public access defibrillation grants to
be used to establish information clearinghouses to increase
public access to defibrillation in schools.
Summary
The Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Response Act
(107-188) included a provision that authorizes the Secretary of
the Department of Health and Human Services to award grants to
states, political subdivisions of states, Indian tribes, and
tribal organizations to develop and implement public access
defibrillation programs. Because many schools also serve as
community meeting places, several communities are considering
placing automatic external defibrillators (AEDs) in schools. In
order to assist schools interested in installing AEDs, H.R. 389
clarifies that the public access defibrillation program grant
dollars authorized by P.L. 107-188 may also be used to
establish information clearinghouses to assist in those
efforts.
Legislative History
H.R. 389 was introduced by Mr. Shimkus on January 27, 2003,
and referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On January 29, 2003, the Full Committee met in open markup
session and ordered H.R. 389 reported to the House by a voice
vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 389 to
the House on February 13, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-13).
On March 12, 2003, H.R. 389 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a vote of
415 yeas and 0 nays.
On March 13, 2003, H.R. 389 was received in the Senate and
referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions.
On June 17, 2003, H.R. 389 passed the Senate by unanimous
consent.
H.R. 389 was presented to the President on June 20, 2003,
and signed by the President on July 1, 2003 (Public Law 108-
41).
TO AMEND TITLE XXI OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT TO EXTEND THE
AVAILABILITY OF ALLOTMENTS FOR FISCAL YEARS 1998 THROUGH 2001 UNDER THE
STATE CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM (SCHIP)
Public Law 108-74 (H.R. 2854, H.R. 531, S. 312)
To amend title XXI of the Social Security Act to extend the
availability of allotments for fiscal years 1998 through 2001
under the State Children's Health Insurance Program, and for
other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 2854 amends title XXI (State Children's Health
Insurance Program) (SCHIP) of the Social Security Act (SSA) to
revise the special rule for the redistribution and availability
of unexpended FY1998 and 1999 SCHIP allotments, including to:
(1) extend the availability of FY 1998 and 1999 reallocated
funds through FY 2004; and (2) permit 50 percent of the total
amount of unexpended FY 2000 and 2001 SCHIP allotments that
remain available to a state through the end of FY 2002 and 2003
to remain available for expenditure by the State through the
end of FY 2004 and 2005, respectively. This became effective as
though it had been enacted on September 30, 2002.
The bill also grants authority to qualifying states, with
respect to FY 1998 through 2001 SCHIP allotments, for fiscal
years in which such allotments are available, to elect to use
not more than 20 percent of those allotments (instead of for
expenditures under SCHIP) for Medicaid medical assistance
payments with respect to certain children under SSA title XIX.
H.R. 2854 amends the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief
Reconciliation Act of 2003 to make a technical amendment with
respect to state eligibility for an increase in its Federal
medical assistance percentage (FMAP) or an increase in the cap
on Medicaid payments to territories. This became effective as
if included in the enactment of the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief
Reconciliation Act of 2003.
Legislative History
H.R. 531 was introduced in the House by Mr. Tauzin on
February 5, 2003 with 71 cosponsors and referred to the
Committee on Energy and Committee.
On June 19, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met
in open markup session and ordered H.R. 531 reported to the
House, as amended, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
On June 26, 2003, H.R. 531 was considered in the House by
unanimous consent, and passed without objection. The bill was
received by the Senate and placed on the Senate legislative
calendar under General Orders.
No further action was taken on H.R. 531 in the 108th
Congress.
S. 312 was introduced by Senator Rockefeller on February 5,
2003, with 25 cosponsors, and referred to the Committee on
Finance. The Committee on Finance reported S. 312 (S. Rpt. 108-
78) on June 24, 2003. The bill passed the Senate by unanimous
consent with an amendment on June 26, 2003.
S. 312 was received by the House and held at the desk on
June 26, 2003.
No further action was taken on S. 312 in the 108th
Congress.
H.R. 2854 was introduced in the House by Mr. Tauzin on July
24, 2003, with three cosponsors and referred to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce. On July 25, 2003, the bill was
discharged from the Committee, considered in the House by
unanimous consent, and passed without objection.
The bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent on July 31,
2003.
H.R. 2584 was presented to the President on August 7, 2003,
and on August 15, 2003, was signed by the President (Public Law
108-74).
MOSQUITO ABATEMENT FOR SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT
Public Law 108-75 (H.R. 342, S. 1015)
To authorize two temporary grant programs to assist States
and localities in coordinating and operating mosquito control
programs.
Summary
S. 1015 authorizes the Secretary of the Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS), operating through the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), to make grants to
states for the purpose of coordinating mosquito control
programs. The Secretary must give preference to states that
have one or more political subdivisions with an incidence or
prevalence of mosquito-borne disease that is substantial
relative to other states. To be eligible, a state must develop
a plan forcoordinating mosquito control programs in the state,
taking into account any assessments or plans that have already been
conducted by political subdivisions in the state. In developing the
plan, the state must consult with political subdivisions. States must
also agree to make grants to political subdivisions to conduct
assessments, including entomological surveys of potential mosquito
breeding areas, and to develop mosquito control plans. The assessment
grants may be as much as $10,000; no matching funds are required for
participation. States must agree to monitor mosquito control programs,
and submit a report to the Secretary. A state may not receive more than
one coordination grant.
The legislation also authorizes the Secretary of HHS,
acting through the CDC, to make grants to political
subdivisions of states for the operation of mosquito control
programs to prevent and control mosquito-borne disease. The
Secretary must give preference to political subdivisions that:
(1) have an incidence or prevalence of mosquito-borne disease
that is substantial relative to other areas; (2) demonstrate
that they will coordinate with contiguous political
subdivisions; and, (3) are located in states that plan to
identify geographic areas that have a significant need for
control, in an effort to better coordinate mosquito control
programs. To be eligible for the grants, political subdivisions
must conduct an assessment to determine the mosquito control
needs of the area, including an entomological survey of
potential mosquito breeding areas, and develop a plan, based on
the assessment, for carrying out a mosquito control program.
Political subdivisions must agree to submit to their respective
state and the Secretary a report that describes the control
program conducted, evaluating whether the program was
effective. Political subdivisions must provide a non-federal
contribution (directly or through donations from public or
private entities) that is not less than $1 for every $2 of
federal funding provided in the grant. This matching funding
may be cash or in-kind. The maximum federal contribution may
not exceed $100,000 per political subdivision for a fiscal
year. The Secretary may waive the matching fund requirement if
the Secretary determines extraordinary economic conditions
justify the waiver. A political subdivision may not receive
more than one mosquito control grant.
In addition, S. 1015 authorizes the CDC to provide training
and technical assistance in the planning, development, and
operation of mosquito control programs, either directly or
through awards of grants or contracts to public and private
entities. The legislation authorizes $100 million to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2003, and such sums as may be
necessary for each of the fiscal years 2004 through 2007. This
funding is in addition to applicable funding that may be
available as authorized by the Public Health Security and
Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002.
Finally, S. 1015 directs the National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences to conduct or support research to
identify or develop methods of controlling the population of
insects and vermin that transmit diseases that have significant
adverse health consequences for humans.
Legislative History
H.R. 342 was introduced by Mr. John on January 27, 2003,
and was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On January 29, 2003, the Full Committee on Energy and
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 342
reported to the House by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 389 to
the House on February 13, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-12).
H.R. 342 was considered by the House under suspension of
the rules and was passed the House by a vote of 416 yeas and 9
nays on March 12, 2003.
On March 13, 2003, H.R. 342 was received in the Senate and
referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions.
No further action was taken on H.R. 342 in the 108th
Congress.
On May 7, 2003, Senator Gregg introduced S. 1015,
legislation that included all of the provisions in H.R. 342,
with clarifications, which was referred to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
reported S. 1015 on June 12, 2003 (S. Rpt. 108-69).
S. 1015 passed the Senate by unanimous consent on June 16,
2003.
On June 17, 2003, S. 1015 was received in the House and
held at the desk. S. 105 was considered in the House by
unanimous consent on July 25, 2003, and passed the House
without objection.
S. 1015 was presented to the President on August 7, 2003.
On August 15, 2003, the President signed S. 1015 (Public Law
108-75).
TO EXTEND THE TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES BLOCK GRANT
PROGRAM, AND CERTAIN TAX AND TRADE PROGRAMS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Public Law 108-89 (H.R. 3146)
To extend the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families block
grant program, and certain tax and trade programs, and for
other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 3146 contains two sections that fall within the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Under
title I of H.R. 3146, section 101 extends through March 31,
2004, provisions providing for abstinence education and for
extending the transitional medal assistance program (1925 of
the Social Security Act title XIX) for six months for former
TANF recipients (originally set to expire on September 30,
2002).
Under title IV of H.R. 3146, section 401 amends SSA title
XIX to provide for the extension through March 31, 2004, of
Medicare cost-sharing for certain low-income individuals.
Legislative History
H.R. 3146 was introduced in the House by Mr. Thomas on
September 23, 2003, and was referred to the Committees on Ways
and Means, Energy and Commerce, and the Budget.
On September 24, 2003, H.R. 3146 was considered in the
House under suspension of the rules, and passed the House, as
amended, by voice vote.
The bill was received by the Senate on September 25, 2003,
and passed the Senate, with an amendment, by unanimous consent
on September 30, 2003.
The House agreed to the Senate amendment to H.R. 3146 by
unanimous consent on September 30, 2003.
H.R. 3146 was presented to the President on September 30,
2003, and was signed by the President on October 1, 2003
(Public Law 108-89).
TO AMEND TITLE XXI OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT TO MAKE TECHNICAL
CORRECTIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE DEFINITION OF QUALIFYING STATE
Public Law 108-127 (H.R. 3288, S. 1547)
To amend title XXI of the Social Security Act to make
technical corrections with respect to the definition of
qualifying State.
Summary
H.R. 3288 amends title XXI, the State Children's Health
Insurance Program (SCHIP), of the Social Security Act (SSA) to
make a technical amendment to the definition of qualifying
state used for purposes of the authority to use up to 20
percent of their FY 1998 through 2001 SCHIP allotments, for
fiscal years in which they are available, for paying the costs
of covering under Medicaid (SSA title XIX) certain low-income
children whose family income meets an income eligibility
standard under such waivers of at least 185 percent of the
poverty line. The bill extends the meaning of qualifying state
to include waivers first implemented, and 185 percent-of-the-
poverty-line eligibility standards operating, on several
specified dates to allow additional States (New Mexico,
Maryland, Hawaii, and Rhode Island) to use such portion of
their unspent SCHIP funds for covering such children under
Medicaid.
Legislative History
H.R. 3288 was introduced in the House on October 14, 2003
by Mr. Tauzin, and was referred to the House Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
On October 20, 2003, H.R. 3288 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a vote of
382 yeas and 0 nays.
The Senate received H.R. 3288 on October 21, 2003. The bill
passed the Senate by unanimous consent on October 31, 2003.
H.R. 3288 was presented to the President on November 5,
2003. The President signed the bill on November 17, 2003
(Public Law 108-127).
ANIMAL DRUG USER FEE ACT OF 2003
Public Law 108-130 (H.R. 1260, S. 313)
A bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to
establish a program of fees relating to animal drugs.
Summary
S. 313 amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to
direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to assess and
collect fees for a new animal drug application. It also directs
the Secretary to assess fees for a supplemental animal drug
application. Additionally, it assesses annual fees on animal
drug products, establishments, and sponsors.
S. 313 establishes a fee schedule for FY 2004 through 2008,
including total fee revenues for animal drug products,
establishments, and sponsors. The bill also adjusts fees to
reflect inflation, review workload, and operating reserves of
carryover user fees. The Secretary is required to submit annual
reports on the performance goals and finances of the Animal
Drug User Fee program. The bill establishes a sunset date of
October 1, 2008, for the provisions of this Act not pertaining
to public accountability and reports and a sunset date of 120
days after such date for such accountability and reporting
provisions.
Legislative History
S. 313 was introduced by Senator Ensign on February 5,
2003. It was read twice and referred to the Senate Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
On February 12, 2003, the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions ordered the bill to be reported with an
amendment in the nature of a substitute. The Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions reported S. 313 to the
Senate on May 21, 2003 (S. Rpt. 108-51).
On May 23, 2003, S. 313 passed the Senate with amendments
by unanimous consent.
On June 3, 2003, the Senate vitiated its previous passage,
and passed S. 313 with an amendment by unanimous consent. On
June 4, 2003, S. 313 was received in the House and referred to
the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Mr. Upton introduced H.R. 1260 in the House on March 13,
2003. The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On September 10, 2003, the Full Committee on Energy and
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 1260
reported to the House by voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 1260 to
the House on September 30, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-287).
On October 1, 2003, H.R. 1260 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House by voice
vote.
On October 2, 2003, H.R. 1260 was received in the Senate
and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
No further action was taken on H.R. 1260 in the 108th
Congress.
On November 4, 2003, S. 313, was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House, as amended,
by voice vote.
On November 7, 2003, the Senate passed S.313, as amended by
the House, by unanimous consent.
On November 12, 2003, S. 313 was presented to the President
and was signed by the President on November 18, 2003 (Public
Law 108-130).
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004
Public Law 108-136 (H.R. 1588, S. 1050)
(Health Provisions)
To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2004 for
military activities of the Department of Defense, for military
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of
Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year
for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 1588 authorized the Public Health Service Corps to
receive the same pay raise as the rest of the uniformed
services. Title XVI includes provisions for Department of
Defense biological countermeasures and an emergency use
provisions. The Department of Defense countermeasures provision
is very similar to those on the civilian side under the Project
Bioshield Act described above. The emergency use provisions
would have amended FDA authority. The emergency use provisions
are similar to the ones that were included in the Project
Bioshield legislation. They provide authority to use certain
unapproved countermeasures in emergency circumstances.
Legislative History
H.R. 1588 was introduced by Mr. Hunter, by request, on
April 3, 2003, and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
There was an exchange of correspondence between the
Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Armed
Services on May 16, 2003.
On May 16, 2003, the Committee on Armed Services reported
H.R. 1588 to the House, as amended (H. Rpt. 108-106).
H.R. 1588 was considered in the House pursuant to H. Res.
245 and H. Res. 247, and on May 22, 2003, the House passed H.R.
1588, amended, by a vote of 361 yeas and 68 nays.
H.R. 1588 was received in the Senate on June 2, 2003. On
June 4, 2003, the bill was laid before Senate by unanimous
consent. The Senate struck all after the enacting clause of
H.R. 1588, inserted in lieu thereof the provisions of S.1050,
and passed the bill, as amended, by voice vote.
On June 4, 2003, the Senate insisted on its amendment,
requested a conference with the House, and appointed conferees.
The House disagreed to the Senate amendment, agreed to the
Senate's request to go to conference on July 16, 2003, and
appointed conferees. The Speaker appointed conferees from the
Committee on Energy and Commerce for consideration of secs.
601, 3113, 3201, and 3517 of the House bill, and secs. 601,
701, 852, 3151, and 3201 of the Senate amendment, and
modifications committed to conference, Messrs. Tauzin, Barton,
and Dingell.
On July 22, 2003 the conference committee met, and the
conference report was filed on November 7, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-
354).
Pursuant to H. Res. 437, on November 7, 2003, the House
agreed to the conference report by vote of 362 yeas and 40
nays, 2 voting present.
On November 12, 2003, the Senate agreed to the conference
report by a vote of 95 yeas and 3 nays.
H.R. 1588 was presented to, and signed by the President on
November 24, 2003 (Public Law 108-136).
BIRTH DEFECTS AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES PREVENTION ACT OF 2003
Public Law 108-154 (H.R. 398, S. 286)
To reauthorize the National Center on Birth Defects and
Disabilities at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) and amend the Developmental Disabilities Act with regard
to the funding of state developmental disabilities councils.
Summary
S. 286 reauthorizes the activities of the National Center
on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (NCBDDD) at the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Authorization of
appropriations for the NCBDDD is permitted at a level of such
sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2003 through
2007.
The legislation also amends section 122(a) of the
Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of
2000 to insert additional consideration in the allotment for
appropriations to States for funding Developmental Disabilities
Councils. When appropriating dollars to states, this section
states that the allotment may not be less than $400,000, the
amount received by the state for the previous year, or the
amount of Federal appropriations received in fiscal year 2000,
2001, or 2002, whichever is greater if the amount appropriated
in a fiscal year is less than $70,000,000. If the amount
appropriated in a fiscal year is morethan $70,000,000, then
state allotments may not be less than $450,000, the amount received by
the state for the previous fiscal years, or the amount of Federal
appropriations received in fiscal year 2000, 2001, or 2002, whichever
is greater.
Legislative History
H.R. 398 was introduced by Mr. Ferguson on January 28,
2003, and referred to the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On January 29, 2003, the Full Committee on Energy and
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 398
reported to the House by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 398 to
the House, amended, on February 13, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-14).
No further action was taken on H.R. 398 in the 108th
Congress.
S. 286 was introduced by Senator Bond on February 4, 2003,
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions. On November 6, 2003, the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions reported S. 286, with an
amendment in the nature of a substitute (S. Rpt. 108-188).
The Senate approved the S. 286, as amended, by unanimous
consent on November 11, 2003.
On November 12, 2003, S. 286 was received in the House and
was held at the desk.
On November 19, 2003, S. 286 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules, and passed the House by a vote
of 415 yeas and 1 nay on November 20, 2003.
S. 286 was presented to the President on November 21, 2003.
On December 3, 2003, the President signed S. 286 (Public Law
108-154).
PEDIATRIC RESEARCH EQUITY ACT OF 2003
Public Law 108-155 (S. 650)
A bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to
authorize the Food and Drug Administration to require certain
research into drugs used in pediatric patients.
Summary
S. 650 amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA) by adding a new section 505B, which provides the Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) with authority to require that
sponsors submit assessments regarding the use of drugs in
pediatric patients in certain specified circumstances. With
respect to drugs and biological products that are not yet
approved, the legislation provides that each new drug
application under section 505 of the FFDCA or biologics license
application under section 351 of the Public Health Service Act
(PHSA) for a new active ingredient, new indication, new dosage
form, new dosing regimen, or new route of administration must
contain data adequate to assess the safety and effectiveness of
the drug or biological product for its claimed indications, and
to support dosing and administration for each pediatric
subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective.
With respect to drugs and biological products that are
already marketed, the legislation allows FDA in compelling
circumstances, having made certain findings and under certain
conditions, to require that all holders of approved
applications for a product submit data on safety and
effectiveness and dosing and administration, after having
provided the holders with notice and an opportunity for written
response and a meeting.
S. 650 requires FDA to grant a full or partial waiver of
the pediatric data requirement for a drug or biological product
for certain reasons, including if the FDA finds that necessary
studies are impossible or highly impractical; if there is
evidence strongly suggesting that the drug or biological
product would be ineffective or unsafe in the pediatric age
groups; or if the drug or biological product does not represent
a meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing therapies for
pediatric patients, the drug or biological product is not
likely to be used by a substantial number of pediatric
patients, and the absence of adequate labeling would not pose
significant risks to pediatric patients. Under the legislation,
when the Secretary grants a full or partial waiver because
there is evidence that the drug or biological product would be
ineffective or unsafe in pediatric populations, the information
must be included in the labeling for the drug or biological
product.
For new drugs, the Secretary may defer the submission of
some or all of the assessments required under the amendment
until a specified date after the approval of the drug or after
the license for the biological product is granted if two
requirements are met. The first is met if the Secretary finds
that the drug is ready for approval for use in adults before
the pediatric studies are complete, or the pediatric studies
should be delayed until additional safety or effectiveness data
have been collected, or there is another appropriate reason for
deferral. The second is met if the applicant has submitted to
the Secretary certification for the grounds for deferring, a
description of the planned or ongoing studies, and evidence
that the studies are being conducted or will be conducted with
due diligence at the earliest possible time.
The legislation provides for meetings with a drug sponsor
during the investigational new drug process to discuss plans
and timelines of pediatric studies or requests for waiver or
deferral of pediatric studies.
The legislation provides that FDA may only impose pediatric
study requirements for already marketed drugs when the
pediatric exclusivity incentives provisions of section 505A of
the FFDCA and the National Institute of Health grant and
contract programs of sections 409I and 499 of the PHSA have
failed to yield necessary pediatric information. FDA must first
allow an opportunity for Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act
mechanisms to work before invoking the new pediatric study
requirements for marketed drugs.
Legislative History
S. 650 was introduced by Senator DeWine on March 18, 2003.
The bill was read twice and referred to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
On March 19, 2003, the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions ordered the bill to be favorably reported
without amendment. The Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions reported S. 650 to the Senate, amended, on June
27, 2003 (S. Rpt. 108-84).
On July 23, 2003, S. 650 passed the Senate, amended, by
unanimous consent.
On July 24, 2003, S. 650 was received in the House and was
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On November 19, 2003, S. 650 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed by voice vote.
S. 650 was presented to the President on November 21, 2003,
and was signed by the President on December 3, 2003 (Public Law
108-155).
HEALTH CARE SAFETY NET AMENDMENTS TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS ACT
Public Law 108-163 (H.R. 3038, S. 1775)
To make technical and conforming changes to the Health Care
Safety Net Amendments Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-251).
Summary
H.R. 3038 makes several technical changes to the Health
Care Safety Net Amendments Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-251). It
renumbers and aligns several sections of the Public Health
Service Act, makes grammatical corrections, including period
and comma placement, and corrects misnamed references to
agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services.
The legislation makes stand-alone provisions in the Health Care
Safety Net Amendments Act of 2002, including telemedicine
incentive grants, part of the Public Health Service Act.
H.R. 3038 also clarifies the original intent of the Health
Care Safety Net Amendments Act of 2002. Section 2 replaces
language inadvertently deleted by the Act to permit the
Department of Health and Human Services to provide technical
assistance either through the Department or by grant or
contract. Further, the technical assistance activities outlined
under the law are not intended to be an exhaustive list; for
example, the Department of Health and Human Services could
provide technical assistance through the planning and
development of networks. Section 2 amends section 332 of the
Public Health Service Act to clarify that Federally qualified
community health centers may be designated as health
professional shortage areas upon date of designation, not the
date of the enactment of the law. It further clarifies section
333A(c)(4) to make priorities in assignment of National Health
Service Corps personnel within 30 days from such notification.
The legislation clarifies section 338E of the Public Health
Service Act with regard to loan repayments of National Health
Service Corps personnel. Finally, H.R. 3038 clarifies that the
Department of Health and Human Services is to conduct a study
of the Department's ability to provide for guarantees of
solvency for managed care networks or plans involving health
centers receiving funding under section 330 of the Public
Health Service Act.
Legislative History
H.R. 3038 was introduced by Mr. Bilirakis on September 9,
2003 and referred to the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On September 10, 2003, the Full Committee on Energy and
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 3038
reported to the House by voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3039 to
the House on September 17, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-275).
On October 1, 2003, H.R. 3038 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a voice
vote.
On October 2, 2003, H.R. 3038 was received in the Senate
and referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
On November 20, 2003, H.R. 3038 passed the Senate by
unanimous consent.
H.R. 3038 was presented to the President on November 26,
2003, and was signed by the President on December 6, 2003
(Public Law 108-163).
MEDICARE MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2004
Public Law 108-173 (H.R. 1, H.R. 2473, S. 1)
To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide
for a voluntary program for prescription drug coverage under
the Medicare program, to modernize the Medicare program, and
for other purposes.
Summary
Title I of H.R. 1 creates a new Part D drug benefit within
Medicare. Part D provides, beginning in 2006, a voluntary
prescription drug benefit for Medicare-eligible seniors and
individuals with disabilities. Beneficiaries would be
guaranteed a choice of at least two plans to choose from. A
beneficiary would pay a monthly premium to the prescription
drug plan. The plan benefit design may vary but must be
actuarially equivalent to a $250 deductible and coinsurance of
25% up to an initial coverage limit of $2250. A beneficiary who
reaches $3,600 in out of pocket spending would receive
catastrophic protection. Beneficiaries who reach the
catastrophic out-of-pocket spending limit of $3,600 would pay
$2 for generics and preferred multiple source drugs, and $5 for
all other drugs, or 5% of the price. Low-income beneficiaries
will also receive additional subsidies and assistance.
H.R. 1 contains provisions for an interim Medicare endorsed
drug discount card. Starting in April 2004 and until the
prescription drugbenefit is in place in 2006, Medicare
beneficiaries may save up to 25% on prescriptions. Low-income
beneficiaries receive $600 of assistance per year for 2004 and 2005.
H.R. 1 creates a new system, beginning in 2006, under which
private plans will bid to provide Medicare services on either a
local or regional basis and will compete with each other on the
basis of their bids. Plan bids will be compared to a benchmark
payment amount. Plans that bid below the benchmark will be paid
their bids, and 75% of the difference between the benchmark and
the bid will be returned to beneficiaries in the form of
additional benefits or reduced premiums. The remaining 25% will
be savings to the government. Plans that bid above the
benchmark will be paid the benchmark amount by the government,
with the beneficiaries paying the Medicare premium plus the
amount above the benchmark.
The legislation renames the Medicare+Choice program
``Medicare Advantage'' and stabilizes payment rates to link
them to cost growth in the traditional fee-for-service program.
Chronic care management programs will also be added to the
renamed ``Medicare Advantage'' program.
Beginning in 2007, H.R. 1 provides that all individuals
earning below $80,000 p/yr will continue to receive the current
75% Part B government subsidy. For individuals between $80-
$100k p/yr, the government subsidy will be 65%; for those
between $100-$150k p/yr, the subsidy will be 50%; for those
between $150-$200k p/yr, the subsidy will be 35%; and for those
earning over $200k p/yr, the subsidy will be 20%. All of the
income amounts are doubled for couples.
H.R. 1 changed Medicare's payment system for physician
administered drugs under Part B from average wholesale price
(AWP) to average sales price (ASP) and addresses problems with
underpayment of physician practice expense payments. The bill
also provides a new competitive bidding structure for durable
medical equipment (DME).
H.R. 1 amends Hatch/Waxman with regards to the approval of
generic drugs. Brand drug companies will be allowed one 30-
month stay of the approval of a generic competitor. Generics
must forego their 180-day generic exclusivity if they do not
bring a product to market within a specified time period.
Additionally, the bill ensures that all agreements between
innovators and generics related to the 180-day exclusivity must
be reported to the Federal Trade Commission.
The bill also adds a number of new preventive health care
benefits to Medicare. Upon becoming eligible for Medicare, an
initial voluntary physical will be offered to beneficiaries.
Screening for diabetes and cardiovascular disease will also be
covered. Mammography payments will be increased. Medicare will
provide a disease management program to assist beneficiaries
with chronic illnesses.
Under H.R. 1, hospitals will receive a 16% increase to
states' Medicaid DSH allotments in 2004. Low DSH states will
receive a 16% annual increase for 5 years. There are also
increased incentives for providers to serve patients in rural
areas and communities. The bill increases payments to sole
community hospitals, critical access hospitals, rural home
health agencies and hospice providers.
Physicians will see their fees increase under Medicare by
1.5% in 2004 and 2005, instead of being reduced by the 4.5%
amount required under prior law. H.R. 1 also increases payments
for physicians who practice medicine in rural areas.
Specifically, the bill establishes a floor on reimbursements
for a component of the physician fee schedule. In addition, it
puts into place a new physician scarcity bonus payment program.
H.R. 1 addresses concerns regarding regulatory cost and
delay under Medicare. It eases paperwork burdens and improves
Medicare's responsiveness to beneficiaries and health care
providers.
Finally, H.R. 1 creates tax-free Health Savings Accounts
(HSAs). Contributions and distributions from the account are
tax-free.
Legislative History
The Subcommittee on Health held a hearing on April 8, 2003
entitled ``Designing a Twenty-First Century Medicare
Prescription Drug Benefit.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the Congressional Budget Office, the President's
Council of Economic Advisors, and the Health Care Financing
Administration, as well as consumer advocacy groups.
The Subcommittee on Health also held a hearing on April 9,
2003, entitled ``Strengthening and Improving Medicare.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from a representative from the
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, policy and industry
specialists, and a consumer advocacy group. In addition, one
witness testified as a Medicare beneficiary.
On June 17, 2003, June 18, 2003, and June 19, 2003, the
Full Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open markup
session and ordered H.R. 2473 reported to the House, as
amended, by a record vote of 29 yeas and 20 nays, a quorum
being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 2473 to
the House, amended, on June 25, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-178, Part I).
The Committee on Ways and Means reported H.R. 2473 to the
House on July 15, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-178, Part II).
While no further action was taken on H.R. 2473 in the 108th
Congress, the reported versions of H.R. 2473 by the Committee
on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Ways and Means were
incorporated into H.R. 1.
H.R. 1 was introduced in the House on June 25, 2003, and
referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in
addition to the Committee on Ways and Means.
On June 26, 2003, the House considered H.R. 1 under the
provisions of H. Res. 299. H.R. 1 passed the House on June 27,
2003, by a vote of 216 yeas, 215 nays, and 1 present.
On July 7, 2003, H.R. 1 was received in the Senate.
On July 7, 2003, H.R. 1 passed the Senate, as amended, by
unanimous consent. The Senate insisted on its amendment, asked
for a conference, and appointed conferees.
On July 14, 2003, the House disagreed to the Senate
amendment, and agreed to a conference. The Speaker appointed
conferees.
The conference report was filed on November 21, 2003 (H.
Rpt. 108-391).
On November 22, 2003, the House considered the conference
report to accompany H.R. 1 under the provisions of H. Res. 463.
The House passed the conference report by a vote of 220 yeas
and 215 nays.
On November 25, 2003, the Senate agreed to the conference
report by a vote of 54 yeas and 44 nays.
On December 7, 2003 the bill was presented to the
President, and on December 8, 2003, the President signed H.R. 1
(Public Law 108-173).
TORTURE VICTIMS RELIEF AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2003
Public Law 108-179 (H.R. 1813)
To reauthorize the Torture Victims Relief Act of 1998.
Summary
H.R. 1813 authorizes the President to make grants to
treatment centers and programs in foreign countries that are
carrying out projects or activities specifically designed to
treat victims of torture. These rehabilitation activities
include both physical and psychological treatment programs. The
Act also authorizes appropriations to the United Nations
Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture. The bill reauthorizes
the Torture Victims Relief Act by increasing the level of
funding that may be provided for programs to assist victims of
torture for an additional 3-year period.
Specifically, H.R. 1813 authorizes the appropriation of
$20,000,000 for fiscal year 2004, $25,000,000 for fiscal year
2005, and $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2006 for the Department
of Health and Human Services to manage domestic centers and
programs for the treatment of victims of torture. It also
authorizes the appropriation of $11,000,000 for fiscal year
2004, $12,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, and $13,000,000 for
fiscal year 2006 to provide assistance for centers in foreign
countries and programs for the treatment of victims of torture
as authorized by the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. Finally,
H.R. 1813 authorizes the appropriation of $6,000,000 for fiscal
year 2004, $7,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, and $8,000,000 for
fiscal year 2006 for the President to make a voluntary
contribution to the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims
of Torture.
Legislative History
H.R. 1813 was introduced by Mr. Smith on April 11, 2003,
and referred to the House Committee on International Relations,
and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On September 4, 2003, the Committee on International
Relations reported H.R. 1813 to the House (H. Rpt. 108-261,
Part I). The Committee on Energy and Commerce was granted an
extension for further consideration ending not later than
October 3, 2003.
On September 10, 2003, the Full Committee on Energy and
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 1813
reported to the House by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 1813 to
the House on September 17, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-261, Part II).
On November 19, 2003, H.R. 1813 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House, amended, by
a voice vote.
On November 25, 2003, H.R. 1813 passed the Senate by
unanimous consent.
H.R. 1813 was presented to the President on December 3,
2003, and was signed by the President on December 15, 2003
(Public Law 108-179).
POISON CONTROL CENTER AND AWARENESS ENHANCEMENT ACT AMENDMENTS OF 2003
Public Law 108-194 (H.R. 1819, S. 686)
To reauthorize the activities of the Nation's poison
control centers until 2009.
Summary
S. 686 reauthorizes the activities of the Nation's poison
control centers until 2009. Authorized activities include (1)
developing standardized poison prevention and poison control
promotion programs; (2) developing standard patient management
guidelines for commonly encountered toxic exposures; (3)
improving national toxic exposure surveillance; expanding the
toxicologic expertise within poison control centers; and, (4)
improving the capacity of poison control centers to answer high
volumes of calls during times of national crisis. In addition,
S. 686 maintains the national toll-free number, the nationwide
media campaign to promote poison control center utilization,
and allows for the implementation of a continuous
toxicosurveillance of poison control center data.
Legislative History
S. 686 was introduced by Senator DeWine on March 21, 2003,
read twice, and referred to the Senate Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
On June 11, 2003, the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions reported S. 686 to the Senate, amended (S.
Rpt. 108-68).
S. 686 passed the Senate, amended, by unanimous consent on
June 20, 2003.
On June 23, 2003, S. 686 was received in the House and
referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On November 19, 2003, the bill was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House, as amended,
on November 20, 2003, by a vote on 420 yeas and 1 nay.
On December 9, 2003, the Senate agreed to the House
amendment to S. 686 by unanimous consent.
S. 686 was presented to the President on December 11, 2003,
and on December 19, 2003 was signed by the President (Public
Law 108-194).
MENTAL HEALTH PARITY REAUTHORIZATION OF 2003
Public Law 108-197 (S. 1929)
To amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974 and the Public Health Service Act to extend the mental
health benefits parity provisions for an additional year.
Summary
S. 1929 amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act
of 1974 and the Public Health Service Act to extend the mental
health benefits parity provisions for an additional year,
through December 31, 2004. The original mental health parity
provisions were part of the Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act of 1996.
Legislative History
Senator Gregg, introduced S. 1929 on November 21, 2003. The
bill was read twice, considered, read the third time, and
passed the Senate by unanimous consent.
S. 1929 was considered in the House by unanimous consent,
and passed the House without objection on December 8, 2003.
S. 1929 was presented to the President on December 11,
2003, and was signed by the President on December 19, 2003
(Public Law 108-197).
WELFARE REFORM EXTENSION ACT OF 2004
Public Law 108-210 (S. 2231)
A bill to reauthorize the Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families block grant program through June 30, 2004, and for
other purposes.
Summary
S. 2231 amends title IV of the Social Security Act (SSA) to
extend through June 30, 2004: (1) the Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) block grant program under part A,
including the sexual activity abstinence education program and
eligibility for Medicaid under SSA title XIX; (2) the National
Random Sample Study of Child Welfare under part B (Child and
Family Services); and, (3) demonstration projects likely to
promote the objectives of part B or part E (Foster Care and
Adoption Assistance). The bill makes appropriations for such
purposes. It also authorizes grants and payments pursuant to
such authority through the third quarter of FY 2004 at the
level provided for such activities through the third quarter of
FY 2002.
Legislative History
S. 2231 was introduced in the Senate on March 25, 2004, by
Senator Grassley, and passed the Senate without amendment by
unanimous consent.
The bill was received in the House and referred to the
House Committee on Ways and Means and in addition to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce on March 25, 2004.
S. 2231 was considered in the House on March 30, 2004,
under suspension of the rules, and passed the House by voice
vote.
S. 2231 was presented to and signed by the President on
March 31, 2004 (Public Law 108-210).
MEDICAL DEVICE TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS ACT
Public Law 108-214 (H.R. 3493, S. 1881)
A bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to
make technical corrections relating to the amendments by the
Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act of 2002, and for
other purposes.
Summary
S. 1881 makes several technical changes to the Medical
Device User Fee and Modernization Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-250).
It renumbers and conforms the appropriate sections of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, making grammatical
corrections, inserting periods, and correcting comma placement.
Section 2 clarifies the distinction between a ``panel track
supplement'' for which substantial clinical data is required to
demonstrate a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness
and a ``180-day supplement'' for which such data is not
required. Next, section 2 clarifies that premarket reports are
within the definition of ``process for the review of device
applications.'' Further, section 2 clarifies the term
``affiliate'' to include international as well as domestic
affiliates in the user fee program.
Section 2 also makes technical changes clarifying that the
third party inspection program applies to 510(h) inspections of
establishments and inspections of foreign facilities required
to register with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Section 2 ensures that facilities can work with third party
inspectors to allow them to complete a full 510(h) inspection
over the course of a two year period. Section 2 clarifies the
law and allows entities to certify that a foreign country
recognizes the third party conducting the inspection, instead
of requiring a statement that such a country recognizes FDA's
inspectional authority. Section 2 also ensures that companies
can use third party inspectors for two consecutive 510(h)
inspections before requesting special permission from the
Secretary for the third such inspection. Finally, section 2
makesimportant modifications to section 301 by providing an 18-
month implementation delay for all branding requirements and clarifies
the definition of modular review to be consistent with the FDA's
modular review program.
Section 3 of the Act requests that the FDA complete a
report on the barriers to the availability of devices intended
for pediatric patients, and provide policy recommendations as
to what could be changed in existing law to address this issue.
Legislative History
On November 17, 2003, Mr. Greenwood introduced H.R. 3493,
the Medical Device Correctional Amendments Act, which was
referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On January 27, 2004, the House considered H.R. 3493 under
suspension of the rules and passed the House by a vote of 333
yeas and 0 nays.
H.R. 3493 was received in the Senate on January 28, 2004,
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3493 in the 108th
Congress.
On November 18, 2003, S. 1881 was introduced by Senator
Alexander. It was read twice and referred to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
On November 21, 2003, the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions ordered S. 1881 reported with an amendment
in the nature of a substitute.
On November 25, 2003, S. 1881 passed the Senate with an
amendment by unanimous consent.
On December 8, 2003, S. 1881 was received in the House, and
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The Full Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open
markup on March 3, 2004, and ordered S. 1881 reported to the
House, as amended, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
S. 1881 was reported to the House, amended, by the
Committee on Energy and Commerce on March 9, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-
433).
On March 9, 2004, S. 1881 was considered in the House under
suspension of the rules. On March 10, 2004, a motion to suspend
the rules and pass the bill, as amended, was agreed to by a
vote of 396 yeas and 0 nays.
On March 12, 2004, the Senate agreed to the House amendment
to S. 1881 by unanimous consent.
S. 1881 was presented to the President on March 22, 2004,
and was signed by the President on April 1, 2004 (Public Law
108-214).
ORGAN DONATION AND RECOVERY IMPROVEMENT ACT
Public Law 108-216 (H.R. 3926, H.R. 399, S. 573)
To authorize new programs to encourage organ donation and
conduct studies and demonstration projects to encourage organ
donation education efforts across the country.
Summary
H.R. 3926 strikes section 377 of the Public Health Service
Act and replaces it with new language. Specifically, the
legislation authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human
Services to award grants to states, transplant centers, organ
procurement organizations, or other public and private entities
to reimburse individuals for travel and subsistence expenses
incurred when making a living organ donation.
H.R. 3926 also directs the Secretary of Health and Human
Services to establish a public education program to increase
awareness about the need to provide for an adequate rate of
organ donation, including by providing grants to states to
conduct public education programs.
The Secretary of Health and Human Services may award grants
to organ procurement organizations and hospitals to create
organ donation coordinator positions to help coordinate the
organ donation activities of hospitals and organ procurement
organizations.
The Act also includes a number of reports and studies.
Legislative History
H.R. 399 was introduced by Mr. Bilirakis on January 28,
2003, and was referred to the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On January 29, 2003, the Full Committee on Energy and
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 399
reported to the House by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 399 to
the House on February 13, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-15).
On March 12, 2003, the bill was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a vote of
425 yeas and 3 nays.
On March 13, 2003, H.R. 399 was received in the Senate and
was referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions.
No further action was taken on H.R. 399 in the 108th
Congress.
On March 6, 2003, Senator Frist introduced S. 573, which
was referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions.
On November 24, 2003, the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions reported S. 573 to the Senate, without
written report.
On November 25, 2003, the Senate passed S. 573 by unanimous
consent. S. 573 was received in the House on December 8, 2003,
and held at the desk.
No further action was taken on S. 573 in the 108th
Congress.
On March 10, 2004, Mr. Bilirakis introduced H.R. 3926,
legislation identical to S. 573, which was referred to the
House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On March 23, 2004, H.R. 3926 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules. On March 24, 2004, the House
passed H.R. 3926 by a vote of 414 yeas and 2 nays.
On March 25, 2004, the bill was received in the Senate,
considered, and passed by unanimous consent.
H.R. 3926 was presented to the President on March 31, 2004,
and was signed by the President on April 5, 2004 (Public Law
108-216).
THE PROJECT BIOSHIELD ACT OF 2004
Public Law 108-276 (H.R. 2122, S. 15)
To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide
protections and countermeasures against chemical, radiological,
or nuclear agents that may be used in a terrorist attack
against the United States by giving the National Institutes of
Health contracting flexibility, infrastructure improvements,
and expediting the scientific peer review process, and
streamlining the Food and Drug Administration approval process
of countermeasures.
Summary
S. 15 amends the Public Health Service Act to authorize the
Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to conduct
research and development with respect to biomedical
countermeasure products for qualified countermeasures. The bill
provides expedited authority for governmental procurements used
to perform, administer or support such research and
development, and increases the simplified acquisition
thresholds. Further, this section provides that the Secretary
may use noncompetitive procedures for procurements when there
are only a limited number of responsible sources.
S. 15 transfers all management, maintenance and funding of
the National Strategic Stockpile of countermeasures for
terrorist attacks and other public health emergencies fully to
the Department of Health and Human Services.
The bill also amends section 121 of the Public Health
Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act by
providing for the procurement of biomedical countermeasures
that affect national security through a special reserve fund
established under this Act. The legislation requires the
Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to
assess threats that may be posed by chemical, biological,
radiological, and nuclear agents, and requires the Secretary of
HHS to assess the public health consequences of such agents and
the availability and appropriateness of countermeasures for the
threats identified. After doing these steps, the Secretaries
jointly determine and recommend to the President that
procurement of such a countermeasure for the Nation's stockpile
is appropriate from the special reserve fund established under
the Act. Congress has already provided the advance
appropriation of $5.6 billion over the next 10 years for this
purpose, consistent with the authorization in S.15 and the
House budget resolution.
S. 15 also waives the premarket approval, clearance and
licensure provisions of the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act
and allows the Secretary of HHS to authorize the emergency use
of an unapproved product during times of military, national,
and public health emergencies. The emergency uses authorized in
this bill apply to both products that have never been approved
in any fashion, and new uses of already-approved products, and
the authority only exists in times of declared emergencies. A
declaration of an emergency can only last for a maximum of one
year, unless the Secretary renews the authorization.
For products that have never been approved, if the
Secretary authorizes the use of such a product, the Secretary
shall place conditions on such authorization for public health
and safety. For products which have been approved for other
purposes and for which the Secretary is authorizing a new
emergency use, manufacturers which wish to avail themselves of
such emergency use authorization may be subjected to the
mandatory conditions listed in the paragraph above.
Legislative History
On May 15, 2003, the Full Committee on Energy and Commerce
met in open markup session to consider a Committee Print, the
Project Bioshield Act of 2003, which was reported to the House,
amended, by a voice vote, a quorum being present. A request to
allow a report to be filed on a bill to be introduced, and that
the action of the Committee be deemed as action on that bill,
was agreed to by unanimous consent.
On May 15, 2003, Mr. Tauzin introduced H.R. 2122, which was
referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in
addition to the Committee on Government Reform, and the Select
Committee on Homeland Security.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 2122 to
the House, amended, on June 10, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-147, Part I).
On June 10, 2003, the Committee on Government Reform and
the Select Committee on Homeland Security were granted an
extension for further consideration ending not later than June
13, 2003.
On June 10, 2003, H.R. 2122 was referred sequentially to
the House Committee on Armed Services for a period ending not
later than June 11, 2003.
The Committee on Government Reform reported H.R. 2122 to
the House, amended, on June 12, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-147, Part
II).
On June 13, 2003, the Select Committee on Homeland Security
was granted an extension for further consideration ending not
later than June 27, 2003.
On June 27, 2003, the Select Committee on Homeland Security
was granted an extension for further consideration ending not
later than July 8, 2003.
The Select Committee on Homeland Security reported H.R.
2122 to the House, amended, on July 8, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-147,
Part III).
On July 16, 2003, H.R. 2122 was considered in the House
pursuant to a previous order of the House. The House passed
H.R. 2122, amended, by a vote of 421 yeas and 2 nays.
On July 17, 2003, the bill was received in the Senate, read
twice, and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General
Orders.
No further action was taken on H.R. 2122 in the 108th
Congress.
On March 11, 2003, Senator Gregg introduced S.15, which was
read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
On March 25, 2003, the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions reported S. 15 to the Senate, amended,
without written report.
The Senate passed S. 15, amended, on May 19, 2004 by a vote
of 99 yeas and 0 nays.
On May 20, 2004, S. 15 was received in the House, and held
at the desk.
S. 15 was considered in the House under a previous order of
the House on July 14, 2004, and passed the House by a vote of
414 yeas and 2 nays.
On July 16, 2004, S. 15 was presented to the President, and
on July 21, 2004, the President signed the bill (Public Law
108-276).
MINOR USE AND MINOR SPECIES ANIMAL HEALTH ACT OF 2004
Public Law 108-282 (S. 741)
A bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
with regard to new animal drugs, and for other purposes.
Summary
Title I of S. 741 addresses the critical shortage of animal
drugs available for minor species, which are defined as animals
other than humans that are not major species (cattle, horses,
swine, chickens, turkeys, dogs, and cats), and for minor uses
for major species, which are defined as the use of a drug in a
major species for a disease that occurs infrequently in a small
number of animals, or in limited geographic areas in a small
number of animals annually.
The legislation allows the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) to award three years of market exclusivity, with full
approval, for any new animal drug that requires research to be
conducted in the targeted minor species to support such
approval.
It also creates a conditional approval process for new
animal drugs intended for a minor use or for use in a minor
species. It requires the same standards for approval as the
full approval, except that there must only be a reasonable
expectation that the drug is effective for use. (Full approval
requires adequate and well-controlled studies to demonstrate by
substantial evidence that a new animal drug is effective.)
Sponsors must commit to conducting additional investigation to
meet the full requirements for the demonstration of
effectiveness within five years. The bill establishes that a
conditional approval is renewable annually for up to four
additional one-year terms upon submission of a request for
renewal. It also requires labels of such drugs to bear a
statement identifying the new animal drug as conditionally
approved.
The Secretary of Health and Human Services is required by
S. 741 to establish an index of legally-marketed, unapproved
new animal drugs for use in minor species. The bill provides
that this index lists drugs that are not FDA-approved and that
are either: (1) not intended for use in animals that will be
consumed by humans or by food-producing animals; or, (2) not
intended for use in early, non-food life stages of food-
producing minor species, unless safety for humans has been
adequately demonstrated. Additionally it specifies labeling
requirements for indexed drugs.
Under S. 741, the Secretary is allowed, before submission
of an application for drug approval, to designate new minor use
or minor species animal drugs. It provides: (1) grants for such
designated drugs for qualified safety and effectiveness
testing, and for manufacturing expenses incurred in connection
with further development of such drugs; and (2) market
exclusivity for such drugs for seven years, with specified
exceptions. Further, the bill requires the Secretary to
terminate any such designation if the sponsor discontinues
active pursuit of approval.
The Secretary is directed to establish within the Center
for Veterinary Medicine of FDA an Office of Minor Use and Minor
Species Animal Drug Development to: (1) designate minor use and
minor species animal drugs; (2) administer grants and
contracts; (3) review minor species drug index listing
requests; and, (4) serve as a liaison to other government
agencies interested in minor use and minor species animal drug
development.
Title II of S. 741 is the Food Allergen Labeling and
Consumer Protection Act. It lays out a number of new
requirements for the labeling of food in order to protect
consumers with food allergies. Specifically, food that contains
one of the eight major food allergens (milk, eggs, fish,
Crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat, and soybeans)
must list the food source from which the major food allergen is
derived either immediately after the list of ingredients or in
parentheses following an ingredient that contains a food
allergen.
Legislative History
S. 741 was introduced by Senator Sessions on March 27,
2003. It was read twice and referred to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
On November 21, 2003 the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions ordered S. 741 reported to the Senate with
an amendment in the nature of a substitute.
Under authority of the order of the Senate of February 12,
2004, the bill was reported by the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions with an amendment in the nature
of a substitute (S. Rpt. 108-226).
On March 8, 2004, the Senate passed S. 741, amended by
unanimous consent.
On March 9, 2004, the bill was received in the House, and
was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On June 15, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health met in open
markup session and approved S. 741 for Full Committee
consideration by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
On June 24, 2004, the Full Committee on Energy and Commerce
met in open markup session and ordered S. 741 reported to the
House by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported S. 741 to the
House on July 15, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-608).
S. 741 was considered in the House under suspension of the
rules on July 20, 2004, and passed the House by voice vote.
On July 23, 2004, S. 741 was presented to the President and
was signed by the President on August 2, 2004 (Public Law 108-
282).
GARRETT LEE SMITH MEMORIAL ACT
Public Law 108-355 (S. 2634)
To amend the Public Health Service Act to support the
planning, implementation, and evaluation of organized
activities involving statewide youth suicide early intervention
and prevention strategies, and to authorize grants to
institutions of higher education to reduce student mental and
behavioral health problems.
Summary
S. 2634, the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Act amends the
Public Health Service Act to revise provisions regarding
Federal assistance for programs to reduce suicide among
children and adolescents. Specifically, the legislation
authorizes the Administrator of the Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration (SAMSHA) to award grants or
cooperative agreements to eligible entities to develop,
implement, complement, and evaluate state-sponsored statewide
or tribal youth suicide early intervention and prevention
strategies in schools, educational institutions, juvenile
justice systems, substance abuse programs, mental health
programs, foster care systems, and other child and youth
support organizations. The bill requires that states and
entities receiving funding under this grant program shall
obtain prior written, informed consent from the child's parent
or legal guardian for assessment services, school-sponsored
programs, and treatment involving medication related to youth
suicide conducted in elementary and secondary schools. The
prior requirements do not apply in the following cases: (1) in
an emergency, where it is necessary to protect the immediate
health and safety of the student, or of other students; or, (2)
other instances, as defined by a state, where parental consent
cannot reasonably be obtained. The term youth is defined as
individuals between 10 and 24 years of age. The bill authorizes
$7 million for fiscal year 2005, $18 million for fiscal year
2006, $30 million for fiscal year 2007, and requires that 85
percent of the grant funds be used to provide direct services.
The legislation also authorizes the Secretary of the
Department of Health and Human Services, acting through the
Director of the Center for Mental Health Services at SAMSHA, in
consultation with the Secretary of Education, to award matching
grants on a competitive basis to institutions of higher
education to enhance services of students with mental and
behavioral health problems that can lead to school failure. The
Secretary may only award a grant for the following purposes:
education seminars; operation of hotlines; preparation of
informational material; preparation of education materials for
families of students; training programs for students and campus
personnel to respond effectively to students with mental and
behavioral health problems; or the creation of a networking
infrastructure to link colleges and universities that do not
have mental health services with health care providers who can
treat mental and behavioral health problems. The bill
authorizes $5 million to be appropriated for each fiscal year
starting in fiscal year 2005 through fiscal year 2007.
Finally, S. 2634 authorizes the Administrator of SAMSHA to
award one competitive grant to fund an additional research,
training, and technical assistance center to provide
appropriate information, training, and technical assistance to
states, political subdivisions, Indian tribes, institutions of
higher education, public organizations, or private nonprofit
organizations for the development or continuation of early
intervention and prevention strategies and to study the
effectiveness of suicide prevention programs. The bill
authorizes $3 million for fiscal year 2005, $4 million for
fiscal year 2006, $5 million for fiscal year 2007.
Legislative History
S. 2634 was introduced by Senator Dodd on July 8, 2004, and
was considered in the Senate and passed without by unanimous
consent.
On July 9, 2004, S. 2634 was received in the House and was
referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On September 8, 2004, S. 2634 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules, and passed the House, as
amended, on September 9, 2004, by a vote of 352 yeas and 64
nays.
The Senate agreed to the House amendment to S. 2634 by
unanimous consent on September 9, 2004.
On October 13, 2004, the bill was presented to the
President, and on October 21, 2004, S. 2634 was signed by the
President (Public Law 108-355).
JUMPSTART OUR BUSINESS STRENGTH (JOBS) ACT
Public Law 108-357 (H.R. 4520, S. 1637)
(Health Provisions)
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to remove
impediments in such Code and make our manufacturing, service,
and high-technology businesses and workers more competitive and
productive both at home and abroad.
Summary
H.R. 4520, as amended by the Senate, contained provisions
providing the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the authority
to regulate tobacco products
Additionally, the legislation would have created a new
modified category of tobacco product consisting of any tobacco
product sold or distributed for use to reduce harm or the risk
of tobacco related disease associated with commercially
marketed tobacco products.
These provisions were not included in the conference report
to accompany H.R. 4520.
The bill did contain section 712, which amends sections
Title XIX of the Social Security Act to include primary and
secondary medical strategies for children and adults with
Sickle Cell Disease as medical assistance under the Medicaid
program and provides for federal reimbursement for education
and other services related to the prevention and treatment of
Sickle Cell Disease. This provision also establishes a
demonstration program to develop systematic mechanism for the
prevention and treatment of Sickle Cell Disease.
Legislative History
On June 4, 2004, Mr. Thomas introduced H.R. 4520. The
legislation was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means,
and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture.
The Committee on Ways and Means reported H.R. 4520 to the
House, amended, on June 16, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-548, Part I).
On June 17, 2004, H.R. 4520 was considered in the House
under the provisions of H. Res. 681, and passed the House,
amended. by a vote 251 yeas and 178 nays.
On June 18, 2004, H.R. 4520 was received in the Senate.
On July 15, 2004, the Senate passed H.R. 4520, with an
amendment, by voice vote. The Senate insisted on its amendment,
requested a conference, and appointed conferees.
On September 29, 2004, the House disagreed to the Senate
amendment, agreed to a conference, and appointed conferees. The
Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on Energy and
Commerce for consideration of sec. 662 and subtitle A of Title
XI of the Senate amendment, and modifications committed to
conference, Messrs. Barton, Burr, and Waxman.
A conference was held on September 29, October 4, 5, 6, and
7, 2004. On October 7, 2004 the conferees filed a conference
report to accompany H.R. 4520 (H. Rpt. 108-755).
On October 7, 2004, the House considered the conference
report to accompany H.R. 4520 under the provisions of H. Res.
830. The House passed the conference report by a vote of 280
yeas and 141 nays.
On October 11, 2004, the Senate agreed to the conference
report by a vote of 69 yeas and 17 nays.
On October 21, 2004, H.R. 4520 was presented to the
President and was signed by the President on October 22, 2004
(Public Law 108-357).
ANABOLIC STEROID CONTROL ACT OF 2004
Public Law 108-358 (S. 2195, H.R. 3866)
A bill to amend the Controlled Substances Act to clarify
the definition of anabolic steroids and to provide for research
and education activities relating to steroids and steroid
precursors.
Summary
S. 2195 would add several new substances to the list of
banned substances. The Secretary of Health and Human Services
shall award grants to public and nonprofit private entities to
carry out education programs in elementary and secondary
schools to highlight the harmful effects of anabolic steroids.
In addition, the United States Sentencing Commission shall
review the Federal sentencing guidelines with respect to
offenses involving anabolic steroids and consider amending the
Federal sentencing guidelines to provide for increased
penalties with respect to offenses involving anabolic steroids.
Legislative History
H.R. 3866 was introduced by Mr. Sensenbrenner on March 1,
2004. The legislation was referred to the Committee on the
Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On March 30, 2004, the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism,
and Homeland Security of the Committee on the Judiciary held a
markup session and forwarded the bill, as amended, to Full
Committee by voice vote.
On March 31, 2004, the Judiciary Committee met in open
markup session and ordered the bill reported to the House, as
amended, by voice vote.
The Committee on the Judiciary reported H.R. 3866 to the
House, amended, on April 2, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-461, Part I).
The Committee on Energy and Commerce was granted an
extension for further consideration ending not later than April
27, 2004.
On April 22, 2004, the Full Committee met in open markup
session to consider H.R. 3866, as reported by the Committee on
the Judiciary, and ordered H.R. 3866 reported to the House, as
amended, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3866 to
the House, amended, on April 27, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-461, Part
II).
On June 2, 2004 the House considered H.R. 3866 under
suspension of the rules. On June 3, 2004, a motion to suspend
the rules and pass the bill, as amended, was agreed to by a
vote of 408 yeas and 3 nays.
On June 3, 2004, H.R. 3866 was received in the Senate, read
twice, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3866 in the 108th
Congress.
On March 11, 2004, S. 2195 was read twice and referred to
the Committee on the Judiciary.
The Committee on the Judiciary met in open markup session
and ordered S. 2195 reported to the Senate with an amendment in
the nature of a substitute on September 30, 2004. On the same
day, the Committee on the Judiciary reported S. 2195 to the
Senate with an amendment in the nature of a substitute, without
written report.
On October 6, 2004, S. 2195 passed the Senate, amended, by
unanimous consent.
On October 6, 2004, S. 2195 was received in the House and
held at the desk.
On October 8, 2004, S. 2195 was considered in the House by
unanimous consent, and passed the House without objection.
On October 13, 2004, S. 2195 was presented to President,
and was signed by the President on October 22, 2004 (Public Law
108-358).
PANCREATIC ISLET CELL TRANSPLANTATION ACT OF 2004
Public Law 108-362 (H.R. 3858)
To increase the supply of pancreatic islet cells for
research by requiring pancreata procured by an organ
procurement organization and used for islet cell
transplantation or research to be counted for purposes of
certification or recertification.
Summary
H.R. 3858 requires that pancreata procured by an organ
procurement organization and used for islet cell
transplantation or research to be counted for purposes of
certification or recertification of organ procurement centers.
By permitting pancreata donated for the purposes of islet cell
transplantation or research to be counted for purposes of
certification or recertification, the number of pancreatic and
other organ donations will increase, expanding the capabilities
of pancreatic islet cell research.
The legislation also requires the Diabetes Mellitus
Interagency Coordinating Committee to complete an annual report
assessing Federal activities and programs relating to
pancreatic islet cell transplantation, including an evaluation
of the adequacy of funding levels, current policies and
regulations affecting the supply of islet cells, the effect of
xenotransplantation on advancing pancreatic islet cell
transplantation, the effect of United Network for Organ Sharing
policies regarding pancreatic retrieval and islet cell
transplantations, data collection activities, implementation of
multiagency clinical investigations of islet cell
transplantation, and recommendations for legislative and
administrative changes to increase the supply of pancreatic
islet cells.
Legislative History
H.R. 3858 was introduced by Mr. Nethercutt on February 26,
2004 and was referred to the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On September 30, 2004, the Full Committee on Energy and
Commerce met in open markup session ordered H.R. 3858 reported
to the House by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3858 to
the House on October 5, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-726).
On October 5, 2004, H.R. 3858 was considered by the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a voice
vote.
On October 6, 2004, H.R. 3858 was received in the Senate
and read twice.
H.R. 3858 passed the Senate by unanimous consent on October
8, 2004.
On October 13, 2004, H.R. 3858 was presented to the
President, and on October 25, 2004, H.R. 3858 was signed by the
President (Public Law 108-362).
MAMMOGRAPHY QUALITY STANDARDS REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2004
Public Law 108-365 (H.R. 4555, S. 1879)
To reauthorize the Mammography Quality Standards Act.
Summary
In 1992, Congress enacted the Mammography Quality Standards
Act (MQSA) to ensure that all women have access to quality
mammography for the detection of breast cancer in its earliest,
most treatable stages. The MQSA provides that screening and
diagnostic services must be accredited and certified by the
Food and Drug Administration.
The Mammography Quality Standards Reauthorization Act of
2004 reauthorizes the MQSA through fiscal year 2007. In
addition, the legislation permits the Secretary of Health and
Human Services to issue a temporary renewal certificates to
facilities for specified purposes. The bill also permits the
Secretary to appoint individuals with expertise in mammography
equipment to the National Mammography Quality Assurance
Advisory Committee and grants the Advisory Committee greater
flexibility in how many times the Committee must meet annually.
Legislative History
H.R. 4555 was introduced by Mr. Dingell on June 14, 2004,
and was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On June 15, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health met in open
markup session and forwarded H.R. 4555 to the Full Committee by
a voice vote, a quorum being present.
On June 24,2004, the Full Committee on Energy and Commerce
met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 4555 reported to
the House, as amended, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 4555 to
the House, amended, on September 22, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-694).
On October 5, 2004, H.R. 4555 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House, as amended,
by a voice vote.
On October 9, 2004, the Senate passed H.R. 4555 by
unanimous consent.
H.R. 4555 was presented to the President on October 13,
2004, and was signed by the President on October 25, 2004
(Public Law 108-365).
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FY 2005 AUTHORIZATION BILL
Public Law 108-375 (H.R. 4200, S. 2400)
(Health Provisions)
To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2005 for
military activities of the Department of Defense, for military
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of
Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year
for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 4200 contained three health-related provisions in the
jurisdiction of the Energy and Commerce Committee. Section 601
authorized the Public Health Service Corps to receive the same
pay raise as the rest of the uniformed services. The conference
agreed to a revised version of Vaccine Health Center of
Excellence. These were originally designed to serve in
connection with the Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program as an
education and consultative service for providers and to assist
service members in getting access to expedited care. The
expansion would require the creation of multiple centers with
the new missions of improving networking between the Department
of Defense (DOD), Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of
Health and Human Services and private advocacy and coalition
groups; and advising service members of additional care that is
not available at the local DOD medical facilities.
Section 726 of the final law also modified a previous
provision allowing the Secretary of Defense to waive informed
consent requirements for certain drugs under certain
conditions. The changes narrowed the bases upon which the
Secretary could invoke such a waiver.
Legislative History
On April 22, 2004, Mr. Hunter introduced H.R. 4200 by
request, and the bill was referred to the House Committee on
Armed Services.
There was an exchange of correspondence between the
Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Armed
Services on May 14, 2004.
On May 14, 2004, the Committee on Armed Service reported
H.R. 2400 to the House, amended (H. Rpt. 108-491).
H.R. 4200 was considered in the House on May 19 and 20,
2004, under the provisions of H. Res. 648. The bill passed the
House by vote of 391 yeas and 34 nays.
On June 23, 2004, the bill passed the Senate with an
amendment by unanimous consent. The Senate insisted on its
amendment, asked for a conference, and appointed conferees.
The House disagreed to the Senate amendment on September
28, 2004, agreed to a conference agreed and appointed
conferees. The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee
on Energy and Commerce for consideration of secs. 596, 601,
3111, 3131, 3133 and 3201 of the House bill, and secs. 321-323,
716, 720, 1084-1089, 1091, 2833, 3116, 3119, 3141, 3142, 3145,
3201, and 3503 of the Senate amendment, and modifications
committed to conference, Messrs. Barton, Upton, and Dingell.
A conference was held on September 29, 2004, and on October
8, 2004 the conference report was filed (H. Rpt. 108-767).
On October 8, 2004, H. Res. 843, providing for the
consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 4200,
passed the House by voice vote. Then, on October 9, 2004, the
conference report was considered in the House under the
provisions of H. Res. 843. The conference report passed the
House by a vote of 359 yeas and 14 nays.
Senate agreed to conference report by unanimous consent on
October 9, 2004.
On October 21, 2004, the bill was presented to President,
and was signed by the President on October 28, 2004 (Public Law
108-375).
ASTHMATIC SCHOOLCHILDREN'S TREATMENT AND HEALTH MANAGEMENT ACT OF 2003
Public Law 108-377 (H.R. 2023)
To require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to
give preference when making asthma-related grants to States
that require schools to allow students to self-administer
medications for asthma and/or anaphylaxis.
Summary
H.R. 2023 requires the Secretary of Health and Human
Services when making any grant that is asthma-related, as
determined by the Secretary, to give preference to States that
require public elementary and secondary schools to permit
students to self-administer medication to treat asthma or
anaphylaxis. Specifically, the bill requires that the schools
permit self-administration of medication if the following
criteria are met: (1) a health care practitioner prescribed the
medication for use by the student during school hours and
instructed the student in the correct and responsible use of
the medication; (2) the student has demonstrated to the health
care practitioner and the school nurse, if available, the skill
level necessary to use the medication and any device that is
necessary to administer such medication as prescribed; (3) the
health care practitioner formulated a written treatment plan
for managing asthma or anaphylaxis episodes of the student and
for medication use by the student during school hours; and, (4)
the student's parent or guardian has completed and submitted to
the school any written documentation required by the school,
including the treatment plan and other documents related to
liability.
The school must permit the student to possess and use his
or her medication while in school, while at a school-sponsored
activity, and in transit to or from school or school-sponsored
activities. The schoolauthorization for the student to carry
the medication is effective for that school and the same school year it
is granted, and must be renewed by the parent or guardian each
subsequent school year. The State must also require that backup
medication, if provided by a student's parent or guardian, be kept at
the school in a location with immediate access. The State must also
require that all documentation related to the student's use of asthma
and/or anaphylaxis medication be kept on file at the student's school
in a location easily accessible in the event of an asthma or
anaphylaxis emergency.
H.R. 2023 clearly states that nothing in the bill creates a
cause of action or in any other way increased on diminishes the
liability of any person under any other law. Finally, the bill
states that Congress commends the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention for identifying and creating ``Strategies for
Addressing Asthma Within a Coordinated School Program'' for
schools. Congress also encourages all schools to review these
strategies and adopt policies that will best meet the needs of
their student population.
Legislative History
H.R. 2023 was introduced by Mr. Stearns on May 7, 2003, and
was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in
addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce.
On June 15, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health met in open
markup session, and forwarded H.R. 2023 to the Full Committee,
amended, by a voice vote.
The Full Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open
markup session on June 24, 2004, and ordered H.R. 2023 reported
to the House, as amended, by a voice vote, a quorum being
present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 2023 to
the House, amended, on July 14, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-606, Part I).
The House Committee on Education and the Workforce granted
an extension for further consideration ending not later than
July 14, 2004.
On October 5, 2004, H.R. 2023 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House, as amended,
by voice vote.
On October 11, 2004, H.R. 2023 passed the Senate by
unanimous consent.
H.R. 2023 was presented to the President on October 19,
2004, and was signed by the President on October 30, 2004
(Public Law 108-377).
SPECIAL OLYMPICS SPORT AND EMPOWERMENT ACT OF 2004
Public Law 108-406 (H.R. 5131)
To provide assistance to Special Olympics.
Summary
Special Olympics Sport and Empowerment Act of 2004
authorizes the Secretaries of Education, of State, and of
Health and Human Services to award grants to, or enter into
contracts or cooperative agreements with, Special Olympics for
specified education, international, and health activities,
including ones promoting Special Olympics and a greater
understanding of contributions to society by individuals with
intellectual disabilities both within and outside of the United
States.
Legislative History
H.R. 5131 was introduced by Mr. Blunt on September 23,
2004, and was referred to the House Committee on Education and
the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on
International Relations, and the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On October 6, 2004, H.R. 5131 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a voice
vote.
On October 10, 2004, the bill passed the Senate by
unanimous consent.
H.R. 5131 was presented to the President on October 19,
2004, and was signed by the President on October 30, 2004
(Public Law 108-406).
MENTALLY ILL OFFENDER TREATMENT AND CRIME REDUCTION ACT OF 2004
Public Law 108-414 (S. 1194)
To authorize a grant program to encourage state and local
governments to improve their treatment of mentally ill
offenders.
Summary
The Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act
of 2004 authorizes a grant program to encourage state and local
governments to improve their treatment of mentally ill
offenders. The grants can be used: to fund mental health courts
or diversion programs; to promote cooperation between the
criminal justice and mental health personnel; or to train
criminal justice and mental health personnel on issues relating
to mentally ill offenders. Under the legislation, each state
must receive a minimum allocation of not less than .75 percent
of the amount allocated. Participants in the collaboration
programs must also match a percentage of the Federal funds
allocated.
The legislation also requires the Attorney General and the
Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish an
interagency task force to address barriers to collaboration on
issues relating to mentally ill offenders. Additionally, the
Attorney General and the Secretary shall develop a list of best
practices for addressing these offenders. The legislation
authorizes $50 million for FY2005 and such sums as may be
necessary for FY2006 through FY2009.
Legislative History
S. 1194 was introduced in the Senate by Senator DeWine on
June 5, 2003. The bill was referred to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
On October 23, 2003, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary
ordered the bill to be reported favorably with an amendment in
the nature of a substitute.
On October 27, 2003, the bill passed the Senate with an
amendment by unanimous consent.
S. 1194 was received in the House the next day where it was
referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
On September 30, 2004, the Full Committee on the Judiciary
met in open markup session and ordered S. 1194 favorably
reported to the House, amended, by voice vote.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on
the Judiciary exchanged correspondence on S. 1194 on October 5,
2004.
On October 5, 2004, the Committee on the Judiciary reported
S. 1194 to the House, amended (H. Rpt. 108-732).
S. 1194 was considered in the House under suspension of the
rules on October 6, 2004, and passed the House, as amended, by
voice vote.
On October 7, 2004, the Senate received S. 1194 and held it
at the desk. On October 11, 2004, the Senate agreed to the
House amendment by unanimous consent.
On October 21, 2004, the bill was presented to the
President. On October 30, 2004, the President signed S. 1194
(Public Law 108-414).
RESEARCH REVIEW ACT OF 2004
Public Law 108-427 (H.R. 5213)
To expand research information regarding multidisciplinary
research projects and epidemiological studies.
Summary
H.R. 5213 Requires the Secretary of Health and Human
Services (HHS), in coordination with the Director of the
National Institute of Health (NIH), to prepare a report
outlining the methods by which the Roadmap for Medical Research
has advanced the use of multidisciplinary research teams and
consortia of research institutions to advance treatments,
develop new therapies, and collaborate on clinical trials,
including with respect to spinal cord injury and paralysis
research.
The bill also requires the Director of the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to prepare a report
outlining the epidemiological studies currently underway at the
CDC, future planned studies, the criteria and scope involved in
determining what epidemiological studies to conduct, defer, or
suspend, with particular regard to epidemiological studies of
inflammatory bowel disease. Additionally, the study would
include a description of the activities CDC undertakes to
establish partnerships with research and patient advocacy
communities to expand epidemiological studies.
Finally, H.R. 5213 directs the Government Accountability
Office to study Medicare and Medicaid coverage of inflammatory
bowel therapies in addition to a study about the problems
patients with inflammatory bowel disease have when applying for
disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act.
Legislative History
H.R. 5213 was introduced in the House by Mr. Bilirakis on
October 5, 2004 and was referred to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means.
On October 6, 2004, H.R. 5213 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and was passed by the House, as
amended, by a vote of 418 yeas and 0 nays on October 7, 2004.
On October 8, 2004, H.R. 5213 was received in the Senate
and read twice.
H.R. 5213 passed the Senate by unanimous consent on
November 16, 2004.
On November 19, 2004, H.R. 5213 was presented to the
President, and on November 30, 2004 was signed by the President
(Public Law 108-427).
THREE AFFILIATED TRIBES HEALTH FACILITY COMPENSATION ACT
Public Law 108-437 (S. 1146)
A bill to implement the recommendations of the Garrison
Unit Joint Tribal Advisory Committee by providing authorization
for the construction of a rural health care facility on the
Fort Berthold Indian Reservation, North Dakota.
Summary
S. 1146, Three Affiliated Tribes Health Facility
Compensation Act, authorizes construction money for certain
rural health facilities.
Legislative History
On May 23, 2003, Senator Conrad introduced S. 1146, which
was referred to the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs.
On October 15, 2003, the Committee on Indian Affairs
reported S. 1146, amended, to the Senate (S. Rpt. 108-165).
S. 1146 passed the Senate, amended, by unanimous consent on
October 27, 2003.
On October 28, 2003, S. 1146 was received in the House and
referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The Committee on Resources reported S. 1146 to the House on
June 3, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-523, Part I).
On June 3, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce was
granted a extension for further consideration of the bill
ending not later than July 9, 2004.
On November 17, 2004, S. 1146 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules, and passed the House by voice
vote.
S. 1146 was presented to the President on November 22,
2004, and was signed by the President on December 3, 2004
(Public Law 108-437).
A BILL TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO PHYSICIANS IN MEDICALLY UNDERSERVED AREAS
Public Law 108-441 (S. 2302)
A bill to improve access to physicians in medically
underserved areas.
Summary
S. 2302 amends the Immigration and Nationality Technical
Corrections Act of 1994 to reauthorize for a period of two
years the ``Conrad State 30 program,'' which annually allows
each State to request up to 30 waivers of the home residency
requirement applicable to J-1 foreign medical graduates for
medical service in health professional shortage areas. The bill
also includes a provision that exempts physicians serving under
this program from the numerical limitation on H-1B visas. The
legislation also permits physicians participating in the
program to practice medicine outside geographic areas
designated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services in the
case of a waiver request from an interested State agency.
Legislative History
Senator Conrad introduced S. 2302 in the Senate on April 7,
2004, and it was referred to the Senate Committee on the
Judiciary.
The Committee on the Judiciary reported S. 2302 to the
Senate with an amendment in the nature of a substitute on
October 7, 2004 without written report.
The Senate passed S. 2302 with an amendment by unanimous
consent on October 11, 2004.
S. 2302 was received in the House on November 16, 2004, and
held at the desk.
On November 17, 2004, S. 2302 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules, and passed the House by a vote
of 407 yeas to 4 nays.
S. 2302 was presented to the President on November 22,
2004, and signed by the President on December 3, 2004 (Public
Law 108-441).
IMPROVING EDUCATION RESULTS FOR CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 2003
Public Law 108-446 (H.R. 1350, S. 1284)
To reauthorize the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act.
Summary
H.R. 1350 as passed by the Senate and enacted into law,
contained provisions requiring States to certify that they meet
the requirements of designating financial requirements of
designating financial responsibilities for services. The bill
also contained language that requires states to ensure that
interagency agreements are in place to ensure that services are
paid for by appropriate state agencies. Finally, H.R. 1350
amends the Children's Health Act to include the Secretary of
Education as a required partner in the longitudinal study and
requires that the study be in compliance with Family Education
Rights Privacy Act requirements.
Legislative History
Mr. Castle introduced H.R. 1350 in the House on March 19,
2003, and it was referred to the House Committee on Education
and the Workforce.
The Committee on Education and the Workforce reported H.R.
1350 to the House on April 29, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-77).
The House considered H.R. 1350 under the provisions of H.
Res. 206 on April 30, 2003, and passed the bill, as amended, by
a vote of 251 yeas to 171 nays.
On May 1, 2003, H.R. 1350 was received in the Senate, read
twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
On May 13, 2004, the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions was discharged by unanimous consent, and the
Senate struck all after the enacting clause in H.R. 1350 and
substituted the language of S. 1248, as amended. The same day,
the Senate passed H.R. 1350 in lieu of S. 1248 with an
amendment by a vote of 95 yeas to 3 nays.
On October 8, 2004, the House disagreed to the Senate
amendment to H.R. 1350, requested a conference with the Senate,
and appointed conferees. The Speaker appointed conferees from
the Committee on Energy and Commerce for consideration of sec.
101 and title V of the Senate amendment, and modifications
committed to conference, Messrs. Barton, Bilirakis, and
Dingell.
On October 9, 2004, the Senate insisted on its amendment,
agreed to the request for a conference, and appointed
conferees.
On November 17, 2004, pursuant to a previous order of the
House, the conference report on H.R. 1350 was filed in the
House (H. Rpt. 108-779).
On November 19, 2004, the House considered the conference
report to accompany H.R. 1350 under the provisions of H. Res.
858. The House passed the conference report to accompany H.R.
1350 by a vote of 397 yeas to 3 nays.
On November 19, 2004, the Senate passed the conference
report by unanimous consent.
H.R. 1350 was presented to the President on November 30,
2004, and was signed by the President on December 3, 2004
(Public Law 108-446).
A BILL TO AMEND TITLE XIX OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT TO EXTEND MEDICARE
COST-SHARING FOR THE MEDICARE PART B PREMIUM FOR QUALIFYING INDIVIDUALS
THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2005
Public Law 108-448 (S. 2618)
A bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to
extend Medicare cost-sharing for the Medicare part B premium
for qualifying individuals through September 2005.
Summary
S. 2618 amends title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security
Act to extend Medicare cost-sharing for the Medicare part B
premium for certain qualifying low-income individuals through
September 2005. S. 2618 allocates funding amounts for specified
periods between January 1, 2004, and September 30, 2005.
Legislative History
S. 2618 was introduced by Senator Grassley on July 7, 2004,
with four cosponsors.
The bill passed the Senate without amendment by unanimous
consent on November 16, 2004.
On November 16, 2004, S. 2618 was received in the House and
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On November 19, 2004, S. 2618 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules, and passed the House by voice
vote.
The bill was presented to the President on November 29,
2004, and on December 8, 2004 was signed by the President
(Public Law 108-448).
INTELLIGENCE REFORM AND TERRORISM PREVENTION ACT OF 2004
Public Law 108-458 (H.R. 10, S. 2845)
(Health Provisions)
A bill to provide for reform of the intelligence community,
terrorism prevention and prosecution, border security, and
international cooperation and coordination, and for other
purposes.
Summary
Title XVIII contains the provisions of H.R. 3266, Faster
and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act of 2004.
Legislative History
H.R. 10 was introduced by Speaker Hastert on September 24,
2004, and referred primarily to the Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence, and in addition to the Committee on Armed
Services, the Committee Education and the Workforce, the
Committee on Energy and Commerce, the Committee on Financial
Services, the Committee on Government Reform, the Committee on
International Relations, the Committee on the Judiciary, the
Committee on Rules, the Committee on Science, the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, the Committee on Ways and
Means, and the Select Committee on Homeland Security, for a
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker.
On October 4, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
was granted an extension for further consideration ending not
later than October 5, 2004. The Committee on Energy and
Commerce was discharged on October 5, 2004.
On October 7 and 8, 2004, H.R. 10 was considered in the
House under the provisions of H. Res. 827. Section 5011 was
adopted as part of an en bloc amendment on the floor of the
House by voice vote on October 8, 2004 (Amendment 793 offered
by Mr. Hoekstra). H.R. 10 passed the House, amended, by a vote
of 282 yeas and 134 nays on October 8, 2004.
No further action was taken on H.R. 10 in the 108th
Congress, but H.R. 10 was superseded by S. 2845.
On September 23, 2004, S. 2845 was introduced by Senator
Collins, read the first time, and placed on Senate Legislative
Calendar under Read the First Time.
On September 24, 2004, the bill was read the second time
and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
S. 2845 passed the Senate with amendments by a vote of 96
yeas and 2 nays on October 6, 2004.
On October 16, 2004, the House is considered to have taken
S. 2845 from the Speaker's table, stricken all after the
enacting clause and inserted the text of H.R. 10 as passed by
the House, pursuant to H. Res. 827. The House insisted on its
amendment and asked for a conference pursuant to H. Res. 827.
The Senate disagreed to the House amendment on October 16,
2004, agreed to request for conference, and appointed
conferees.
On December 7, 2004, the conference report to accompany S.
2845 was filed (H. Rpt. 108-796), containing sections 7303(i),
7402, 7403, and 7405 under the jurisdiction of the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
The conference report was considered in the House under the
provisions of H. Res. 870 on the same day, and the House agreed
to the conference report by a vote of 336 yeas and 75 nays.
On December 8, 2004, the Senate agreed to the conference
report by a vote of 89 yeas and 2 nays.
S. 2845 was presented to the President on December 15,
2004, and was signed by the President on December 17, 2004
(Public Law 108-458).
CHILDREN'S HOSPITALS GRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION
Public Law 108-490 (H.R. 5204)
To modify provisions regarding the determination of the
amount of payments for indirect expenses associated with
operating approved graduate medical residency training programs
at children's hospitals.
Summary
H.R. 5204 amends the Public Health Service Act to require
the Secretary of Health and Human Services to consider the
ratio of residents in children's hospitals' approved graduate
medical residency training programs to beds (but excluding beds
or bassinets assigned to healthy new born infants) when
determining the amount of payments to such hospitals for
indirect expenses associated with the treatment of more
severely ill patients and the additional costs associated with
teaching residents in such programs.
Legislative History
Ms. Eshoo introduced H.R. 5204 on October 4, 2004, and it
was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
H.R. 5204 was considered in the House under suspension of
the rules on October 6, 2004, and passed the House the same day
by voice vote.
The bill was received in the Senate on October 7, 2004.
On December 8, 2004, H.R. 5204 passed the Senate by
unanimous consent.
H.R. 5204 was presented to the President on December 16,
2004, and was signed by the President on December 23, 2004
(Public Law 108-490).
PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, WORK, AND FAMILY PROMOTION ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 4)
To reauthorize and improve the program of block grants to
States for temporary assistance for needy families, improve
access to quality child care, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 4 contains provisions that fall within the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Section
201 revises, reauthorizes, and extends the program for
abstinence education under the Social Security Act title V
(Maternal and Child Services Block Grant) through FY 2008,
allowing funds that the Secretary determines will not be
required to carry out an abstinence program of a particular
State to be reallocated among the States with abstinence
education programs.
Section 601 of H.R. 4 amends title XIX of the SSA
(Medicaid) to continue the transitional medical assistance
(TMA) program until September 30, 2008. It permits states to
extend TMA for up to 24 months, allowing continuous eligibility
for 12 months by making reporting requirements optional, and
eases access by permitting states to waive the requirements for
previous receipt of Medicaid (for three of the previous six
months). Section 601 makes requirements concerning the
extension of eligibility for medical assistance optional for
states that extend coverage to children and parents through 185
percent of the Federal poverty level. This section also
requires notice for all families whose aid under SSA title IV
part A or E has terminated but whose eligibility for Medicaid
continues, and extends use of outstationed workers to accept
applications for TMA. Section 602 of H.R. 4 amends the State
Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to prohibit the
spending of SCHIP funds on childless couples.
Legislative History
H.R. 4 was introduced by Mrs. Pryce on February 4, 2003,
and was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in
addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the Committee
on Education and the Workforce, the Committee on Agriculture,
and the Committee on Financial Services on February 7, 2003.
On February 13, 2003, H.R. 4 was considered in the House
under the provisions of H. Res. 69. The bill passed the House
by a vote of 230 yeas and 192 nays.
On February 13, 2003, the bill was received by the Senate
and referred to the Committee on Finance.
On October 3, 2003, H.R. 4 was reported to the Senate,
amended, by the Committee on Finance (S. Rpt. 108-162).
The bill was considered in the Senate on March 30, 2004,
March 31, 2004, and April 1, 2004.
A cloture motion was not invoked in Senate by a vote of 51
yeas and 47 nays.
No further action was taken on H.R. 4 in the 108th
Congress.
HELP EFFICIENT, ACCESSIBLE, LOW-COST TIMELY HEALTHCARE (HEALTH) ACT OF
2003
(H.R. 5, H.R. 4280)
To improve patient access to health care services and
provide improved medical care by reducing the excessive burden
the liability system places on the health care delivery system.
Summary
H.R. 5 establishes federal standards to reform the medical
liability system. The provisions of H.R. 5 apply to any health
care lawsuit brought in a federal or state court, or subject to
an alternative dispute resolution system, that is initiated on
or after the date of enactment, with the exception that any
health care lawsuit arising from an injury occurring prior to
the date of the enactment will be governed by the applicable
statute of limitations provisions in effect at the time the
injuryoccurred. In general, any issue that is not governed by
any provision of law established by or under H.R. 5 is governed by
otherwise applicable state or federal law.
H.R. 5 includes language binding the statute of limitation
for a health care lawsuit. The bill states that a health care
lawsuit shall be commenced 3 years after the date of
manifestation of injury or 1 year after the claimant discovers,
or through the use of reasonable diligence should have
discovered, the injury, whichever occurs first. In no event
shall the time for commencement of a health care lawsuit exceed
3 years unless tolled for any of the following: (1) upon proof
of fraud; (2) intentional concealment; or, (3) the presence of
a foreign body, which has no therapeutic or diagnostic purpose
or effect, in the person of the injured person. There is an
exception for alleged injuries sustained by a minor before the
age of 6, in which case a health care lawsuit may be commenced
by or on behalf of the minor until the later of 3 years from
the date of injury, or the date on which the minor attains the
age of 8. This time period is tolled for minors for any period
during which a parent or guardian and a health care provider or
health care organization have committed fraud or collusion in
the failure to bring an action on behalf of the injured minor.
H.R. 5 does not limit the amount of economic losses a
claimant may recover. Under H.R. 5, economic loss includes, for
example, objectively verifiable monetary losses, past and
future medical expenses, loss of past and future earnings, cost
of obtaining domestic services, loss of employment, and loss of
business or employment opportunities. H.R. 5 specifies that a
claimant may recover up to $250,000 in non-economic damages.
Non-economic damages is defined as damages for physical and
emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, physical impairment,
mental anguish, disfigurement, loss of enjoyment of life, loss
of society and companionship, loss of consortium, hedonic
damages, injury to reputation, and all other nonpecuniary
losses of any kind or nature. With respect to compensatory or
punitive damages, H.R. 5 does not preempt any state law
(enacted before, on, or after the date of enactment of H.R. 5)
that specifies a particular monetary amount of compensatory or
punitive damages (or the total amount of damages) that may be
awarded in a health care lawsuit.
H.R. 5 establishes a rule that apportions damages in
proportion to a defendant's degree of fault. The legislation
requires that courts supervise the arrangements for payment of
damages to protect against conflicts of interest that may have
the effect of reducing the amount of damages awarded that are
actually paid to claimants. H.R. 5 establishes a sliding fee
schedule for the payment of contingency fees from a claimant's
damage recovery as follows: 40 percent of the first $50,000
recovered by the claimant; 33\1/3\ percent of the next $50,000
recovered by the claimant; 25 percent of the next $500,000
recovered by the claimant; and 15 percent of any amount by
which the recovery by the claimant(s) is in excess of $600,000.
H.R. 5 clarifies that in any health care lawsuit, any party
may introduce evidence of collateral source benefits received
``or reasonably likely to be received'' from other parties (and
which benefits would cover the same injuries). H.R. 5 requires
the court, at the request of any party, to order that the award
of future damages equaling or exceeding $50,000 be paid by
periodic payments.
H.R. 5 clearly states that no demand for punitive damages
shall be included in a health care lawsuit as initially filed.
The legislation does not permit the award of punitive damages
in health care lawsuits if compensatory damages are not
awarded. H.R. 5 states, however, that punitive damages may be
awarded if otherwise permitted by applicable state or federal
law. In all cases, punitive damages may only be awarded if it
is first proven by clear and convincing evidence that a
defendant acted with malicious intent to injure the claimant,
or that such person deliberately failed to avoid unnecessary
injury that such person knew the claimant was substantially
certain to suffer. The amount of any punitive damages that are
awarded may be as much as two times the amount of economic
damages awarded, or $250,000, whichever is greater. H.R. 5
allows for bifurcation procedures, at either party's request,
so that the proceedings on punitive damages would be separate
from and subsequent to the proceedings on compensatory damages.
H.R. 5 does not permit the award of punitive damages
against the manufacturer or distributor of a medical product
based on a claim that the product caused the harm where: the
product was subject to premarket approval or clearance by the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with respect to the safety
of the formulation or performance of the product or the
adequacy of the labeling of the product, and the product was
approved and cleared by the FDA; or, the medical product is
generally recognized among qualified experts as safe and
effective pursuant to conditions established by the FDA and
applicable regulations. H.R. 5 prohibits a health care provider
from being named as a party in a product liability lawsuit for
prescribing or dispensing pursuant to a prescription drug or
device that is approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
Punitive damages may be awarded against a manufacturer or
distributor of a medical product, however, if a person, before
or after premarket approval or clearance of the product
knowingly misrepresented or withheld information from the FDA
that is required to be submitted or is material and causally
related to the harm which the claimant allegedly suffered.
Punitive damages may also be awarded if a person made an
illegal payment to an FDA official for the purpose of either
securing or maintaining approval or clearance.
H.R. 5 includes a sense of Congress that a health insurer
should be liable for damages for harm caused when it makes a
decision as to what care is medically necessary and
appropriate.
H.R. 4280 is substantially similar to H.R. 5.
Legislative History
H.R. 5 was introduced in the House by Mr. Greenwood on
February 5, 2003. The bill was referred to the Committee on the
Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On February 27, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health of the
Committee on Energy and Commerce held an oversight hearing on
assessing the need to enact medical liability reform. The
hearing focused on the current medical liability crisis, what
other factors contribute torising medical malpractice insurance
premiums, and the potential impact of medical liability reforms, such
as those proposed in H.R. 5, on patient's rights, insurance companies
and physicians. Testimony was received from a patient perspective and a
health law attorney, as well as industry representatives and consumer
advocacy groups.
On March 4, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health met in open
markup session and forwarded H.R. 5 to the Full Committee,
amended, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
On March 6, 2003, the Full Committee on Energy and Commerce
met in open markup session and ordered H.R 5 reported to the
House, as amended, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on the Judiciary reported H.R. 5 to the
House, amended, on March 11, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-32, Part I).
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 5 to the
House, as amended, on March 11, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-32, Part II).
On March 13, 2003, H.R. 5 was considered in the House under
the provisions of H. Res. 139. The House passed H.R. 5, as
amended, by a vote of 229 yeas to 197 nays.
On March 13, 2003, H.R. 5 was received in the Senate. On
March 20, 2003, the bill was read the first time, and placed on
Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time. On March
21, 2003, H.R. 5 was read the second time and placed on Senate
Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
No further action was taken on H.R. 5 in the 108th
Congress.
H.R. 4280 was introduced in the House by Mr. Greenwood on
May 5, 2004. The bill was referred to the Committee on the
Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
The House considered H.R. 4280 under the provisions of H.
Res. 638 on May 12, 2004. H.R. 4280 passed the House by a vote
of 229 yeas and 196 nays, with one Member voting present.
No further action was taken on H.R. 4280 in the 108th
Congress.
PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY IN FOOD CONSUMPTION ACT
(H.R. 339)
To prevent legislative and regulatory functions from being
usurped by civil liability actions brought or continued against
food manufacturers, marketers, distributors, advertisers,
sellers, and trade associations for claims of injury relating
to a person's weight gain, obesity, or any health condition
associated with weight gain or obesity.
Summary
H.R. 339 provides that a qualified civil liability action
may not be brought in any Federal or State court, and that a
qualified civil liability action that is pending on the date of
the enactment of this Act shall be dismissed immediately by the
court in which the action was brought or is currently pending.
The legislation defines a ``qualified civil liability action''
as a civil action brought by any person against a manufacturer
or seller of a qualified product, or a trade association, for
damages, penalties, declaratory judgment, injunctive or
declaratory relief, restitution, or other relief arising out
of, related to, or resulting in injury or potential injury
arising from a person's consumption of a qualified product and
a person's resulting weight gain, obesity, or any health
condition that is associated with a person's weight gain or
obesity. Such actions include those brought by a person other
than the person on whose weight gain, obesity, or health
condition the action is based, and any derivative action
brought by, or on behalf of, any person or any representative,
spouse, parent, child, or other relative of any person. The
term ``qualified product'' is defined as a food, as defined in
section 201(f) of the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (21
U.S.C.321(f)).
Legislative History
H.R. 339 was introduced in the House by Mr. Keller on
January 27, 2003. The bill was referred to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
On January 28, 2004, the Committee on the Judiciary met in
open markup session and ordered H.R. 339 reported to the House,
amended, by voice vote.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on
the Judiciary exchanged correspondence on H.R. 339 on March 4,
2004.
The Committee on the Judiciary reported H.R. 339 to the
House, amended, on March 5, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-432), pursuant to
the previous order of the House of March 4, 2004.
The House considered H.R. 339 on March 10, 2004, pursuant
to the provisions of H. Res. 522, and approved the bill by a
roll call vote of 276 yeas to 139 nays.
On March 11, 2004, H.R. 339 was received in the Senate. The
bill was read the first time and placed on Senate Legislative
Calendar under Read the First Time on March 25, 2004. On March
26, 2004, the bill was read the second time and placed on
Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
No further action on H.R. 339 occurred in the 108th
Congress.
PATIENT SAFETY AND QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ACT
(H.R. 663, S. 720)
To amend title IX of the Public Health Service Act to
provide for the improvement of patient safety and to reduce the
incidence of events that adversely affect patient safety, and
for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 663 provides the opportunity for health care providers
to submit information, in the form of a work product, on
medical errors and other patient safety issues to a patient
safety organization (PSO). The bill protects such information
from discovery or use in courts or administrative proceedings.
Such protection would encourage more robust evaluations of
patient safety issues in hospitals and other provider
organizations. H.R. 663 also provides for certain
confidentialityrequirements for communications not connected
with judicial or administrative proceedings. The bill sets out
qualifications for PSO's. The decision of a provider or institution to
contract with a PSO would be voluntary. However, once such a decision
is made and in operation, various rules would apply to the flow of
patient safety information. The Secretary of Health and Human Services
would enforce these rules through administrative and civil penalties.
H.R. 663 also authorizes the Secretary of HHS to establish
or to designate other entities to create a voluntary national
database to track medical errors. The Secretary of HHS is also
authorized to develop and adopt voluntary national standards to
promote the compatibility of health information technology
systems. Finally, H.R. 663 establishes grant programs for
electronic prescribing and information technologies for
hospitals and other healthcare providers. This will allow for
physicians and other types of providers who lack the necessary
resources to adopt the latest technologies that have been
proven to significantly reduce the incidence of medical errors.
Legislative History
Mr. Bilirakis introduced H.R. 663 on February 11, 2003, and
the bill was referred to the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
The Full Committee on Energy and Commerce Committee met in
open markup session on February 12, 2003, and ordered H.R. 663
reported to the House, amended, by voice vote.
On March 6, 2003 the Committee on Energy and Commerce
reported H.R. 663 to the House, amended (H. Rpt. 108-28).
H.R. 663 was considered in the House under suspension of
the rules on March 12, 2003, and passed the House, as amended,
by a vote of 418 yeas and 6 nays.
On March 13, 2003, H.R. 663 was received in the Senate,
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
The Senate passed H.R. 663, amended with the text of S.
720, by unanimous consent on July 22, 2004, requested a
conference, insisted on its amendments, and appointed
conferees.
No further action was taken on H.R. 663 in the 108th
Congress.
MEDICARE REGULATORY AND CONTRACTING REFORM ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 810)
To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide
regulatory relief and contracting flexibility under the
Medicare Program.
Summary
H.R. 810 streamlines Medicare rules for providers and
suppliers. This legislation addresses the need for consistent
and accurate written responses from Medicare contractors, and
helps beneficiaries better understand and navigate the Medicare
program. It takes sensible steps to educate providers and
clarify provider rights, while protecting and supporting
efforts to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare.
More specifically, H.R. 810; (1) ensures that substantive
regulation or policy changes take effect no earlier than 30
days after the Secretary of Health and Human Services has
issued such a change; (2) calls for the Secretary to update
Congress every 2 years on areas of confusion, inconsistency, or
conflict among Medicare's various statutory and regulatory
provisions; (3) provides for the designation and specific
training of Medicare-only Administrative Law Judges; (4)
creates an expedited process for providers to obtain judicial
review of appeals for denied claims and provider agreement
determinations; (5) requires the Secretary to expedite appeal
proceedings when termination of participation or other
immediate sanctions have been imposed on providers; (6) opens
all contracts to competitive bidding, giving CMS the ability to
terminate contractors that are inefficient; (7) requires
Medicare contractors to develop information security programs
for all Medicare-related business; (8) requires Medicare
contractors to provide general written responses to beneficiary
and provider written inquiries within 45 business days; (9)
treats providers who rely on written guidance or written
responses to inquiries fairly and equitably; (10) calls for the
Secretary to appoint an individual to develop appropriate
responses to complaints concerning inconsistencies and
confusion in the Medicare program; (11) limits random
prepayment review to cases that fit a standard protocol
developed by the Secretary; (12) requires the Secretary to
develop standards for repayment plans, taking into account a
provider's reliance on guidance and financial hardship; (13)
requires Medicare to inform beneficiaries that utilize skilled
nursing facilities (SNFs) well in advance of the end of the 100
days of care; and, (14) allows beneficiaries who receive a
notice from a provider that Medicare may no cover a particular
service to find out in advance whether or not it will be
covered.
Legislative History
On February 13, 2003, H.R. 810 was introduced by Mrs. Nancy
Johnson and referred to the Committee on Ways and Means and in
addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On March 26, 2003, the Full Committee on Energy and
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 810
reported to the House, amended, by voice vote, a quorum being
present.
The Committee on Ways and Means reported H.R. 810 to the
House on April 11, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-74, Part I).
On April 11, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce was
granted an extension for further consideration ending not later
than April 29, 2003.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 810 to
the House, amended, on April 29, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-74, Part
II).
No further action was taken on H.R. 810 in the 108th
Congress.
PATIENT NAVIGATOR, OUTREACH, AND CHRONIC DISEASE PREVENTION ACT OF 2004
(H.R. 918)
To amend the Public Health Service Act to authorize a
demonstration grant program to provide patient navigator
services to reduce barriers and improve health care outcomes,
and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 918 authorizes the Secretary of the Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS) to award grants to promote
model ``patient navigator'' programs to improve health care
outcomes for individuals with cancer or other chronic diseases,
with specific emphasis on health disparity populations. The
bill authorizes a 5-year demonstration program, managed by the
Administrator of the Health Resources and Services
Administration, to evaluate the impact of patient navigators on
improving health care outcomes.
The Administrator may award grants to eligible entities to
recruit, assign, train, and employ patient navigators who have
a direct knowledge of the communities they serve. Eligible
entities include a public or nonprofit private health center, a
community health center, a health facility operated with the
Indian Health Services, a hospital, a cancer center, a rural
health clinic, an academic health center, or a nonprofit entity
that enters into a partnership or coordinates referrals with
such health care facilities. An eligible entity may only
receive a grant for a 3-year period, and may apply for a one-
year waiver. No grant may be awarded after September 30, 2010.
Patient navigators must coordinate health care services and
provider referrals, facilitate involvement of community
organizations to provide assistance to patients, facilitate
enrollment in clinical trials, anticipate barriers within the
health care system and help ensure prompt diagnostic care and
treatment, coordinate with health insurance ombudsman programs,
and conduct ongoing outreach to health disparity populations
for preventative care.
Grant recipients must establish baseline measures and
benchmarks to evaluate program outcomes. The Secretary is
required to conduct a study of the results of the program no
later than 6 months after the completion of the demonstration
grant program.
Legislative History
H.R. 918 was introduced by Mr. Menendez on February 26,
2003, and it was referred to the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce, and in addition to the House Committee on Resources.
On September 30, 2004 the Full Committee on Energy and
Commerce met open markup session and ordered H.R. 918 reported
to the House, amended, by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
On October 5, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
reported H.R. 918 to the House, amended (H. Rpt. 108-727, Part
I).
On October 5, 2004, H.R. 918 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and as passed the House, as
amended, by a voice vote.
On October 6, 2004, H.R. 918 was received in the Senate.
No further action was taken on H.R. 918 in the 108th
Congress.
CHILD MEDICATION SAFETY ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 1170)
To protect children and their parents from being coerced
into administering a controlled substance in order to attend
school.
Summary
H.R. 1170 requires states, as a condition of receiving
Federal education funds, to establish policies and procedures
prohibiting school personnel from requiring a child to take
medication in order to attend school.
Legislative History
H.R. 1170 was introduced by Mr. Burns on March 11, 2003.
The bill was referred to the Committee on Education and the
Workforce.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on
Education and the Workforce exchanged correspondence concerning
H.R. 1170 on May 20, 2003.
The Committee on Education and the Workforce reported H.R.
1170 to the House on May 21, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-121).
H.R. 1170 was considered in the House under suspension of
the rules on May 21, 2003, and passed the House, amended, by a
vote of 425 yeas and 1 nay.
On May 22, 2003 H.R. 1170 was received in the Senate, read
twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
No further action was taken on H.R. 1170 in the 108th
Congress.
SPECIAL POSTAGE STAMP TO BENEFIT BREAST CANCER RESEARCH
(H.R. 1385)
To extend the provision of title 39, United States Code,
under which the United States Postal Service is authorized to
issue a special postage stamp to benefit breast cancer
research.
Summary
H.R. 1385 extends the U.S. Postal Service's authority to
issue special postage stamps to help provide funding for breast
cancer research through December 31, 2006.
Legislative History
H.R. 1385 was introduced by Mr. Baca on March 20, 2003, and
was referred to the Committee on Government Reform, and in
addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and the
Committee on Armed Services.
On January 27, 2004, H.R. 1385 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules, and passed the House by a vote
of 331 yeas and 1 nay.
On January 28, 2004, H.R. 1385 was received in the Senate,
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Governmental
Affairs.
No further action was taken on H.R. 1385 in the 108th
Congress.
OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 2086)
To amend the Office of National Drug Control Policy
Reauthorization Act of 1998 to reauthorize the Office of
National Drug Control Policy through fiscal year 2008.
Summary
H.R. 2086 amends the Office of National Drug Control
Reauthorization Act of 1998 to reauthorize the Office of
National Drug Control Policy through fiscal year 2008.
Legislative History
H.R. 2086 was introduced in the House by Mr. Souder on May
14, 2003. The bill was referred to the House Committee on
Government Reform, and in addition, the Committee on the
Judiciary, the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
On June 19, 2003 the Committee on Government Reform
reported H.R. 2086 to the House, amended (H. Rpt. 108-167, Part
I).
The Committee on Energy and Commerce, the Committee on the
Judiciary, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
were granted an extension for further consideration ending not
later than July 14, 2003.
On July 14, 2003, the Committee on the Judiciary reported
H.R. 2086 to the House, amended (H. Rpt. 108-167, Part II).
On September 30, 2003, the House considered H.R. 2086 under
suspension of the rules, and passed the House, as amended, by
voice vote.
H.R. 2086 was received in the Senate on October 1, 2003,
read twice, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
No further action was taken on H.R. 2086 in the 108th
Congress.
TO AMEND THE FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, AND COSMETIC ACT TO PROVIDE FOR THE
REGULATION OF NONCORRECTIVE CONTACT LENS AS MEDICAL DEVICES, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES
(H.R. 2218)
To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to
provide for the regulation of all contact lenses as medical
devices, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 2218 amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
to: (1) regulate all contact lenses as medical devices; and,
(2) state that such regulation shall not be construed as having
any legal effect on any other Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)-regulated article.
Legislative History
On May 22, 2003, H.R. 2218 was introduced in the House by
Mr. Boozeman, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
H.R. 2218 was considered in the House on November 19, 2003,
under suspension of the rules and passed the bill, as amended,
by voice vote.
On November 20, 2003 the bill was received in the Senate.
On December 9, 2003, it was read twice and referred to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
No further action was taken on H.R. 2218 was taken in the
108th Congress.
PHARMACEUTICAL MARKET ACCESS ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 2427)
Summary
H.R. 2427 would require the packaging of every prescription
drug to use counterfeit-resistant technology. A prescription
drug would be misbranded if the packaging of the drug did not
include this technology. The legislation eliminates section
804(l) of the Food and Drug Cosmetic Act (FDCA), which would
not permit reimportation until the Secretary of Health and
Human Services demonstrates that it will pose ``no additional
risk'' to public health and safety.
The legislation instructs the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) to promulgate regulations permitting ``qualifying
individuals'' to reimportcovered products into the United
States. A ``qualifying individual'' is defined as any individual ``who
is not a pharmacist or wholesaler.''
Legislative History
On June 11, 2003, Mr. Gutknecht introduced H.R. 2427. The
bill was referred to the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
On July 25, 2003, H.R. 2427 was considered in the House
under the provisions of H. Res. 335. The House passed H.R. 2427
by a vote 243 yeas and 186 nays.
On July 25, 2003, the legislation was received in the
Senate, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
No further action was taken on H.R. 2427 in the 108th
Congress.
THE HEALTH INSURANCE CERTIFICATE ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 2698)
To provide for a system of health insurance certificates to
increase the number of Americans with health insurance
coverage.
Summary
H.R. 2698 is a means-tested, social spending program
designed to reduce the number of uninsured Americans by
providing subsidies to low and low-middle income families
specifically for the purchase of health insurance coverage. In
many cases, the Act will simply reduce the financial burden of
those who have already been paying for health insurance
coverage. H.R. 2698 authorizes almost $50 billion
($49,965,000,000) over 10 years for the combination of this
purpose and for funding high-risk pools. The Secretary of
Health and Human Services would administer the program.
The certificate value established by H.R. 2698 would vary,
in part, by income and, in part, by the number of family
members addressed. There are two categories of health
certificates: (1) certificates to subsidize the purchase of
health insurance provided outside the employment context; and,
(2) certificates for use as a premium subsidy for employment-
related health insurance certificates to subsidize the purchase
of health insurance provided within the employment context.
H.R. 2698 also includes increased funding for state high-
risk pools.
Legislative History
Mr. Bilirakis introduced H.R. 2698 on July 10, 2003. The
bill was referred to the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On July 17, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing
on H.R. 2698. Witnesses included representatives of insurers,
doctors, employers, and labor, as well an expert from academia.
No further action was taken on H.R. 2698 in the 108th
Congress.
NATIONAL UNIFORMITY FOR FOOD ACT
(H.R. 2699)
To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to
provide for uniform food safety warning notification
requirements, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 2699 amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FDCA) to prohibit any state or political subdivision from
establishing or continuing in effect as to any food in
interstate commerce any requirement for food that is not
identical to specified FDCA provisions. It allows current state
notification or food safety requirements to continue for 180
days after the enactment of this Act, during which such state
may petition for an exemption or a new national standard. Under
the legislation, a state may petition for an exemption and for
a national standard regarding any requirement under the FDCA or
the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act relating to food
regulation. A state is allowed to establish a requirement that
would otherwise violate FDCA provisions relating to national
uniform nutrition labeling or this paragraph if the requirement
is needed to address an imminent hazard to health that is
likely to result in serious adverse health consequences and if
other requirements are met.
Legislative History
On July 10, 2003, Mr. Burr introduced H.R. 2699, which was
referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On September 30, 2004, the Full Committee on Energy and
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 2699
reported to the House, amended, by a record vote of 30 yeas and
15 nays, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 2699 to
the House, amended, on October 8, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-770).
No further action was taken on H.R. 2699 in the 108th
Congress.
NATIONAL ALL SCHEDULES PRESCRIPTION ELECTRONIC REPORTING ACT
(H.R. 3015)
Summary
H.R. 3015 amends Part P of title III of the Public Service
Act by adding new section 399O, Controlled Substance Monitoring
Program. Under this program, the Secretary of Health and Human
Services would award grants to states to establish and operate
controlled substance monitoring programs.
In implementing a PDMP under this section, a state shall
require all dispensers to report each dispensing in the state
not later than one weekafter the dispensing. Each state
operating an authorized monitoring program would be required to cover
Schedule II, III, and IV drugs. The bill will also facilitate the
interoperability of state systems so drug diversion and abuse that
crosses states lines can also be detected.
Legislative History
On September 4, 2003, Mr. Whitfield introduced H.R. 3015.
The legislation was referred to the House Committee on Energy
and Commerce.
On September 30, 2004 the Full Committee on Energy and
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 3015
reported to the House, amended, by a voice vote, a quorum being
present.
On October 5, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
reported H.R. 3015 to the House, amended (H. Rpt. 108-728).
H.R. 3015 was considered in the House under suspension of
the rules and passed the House, as amended, by voice vote.
On October 6, 2004, H.R. 3015 was received in the Senate.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3015 in the 108th
Congress.
NATIONAL BONE MARROW REGISTRY REAUTHORIZATION ACT
(H.R. 3034)
To reauthorize the national bone marrow donor registry.
Summary
H.R. 3034 continues the basic functions of the registry,
with minor changes to reflect relatively new functions of the
bone marrow registry. The national bone marrow registry is
under the general supervision of the Secretary of Health and
Human Services and a board of directors. H.R. 3034 extends the
time period a member of the board of directors may serve. The
bone marrow registry, which maintains close ties with the
Department of the Navy, currently prepares for emergency
events, where large segments of the population may need urgent
transplants. H.R. 3034 explicitly authorizes the registry to
maintain and expand medical response capabilities in concert
with federal programs for responding to terrorist threats that
can damage marrow. Additional authorization of appropriations
for this may be awarded if the Secretary deems it necessary to
significantly expand this function of the registry. H.R. 3034
requires the continued promotion of research to improve the
availability, efficiency, safety, and cost of transplants. In
addition, the registry must increase the number of umbilical
cord blood units listed in the registry. H.R. 3034 also
includes provisions to increase information sharing with
transplant patients. For example, current law requires that the
bone marrow registry include a scientific registry of
information relating to patients who have been recipients of a
transplant of bone marrow from a biologically unrelated donor.
H.R. 3034 requires the scientific registry to participate in
medical research that has the potential to improve transplant
outcomes and make the relevant scientific information available
to the public. The legislation authorizes the appropriation of
$32 million for fiscal year 2004, and such sums as may be
necessary for fiscal years 2005-2008.
Legislative History
H.R. 3034 was introduced in the House on September 5, 2003,
by Mr. Bill Young, and was referred to the House Committee on
Energy and Commerce Committee.
On September 10, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 3034 to be reported
to the House, amended, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3034 to
the House, amended, on September 17, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-276).
On October 1, 2003, the bill was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules, and passed the House, as
amended, by voice vote.
On October 2, 2003, H.R. 3034 was received in the Senate,
read twice, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3034 in the 108th
Congress.
FASTER AND SMARTER FUNDING FOR FIRST RESPONDERS ACT OF 2004
(H.R. 3266)
To authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to make
grants to first responders, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 3266 would reform the manner in which the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) issues grants to enhance the ability
of states, local governments, and first responders to prevent,
prepare for, mitigate and respond to acts of terrorism. The
bill does not create a new terrorism grant program. The primary
revision to law would be to modify the criteria used to
distribute funding for two existing first responder grant
programs--the State Homeland Security and the Urban Area
Security Initiative grant programs. In addition H.R. 3266 would
authorize the appropriation of $3.4 billion in FY 2006 for
first responder grants including the above programs.
H.R. 3266 does not apply to grants administered by the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). However, there
may be overlap between the types of first responder issues
addressed in H.R. 3266 and those addressed by HHS pursuant to
earlier legislative authority.
Section 3 of the bill directs the Secretary of Homeland
Security to: (1) establish clearly defined essential
capabilities for State and local government preparedness for
terrorism, for purposes of covered grants (i.e., any grant
provided by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)to states
or regions to improve the ability of first responders to prevent,
prepare for, respond to, or mitigate terrorist attacks, including any
grant under DHS's State Homeland Security Grant Program or Urban Area
Security Initiative); and, (2) establish (within 120 days after this
Act's enactment) and regularly update (at least every three years)
essential capabilities.
The bill further directs the Secretary to require that any
state applying for a covered grant submit a three-year State
homeland security plan that: (1) demonstrates the extent to
which the state has achieved, and what is still needed for the
state to achieve, the applicable essential capabilities; (2)
includes a prioritization of such additional needs based on
threat, vulnerability, and consequence assessment factors; (3)
describes how the State intends to address such additional
needs at the city, county, regional, state, and interstate
level, with particular emphasis on regional planning and
cooperation within its jurisdictional borders and with
neighboring states; and, (4) is developed in consultation with
and subject to appropriate comment by local governments.
H.R. 3266 also directs the Secretary to support the
development of, promulgate, and update national voluntary
consensus standards for: (1) the performance, use, and
validation of first responder equipment, which shall be
consistent with existing standards, take into account new types
of terrorism threats, and focus on maximizing interoperability,
interchangeability, durability, flexibility, efficiency,
efficacy, portability, sustainability, and safety; and, (2)
first responder training under covered grant programs that will
enable State and local government first responders to achieve
optimal levels of terrorism preparedness as quickly as
practicable. Lists required categories of first responder
equipment
Legislative History
Mr. Cox introduced H.R. 3266 on October 8, 2003. The bill
was referred to the House Select Committee on Homeland
Security, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure, the Committee on the Judiciary, and the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The Select Committee on Homeland Security reported H.R.
3266 to the House, amended, on April 2, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-460,
Part I).
On April 2, 2004 the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and the
Committee on the Judiciary were granted an extension for
further consideration ending not later than June 7, 2004.
On May 11, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing
on H.R. 3266. The primary focus of the hearing was the need to
avoid unnecessary duplication of functions and the need for
coordination between the Department of Homeland Security and
the Department of Health and Human Services. Witnesses included
representatives of the Department of Homeland Security and the
Department of Health and Human Services.
On June 3, 2004 the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and the
Committee on the Judiciary were granted an extension for
further consideration ending not later than June 14, 2004.
On June 3, 2004, the Full Committee on Energy and Commerce
met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 3266 reported to
the House, amended, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3266 to
the House, amended, on June 14, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-460, Part
II).
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported
H.R. 3266 to the House, amended, on June 21, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-
460, Part III).
The Committee on the Judiciary reported H.R. 3266 to the
House, amended, on June 21, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-460, Part IV).
No further action was taken on H.R. 3266 in the 108th
Congress.
TAX RELIEF EXTENSION ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 3521)
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend
certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 3521 extends the application of mental health parity
provision under the Public Health Service Acts to December
2004. The original mental health parity provisions were part of
the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of
1996.
Legislative History
Mr. Thomas introduced H.R. 3521 on November 19, 2003. The
bill was referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means, and
in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and the
Committee on Education and the Workforce.
On November 20, 2003, H.R. 3521 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules, and passed the House by voice
vote.
H.R. 3521 was received in the Senate on November 21, 2003.
On December 9, 2003 H.R. 3521 was read twice and referred to
the Committee on Finance.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3521 in the 108th
Congress.
STROKE TREATMENT AND ONGOING PREVENTION ACT
(H.R. 3658)
To authorize programs to strengthen education, prevention,
and treatment programs to improve health outcomes for stroke
patients.
Summary
H.R. 3658 amends the Public Health Service Act to
strengthen education, prevention, and treatment programs to
improve health outcomes for stroke patients.
To increase public awareness of the signs of stroke, H.R.
3658 authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Health and
Human Services to carry out an education and information
campaign. The Secretary is required to establish quantitative
benchmarks to measure the impact of the campaign over time. To
expand research information about stoke patients, H.R. 3658
reauthorizes the Paul Coverdell National Acute Stroke Registry
and Clearinghouse at the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC).
To improve medical professional development in advanced
stroke and traumatic injury treatment and prevention, H.R 3658
authorizes two grant programs at the Department of Health and
Human Services. The first authorizes the Secretary to make
grants to public and nonprofit entities for the purpose of
planning, developing, and enhancing approved residency training
programs and other training for appropriate health professions
in emergency medicine to improve stroke and traumatic injury
prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation. The
Secretary may also make grants to a consortium of public and
private entities for the development and implementation of
education programs for appropriate health care professions in
the use of newly developed diagnostic approaches, technologies,
and therapies to treat stroke or traumatic injury. The
Secretary must report on the results of the activities of these
two grant programs no later than one year after the allocation
of grants.
Finally, H.R. 3658 includes a five-year pilot project to
improve stroke patient outcomes by coordinating health care
delivery through existing telehealth networks. The Secretary is
authorized to make up to seven grants to states or a consortium
of states or political subdivisions for a period of up to three
years. Recipients are required to establish baseline measures
and benchmarks to evaluate program outcomes. Not later than
March 31, 2010, the Secretary of Health and Human Services is
required to report to Congress on the pilot project outcomes,
including recommendations on how to promote stroke networks and
recommendations on whether similar telehealth grant programs
could be used to improve patient outcomes in other public
health areas.
Legislative History
H.R. 3658 was introduced by Ms. Capps on December 8, 2003,
and was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The Subcommittee on Health met in open markup session on
January 28, 2004, and forwarded the bill to the Full Committee,
amended, by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
On March 3, 2004, the Full Committee on Energy and Commerce
met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 3658 reported to
the House, as amended, by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
On March 30, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
reported H.R. 3658 to the House (H. Rpt. 108-453).
On June 14, 2004, H.R. 3658 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House, as amended,
by a voice vote.
On June 15, 2004, H.R. 3658 was received in the Senate and
referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions. No further action was taken on H.R. 3658 in the 108th
Congress.
UNDOCUMENTED ALIEN EMERGENCY MEDICAL ASSISTANCE ACT AMENDMENTS OF 2004
(H.R. 3722)
To amend section 1011 of the Medicare Prescription Drug,
Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 to impose conditions
on Federal reimbursement of emergency health services furnished
to undocumented aliens.
Summary
H.R. 3722 amends the Medicare Prescription Drug,
Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 to: (1) prohibit
Federal reimbursement of hospital-provided emergency and
certain transportation services to undocumented aliens unless
the hospital provides the Secretary of Homeland Security with
information regarding an alien's citizenship, immigration
status, financial data, and employer; (2) make the employer of
certain undocumented aliens responsible for such costs; and,
(3) direct the Secretary to initiate removal procedures against
an alien determined to be removable under Federal immigration
law. It also directs the Secretary of State to analyze the
feasibility of effecting treaties for international medical
evacuations.
Legislative History
On January 21, 2004, H.R. 3722 was introduced by Mr.
Rohrabacher, and was referred to the House Committee on Energy
and Commerce.
On May 17, 2004, H.R. 3722 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules. The bill failed to pass the
House by a vote of 88 yeas and 331 nays.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3722 in the 108th
Congress.
AMYOTROPHIC LATERAL SCLEROSIS
(H. Res. 278)
Recognizing the contributions Lou Gehrig and his legacy
have made in the fight against Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis.
Summary
H. Res. 278 recognizes the celebration of Lou Gehrig's
100th birthday and commends the contribution Gehrig and his
legacy have made to the search for better treatments and a cure
for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS). The Resolution
supports cutting-edge research to find a cure for ALS. In
addition, H. Res. 278 applauds all organizations, including the
ALS Association, in their efforts to raise awareness about the
disease, support research initiatives, and assist those
suffering with ALS and their families.
Legislative History
H. Res. 278 was introduced in the House by Mr. Engel and
nineteen cosponsors on June 16, 2003, and was referred to the
House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On June 19, 2003, H. Res. 278 was considered in the House
by unanimous consent, and passed the House without objection.
AWARENESS OF HEART DISEASE AMONG WOMEN
(H. Res. 522)
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that
there is a critical need to increase awareness and education
about heart disease and the risk factors of heart disease among
women.
Summary
H. Res. 522 declares the sense of the House of
Representatives that there is a critical need to increase
awareness and education about heart disease and the risk
factors for heart disease among women.
The resolution commends First Lady Laura Bush and the
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute in their vital
campaign to raise public awareness that heart disease is the
number one killer of American women.
The resolution also recognizes that the more women become
cognizant of the scourge of heart disease and how to prevent
it, the more likely they can make sound lifestyle changes to
help reduce their chances of getting heart disease.
Legislative History
H. Res. 522 was introduced in the House by Mr. Snyder and
fifty-eight cosponsors on February 10, 2004, and was referred
to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The Full Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open
markup session on March 3, 2004, and ordered H. Res. 522
reported to the House by voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H. Res. 522
to the House on March 18, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-440).
On March 23, 2004, H. Res. 522 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House on March 24,
2004, by a vote of 420 yeas and 0 nays.
GIVE KIDS A SMILE
(H. Res. 567)
Congratulating the American Dental Association for
sponsoring the second annual ``Give Kids a Smile'' program
which emphasizes the need to improve access to dental care for
children, and thanking dentists for volunteering their time to
help provide needed dental care.
Summary
H. Res. 567 congratulates the American Dental Association
for establishing and continuing its sponsorship of the ``Give
Kids a Smile'' program and thanks the thousands of dentists,
dental hygienists, dental assistants, and others who volunteer
their time and support the program. The resolution also
emphasizes the need to improve access to dental care for
children.
Legislative History
H. Res. 567 was introduced by Mr. Cantor on March 17, 2004,
and was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On September 30, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
met in open markup session and ordered H. Res. 567 reported to
the House by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
On October 4, 2004, H. Res. 567 was considered by the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a vote of
338 yeas and 0 nays.
SUPPORTING THE NEED TO PROVIDE CANCER PATIENTS WITH ACCESS TO TREATMENT
OPTIONS
(H. Res. 669)
To express the sense of the House of Representatives with
respect to the need to provide prostate cancer patients with
meaningful access to information on treatment options.
Summary
H. Res. 669 expresses the sense of the House of
Representatives that national and community organizations and
health care providers have played a commendable role in
supplying information concerning the importance of screening
for prostate cancer and the treatment options available for
patients with prostate cancer. The resolution also recommends
that the Federal Government and the States should ensure that
health care providers supply prostate cancer patients with
appropriateinformation and any other tools necessary for
prostate cancer patients to receive readily understandable descriptions
of the advantages, disadvantages, benefits, and risks of all medically
efficacious treatments for prostate cancer.
Legislative History
Mr. Deal introduced H. Res. 669 in the House on June 9,
2004, and was referred to the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
H. Res. 669 was considered in the House under suspension of
the rule on June 14, 2004, and passed the same day by a vote of
377 yeas and 3 nays.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES RESOLUTION OF INQUIRY
(H. Res. 776)
Of inquiry requesting the President and directing the
Secretary of Health and Human Services provide certain
documents to the House of Representatives relating to estimates
and analyses of the cost of the Medicare prescription drug
legislation.
Summary
H. Res. 776 requests the President of the United States and
directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to provide
certain documents to the House of Representatives relating to
estimates and analysis of the cost of the Medicare prescription
drug legislation. Specifically, the information requested is as
follows: (1) any estimates and any analyses made by the
Department of Health and Human Services or the Office of
Management and Budget relating to the cost of any version of
the Medicare prescription drug legislation; (2) any
communications (whether written or electronic) relating to such
cost estimates or analyses or their release to Members of
Congress between employees within the executive branch; (3) any
communications (whether written or electronic) relating to such
cost estimates or analyses or their release to Members of
Congress between employees of the executive branch and Members
of Congress or their staff; and, (4) any communications
(whether written or electronic) relating to such cost estimates
or analyses or their release to Members of Congress between
employees of the executive branch and persons other than
employees of the executive branch or legislative branch. For
purposes of this resolution the term 'any version of the
Medicare prescription drug legislation' refers to any version
of H.R. 1 or S. 1 (108th Congress), including the conference
report on H.R. 1.
Legislative History
Mr. Rangel and four cosponsors introduced H. Res. 776 on
September 15, 2004. The resolution was referred to the House
Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the
Committee on Ways and Means.
On September 30, 2004 the Full Committee on Energy and
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H. Res. 776
adversely reported to the House, without amendment, by a
recorded vote of 26 yeas and 21 nays, a quorum being present.
On October 7, 2004, H. Res. 776 was reported adversely to
the House by the Committee on Ways and Means (H. Rpt. 108-754,
Part I).
On October 8, 2004, H. Res. 776 was reported adversely to
the House by the Committee on Energy and Commerce (H. Rpt. 108-
754, Part II).
No further action was taken on H. Res. 776 in the 108th
Congress.
ENCOURAGING PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES TO PROMOTE HEALTHY
LIFESTYLES
(H. Con. Res. 34)
Expressing the sense of the Congress that private health
insurance companies should take a proactive role in promoting
healthy lifestyles.
Summary
H. Con. Res. 34 commends Secretary of Health and Human
Services Tommy Thompson for his efforts to encourage private
health insurance companies to take action to encourage people
in the United States to lead active lifestyles. It also
expresses the sense of the Congress that private health
insurance companies should: (1) do more to encourage people in
the United States to lead a healthier and more active lifestyle
to prevent expensive and painful illnesses; (2) provide
discounted premiums to those who exercise regularly; and, (3)
encourage frequent screening for diseases that are easily
treatable in their early stages. Finally, the resolution
applauds private health insurance companies that are already
taking these actions.
Legislative History
Ms. McCarthy introduced H. Con. Res. 34 in the House along
with six cosponsors on February 12, 2003, and it was referred
to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The Full Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open
markup session on September 30, 2004, and ordered H. Con. Res.
34 reported to the House by voice vote, a quorum being present.
H. Con. Res. 34 was considered in the House under
suspension of the rules on October 5, 2004, and passed the
House by voice vote.
The resolution was received in the Senate on October 6,
2004.
No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 34 in the 108th
Congress.
U.S. CORPORATIONS CONTRIBUTIONS TO FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS
(H. Con. Res. 108)
Encouraging corporations to contribute to faith-based
organizations.
Summary
H. Con. Res. 108 encourages all U.S. corporations to make
greater contributions to faith-based organizations battling
societal challenges. The resolution also expresses the sense of
Congress that such corporations are important partners with
government in efforts to overcome social problems; and should
not adopt policies that prohibit contributions to faith-based
organizations.
Legislative History
H. Con. Res. 108 was introduced by Mr. Mark Green on March
20, 2003 and was referred to the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On April 30, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met
in open markup session and ordered H. Con. Res. 108 reported to
the House, amended, by a voice vote.
No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 108 in the
108th Congress.
SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF HUMAN GENOME MONTH AND DNA DAY
(H. Con. Res. 110)
Recognizing the sequencing of the human genome as one of
the most significant scientific accomplishments of the past one
hundred years and expressing support for the goals and ideals
of Human Genome Month and DNA Day.
Summary
H. Con. Res. 110 recognizes: (1) the 50th anniversary of
the accomplishment of describing the structure of
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), the essential completion of the
sequencing of the human genome in April 2003, and the
development of a plan for the future of genomics; and, (2) the
sequencing of the human genome as one of the most significant
scientific accomplishments of the past 100 years. The
resolution also expresses support for the goals and ideals of
Human Genome Month (April 2003) and DNA Day (April 25, 2003).
Legislative History
Ms. Slaughter introduced H. Con. Res. 110 in the House
along with nine cosponsors on March 24, 2003, and was referred
to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The Full Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open
markup session on April 30, 2003, and ordered H. Con. Res. 110
reported to the House by voice vote, a quorum being present.
H. Con. Res. 110 was considered in the House under
suspension of the rules on June 10, 2003, and passed the House
on June 11, 2003 by a vote of 414 yeas and 0 nays.
The resolution was received in the Senate on June 12, 2003,
and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 110 in the
108th Congress.
ANNIVERSARY OF THE ORPHAN DRUG ACT
(H. Con. Res. 147)
Commemorating the 20th Anniversary of the Orphan Drug Act
and the National Organization for Rare Disorders.
Summary
H. Con. Res. 147 commemorates the 20th anniversary of the
Orphan Drug Act and the National Organization for Rare
Disorders and recognizes the contributions such Act has made to
the rare disease community.
Legislative History
H. Con. Res. 147 was introduced in the House by Mr. Foley
and 14 cosponsors on April 10, 2003, and was referred to the
House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The Full Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open
markup session on April 30, 2003, and ordered H. Con. Res. 147
reported to the House by voice vote, a quorum being present.
The House considered H. Con. Res. 147 under suspension of
the rules on May 19, 2003, and passed the House, as amended, by
a vote of 386 yeas and 0 nays.
The resolution was received in the Senate on May 20, 2003,
and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 147 in the
108th Congress.
SUPPORTING THE NATIONAL MARROW DONOR PROGRAM
(H. Con. Res. 206)
Supporting the National Marrow Donor Program and other bone
marrow donor programs and encouraging Americans to learn about
the importance of bone marrow donation.
Summary
H. Con. Res. 206 expresses support for the goals and ideals
of the National Marrow Donor Program and other bone marrow
donor programs.
Legislative History
H. Con. Res. 206 was introduced by Mr. Burgess and one
cosponsor on June 4, 2003, and was referred to the House
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On November 21, 2003, H. Con. Res. 206 was considered in
the House under suspension of the rules and passed the House by
a vote of 432 yeas and 2 nays.
The resolution was received in the Senate on November 22,
2003, and referred to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions on December 9, 2003.
No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 206 in the
108th Congress.
DEFIBRILLATION PROGRAMS
(H. Con. Res. 250)
Recognizing community organization of public access
defibrillation programs.
Summary
H. Con. Res. 250 recognizes the growing number of community
activists, organizations, and municipal governments leading the
national effort to establish public access defibrillation
programs and encourages the continued development and
implementation of programs in a variety of community venues.
Legislative History
H. Con. Res. 250 was introduced by Mr. Brown (OH) on July
23, 2003 and was referred to the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On September 30, 2004, the Full Committee on Energy and
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H. Con. Res.
250 reported to the House by a voice vote, a quorum being
present.
On October 5, 2004, H. Con. Res. 250 was considered in the
House under suspension of the rules and was passed the House by
a voice vote.
On October 6, 2004, the resolution was received in the
Senate.
No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 250 in the
108th Congress.
RECOGNIZING THE IMPORTANCE OF EARLY DIAGNOSIS, PROPER TREATMENT, AND
ENHANCED PUBLIC AWARENESS OF TOURETTE SYNDROME
(H. Con. Res. 430)
Recognizing the importance of early diagnosis, treatment,
and enhanced public awareness of Tourette Syndrome and
supporting the goals and ideals of National Tourette Syndrome
Awareness Month.
Summary
H. Con. Res. 430 recognizes: (1) the impact that Tourette
Syndrome can have on people living with the disorder; (2) the
importance of an early diagnosis and proper treatment of
Tourette Syndrome; and, (3) the need for enhanced public
awareness of Tourette Syndrome. The resolution also expresses
support for the goals and ideals of National Tourette Syndrome
Awareness Month, as designated by the Tourette Syndrome
Association, and encourages the President to issue a
proclamation calling on the people of the United States and
interested organizations to observe National Tourette Syndrome
Awareness Month.
Legislative History
Mr. Young (FL) introduced H. Con. Res. 430 on May 18, 2004,
and it was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
H. Con. Res. 430 was considered in the House under
suspension of the rules on November 17, 2004, and passed the
House by voice vote.
The resolution was received in the Senate on November 18,
2004.
On December 8, 2004, H. Con. Res. 430 was referred to the
Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 430 in the
108th Congress.
NATIONAL NURSE PRACTITIONERS WEEK
(H. Con. Res. 500)
Honoring the goals and ideals of National Nurse
Practitioners Week.
Summary
H. Con. Res. 500 honors the goals and ideals of National
Nurse Practitioners Week and offers Congress' sincere support
to nurse practitioners around the country as they continue to
provide high-quality health care to many Americans.
Legislative History
H. Con. Res. 500 was introduced by Mr. Burgess on September
28, 2004 and was referred to the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
On October 6, 2004, H. Con. Res. 500 was considered by the
House under suspension of the rules and was passed the House by
a voice vote.
On October 7, 2004, the resolution was received in the
Senate.
No further action was taken on H. Con. Res. 500 in the
108th Congress.
NATIONAL AUTISM AWARENESS MONTH
(H. Res. 605)
Recognizing the importance of increasing awareness of
autism, supporting programs for increased research and improved
treatment of autism, improving training and support for
individuals with autism and those who care for individuals with
autism, and for other purposes.
Summary
H. Res. 605 supports the goals and ideals of a National
Autism Awareness Month. The resolution recognizes and commends
the parents and relatives of children with autism for their
sacrifice and dedication in providing for the special needs of
children with autism and for absorbing significant financial
costs for specialized education and support services. The
resolution supports aggressive research to: (1) determine
causes of autism; (2) identify the best methods of early
intervention and treatment; (3) expand programs for individuals
with autism across their lifespan; and, (4) promote
understanding of the special needs of individuals with autism.
The resolution also commends the Department of Health and
Human Services for implementing programs to study the
epidemiology of autism and related disorders and advancing
autism research at the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention and the National Institutes of Health.
The resolution stresses the need to begin early
intervention services soon after an individual has been
diagnosed with autism, noting that early intervention
strategies are the primary therapeutic options for individuals
with autism and early intervention significantly improves
outcomes for individuals with autism and can reduce the level
of funding and services needed later in life.
H. Res. 605 supports the Federal Government's commitment to
provide states with part of the costs needed to educate
children with disabilities under part B of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act.
The resolution encourages more Americans to pursue the
teaching profession and to be trained with the skills necessary
to teach, assist, and respond to special needs students,
including those students with autism.
The resolution recognizes the importance of worker training
programs that meet the needs of developmentally disabled
individuals, including those individuals with autism.
Finally, H. Res. 605 notes that people with autism can be,
and are, productive members of the workforce if they are given
appropriate support, training, and early intervention services.
Legislative History
H. Res. 605 was introduced in the House by Mr. Tierney and
forty-five cosponsors on April 22, 2004, and was referred to
the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to
the Committee on Education and the Workforce.
On May 5, 2004, H. Res. 605 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules and passed the House, as amended,
by vote of 421 yeas and 0 nays.
NATIONAL EPILEPSY AWARENESS MONTH
(S. Con. Res. 48)
A concurrent resolution supporting the goals and ideals of
``National Epilepsy Awareness Month'' and urging support for
epilepsy research and service programs.
Summary
S. Con. Res. 48 supports the goals and ideals of a National
Epilepsy Awareness Month. Urges support for epilepsy research
programs at the National Institutes of Health and at the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Legislative History
S. Con. Res. 48 was introduced in the Senate by Ms. Lincoln
and six cosponsors on June 4, 2003 and referred to the Senate
Committee on the Judiciary.
On June 12, 2003, the Senate passed S. Con. Res. 48,
amended, by unanimous consent.
On June 16, 2003, S. Con. Res. 48 was received by the House
and was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On November 19, 2003, S. Con. Res. 48 was considered in the
House under suspension of the rules and passed the House by a
voice vote.
Oversight Activities
ASSESSING THE NEED TO ENACT MEDICAL LIABILITY REFORM
On February 27, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing assessing the need to enact medical liability
reform. The hearing focused on the current medical liability
crisis, what other factors contribute to rising medical
malpractice premiums, and the potential impact of medical
liability reforms, such as those proposed in H.R. 5, the Help
Efficient, Accessible, Low-Cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH) Act
of 2003, on patients' rights, insurance companies and
physicians. Testimony was received from a patient perspective
and a health law attorney, as well as industry representatives
and consumer advocacy groups.
MEDICAID TODAY: THE STATES' PERSPECTIVE
On March 12, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing examining the Medicaid program. The hearing
focused on the governors' assessment of the current Medicaid
program faces and ways to improve and strengthen the program.
Specifically, the hearing focused on current and long term
Medicaid financing, and other issues surrounding Medicaid. The
only witnesses were three Governors who provided their views on
the Medicaid program.
HIV/AIDS, TB, AND MALARIA: COMBATING A GLOBAL PANDEMIC
On March 20, 2003, the Health Subcommittee held a hearing
on global pandemics of infectious diseases. The hearing focused
on the global HIV/AIDS pandemic, specifically in Sub-Saharan
Africa, and ways to prevent the spread of disease in the
future. Testimony was received from the Department of Health
and Human Services, as well as policy and industry specialists.
FURTHERING PUBLIC HEALTH SECURITY: PROJECT BIOSHIELD
On March 27, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing on Project Bioshield. Project Bioshield aims
to spur the research and development of new vaccines, drugs,
and other countermeasures to deal with those biological,
chemical, nuclear or radiological agents that pose a material
threat to our national security. Witnesses included Secretary
of Health and Human Services, Tommy Thompson, and other experts
in vaccine and drug research and development.
DESIGNING A TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFIT
On April 8, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing to provide Members with a better
understanding of the complexity involved in designing a
Medicare drug benefit and some of the issues that needed to be
considered in developing legislation creating the drug benefit,
including program design and management tools necessary to
ensure its affordability and long-term sustainability.
Witnesses included former government officials and economic
advisers from the Congressional Budget Office, the President's
Council of Economic Advisors, and the Health Care Financing
Administration, as well as consumer advocacy groups.
STRENGTHENING AND IMPROVING MEDICARE
On April 9, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing to examine the long-term fiscal situation of
the Medicare program and options for improving beneficiary
choices within the program. Witnesses included a representative
from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, policy and
industry specialists, and a consumer advocacy group. In
addition, one witness testified as a Medicare beneficiary.
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH: DECODING OUR FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN
GENOMIC RESEARCH
On May 22, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing on genomic research activities at the
National Institutes of Health. The hearing focused on how NIH
is utilizing taxpayer dollars to improve and expand its
research activities in the field of genomics research.
Witnesses included representatives of the National Institute of
Health, the Department of Energy, the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, and university based and private sector
researchers.
CONSUMER DIRECTED SERVICES: IMPROVING MEDICAID BENEFICIARIES' ACCESS TO
QUALITY CARE
On June 5, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing to examine several state demonstration
projects that allow Medicaid beneficiaries with disabilities to
manage some of their personal care services. The hearing
focused on these demonstration programs, known generically as
Cash and Counseling, which allow certain beneficiaries to
choose to receive a monthly cash-allowance for personal care
services based on a professional assessment of their needs.
Witnesses discussed whether this program should be expanded
nationwide and concerns with including other Medicaid-covered
services within the program. Witnesses included representatives
from Florida's program, as well as an advocacy group
representing disabled beneficiaries, and the mother of a
disabled beneficiary.
NIH: MOVING RESEARCH FROM THE BENCH TO THE BEDSIDE
On July 10, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing on the translation of medical research
findings at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The
hearing focused on how NIH's technology transfer policies are
working to bring new products to the market and improve public
health, and evaluated whether NIH's technology transfer
policies prohibit the federal government from fairly recouping
research investments. Witnesses included representatives of the
NIH, including the National Library of Medicine, the Food and
Drug Administration, as well as representatives of the
biotechnology industry, university researchers, and patient
advocates.
CHALLENGES FACING THE MEDICAID PROGRAM IN THE 21ST CENTURY
On October 8, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing on the challenges facing the Medicaid
program, including incentives for states to maximize federal
contributions and financing.Witnesses at the hearing provided
perspectives on the challenges facing the Medicaid program and
suggested program changes. Witnesses included the Administrator for the
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, a delegate to a State House
of Representatives, and a policy specialist from the health care
industry.
EVALUATING COORDINATION OF CARE IN MEDICAID: IMPROVING QUALITY AND
CLINICAL OUTCOMES
On October 15, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held a
hearing to examine how the Medicaid program coordinates care
for its beneficiaries to improve health and quality of care.
The hearing focused on the efforts to coordinate care through
disease management, Primary Care Case Management programs,
integrated managed care plans, and other new innovative state
approaches. Witnesses included government health care officials
from Florida, North Carolina and Indiana, and representatives
from health care organizations.
PRESCRIPTION DRUG MONITORING: STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE TREATMENT AND DETER
PRESCRIPTION DRUG ABUSE
On March 4, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing on prescription drug monitoring programs. The
hearing focused on examining the role of prescription drug
monitoring programs in preventing and deterring prescription
drug abuse. The hearing will consist of one panel of witnesses.
Witnesses testifying included a Member of Congress, the
Secretary of the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family
Services, and representatives of the General Accounting Office
and two trade associations.
INTER-GOVERNMENTAL TRANSFERS: VIOLATIONS OF THE FEDERAL-STATE MEDICAID
PARTNERSHIP OR LEGITIMATE STATE BUDGET TOOL?
On March 18, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing to examine how some states use inter-
governmental transfers (IGTs), and the impact these funding
mechanisms have on the growth in Federal Medicaid spending.
Witnesses included officials from the U.S. General Accounting
Offices and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Office of Inspector General, as well as a hospital
representative.
On April 1, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held its
second oversight hearing to examining IGTs. Witnesses included
representative from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services and the Ohio Office of Medicaid.
NIH: RE-ENGINEERING CLINCIAL RESEARCH
On March 25, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held a joint
oversight hearing with the Subcommittee on Emergency
Preparedness of the Select Committee on Homeland Security on
clinical research activities at the National Institutes of
Health (NIH). The hearing focused on how NIH is conducting
clinical research and highlighted areas for improvement.
Witnesses included the Director of the NIH, as well as
representatives of the biotechnology industry, patient advocacy
organizations, and university researchers.
PHYSICIAN FEE SCHEDULE: A REVIEW OF THE CURRENT MEDICARE PAYMENT SYSTEM
On May 5, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing on the history of how physicians and other
health professionals are reimbursed under Medicare. The hearing
also focused on the mechanics of the current payment system,
including the formula used to annually update payment made to
doctors under the Medicare physician fee schedule. Witnesses
included representatives from the U.S. General Accounting
Office, Congressional Budget Office, and Medicare Payment
Advisory Commission.
MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG DISCOUNT CARDS
On May 20, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing
regarding implementation of the Medicare Drug Discount Card
Program established in the Medicare Modernization Act. The
hearing focused on efforts to educate beneficiaries about the
new benefit, and savings that they may realize from enrolling
in the program. Witnesses included the Administrator for the
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, as well as industry
and consumer advocacy representatives and a Medicare
beneficiary.
SCIENTIFIC OPPORTUNITIES AND PUBLIC NEEDS: BALANCING NIH'S PRIORITY
SETTING PROCESS
On June 2, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing on the National Institutes of Health budget
and priority setting process. The hearing focused on examining
how the National Institutes of Health set research priorities
to meet public health needs and advance scientific
opportunities. Witnesses included representatives of the
National Institutes of Health.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FOOD SECURITY PROVISIONS FOR THE PUBLIC HEALTH
SECURITY AND BIOTERRORISM PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE ACT
On June 25, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing to review the implementation of food security
provisions. The hearing reviewed new requirements for
registration of food processors, prior notice of imported food
shipments, establishment and maintenance of records, and
administrative detention. The Public Health Security and
Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act, enacted in the
107th Congress, mandated these requirements. Witnesses
includedrepresentatives of the Food and Drug Administration, U.S.
Customs, the food processing and distribution industries.
ASSESSING DIGESTIVE DISEASE RESEARCH AND TREATMENT OPPORTUNITIES
On July 8, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing on digestive disease research and treatment
programs. The hearing focused on raising awareness about
digestive diseases and examining what the National Institutes
of Health and others are doing to study these diseases and
improve patient outcomes. Witnesses included representatives of
the National Institutes of Health, patient advocates, and
university researchers.
HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: IMPROVING QUALITY AND VALUE OF PATIENT
CARE
On July 22, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing examining health information technology. The
hearing provided the Committee with an opportunity to assess
the Administration's new strategic information technology
framework. The hearing also explored the promise that health
information technology holds for improving America's healthcare
system and examined barriers that have slowed the adoption of
this technology by hospitals, doctors, and other providers of
healthcare. Witnesses included the Health and Human Services
Secretary Tommy Thompson, and a representative of the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs and other policy experts.
KEEPING SENIORS HEALTHY: NEW PREVENTIVE BENEFITS IN THE MEDICARE
MODERNIZATION ACT
On September 21, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held a
hearing to examine the preventive benefits in the Medicare
program, specifically the expansion of preventive benefits
under the Medicare Modernization Act, which take effect January
1, 2005. Witnesses provided insight on the need for these
services, how the medical community determines the
appropriateness of utilizing these services, and mechanisms to
ensure beneficiaries take advantage of them. Witnesses included
representatives from the Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality, U.S. Government Accountability Office, and a non-
profit research organization.
IMPROVING WOMEN'S HEALTH: UNDERSTANDING DEPRESSION AFTER PREGNANCY
On September 29, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing on depression after pregnancy. The hearing
focused on raising awareness about depression experienced by
some women after pregnancy. Testimony was received from patient
advocates and medical practitioners.
FLU VACCINE: PROTECTING HIGH-RISK INDIVIDUALS AND STRENGTHENING THE
MARKET
On November 18, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health and the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a joint
hearing on the flu vaccine shortage, ways to protect high-risk
individuals for this flu season, and decrease the chances of
this problem happening next year. The Committee received
testimony from representatives from the Department of Health
and Human Services, the Government Accountability Office, a
state health department, and various segments of the health
care industry.
Hearings Held
Assessing the Need to Enact Medical Liability Reform.--
Oversight hearing on Assessing the Need to Enact Medical
Liability Reform. Hearing held on February 27, 2003. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-2.
Medicaid Today: The States' Perspective.--Oversight hearing
on Medicaid Today: The States' Perspective. Hearing held on
March 12, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-24.
HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria: Combating a Global Pandemic.--
Oversight hearing on HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria: Combating a
Global Pandemic. Hearing held on March 20, 2003. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-10.
Furthering Public Health Security: Project BioShield.--
Joint oversight hearing with the Subcommittee on Emergency
Preparedness of the Select Committee on Homeland Security on
Furthering Public Health Security: Project BioShield. Hearing
held on March 27, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-11.
Designing a Twenty-First Century Medicare Prescription Drug
Benefit.--Oversight hearing on Designing a Twenty-First Century
Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit. Hearing held on April 8,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-25.
Strengthening and Improving Medicare.--Oversight hearing on
Strengthening and Improving Medicare. Hearing held on April 9,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-22.
National Institutes of Health: Decoding our Federal
Investment in Genomic Research.--Oversight hearing on National
Institutes of Health: Decoding our Federal Investment in
Genomic Research. Hearing held on May 22, 2003. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-23.
Consumer Directed Services: Improving Medicaid
Beneficiaries' Access to Quality Care.--Oversight hearing on
Consumer Directed Services: Improving Medicaid Beneficiaries'
Access to Quality Care. Hearing held on June 5, 2003. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-28.
NIH: Moving Research from the Bench to the Bedside.--
Oversight hearing on NIH: Moving Research from the Bench to the
Bedside. Hearing held on July 10, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number
108-38.
Health Insurance Certificate Act of 2003.--Hearing on H.R.
2698, Health Insurance Certificate Act of 2003. Hearing held on
July 17, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-44.
Challenges Facing the Medicaid Program in the 21st
Century.--Oversight hearing on Challenges Facing the Medicaid
Program in the 21st Century. Hearing held on October 8, 2003.
PRINTED, Serial Number 108-58.
Evaluating Coordination of Care in Medicaid: Improving
Quality and Clinical Outcomes.--Oversight hearing on Evaluating
Coordination of Care in Medicaid: Improving Quality and
Clinical Outcomes. Hearing held on October 15, 2003. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-57.
Prescription Drug Monitoring: Strategies to Promote
Treatment and Deter Prescription Drug Abuse.--Oversight hearing
on Prescription Drug Monitoring: Strategies to Promote
Treatment and Deter Prescription Drug Abuse. Hearing held on
March 4, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-73.
Inter-governmental Transfers: Violations of the Federal-
State Medicaid Partnership or Legitimate State Budget Tool?--
Oversight hearing on Inter-governmental Transfers: Violations
of the Federal-State Medicaid Partnership or Legitimate State
Budget Tool? Hearings held on March 18, 2004 and April 1, 2004.
PRINTED, Serial Number 108-76.
NIH: Re-engineering Clinical Research.--Oversight hearing
on NIH: Re-engineering Clinical Research. Hearing held on March
25, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-69.
Physician Fee Schedule: A Review of the Current Medicare
Payment System.--Oversight hearing on Physician Fee Schedule: A
Review of the Current Medicare Payment System. Hearing held on
May 5, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-95.
Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act of
2004.--Hearing on H.R. 3266, Faster and Smarter Funding for
First Responders Act of 2004. Hearing held on May 11, 2004.
PRINTED, Serial Number 108-102.
Medicare Prescription Drug Discount Cards: Immediate
Savings for Seniors.--Oversight hearing on Medicare
Prescription Drug Discount Cards: Immediate Savings for
Seniors. Hearing held on May 20, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number
108-130.
Scientific Opportunities and Public Needs: Balancing NIH's
Priority Setting Process.--Oversight hearing on Scientific
Opportunities and Public Needs: Balancing NIH's Priority
Setting Process. Hearing held on June 2, 2004. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-131.
Implementation of the Food Security Provisions of the
Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and
Response Act.--Oversight hearing on Implementation of the Food
Security Provisions of the Public Health Security and
Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act. Hearing held on
June 25, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-114.
Assessing Digestive Diseases Research and Treatment
Opportunities.--Oversight hearing on Assessing Digestive
Diseases Research and Treatment Opportunities. Hearing held on
July 8, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-94.
Health Information Technology: Improving Quality and Value
of Patient Care.--Oversight hearing on Health Information
Technology: Improving Quality and Value of Patient Care.
Hearing held on July 22, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-132.
Keeping Seniors Healthy: New Preventive Benefits in the
Medicare Modernization Act.--Oversight hearing on Keeping
Seniors Healthy: New Preventive Benefits in the Medicare
Modernization Act. Hearing held on September 21, 2004. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-117.
Improving Women's Health: Understanding Depression After
Pregnancy.--Oversight hearing on Improving Women's Health:
Understanding Depression After Pregnancy. Hearing held on
September 29, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-133.
Flu Vaccine: Protecting High-Risk Individuals and
Strengthening the Market.--Joint oversight hearing with the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on Flu Vaccine:
Protecting High-Risk Individuals and Strengthening the Market.
Hearing held on November 18, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-
134.
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
(Ratio 18-15)
FRED UPTON, Michigan, Chairman
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida
ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland CLIFF STEARNS, Florida
KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri Vice Chairman
MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio
JIM DAVIS, Florida CHRISTOPHER COX, California
CHARLES A GONZALEZ, Texas NATHAN DEAL, Georgia
RICK BOUCHER, Virginia ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming
BART GORDON, Tennessee JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois
PETER DEUTSCH, Florida HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING,
ANNA G. ESHOO, California Mississippi
BART STUPAK, Michigan VITO FOSSELLA, New York
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York STEVE BUYER, Indiana
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire
(ex officio) MARY BONO, California
GREG WALDEN, Oregon
LEE TERRY, Nebraska
JOE BARTON, Texas
(ex officio)
Jurisdiction: Interstate and foreign telecommunications including, but
not limited to all telecommunication and information transmission by
broadcast, radio, wire, microwave, satellite, or other mode.
Legislative Activities
ORBIT TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS ACT OF 2003
Public Law 108-39 (H.R. 2312)
To amend the Communications Satellite Act of 1962 to
provide for the orderly dilution of the ownership interest in
Inmarsat by former signatories to the Inmarsat Operating
Agreement.
Summary
H.R. 2312 amended the Communications Satellite Act of 1962
to extend until June 30, 2004, the deadline for conducting an
initial public offering of securities for the successor
entities of Inmarsat; and allow the Federal Communications
Commission to extend such deadline to not later than December
31, 2004.
Legislative History
H.R. 2312 was introduced in the House on June 3, 2003 by
Mr. Shimkus and four cosponsors, and was referred to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On June 12, 2003, H.R. 2312 passed the House by unanimous
consent.
On June 17, 2003, H.R. 2312 was received in the Senate. On
June 20, 2003, the bill passed the Senate without amendment by
unanimous consent and was cleared for the White House.
The President signed H.R. 2312 on June 30, 2003 (Public Law
108-39).
A BILL TO AMEND THE COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE ACT OF 1962 TO EXTEND THE
DEADLINE FOR THE INTELSAT INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING
Public Law 108-228 (S. 2315)
To amend the Communications Satellite Act of 1962 to extend
the deadline for the INTELSAT initial public offering.
Summary
S. 2315 amends section 621(5)(A)(i) of the Communications
Satellite Act of 1962 (47 U.S.C. 763(5)(A)(i)) by moving the
initial public offering deadline for INTELSAT from December 31,
2003 to June 30, 2005, and allowing the Federal Communications
Commission to extend the deadline not later than December 31,
2005.
Legislative History
S. 2315 was introduced in the Senate on April 8, 2004, by
Senator Burns. On April 27, 2004, the Senate passed S. 2315
without amendment by unanimous consent.
On April 28, 2004, S. 2315 was received in the House and
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On May 5, 2004, and the House passed S. 2315 by unanimous
consent.
On May 18, 2004, S. 2315 was signed by the President
(Public Law 108-228).
CONTROLLING THE ASSAULT OF NON-SOLICITED PORNOGRAPHY AND MARKETING ACT
OF 2003
Public Law 108-187 (S. 877, H.R. 2214, H.R. 2515)
A bill to regulate interstate commerce by imposing
limitations and penalties on the transmission of unsolicited
commercial electronic mail via the Internet.
Summary
Certain provisions within S. 877 are applicable
specifically to wireless services. The bill requires the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC), in consultation with
the Federal Trade Commission, to promulgate rules to protect
consumers from unwanted mobile service commercial messages. In
promulgating such rules, the FCC is requiredto take into
consideration whether a provider of mobile commercial services has a
previously existing relationship with a subscriber. The FCC is also
required to consider the ability of a sender of a commercial electronic
mail message to reasonably determine that the message is a mobile
service commercial message.
Legislative History
On April 10, 2003, S. 877 was introduced by Senator Burns
and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation. On July 16, 2003, the Committee met in open
markup session and favorably reported S. 877, with an amendment
in the nature of a substitute.
On May 22, 2003, H.R. 2214 was introduced by Mr. Burr, was
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and the
Committee on the Judiciary.
On June 18, 2003, H.R. 2515 the Anti-Spam Act of 2003,
sponsored by Mrs. Wilson, was referred to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce, and the Committee on the Judiciary.
On July 9, 2003, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and
the Internet held a joint oversight hearing with the
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection on
three legislative proposals; H.R. 2214, The Reduction in the
Distribution of Spam Act of 2003; H.R. 2515, Anti-Spam Act of
2003; and S. 877, Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited
Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003.
No further action was taken on H.R. 2214 and H.R. 2515 in
the 108th Congress.
On October 22, 2003, S. 877 passed the Senate with an
amendment by a roll call vote of 97 yeas and 0 nays.
S. 877 was received in the House and held at the desk on
October 24, 2003. The bill was considered in the House under
suspension of the rules on November 21, 2003. On November 22,
2003, the House passed the bill, as amended, by a vote of 392
yeas to 5 nays.
On November 25, 2003, the Senate concurred with the House
amendment, with an amendment, by unanimous consent.
On December 8, 2003, the bill was received in the House. By
unanimous consent the House agreed to the Senate amendment
without objection.
S. 877 was presented to the President on December 11, 2003,
and on December 16, 2003, the President signed S. 877 (Public
Law 108-187).
2004 CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT
Public Law 108-199 (H.R. 2673)
An Act making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and for other
purposes.
Summary
This Act contained a variety of 2004 appropriations
provisions, including those that originated in the House and
Senate Commerce, Justice, and State appropriations bills.
Section 629 of the bill amended section 202(c) of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 to require the Federal
Communications Commission (the Commission) to amend its rules
to raise to 39 percent from 35 percent the potential national
audience reach cap for broadcast television station licensees.
Doing so changed a decision by the Commission to raise the cap
to 45 percent. Broadcasters that exceed the cap for reasons
other than population growth have two years to divest. The
Commission may not forbear under section 10 of the
Communications Act of 1934 from applying the 39-percent cap.
Section 629 of the Act also replaced the Commission's biennial
review of media ownership regulation with a quadrennial review,
and stated that the 39-percent cap shall not be subject to that
quadrennial review.
Legislative History
Mr. Wolf introduced H.R. 2799, the House Commerce, Justice,
and State appropriations bill, on July 21, 2003. The bill, as
amended, contained language that would have reinstated the 35-
percent potential national audience reach cap.
Senator Gregg introduced S. 1585, the Senate Commerce,
Justice, and State appropriations bill, on September 5, 2003.
It also contained language reinstating the 35-percent potential
audience reach cap when it was reported out of the Senate
Appropriations Committee.
On July 9, 2003, Mr. Bonilla introduced H.R. 2673, the
House Agriculture, Rural Development, and Food and Drug
Administration appropriations.
H.R. 2673 was considered in the House on July 14, 2003, and
passed the House by a vote of 347 yeas and 64 nays. The bill
was received in the Senate on July 15, 2003.
On November 6, 2003, the Senate passed H.R. 2673, with an
amendment by a vote of 93 yeas and 1 nay, and requested a
conference.
The House disagreed to the Senate amendment on November 18,
2003, and agreed to a conference.
On November 19, 2003, a conference was held.
On December 8, 2003, the House considered the conference
report to accompany H.R. 2673 (H. Rpt. 108-401), which
contained language creating a 39-percent potential audience
reach cap. The House agreed to the conference report by a vote
of 242 yeas and 176 nays.
The Senate passed the conference report by a vote of 65
yeas and 28 nays on January 22, 2004.
On January 22, 2003 the bill was presented to the
President, who signed H.R. 2673 on January 23, 2004 (Public Law
108-199).
MODIFYING AND EXTENDING CERTAIN PRIVATIZATION REQUIREMENTS OF THE
COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE ACT OF 1962
Public Law 108-371 (S. 2896)
A bill to modify and extend certain privatization
requirements of the Communications Satellite Act of 1962.
Summary
S. 2896 amends the Communications Satellite Act of 1962 to
extend until June 30, 2005, the deadline for conducting an
initial public offering of securities for Inmarsat. The bill
also allows a successor entity to forgo an initial public
offering and public securities listing if the entity adequately
certifies to the Federal Communications Commission that the
entity has achieved substantial dilution of signatory financial
interests, that any signatories that retain a financial
interest do not possess effective control of such entity, and
that no intergovernmental organization has any ownership
interest in a successor entity of INTELSAT or more than a
minimal interest in a successor entity of Inmarsat.
Legislative History
S. 2896 was introduced in the Senate by Senator Burns, read
twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without
amendment by unanimous consent on October 5, 2004.
On October 6, 2004, S. 2896 was received in the House and
held at the desk. The House passed S. 2896 by unanimous consent
on October 8, 2004.
S. 2896 was presented to the President on October 13, 2004,
and signed by the President on October 25, 2004 (Public Law
108-371).
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005
Public Law 108-375 (H.R. 4200, S. 2400)
(Telecommunications Provisions)
To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2005 for
military activities of the Department of Defense, for military
construction, and for defense activities of the Department of
Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year
for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.
Summary
S. 2400 contained provisions that increased the Federal
Communications Commission penalties for the broadcast of
indecent material up to $275,000 per incident, set out
additional factors for the Commission to consider when
examining broadcast indecency violations, regulated violent
television programming, and suspended media ownership rules
adopted by the Commission.
Legislative History
On April 22, 2004, Mr. Hunter introduced H.R. 4200 by
request, and the bill was referred to the House Committee on
Armed Services.
There was an exchange of correspondence between the
Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Armed
Services on May 14, 2004.
On May 14, 2004, the Committee on Armed Service reported
H.R. 2400 to the House, amended (H. Rpt. 108-491).
H.R. 4200 was considered in the House on May 19 and 20,
2004, under the provisions of H. Res. 648. The bill passed the
House by vote of 391 yeas and 34 nays.
On June 23, 2004, the bill passed the Senate with an
amendment by unanimous consent. The Senate insisted on its
amendment, asked for a conference, and appointed conferees.
The House disagreed to the Senate amendment on September
28, 2004, agreed to a conference agreed and appointed
conferees. The Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee
on Energy and Commerce for consideration of secs. 596, 601,
3111, 3131, 3133 and 3201 of the House bill, and secs. 321-323,
716, 720, 1084-1089, 1091, 2833, 3116, 3119, 3141, 3142, 3145,
3201, and 3503 of the Senate amendment, and modifications
committed to conference, Messrs. Barton, Upton, and Dingell.
A conference was held on September 29, 2004, and on October
8, 2004 the conference report was filed (H. Rpt. 108-767).
On October 8, 2004, H. Res. 843, providing for the
consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 4200,
passed the House by voice vote. Then, on October 9, 2004, the
conference report was considered in the House under the
provisions of H. Res. 843. The conference report passed the
House by a vote of 359 yeas and 14 nays.
Senate agreed to conference report by unanimous consent on
October 9, 2004.
On October 21, 2004, the bill was presented to President,
and was signed by the President on October 28, 2004 (Public Law
108-375).
CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005
Public Law 108-447 (H.R. 4818, S. 2812)
(Telecommunications Provisions)
Making appropriations for foreign operations, export
financing, and related programs for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2005, and for other purposes.
Summary
Title IX of Division J of H.R. 4818 reauthorizes certain
expiring communications and copyright act provisions that
govern the retransmission of broadcast television signals by
direct broadcast satellite (DBS) providers such as DirecTV and
EchoStar. It also modernizes other provisions to enhance
consumer choice, increase parity betweensatellite and cable
operators, and further promote competition. Because Title IX implicates
both communications and copyright issues, the House Energy and Commerce
Committee and the House Judiciary Committee worked together closely.
The Communications Act provisions in Title IX stem from H.R. 4501,
which passed the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The copyright act
provisions stem from H.R. 4518, which passed the House Judiciary
Committee. These provisions were combined with communications and
copyright act provisions that originated in the Senate Commerce and
Judiciary committees.
The Communications Act provisions would: (1) extend to
December 31, 2009, from December 31, 2004, the retransmission
consent exemption that allows satellite operators to provide
distant broadcast signals to unserved households without having
to compensate the distant broadcasters; (2) allow satellite
operators to carry on a comparable basis the same
``significantly viewed'' broadcast signals that cable operators
may already carry; (3) require satellite operators within 18
months of enactment to enable all subscribers in a market in
which local signals are available over their satellite service
to be able to receive over a single satellite dish all the
local analog broadcast stations in that market, and to be able
to receive over a single satellite dish all the local digital
channels in that market, although the local analog and local
digital channels may be on separate dishes; (4) allow, but not
require, satellite operators to carry low-power television
stations; (5) require satellite operators to stop offering
distant broadcasts signals once they carry local signals, but
grandfather certain existing subscribers; (6) extend to
satellite operators the same privacy obligations that cable
operators are subject to; and (7) codify existing practice
allowing satellite operators to provide distant digital signals
to consumers in analog white areas, and allow satellite
operators to begin providing distant digital signals in digital
white areas as early as April 2006.
Legislative History
On July 13, 2004, the House Committee on Appropriations
reported an original measure to the House (H. Rpt. 108-599).
The measure was introduced by Mr. Kolbe as H.R. 4818 on the
same day.
The House considered H.R. 4818 under the provisions of H.
Res. 715, and on July 15, 2004 the House passed H.R. 4818 by a
vote of 365 yeas and 41 nays.
On July 19, 2004, the bill was received in the Senate, read
twice, and referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
On September 23, 2004, the Senate Committee on
Appropriations discharged by unanimous consent, and was
considered in the Senate. H.R. 4818 passed the Senate in lieu
of S. 2812 with an amendment by voice vote. The Senate insisted
on its amendment, asked for a conference, and appointed
conferees.
On November 16, 2004, the House disagreed to the Senate
amendment, and agreed to a conference without objection.
On November 17, 2004, the conferees agreed to file the
conference report, and filed the conference report on November
20, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-792).
Conference report to accompany H.R. 4818 was considered in
the House under the provisions of H. Res. 866, and passed the
House by 344 yeas, 51 nays, and 1 present on November 20, 2004.
The Senate passed the conference report by a vote of 65
yeas and 30 nays on November 20, 2004.
The conference report was held at desk, pending the
adoption of H. Con. Res. 528, which directed the Clerk of the
House of Representatives to make corrections in the enrollment
of H.R. 4818. The Senate passed H. Con. Res. 528 on November
20, 2004 and the House passed H. Con. Res. 528 on December 6,
2004.
H.R. 4818 was presented to the President on December 7,
2004, and was signed by the President on December 8, 2004
(Public Law 108-447).
INTELLIGENCE REFORM AND TERRORISM PREVENTION ACT OF 2004
Public Law 108-458 (H.R. 10, S. 2845)
(Telecommunications Provisions)
A bill to provide for reform of the intelligence community,
terrorism prevention and prosecution, border security, and
international cooperation and coordination, and for other
purposes.
Summary
Section 7501 of the conference report filed with S. 2845
expresses the sense of Congress that Congress must pass
legislation in the first session of the 109th Congress to
establish a comprehensive approach to the return of television
broadcast spectrum as early as December 31, 2006. Such
legislation is necessary because Congress gave television
broadcasters additional 6 megahertz blocks of spectrum in 1997
to transmit digital broadcasts simultaneously with the analog
broadcasts they transmit on their original 6 megahertz blocks
of spectrum. Broadcasters in a market are each supposed to
cease analog transmissions and return 6 megahertz of spectrum
by the later of December 31, 2006, or once more than 85-percent
of television households in the market can receive digital
channels using a digital television, a digital-to-analog
converter box, cable service, or satellite service. Once
returned, 24 megahertz of the spectrum is to be repurposed for
public safety use and the rest can be auctioned for advanced
commercial services, such as wireless broadband. Unfortunately,
the 85-percent penetration test could delay the termination of
analog broadcasts and the return of spectrum well beyond 2007.
Absent comprehensive digital television transition legislation,
the 85-percent test will hinder the repurposing of spectrum for
these important public safety and advanced commercial uses.
Legislative History
H.R. 10 was introduced by Speaker Hastert on September 24,
2004, and referred primarily to the Permanent Select Committee
onIntelligence, and in addition to the Committee on Armed
Services, the Committee on Education and the Workforce, the Committee
on Energy and Commerce, the Committee on Financial Services, the
Committee on Government Reform, the Committee on International
Relations, the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on Rules, the
Committee on Science, the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, the Committee on Ways and Means, and the Select
Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently
determined by the Speaker.
On October 4, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
was granted an extension for further consideration ending not
later than October 5, 2004. The Committee on Energy and
Commerce was discharged on October 5, 2004.
On October 7 and 8, 2004, H.R. 10 was considered in the
House under the provisions of H. Res. 827. Section 5011 was
adopted as part of an en bloc amendment on the floor of the
House by voice vote on October 8, 2004 (Amendment 793 offered
by Mr. Hoekstra). H.R. 10 passed the House by a vote of 282
yeas and 134 nays on October 8, 2004.
No further action was taken on H.R. 10 in the 108th
Congress, but H.R. 10 was superseded by S. 2845.
On September 23, 2004, S. 2845 was introduced by Senator
Collins, read the first time, and placed on Senate Legislative
Calendar under Read the First Time.
On September 24, 2004, the bill was read the second time
and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
S. 2845 passed the Senate with amendments by a vote of 96
yeas and 2 nays on October 6, 2004.
On October 16, 2004, the House is considered to have taken
S. 2845 from the Speaker's table, stricken all after the
enacting clause and inserted the text of H.R. 10 as passed by
the House, pursuant to H. Res. 827. The House insisted on its
amendment and asked for a conference pursuant to H. Res. 827.
The Senate disagreed to House amendment on October 16,
2004, agreed to request for conference, and appointed
conferees.
On December 7, 2004, the conference report to accompany S.
2845 was filed (H. Rpt. 108-796), containing sections 7303(i),
7402, 7403, and 7405 under the jurisdiction of the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
The conference report was considered in the House under the
provisions of H. Res. 870 on the same day, and passed the House
by a vote of 336 yeas and 75 nays.
On December 8, 2004, the Senate passed the conference
report by a vote of 89 yeas and 2 nays.
S. 2845 was presented to the President on December 15,
2004, and was signed by the President on December 17, 2004
(Public Law 108-458).
ENHANCE 911 ACT OF 2004 COMMERCIAL SPECTRUM ENHANCEMENT ACT UNIVERSAL
SERVICE ANTIDEFICIENCY TEMPORARY SUSPENSION ACT
Public Law 108-484 (H.R. 5419, H.R. 2898, S. 1250, H.R.
1320)
To amend the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration Organization Act to facilitate the reallocation
of spectrum from governmental to commercial users; to improve,
enhance, and promote the Nation's homeland security, public
safety, and citizen activated emergency response capabilities
through the use of enhanced 911 services, to further upgrade
Public Safety Answering Point capabilities and related
functions in receiving E-911 calls, and to support in the
construction and operation of a ubiquitous and reliable citizen
activated system; and to provide that funds received as
universal service contributions under section 254 of the
Communications Act of 1934 and the universal service support
programs established pursuant thereto are not subject to
certain provisions of title 31, United States Code, commonly
known as the Antideficiency Act, for a period of time.
Summary
H.R. 5419 contains the legislative text of three bills, two
of which the Committee on Energy and Commerce took action on.
Title I of H.R. 5419 contains the legislative language of
H.R. 2898, a bill that amends the National Telecommunications
and Information Administration Organization Act to: (1)
establish a joint program to facilitate coordination between
Federal, state, and local emergency communications systems,
emergency personnel, public safety organizations,
telecommunications carriers, and telecommunications equipment
manufacturers and vendors involved in the implementation of E-
911 services; (2) create an E-911 Implementation Coordination
Office to implement such program; and, (3) develop a management
plan for such program. The bill also directs the Assistant
Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information and
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator to provide
grants to eligible entities (states, local governments, tribal
organizations) for the implementation of Phase II E-911
services through planning, infrastructure improvements,
telecommunications equipment purchases, and personnel training.
Further, the bill requires each grant applicant to: (1) certify
to the Assistant Secretary and the Administrator, at the time
of application and annually thereafter if receiving such a
grant, that no portion of designated E-911 charges (taxes or
fees designated or presented to deliver or improve E-911
services) imposed by a state or other taxing jurisdiction is
being obligated or expended for any other purpose than for
which the surcharges are designated; and, (2) agree that if
such charges are used for any other purpose, all of the grant
funds shall be returned.
Title II of the bill contains the legislative language of
H.R. 1320, the Commercial Spectrum Enhancement Act of 2003.
This title provides a clear, predictable mechanism for
compensating federal entities that move their spectrum
operations from frequencies that are reallocated from
government to non-government use. Title II provides federal
government spectrum licensees that incur relocation costs
because of the reallocation of spectrum bands from government
to non-government use with the authority to receive
reimbursement for their relocation costs from the Spectrum
Relocation Fund (SRF). This title also requires theCommission
to notify the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) eighteen months before conducting an auction of
reallocated spectrum.
Title III of H.R. 5419 exempts the Universal Service Fund
from provisions of the Anti-Deficiency Act for one year from
the date of enactment. This language addresses an accounting
problem affecting the Universal Administrative Service
Company's (USAC) administration of the Schools and Libraries
``E-rate'' program, that was created when the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) ordered USAC to comply with
Federal government accounting standards (GovGAAP) by October 1,
2004.
Legislative History
On March 18, 2003, H.R. 1320 was referred to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce.
The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
held a hearing on March 25, 2003. The Subcommittee received
testimony from Federal officials from the Commerce and Defense
Departments, representatives from technology and wireless
companies, and public interest groups.
On April 9, 2003, the Subcommittee met in open markup
session and approved the bill for Full Committee consideration,
amended, by voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Full Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open
markup session on April 30, 2003, and ordered H.R. 1320
reported to the House, as amended, by voice vote.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 1320 to
the House, amended, on June 3, 2003 (H. Rpt. 108-137).
On June 11, 2003, the House considered the bill under
suspension of the rules, and passed the bill, as amended, by a
vote of 408 yeas and 10 nays.
H.R. 1320 was received in the Senate on June 12, 2003, and
referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation. The bill was reported by the Senate Commerce
Committee with an amendment on October 17, 2003, and placed on
the Senate Calendar under General Orders.
No further action was taken on H.R. 1320 in the 108th
Congress.
On July 25, 2003, H.R. 2898 was introduced by Rep. Shimkus,
and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On September 11, 2003, the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet held a legislative hearing
on H.R. 2898, receiving testimony from Federal and state
officials, a representative from the Tennessee Emergency
Communications Board and a wireless company.
The Subcommittee met in open markup session on September
23, 2003, and approved H.R. 2898 for Full Committee
consideration, as amended, by voice vote, a quorum being
present.
The Full Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open
markup session on October 1, 2003, and ordered H.R. 2898
reported to the House, amended, by voice vote, a quorum being
present.
On October 14, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
reported H.R. 2898 to the House (H. Rpt. 108-311).
The House considered the bill under the suspension of the
rules, and it passed the bill, as amended, by voice vote on
November 4, 2003.
The bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation on December 9, 2003.
No further action was taken on H.R. 2898 during the 108th
Congress.
H.R. 5419 was introduced by Mr. Upton on November 20, 2004,
and contained the provisions of H.R. 2898 and H.R. 1320. The
bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On November 20, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
was discharged from further consideration of the bill, and H.R.
5419 was considered in the House by unanimous consent. The bill
passed the House without objection.
H.R. 5419 was received in the Senate and read twice on
November 20, 2004. On December 8, 2004, H.R. 5419 passed the
Senate by unanimous consent.
H.R. 5419 was presented to the President on December 16,
2004, and was signed by the President on December 23, 2004
(Public Law 108-494).
FASTER AND SMARTER FUNDING FOR FIRST RESPONDERS ACT OF 2003
(H.R. 3266)
To authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to make
grants to first responders, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 3266 directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to:
(1) establish clearly defined essential capabilities for State
and local government preparedness for terrorism, for purposes
of covered grants (i.e., any grant provided by the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) to States or regions to improve the
ability of first responders to prevent, prepare for, respond
to, or mitigate terrorist attacks, including any grant under
DHS's State Homeland Security Grant Program or Urban Area
Security Initiative); and (2) establish (within 120 days after
enactment) and regularly update (at least every three years)
the definition for ``essential capabilities.'' Section 3 of the
bill addresses the uses for which funds may be granted. One use
under the program involves ``the costs of commercially
available equipment that complies with, where applicable,
national voluntary consensus standards, and that facilitates
interoperability, coordination, and integration between
emergency communications systems.'' Section 7 of the bill
includes the Sense of Congress that interoperable emergency
communications systems should be developed and promulgated as
soon as practicable for use by first responders.
Legislative History
On October 8, 2003, Mr. Cox introduced H.R. 3266, which was
referred to the Select Committee on Homeland Security, and in
addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
the Committee on the Judiciary, and the Committee on Energy and
Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker.
On April 2, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce was
granted an extension for further consideration ending not later
than June 7, 2004, and the bill was referred sequentially to
the House Committee on Science for a period ending not later
than April 2, 2004, for consideration of such provisions of the
bill and amendment as fall within the jurisdiction of that
committee pursuant to clause (n), rule X.
The Subcommittee on Health held a hearing on May 11, 2004.
On June 3, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce was
granted an extension for further consideration ending not later
than June 14, 2004.
The Full Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open
markup session and ordered H.R. 3266 reported to the House,
amended, by voice vote.
On June 14, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Commerce was
granted an extension for further consideration ending not later
than June 21, 2004.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3266 to
the House, amended on June 14, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-460, Part
II.).
No further action was taken on H.R. 3266 in the 108th
Congress, but certain aspects became law as part of Public Law
108-458, the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act.
BROADCAST DECENCY ENFORCEMENT ACT
(H.R. 3717, S. 2056)
To increase the penalties for violations by television and
radio broadcasters of the prohibitions against transmissions of
obscene, indecent, and profane material, and for other
purposes.
Summary
H.R. 3717 amends the Communications Act of 1934 to (1)
raise the maximum penalty cap for broadcast stations, networks
and performers to $500,000 for each indecency violation; (2)
give the Commission guidance to set penalties so the agency
takes into consideration whether the violator is a small or
large broadcaster, company or individual, and the type of
entity responsible for the indecent programming; (3) allow the
Commission to pursue an individual or network for a first
indecency offense; (4) require the Commission to complete
action on indecency complaints within 270 days; (5) require the
Commission to take indecency violations into account during
license application, renewal and modifications; and, (6) after
three indecency violations, require the Commission to hold a
license revocation hearing to consider revoking the broadcast
station license.
Legislative History
H.R. 3717 was introduced in the House by Mr. Upton on
January 21, 2004, with 25 cosponsors. The bill was referred to
the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On January 28, 2004, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on the Commission's
enforcement of broadcast indecency standards. The Subcommittee
received testimony from government, industry and family group
representatives. On February 11, 2004, and February 26, 2004,
the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held
legislative hearings on H.R. 3717. The Subcommittee received
testimony from broadcasters and government representatives.
The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet met
on February 12, 2004, in open markup session and approved H.R.
3717 for Full Committee consideration, without amendment, by a
voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Full Committee on Energy and Commerce met on March 3,
2004, in open markup session and ordered H.R. 3717 reported to
the House, amended, by a recorded vote of 49 yeas and 1 nay, a
quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 3713 to
the House, amended, on March 9, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-434).
The House considered H.R. 3717, as amended, under the
provisions of H. Res. 554, on March 11, 2004, and passed H.R.
3717 by a vote of 391 yeas to 22 nays, with 1 present.
On March 11, 2004, H.R. 3717 was received in the Senate.
The bill was read the first time on March 25, 2004. On March
26, 2004, H.R. 3717 was read the second time and placed on
Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders.
No further action was taken on H.R. 3717 in the 108th
Congress.
SATELLITE HOME VIEWER EXTENSION AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2004
(H.R. 4501, H.R. 4518)
A bill to extend the statutory license for secondary
transmissions by satellite carriers of transmissions by
television broadcast stations under title 17, United States
Code, and to amend the Communications Act of 1934 with respect
to such transmissions, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 4518 would reauthorize certain expiring communications
and copyright act provisions that govern the retransmission of
broadcast television signals by direct broadcast satellite
(DBS) providers such as DirecTV and EchoStar. It also would
modernize other provisions toenhance consumer choice, increase
parity between satellite and cable operators, and further promote
competition. Because the bill implicates both communications and
copyright issues, the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the House
Judiciary Committee have worked closely in drafting the legislation.
Pursuant to a compromise between the House Energy and Commerce
Committee and the House Judiciary Committee, H.R. 4518 was amended to
combine its copyright provisions with the Communications Act provisions
of H.R. 4501.
The Communications Act provisions would: (1) extend to
December 31, 2009, from December 31, 2004, the retransmission
consent exemption that allows satellite operators to provide
distant broadcast signals to unserved households without having
to compensate the distant broadcasters; (2) allow satellite
operators to carry on a comparable basis the same
``significantly viewed'' broadcast signals that cable operators
may already carry; (3) require one year from enactment that
satellite operators enable all subscribers in a market in which
local signals are available over their satellite service to be
able to receive all the local broadcast stations in that market
using a single satellite dish; (4) allow, but not require,
satellite operators to carry low-power television stations; (5)
require satellite operators to stop offering distant broadcast
signals once they carry local signals, but grandfather certain
existing subscribers; and, (6) require the Commission to
propose by the end of 2005 how it would define a digital white
area (the area in which digital signals cannot be viewed using
an over-the-air receiver) once the digital transition is
complete.
Legislative History
The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
held an oversight hearing on March 10, 2004, on the expiring
satellite legislation and a legislative hearing on April 1,
2004, on staff draft reauthorization legislation.
The Subcommittee met in open markup session on April 28,
2004, and approved a Committee Print for Full Committee
consideration, as amended, by a voice vote, a quorum being
present.
The Full Committee on Energy and Commerce met on June 3,
2004, in open markup session and ordered a Committee Print
reported to the House, as amended, by voice vote, a quorum
being present. The Full Committee agreed by unanimous consent
to a request by Chairman Barton to file a report on a bill to
be introduced, and that the actions of the Committee be deemed
as action on that bill. Mr. Upton introduced the Committee
Print on June 3, 2004, as H.R. 4501, and the Committee filed a
report (H. Rpt. 108-634) on July 22, 2004, on that bill. No
further action was taken on H.R. 4501.
H.R. 4518, which was ordered reported by the Committee on
the Judiciary, was amended to include the Communications Act
provisions of H.R. 4501. H.R. 4518 was considered in the House
under suspension of the rules on October 6, 2004, and passed
the House, as amended, by voice vote.
H.R. 4518 was received in the Senate on October 7, 2004. No
further action was taken on the bill in the 108th Congress.
Certain aspects of the bill became law as part of Public Law
108-447, the 2005 Consolidated Appropriations Act.
JUNK FAX PREVENTION ACT OF 2004
(H.R. 4600)
To amend section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 to
clarify the prohibition on junk fax transmissions.
Summary
H.R. 4600 reestablishes an existing business relationship
exception to allow entities to send commercial faxes to their
customers and members without first receiving written
permission and establishes new opt-out safeguards to provide
additional protections for the recipients. Accordingly, three
years after enactment, the Commission has the discretion to
enact a time-limited EBR between 5-7 years if the Commission
finds that the EBR has resulted in a significant number of
complaints regarding junk faxes, resulting complaints were a
result of the EBR being too long and not consistent with the
reasonable expectations of the consumer; a cost benefit
analysis justifies a shorter EBR; and small businesses' costs
are not too burdensome. The Commission has the discretion to
exempt by rule non-profit trade or professional associations
from the notice of opt-out because these groups are opt-in
organizations.
Legislative History
The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
held a legislative hearing on ``H.R. __, The June Fax
Prevention Act of 2004'' on June 15, 2004. The Subcommittee
received testimony from government, industry and association
representatives.
H.R. 4600 was introduced in the House by Rep. Upton on June
16, 2004 with 23 cosponsors, which was referred to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
On June 24, 2004, the Full Committee on Energy and Commerce
met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 4600 reported to
the House, as amended, by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported H.R. 4600 to
the House, amended, on July 9, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-593).
The House considered H.R. 4600 under suspension of the
rules on July 20, 2004, and passed H.R. 4600, as amended, by a
voice vote.
On July 21, 2004, H.R. 4600 was received in the Senate and
on July 23, 2004, H.R. 4600 was read twice and referred to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
No further action was taken on H.R. 4600 in the 108th
Congress.
Oversight Activities
HEALTH OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS SECTOR
On February 5, 2003, and February 26, 2003, the
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held
oversight hearings focusing on the health of the
telecommunications sector. These hearings explored the
telecommunications sector's economic slump, its affect on
service providers and equipment manufacturers, and the impact
of Commission regulations on the telecommunications sector. The
Committee received testimony from Federal officials, financial
analysts, and public policy and research organizations.
On January 29, 2003, Chairman Tauzin, Ranking Member
Dingell, and 20 Members of the Committee wrote to Commission
Chairman Michael Powell to express concern that the
Commission's local competition rules were subverting the intent
of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and undermining the
economic well-being of the telecommunications sector. The
Members asked the Commission to foster facilities-based
competition by providing all competitors with the incentive to
build new networks.
On March 17, 2004, Chairman Barton, Ranking Member Dingell,
and Representatives Upton and Boucher wrote to U.S. Attorney
General John Ashcroft to request that the Solicitor General not
appeal a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.
Circuit that struck down the Commission's February 2003
unbundling rules. The authors of the letter believed that the
court's decision would have a positive impact on the health of
the telecommunications sector.
E-911
On June 4, 2003, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and
the Internet held an oversight hearing on wireless E-911
implementation which explored the progress that wireless
carriers, local exchange carriers (LECs), and public safety
answering points (PSAPs) were making in their efforts to deploy
Phase II Enhanced 911 service within the deadlines and
parameters established by the Commission. The Committee
received testimony from a Federal agency, representatives of
large wireless providers, and a representative of the National
Emergency Number Association.
PUBLIC SAFETY ACCESS TO SPECTRUM
On June 11, 2003, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on the spectrum
needs of our nation's first responders. The Subcommittee
received testimony from Members of Congress, state and local
officials, commercial mobile service providers, and equipment
manufacturers. Topics that were explored included interference
problems on radio frequencies used by first responders,
interoperability communication difficulties with officials in
other agencies on common radio frequencies, and modernizing
communications systems.
SPAM
On July 9, 2003, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and
the Internet held a joint oversight hearing with the
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection on the
legislative efforts to combat unsolicited commercial email,
also known as spam. The hearing explored the problems created
by spam, which has been a ballooning problem for electronic
mail users, businesses, and Internet service providers.
Witnesses included representatives from: large Internet service
providers, a technology company, a commercial email advertiser,
the FTC, a state Attorneys General office, and a consumer
advocacy group.
BROADBAND TECHNOLOGIES
The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
held a series of hearings to explore the changing
telecommunications marketplace and the regulatory treatment of
broadband services. New technologies continue to alter the
telecommunications marketplace and provide consumers with
innovative new applications, yet a range of broadband services
have been regulated in a disparate manner. On July 21, 2003,
the Subcommittee held a hearing on the disparity in regulation
and what the proper regulatory framework for broadband Internet
access services should be. On July 7, 2004, the Subcommittee
held a hearing on the impact of Voice over Internet Protocol
(VOIP) services on the communications industry as well as the
impact of the current statutory/regulatory framework for
communications services on VOIP services. In both hearings, the
Subcommittee received testimony from Federal and state
government officials, representatives from communications
companies, and public policy organizations.
On January 29, 2003, Chairman Tauzin, Ranking Member John
Dingell, and 20 Members of the Committee wrote to the Chairman
of the Federal Communications Commission to urge the Commission
to ensure that unbundling rules are not applied to broadband
facilities.
On January 22, 2004, Chairman Tauzin, Ranking Member
Dingell, and Representatives Upton and Boucher wrote to the
Chairman of the Commission to resolve ambiguities in the
Commission's 2003 broadband rules.
On March 17, 2004, Chairman Barton, Ranking Member Dingell,
and Representatives Upton and Boucher wrote to the Attorney
General to urge the Solicitor General not to appeal the
decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that
upheld the Commission's rules that exempted packet-switched and
fiber facilities from onerous facilities.
On September 23, 2004, Chairman Barton, Ranking Member John
Dingell, and Representative Upton wrote to the Commission to
urge that the Commission's unbundling rules imposed under
Section 271 of the Communications Act be reconciled with the
Commission's unbundling rules imposed under Section 251 to
ensure that companies investing in new broadband facilities
have the maximum incentive to deploy such facilities as quickly
and ubiquitously as possible.
On October 5, 2004, Chairman Barton, 32 Members of the
Committee, and 29 non-Committee Members wrote to the Commission
tourge the agency to determine that VOIP services are
interstate and subject to the Commission's exclusive jurisdiction.
On October 20, 2004, Ranking Member Dingell and 22 Members
of the Committee wrote to the Commission supporting the notion
that Voice over Internet Protocol Service is interstate in
nature and that the Commission should have exclusive
jurisdiction over rate regulation. These Members urged the
Commission, however, to proceed with careful deliberation on
VoIP matters and not disrupt the critical and longstanding role
of the states in protecting consumers and ensuring public
safety.
UNIVERSAL SERVICE REFORM
On September 24, 2003, the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet held an oversight hearing
on the future of universal service. Competition and technology
have begun to erode the existing universal service system, and,
in the long term, current universal service policies do not
seem sustainable. This hearing focused on competition and
advances in technology, as well as current and future funding
mechanisms. Witnesses from Federal and state regulatory bodies
as well as large and small telecommunications companies
provided testimony.
COMPUTER VIRUSES
On November 6, 2003, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications
and the Internet held an oversight hearing on computer viruses.
The hearing focused on the increasing threat from malicious
code, known as computer worms and viruses, as well as the
financial impact on business and consumers of computer viruses.
Testimony was received from representatives of cyber security
companies, software companies, and Internet service providers.
EDUCATION TECHNOLOGY
On November 19, 2003, the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet held an oversight hearing
to explore proposals that use spectrum auction proceeds for
investments in education technology initiatives. Proposals that
the Subcommittee examined would use spectrum auction proceeds
to fund educational, cultural, and employment-training
programs. The Subcommittee received testimony from witnesses
including an FTC Commissioner, a former Federal official, a
professor of international development, and the author of a
study that has explored using auction proceeds to fund these
types of programs.
DECENCY
On January 28, 2004, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications
and the Internet held an oversight hearing to examine the
Federal Communications Commission's enforcement of the decency
rules that apply to over-the-air broadcasters. The focus of
this hearing was to examine the rules for broadcast decency and
the Federal Communications Commission's effectiveness in
enforcing those rules. The Subcommittee received testimony from
the Commission, an attorney representing television
programmers, a local television broadcaster, and an advocacy
group.
COMPETITION IN THE COMMUNICATIONS MARKETPLACE
On February 4, 2004 and May 19, 2004, the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet held oversight hearings on
the state of competition in the communications marketplace in
general, as well as how the convergence of voice, video, and
data services is enabling companies using different technology
platforms to compete head-to-head. During the first hearing,
the Subcommittee received testimony from financial analysts and
economists. During the second hearing, the Subcommittee
witnessed demonstrations of new technology devices that reflect
the convergence of voice, video, and data services. The hearing
included demonstrations of video services over wireless
telephones, wireless broadband Internet access, and an
Internet-based unified messaging service. The Subcommittee also
heard testimony regarding the delivery of broadband services
using the electricity grid.
MULTICHANNEL VIDEO COMPETITION
The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
held an oversight hearing on March 10, 2004 regarding the
reauthorization of the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of
1999 (SHVIA). SHVIA governs how satellite operators carry
broadcast television signals. Portions of SHVIA expire December
31, 2004. The purpose of the hearing was to consider whether to
extend SHVIA, and to determine if Congress should make any
changes in the regime governing satellite delivery of broadcast
television. Witnesses included the Federal Communications
Commission as well as industry representatives and consumer
groups.
Full Committee Chairman Barton, Ranking Member Dingell,
Subcommittee Chairman Upton, Subcommittee Ranking Member
Markey, and Congressman Deal sent a letter on May 18, 2004, to
Commission Chairman Powell asking the Commission to investigate
the provision by cable and satellite operators of a la carte or
themed-tier service, as well as whether anything currently
prevents cable and satellite operators from offering a la carte
or themed-tier service on a voluntary basis. The letter
requested that the Commission submit a report to the House
Committee on Energy and Commerce by November 18, 2004, with its
findings. The Committee received a report on the day requested.
The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
held an oversight hearing on July 14, 2004, with respect to
multi-channel video competition. The Subcommittee explored the
level of competition between cable and satellite operators. The
Subcommittee also examined whether cable and satellite
operators should be required to offer a la carte or themed-tier
television service, or at least be permitted to do so
voluntarily. Witnesses included representatives of cable and
satellite operators, television programmers, and advocacy
groups.
DOT KIDS
On May 6, 2004, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and
the Internet held an oversight hearing on The `Dot Kids'
Internet Domain: Protecting Children Online. This hearing
focused on the roll out of the new ``dot kids'' Internet domain
and what actions industry, government, and other organizations
could take to ensure the domain is a success. The Subcommittee
received testimony from government officials, industry
representatives, and child safety organizations.
DIGITAL TELEVISION
The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
held an oversight hearing on June 2, 2004, on the digital
television transition. Witnesses included industry
representatives, advocacy groups, and a think tank.
The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
held an oversight hearing on July 21, 2004, on a digital
television transition plan implemented in Berlin, Germany. The
Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported on how Berlin,
Germany, administered a hard deadline for its digital
television transition, and other industry representatives
debated whether a similar approach might work in the United
States.
The Committee hosted a digital television roundtable
discussion on July 22, 2004. The roundtable was designed to
solicit updates from the Commission, industry and consumer
groups on the DTV transition's progress and remaining DTV
issues.
HOMELAND SECURITY
On June 23, 2004, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications
and the Internet held an oversight hearing which focused on
protecting homeland security, and explored the progress made in
ensuring that public safety communications systems and
therefore communications between different public-safety
agencies are interoperable. Many first responders use
communications equipment that is several decades old and often
based upon incompatible standards. Further, local agencies are
experiencing a budgetary crunch and do not have the resources
necessary to purchase new equipment, and there is no universal
band or bands of frequencies on which all public safety
agencies can communicate simultaneously using radios. This
hearing explored whether interoperability is an achievable goal
and the steps that need to be taken in order to achieve that
goal. Witnesses included officials from Federal, state/local
agencies, and wireless companies.
LAW ENFORCEMENT ACCESS TO COMMUNICATION NETWORKS IN A DIGITAL AGE
On September 8, 2004, the Subcommittee held an oversight
hearing on the implications for law enforcement of a migration
of communications traffic from circuit-switched networks to
packet-switched networks. Law enforcement officials strongly
believe that they should have the same access to communications
traffic offered through broadband services that law enforcement
has with respect to traditional telephone services. Witnesses
included representatives from federal law enforcement agencies
and representatives of the communications sector.
TELEVISION VIOLENCE
On September 13, 2004, the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet held an oversight hearing
on the effect of television violence on children. The hearing
took place in Chicago, Illinois. The hearing focused on the
emotional and psychological impact that television violence has
on young children as well as what can be done to reduce the
exposure of children to such violent programming. Witnesses
included trade and policy organizations, mental health experts,
and legal scholars.
On March 5, 2004 Full Committee Chairman Barton, Ranking
Member Dingell, and 37 members of the committee signed a letter
to FCC Chairman Powell asking the Commission to issue a notice
of inquiry regarding excessively violent broadcast television
programming. The Commission is to submit a report to the House
Energy and Commerce Committee by January 1, 2005.
WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS
On September 29, 2004, the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet held an oversight hearing
to examine wireless directory assistance policies and programs.
Witnesses included a U.S. Senator, representatives of the
wireless industry, consumer groups, and technology companies.
HEARINGS HELD
Health of the Telecommunications Sector: A Perspective from
Investors and Economists.--Oversight hearing on the Health of
the Telecommunications Sector: A Perspective from Investors and
Economists. Hearing held on February 5, 2003. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-3.
Health of the Telecommunications Sector: A Perspective from
the Commissioners of the Federal Communications Commission.--
Oversight hearing on the Health of the Telecommunications
Sector: A Perspective from the Commissioners of the Federal
Communications Commission. Hearing held on February 26, 2003.
PRINTED, Serial Number 108-6.
Commercial Spectrum Enhancement Act.--Hearing on H.R. 1320,
the Commercial Spectrum Enhancement Act. Hearing held on March
25, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-12.
Wireless E-911 Implementation: Progress and Remaining
Hurdles.--Oversight hearing on Wireless E-911 Implementation:
Progress and Remaining Hurdles. Hearing held on June 4, 2003.
PRINTED, Serial Number 108-27.
The Spectrum Needs of Our Nation's First Responders.--
Oversight hearing on the Spectrum Needs of Our Nation's First
Responders. Hearing held on June 11, 2003. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-34.
Legislative Efforts to Combat Spam.--Joint hearing with the
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection on
Legislative Efforts to Combat Spam. Hearing held on July 9,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-35.
The Regulatory Status of Broadband Services: Information
Services, Common Carriage, or Something in Between.--Oversight
hearing on the Regulatory Status of Broadband Services:
Information Services, Common Carriage, or Something in Between?
Hearing held on July 21, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-40.
E-911 Implementation Act of 2003.--Hearing on H.R. 2898, a
bill to improve homeland security, public safety, and citizen
activated emergency response capabilities through the use of
enhanced 911 wireless services. Hearing held on September 11,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-47.
The Future of Universal Service.--Oversight hearing on the
Future of Universal Service. Hearing held on September 24,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-49.
Computer Viruses: The Disease, the Detection, and the
Prescription for Protection.--Oversight hearing on Computer
Viruses: The Disease, the Detection, and the Prescription for
Protection. Hearing held on November 6, 2003. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-66.
Digital Dividends and Other Proposals to Leverage
Investment in Technology.--Oversight hearing on Digital
Dividends and Other Proposals to Leverage Investment in
Technology. Hearing held on November 19, 2003. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-50.
``Can you say that on TV?'': An Examination of the FCC's
Enforcement with Respect to Broadcast Indecency.--Oversight
hearing on ``Can you say that on TV?'': An Examination of the
FCC's Enforcement with Respect to Broadcast Indecency. Hearing
held on January 28, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-67.
The Current State of Competition in the Communications
Marketplace.--Oversight hearing on the Current State of
Competition in the Communications Marketplace. February 4,
2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-63.
Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act.--Hearing on H.R. 3717,
the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act. Hearings held on
February 11, 2004 and February 26, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number
108-68.
Oversight of the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act.--
Oversight hearing on the Oversight of the Satellite Home Viewer
Improvement Act. Hearing held on March 10, 2004. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-75.
The Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Reauthorization Act
of 2004.--Hearing on H.R. __, the Satellite Home Viewer
Improvement Reauthorization Act of 2004. Hearing held on April
1, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-78.
The ``Dot Kids'' Internet Domain: Protecting Children
Online.--Oversight hearing on the ``Dot Kids'' Internet Domain:
Protecting Children Online. Hearing held on May 6, 2004.
PRINTED, Serial Number 108-84.
Competition in the Communications Marketplace: How
Convergence is Blurring the Lines Between Voice, Video, and
Data Services.--Oversight hearing on Competition in the
Communications Marketplace: How Convergence is Blurring the
Lines Between Voice, Video, and Data Services. Hearing held on
May 19, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-85.
Advancing the DTV Transition: An Examination of the FCC
Media Bureau Proposal.--Oversight hearing on Advancing the DTV
Transition: An Examination of the FCC Media Bureau Proposal.
Hearing held on June 2, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-86.
The Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2004.--Hearing on H.R. __,
the Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2004. Hearing held on June 15,
2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-87.
Protecting Homeland Security: A Status Report on
Interoperability Between Public Safety Communications
Systems.--Oversight hearing on Protecting Homeland Security: A
Status Report on Interoperability Between Public Safety
Communications Systems. Hearing held on June 23, 2004. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-98.
Voice Over Internet Protocol Services: Will the Technology
Disrupt the Industry or Will Regulation Disrupt the
Technology?--Oversight hearing on Voice Over Internet Protocol
Services: Will the Technology Disrupt the Industry or Will
Regulation Disrupt the Technology? Hearing held on July 7,
2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-104.
Competition and Consumer Choice in the MVPD Marketplace--
Including an Examination of Proposals to Expand Consumer
Choice, Such as A La Carte and Themed-Tiered Offerings.--
Oversight hearing on Competition and Consumer Choice in the
MVPD Marketplace--Including an Examination of Proposals to
Expand Consumer Choice, Such as A La Carte and Themed-Tiered
Offerings. Hearing held on July 14, 2004. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-110.
The Digital Television Transition: What We Can Learn from
Berlin.--Oversight hearing on the Digital Television
Transition: What We Can Learn from Berlin. Hearing held on July
21, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-101.
Law Enforcement Access to Communications Systems in the
Digital Age.--Oversight hearing on Law Enforcement Access to
Communications Systems in the Digital Age. Hearing held on
September 8, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-115.
The Effect of Television Violence on Children: What
Policymakers Need to Know.--Oversight hearing on the Effect of
Television Violence on Children: What Policymakers Need to
Know. Hearing held on September 13, 2004. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-116.
An Examination of Wireless Directory Assistance Policies
and Programs.--Oversight hearing on an Examination of Wireless
Directory Assistance Policies and Programs. Hearing held on
September 29, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-122.
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
(Ratio 9-7)
JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania,
Chairman
PETER DEUTSCH, Florida MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida
DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado CLIFF STEARNS, Florida
TOM ALLEN, Maine RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California GREG WALDEN, Oregon
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts Vice Chairman
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey
(ex officio) MIKE ROGERS, Michigan
JOE BARTON, Texas
(ex officio)
Jurisdiction: Responsibility for oversight of agencies, departments,
and programs within the jurisdiction of the full committee, and for
conducting investigations within such jurisdiction.
Introduction
During the 108th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight
and Investigations conducted inquiries with respect to Federal
agencies within the Committee's jurisdiction, including the
Department of Health and Human Services, the Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services, the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, the National
Institutes of Health, the Department of Energy, the Federal
Communications Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
and the Environmental Protection Agency. The Subcommittee's
oversight has exposed improper and illegal governmental and
corporate activities, uncovered waste, fraud and abuse of
taxpayer dollars, strengthened our national security and our
defenses against terrorist attacks, improved health care and
environmental protection, and promoted the enhanced protection
of American consumers and investors. These investigations have
provided the basis for enactment of corrective legislation in
the 108th Congress, and will provide the foundation for
legislative action in the 109th Congress. In addition, the
Subcommittee's inquiries have resulted in meaningful changes in
the Executive Branch's implementation and enforcement of
current law and the establishment of cost-saving measures in
the operations of the various departments and agencies.
Oversight Activities
HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO HEALTH AND HEALTH
CARE
Hearings
MEDICAL LIABILITY
On February 10, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a field hearing at St. Mary Medical Center
in Langhorne, Pennsylvania, on issues surrounding the rise of
medical liability insurance premiums. The hearing examined the
impact of rising premiums on the provision of health care in
the state, the business practices of Pennsylvania insurers, the
influence of medical liability claims on the rates, and the
current and proposed state and federal legislative initiatives
directed at addressing medical liability insurance issues. The
governor of Pennsylvania spoke on the first panel. The
hearing's second panel featured patients and physicians who
testified to their experiences with the provision of health
care, as well as a hospital administrator and a representative
of the American Medical Association. The third panel featured
representatives from the insurance industry, medical schools
and other medical enterprises, academia, advocacy
organizations, and the trial bar. The hearing helped focus
attention on the effects and causes of rising medical liability
premiums in Pennsylvania, and nationally.
ACCESS TO PHARMACEUTICALS
On March 10, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a field hearing in Aventura, Florida, on
South Florida's access to affordable prescription drugs. The
hearing examined the experiences of Florida's senior citizens
concerning the cost of drugs, the perspective of federal and
state regulators regarding the safety and efficacy of drugs
imported into Florida, and the perspective of pharmaceutical
industry and pharmacy associations on efforts to assist low-
income seniors in obtaining free or discounted pharmaceuticals.
There were three panels of witnesses. The first panel was
comprised of two private citizens and a representative of the
American Association of Retired Persons (AARP). The second
panel was comprised of representatives from the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) and the Bureau of Statewide Pharmaceutical
Services of the Florida Department of Health. The third panel
consisted of three representatives from the pharmacy and
pharmaceutical industries. The hearing continued the
Committee's efforts to oversee and address issues surrounding
the safety and efficacy of pharmaceuticals, particularly, the
Subcommittee's work in the 107th Congress examining the ability
of the FDA to protect against counterfeit or poor-quality
imported pharmaceuticals.
SEVERE ACUTE RESPIRATORY SYNDROME (SARS)
On May 7, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a public Member briefing and then a hearing
on public health issues surrounding an outbreak of Severe Acute
Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), and subsequent worldwide
surveillance alert surrounding the spread of this deadly viral
infection from China in the Winter and Spring of 2003. The
Subcommittee's briefing with the executive director of the
Communicable Diseases division of the World Health Organization
provided information on the international public health
community's ability to respond to infectious disease outbreaks
such as SARS. The hearing that followed the briefing served to
(1) provide information about the causes of SARS, how SARS is
affecting health agencies andhospitals, and the ability of
hospitals to respond adequately to SARS and other major public health
threats; (2) review research that could help develop vaccines or
produce drugs that could treat the SARS outbreak, or help diagnosis the
disease; and (3) examine the lessons learned from the SARS outbreak to
determine whether the United States has sufficient resources and
authority to prevent or contain SARS or other future outbreaks. The
Subcommittee heard testimony from the three panels of witnesses. The
first panel featured the Department of Health and Human Services
Assistant Secretary for Public Health Emergency Preparedness, the
Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the
Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease,
an official with the FDA, and an official with the U.S. Government
Accountability Office. The second panel was comprised of witnesses from
the public health community, who could identify issues raised by the
SARS outbreak. The third panel was comprised of witnesses from the
therapeutic products industries, whose companies had produced or were
attempting to produce medical products potentially useful for combating
SARS.
ORGAN DONATION
On June 3, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing that examined initiatives the
health care community is exploring to increase organ donation.
There are 81,000-plus candidates in the United States waiting
for an organ transplant. The hearing examined issues related to
advances in science to improve the success of organ
transplantation, issues surrounding potential financial
incentives to increase organ donation, Health and Human
Services' Best Practices Initiative, and state initiatives to
increase organ donations. Three panels of witnesses featured
patients waiting for or who had received transplants, and
representatives from state and federal organ donor networks,
the Department of Health and Human Services, and the medical
and advocacy community.
IMPORTED PHARMACEUTICALS
On June 24, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing that examined the system in place
to protect against counterfeit and unapproved pharmaceutical
imports. The purpose of the hearing was to receive testimony
concerning (1) the measures taken by the FDA to prevent
imported unapproved and counterfeit pharmaceuticals from being
taken by U.S. consumers, (2) the release by FDA of 1,233
packages of counterfeit Viagra that were imported through
Miami, Florida, and (3) the findings of the South Florida
Statewide Grand Jury that highlighted a burgeoning counterfeit
drug problem in Florida and which were a driving force behind a
Florida law designed to ensure the safety and efficacy of
pharmaceuticals taken by Floridians. The Subcommittee received
testimony from the FDA, the Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection, and Florida officials from agencies responsible for
oversight of pharmaceutical imports, and the prosecution of
violations of state import laws. The hearing provided a case
study into the nationwide issues surrounding the import of
pharmaceuticals for personal use.
DIETARY SUPPLEMENT SAFETY
On July 23 and 24, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held two hearings, the second as a joint hearing
with the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection, on issues relating to ephedra-containing dietary
supplements. The first hearing focused on manufacturers and
distributors of ephedra-containing supplements and the
advertising and labeling, and safety concerns related to their
products. The second hearing focused on policies and concerns
related to sports leagues and organizations, including the
various positions sports leagues have taken on the use of
ephedra-containing supplements by their athletes, and on issues
related to the regulatory environment for ephedra-based
products. At the July 23 hearing, the Subcommittee received
testimony from the parents of victims, including a Major League
Baseball pitcher, who died while taking ephedra-containing
products; from witnesses with knowledge of ephedra industry
practices; from medical authorities; and from the U.S.
Government Accountability Office. All three witnesses on the
second panel, who were associated with a particular ephedra-
supplement maker and promoter, invoked their Fifth Amendment
protections when faced with questions under oath. On the final
panel, the Subcommittee received testimony from witnesses
associated with three manufacturers and distributors of ephedra
products. At the July 24 hearing, the Subcommittees received
testimony from representatives of Major League Baseball, the
Major League Baseball Players Association, the National
Football League, NASCAR, Major League Soccer, and the National
Collegiate Athletic Association. A second panel provided
testimony from the FDA and the Federal Trade Commission.
On June 16, 2004, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing to examine the safety of dietary
supplements for overweight children. The hearing focused on
several companies that formulated, marketed, manufactured and/
or distributed dietary supplements for use by children as young
as six years of age and the safety and efficacy concerns
surrounding the use of such products by children. The
Subcommittee received testimony from two panels of witnesses:
an official with the Federal Trade Commission, an official with
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and two expert
witnesses on pediatric obesity testified on the first panel,
and nine witnesses associated companies involved in the dietary
supplement industry testified on the second panel.
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICIES
On May 12 and 18, 2004 and on June 22, 2004, the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held three
hearings focusing on conflict-of-interest issues involving
National Institutes of Health (NIH) employees and drug
companies. The purpose of the hearings was to: (1) assess
therecommendations of the NIH Blue Ribbon Panel on Conflict of Interest
Policies, which was appointed to examine conflicts of interest polices,
especially those related to consulting arrangements and outside
``awards'' received by NIH officials; (2) review two case studies, one
illustrating the Committee's concerns about consulting arrangements,
and the other illustrating the concerns about outside awards, as well
as related legal and policy decisions by the Office of Government
Ethics, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the NIH;
and, (3) assess the NIH's response to the Committee's concerns and the
Blue Ribbon Panel Report recommendations, and explore whether the
National Cancer Institute (NCI) properly managed conflict of interest
issues. At the May 12 hearing, the Subcommittee received testimony from
the NIH Director and the co-chairs of the NIH Blue Ribbon Panel. At the
May 18 hearing, the Subcommittee received testimony from officials and
employees in HHS Office of Government Ethics, the NIH, NCI and FDA, as
well as from a legal authority from the Congressional Research Service.
The June 22 hearing received testimony from the NIH Director, the NIH
General Counsel, officials from NCI, and representatives of two drug
companies associated with the consulting arrangements in question.
HOSPITAL BILLING AND COLLECTION PRACTICES
On June 24, 2004 the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing to examine hospital billing and
collection practices for uninsured/self-pay patients. The
hearing focused on questions surrounding policies and practices
for setting rates for and charging the uninsured or self-pay
patients, the laws and regulations that affect the policies,
and the guidance from the HHS regarding billing and collection
practices. Because of the pricing system set up by hospitals
under the interpretation of Medicare regulations, uninsured
patients are charged the ``list price'' for hospital care. For
insured patients, there are discounts as high as 50 percent
from the list price, which are negotiated by their insurance
companies. Such a system has the effect of charging the
uninsured the highest prices for health care. As a result,
uninsured patients have lost good credit ratings and have had
liens placed on their residences. The Subcommittee received
testimony from three panels of witnesses. The first panel
featured expert and advocacy witnesses who testified about
hospital management and finance, debtor-creditor law,
bankruptcy, and the perspective of patients. The second panel
featured the chief executive officers of the five largest
hospital chains in the United States. And the third panel was
comprised of representatives from the Center for Medicare and
Medicaid Services and the HHS Office of Inspector General.
During the hearing, all of the hospital chains present stated
that they had implemented or would implement policies providing
free or discounted care for low-income, uninsured patients.
ANTI-DEPRESSANT USE BY CHILDREN
On September 9 and September 23, 2004, the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations held hearings examining concerns
over the safety and efficacy of anti-depressants in children
and whether data from various pediatric clinical trials of
anti-depressants had been communicated adequately to the
public. The September 9 hearing focused on publication and
disclosure issues of the safety and efficacy data in pediatric
anti-depressant clinical trials. The Subcommittee received
testimony from representatives of the seven pharmaceutical
companies that conducted pediatric clinical trials for
depressed children, the FDA, and industry associations. The
September 23 hearing focused primarily on the FDA's regulatory
process of reviewing the anti-depressant pediatric clinical
trial safety data and whether the FDA informed the public in an
accurate and timely manner about the risks associated with
these drugs for children. Six witnesses from the FDA provided
testimony.
AVAILABILITY OF INFLUENZA VACCINATIONS
On November 18, 2004, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a joint hearing with the Subcommittee on
Health, to examine the current flu vaccine shortage and assess
what is being done to protect high-risk individuals for 2004/
2005 flu season and also to decrease the chances of shortages
happening in the future. Broader vaccine marketplace issues
were also examined. The Subcommittees received testimony from
representatives from the Department of Health and Human
Services, the Government Accountability Office, a state health
department, and various segments of the health care industry.
Additionally, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations initiated an investigation of issues surrounding
the loss of nearly half of the flu vaccine needed by the United
States for the 2004/2005 flu season, as a result of
contamination at the Liverpool, UK manufacturing facility of
Chiron Corporation. Full Committee Chairman Barton and Ranking
Member Dingell wrote the HHS, FDA, and the Chiron Corporation,
on November 18, 2004, requesting documents relating to when the
flu vaccine shortage first became apparent, and the company and
agencies' attention and response to the reports of problems as
they emerged. This aspect of the investigation is ongoing.
MEDICAID DRUG REIMBURSEMENT
On December 7, 2004, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing on prescription drug
reimbursement under Medicaid. The hearing focused on whether
the Federal Medicaid program pays too much for prescription
drugs, primarily because most states continue to reimburse
based upon Average Wholesale Price, or AWP, a price reported by
drug manufacturers solely for reimbursement purposes. Pricing
data and documents obtained by the Subcommittee during its
extensive investigation revealed that AWP bears little
relationship to what pharmacies and physicians actually pay for
the drugs, particularly for generic drugs. States have
difficulty in obtaining accurate sales prices because, although
CMS receives them from the manufacturers, it is barred by law
from sharing them with the states. Some states have been very
aggressive in establishing other mechanism to get accurate
prices and additional price concessions from drugmanufacturers.
But all of the witnesses agreed that the AWP system was ``broken'' and
needed to be fixed. During the hearing, the Subcommittee received
testimony from two witnesses, from Ven-A-Care of Florida Keys, Inc.,
which had been instrumental in bringing various Medicare and Medicaid
abuses to the attention of the Congress, as well as Federal and state
agencies. The company also had prosecuted numerous false claims cases
arising from the issues examined at the Hearing. The Subcommittee also
received testimony from officials from the CMS, the Texas Attorney
General's office, the Texas Health and Human Services Commission,
Michigan Department of Community Health, pharmacy chains, and generic
and brand drug manufacturers.
Investigative Activities
NIH MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT OF RESEARCH
In the 108th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations initiated an examination of the NIH management
and oversight of its federally funded research. Between 1998
and 2002, Congress increased NIH's appropriations from $13.6
billion to $23.1 billion, an increase of $9.5 billion. During
this same period, NIH increased the amount of grant awards it
issued from $9.5 billion to $16.6 billion, an increase of $7
billion. In a March 2003 letter to the NIH director, Full
Committee Chairman Tauzin and Subcommittee Chairman Greenwood
requested information relating to grant oversight; efforts to
address waste, fraud, and abuse in federal grants; and
information relating to NIH administration and administrative
costs. The review is ongoing.
NIH AWARDS PROCESS
In the 108th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations opened an inquiry into the fairness of the NIH
awards process, specifically whether in some cases NIH's
methods of awarding grants and contracts are structured to
ensure or maximize the chances that certain institutions and/or
individuals personally favored by high-ranking NIH officials
win the awards. On November 10, 2003, Full Committee Chairman
Tauzin and Subcommittee Chairman Greenwood issued letters to
relevant parties requesting information relating to a March
2002 award to Harvard University of a five-year, $40 million
subcontract for a molecular target laboratory (MTL) through a
prime contract funded by the National Cancer Institute.
Documents obtained by the Committee raised questions about
whether the outcome of the award was pre-determined. The review
is ongoing.
NIH PROCUREMENT PROCESS
As part of its oversight of NIH financial management, and
its broader review of procurement policies at agencies within
its jurisdiction, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations initiated an examination of the standards used
to award contracts and the nature of the procurement process at
NIH. In a March 2004 letter to the NIH director, Full Committee
Chairman Barton and Subcommittee Chairman Greenwood requested
records relating to the use of purchase cards, purchase orders,
telecommunications support contracts, and technology
acquisition contracts at the agency. The review is ongoing.
NIH SALARY LIMITATIONS
As part of its oversight of the ethics programs at the NIH,
the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations identified
issues concerning the NIH's use of special authority under
Title 42 of the Public Health Service Act. The special
authority, 42 U.S.C. 209(f) ``Special Consultants,'' provides
that under certain circumstances, special consultants may be
employed ``to assist and advise in the operations of the
[Public Health] Service'' without regard to civil service laws.
Since 2000, the NIH, without the knowledge of Congress, has
been using 42 U.S.C. 209(f) as a mechanism to increase the
salaries of government scientists by evading the salary
limitations in the civil service system and treating these
full-time, government scientists as if they were temporary
expert consultants. As a result, the NIH has compensated nearly
4,000 out of 6,000 of its scientists under this mechanism,
including paying some NIH Institute Directors and other senior
NIH officials at annual salary rates greater than the salary of
the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.
The Subcommittee raised legal and policy questions about the
perceived misuse of special-consultant authority during its NIH
oversight hearings. As a result of the Subcommittee's raising
the issue, the NIH is working with the Committee on a
legislative solution that addresses the concerns raised.
FEDERAL WORKPLACE DRUG TESTS
In a February 2003 letter to the Secretary of HHS, the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations raised concerns
about delays to include alternative drug tests in federal
workplace programs and requested that the agency expedite
review of alternative drugs tests and take appropriate action
to strengthen the federal workplace drug-testing program.
Federal workplace drug testing policy continues to be based
only on testing of urine, as it has since 1988. However, since
1988 the FDA has approved alternative drug tests using hair,
sweat, and saliva. Notwithstanding FDA clearance of
alternatives to urine-testing for drugs-of-abuse, increased use
of alternative tests in the private sector, and the meetings of
the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA)'s Drug Testing Advisory Board over a five-year period,
SAMHSA had not published proposed guidelines on alternative
specimens for notice and comment. As a result of the
Subcommittee's inquiry, HHS published proposed revisions to
federal mandatory drug-testing guidelines in the Federal
Register. These revisions require federal workers who submit to
drug screening to have their saliva, sweat or hair tested as
the Administration increases efforts to deter and detect
illegal drug use among 1.6 million civilian employees.
STATES' ADMINISTRATION OF MEDICAID
In the 108th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations launched an investigation into potential waste,
fraud, and abuse in the Medicaid program. In January 2003, the
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) placed Medicaid for
the first time on its list of government programs at ``High
Risk'' of fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement. On June 12,
2003, the Subcommittee issued letter requests to all 50 states
for documents and information on a range of matters relating to
each State's administration and oversight of the Medicaid
program. Part of this inquiry involved an examination of
intergovernmental transfers and state financing mechanisms:
Among the matters principally at issue with intergovernmental
transfers is the use of certain financing mechanisms by some
states to generate additional Federal Medicaid matching funds.
Included in these financing mechanisms is a process by which
excessive Medicaid payments to state-owned health facilities
are subsequently returned to the state treasury and then
reported to the Federal government for the purposes of
obtaining Medicaid matching dollars. The Subcommittee has been
investigating the scope and prevalence of such mechanisms, and
whether this is common practice among certain states and their
public hospitals.
STATES' EFFORTS TO REDUCE MEDICAID SPENDING ON DRUGS
As part of its ongoing investigation into prescription drug
reimbursement under Medicaid, Subcommittee Chairman Greenwood,
in February 2004, requested a U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) review of Medicaid prescription drug reimbursement
approaches by the states. Among states, outlays for Medicaid
ranked second only to elementary and secondary education. The
Subcommittee requested that GAO determine whether states have
been obtaining all available drug rebates under the Medicaid
Drug Rebate program to which they are entitled and that GAO
examine means by which states can constrain the growth in drug
spending without affecting enrollees' access to quality
prescription drugs. A report from GAO is expected in the 109th
Congress.
THE 340B DRUG DISCOUNT PROGRAM
In August 2004, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations opened an investigation into Department of
Health and Human Services' management of the 340B Drug Discount
Program, which was created to provide discount drug prices for
various entities that serve low-income patients, including
community health centers and public hospitals. The
investigation was prompted by two inspection reports issued in
June 2004 by the Department of Health and Human Services'
Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG). The reports focused on
the administration of the program and revealed that 340B
entities are often overcharged for the drugs and that there are
major structural defects in the management and oversight of the
Program on the part of HHS's Health Resources and Services
Administration (HRSA). The first of these inspection reports
compared the prices that a sample of the 340B entities actually
paid in September 2002 to the 340B ceiling prices for those
drugs and found that many of the sampled prices exceeded the
ceiling prices, resulting in substantial overcharges. These
overcharges are often passed on to Medicaid, because if covered
entities dispense drugs purchased through the 340B Program to
Medicaid recipients, they are required to bill Medicaid at
acquisition cost. The report went on to explain that HRSA has
no processes or procedures to ensure that 340B entities receive
the discounted prices from the drug manufacturers, nor does it
have the authority to remedy any overcharges it may uncover.
The second report found serious problems with the database used
by HRSA to administer the Program and concluded that these
deficiencies compromised HRSA's ability to manage the Program
successfully. Full Committee Chairman Barton sent a letter to
HRSA on August 9, 2004 asking HRSA to describe its management
of the 340B Program and what steps it has taken to improve its
oversight in light of the HHS-OIG reports. Chairman Barton also
sent a request letter to HHS-OIG on October 31, 2004 requesting
additional examination of this issue.
DESIGNER STEROIDS
As part of its investigation of the marketing of dangerous,
unregulated supplements, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations initiated an inquiry into the proliferation of
``pro-steroid'' and ``precursor steroid'' and related products
in the marketplace--increasingly used by teenagers. Neither the
1990 Controlled Substances Act nor the Anabolic Steroid Control
Act of 1990 specifically empowers the FDA and Drug Enforcement
Agency (DEA) to regulate or, where appropriate, ban these
substances, which may in fact be more powerful than the
steroids and related products Congress banned in 1990. Because
of news reports that marketers may have taken advantage of this
potential regulatory loophole, the Committee sent letter
requests to the FDA and DEA for information on efforts to
address the safety and regulatory concerns surrounding the
development and market of these products.
ILLICIT INTERNET PHARMACIES
On December 9, 2003, as part of its continuing oversight of
the problems of counterfeit drugs, Internet pharmacies, and
imported drugs, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations initiated an investigation of enablers of
illegal Internet pharmacies and what efforts have been made
toward discouraging these enablers from facilitating illicit
Internet pharmacies. Enablers include: Internet search engines
that accept advertising from illicit Internet pharmacies,
consignment carriers used by Web sites to ship drugs from these
pharmacies, and credit card companies used in advertising by
illicit Internet pharmacies. The Committee sent letters to the
FDA, and the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection to get
details about any companies that these agencies have contacted,
and whether any of these companies committed to
discontinuedoing business with illicit Internet pharmacies. In
addition, the Committee wrote to the CEOs of Federal Express, United
Parcel Service, Visa International, and MasterCard International, for
information about each company's actions or counter-measures taken
relating to illicit Internet pharmacy websites.
PAINKILLER ABUSE
In connection with the Subcommittee's ongoing oversight of
pharmaceutical abuse and diversion in general, and of the abuse
and diversion of the painkiller Oxycontin in particular, the
Subcommittee initiated an examination of Palladone, a high
dose, extended release formulation that contains hydromorhone,
a Schedule II narcotic painkiller. Palladone is currently
undergoing FDA evaluation. On February 26, 2003, Chairman
Tauzin, Ranking Member Dingell, Subcommittee Chairman
Greenwood, and Subcommittee Ranking Member Deutsch wrote Purdue
Pharma L.P. for records relating to risk management, safety,
and marketing of Palladone. As part of this inquiry the
Subcommittee continued its oversight of efforts to reduce
deaths and addiction associated with Oxycontin, while at the
same time enabling legitimate patients access to effective
palliative medication. In addition, Subcommittee Chairman
Greenwood, with Appropriations' Commerce-Justice-State
Subcommittee Chairman Wolf and Mr. Harold Rogers, requested
that the GAO examine Oxycontin abuse and diversion and efforts
to address the problem. In December 2003, the GAO issued its
report and recommended that the FDA Commissioner ensure that
FDA's risk-management plan guidance encourages pharmaceutical
manufacturers that submit new drug applications for these
substances to include plans that contain a strategy for
monitoring the use of these drugs and identifying potential
abuse and diversion problems.
PRESCRIPTION DRUG SAFETY
As part of its continuing oversight of the public health
and the safety of prescription drugs, the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations initiated an investigation of
issues surrounding the withdrawal of a non-steroidal anti-
inflammatory drug (NSAID) Cox-2 inhibitor called rofecoxib,
known commercially as Vioxx, by its manufacturer Merck & Co.,
Inc. (Merck). On September 30, 2004, Merck publicly announced a
voluntary worldwide withdrawal of Vioxx, a medicine approved by
the FDA in 1999 for use in treating osteoarthritis and the
management of acute pain in adults, and later, for rheumatoid
arthritis. The publicly reported reason for this withdrawal was
new data from a three-year clinical trial that showed a two-
fold increase in cardiovascular adverse events in patients
taking Vioxx. On November 23, 2004, Committee Chairman Barton
and Ranking Member Dingell wrote Merck and the FDA to request
more information and documentation relating to: (1) FDA
knowledge about these cardiovascular adverse events associated
with Vioxx, (2) when FDA learned about this information, (3)
the action FDA took in response to cardiovascular safety
concerns associated with Vioxx. The investigation is ongoing.
HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO ENERGY AND THE
ENVIRONMENT
Hearings
MANAGEMENT OF LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY
On February 26 and March 12, 2003, the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations held hearings on procurement and
property mismanagement and theft at Los Alamos National
Laboratory. The purpose of the hearings was to: (1) assess
reports of theft and loss of governmental property and misuse
of government procurement mechanisms by personnel at Los Alamos
National Laboratory (LANL), (2) review the actions of the
University of California (UC) and LANL management in response
to such reports, and (3) review the effectiveness of oversight
of LANL by UC and the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA). At the February 26 hearing, the Subcommittee received
testimony from two employees who were terminated during their
investigation of theft at LANL, from the Department of Energy's
Inspector General, and from a UC official who reviewed LANL
issues. At the March 12 hearing, the Subcommittee received
testimony from three LANL officials involved in the Lab's
response to reported fraud and theft, a LANL employee
responsible for a critical management contract, officials
responsible for setting procurement and property management
policy, and the former Director of LANL, the UC officials
responsible for Laboratory Management, and an NNSA official
responsible for direct federal oversight of LANL.
On May 1, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing to review the Department of
Energy's (DOE's) management of LANL, and LANL's response to the
issues discussed in the previous hearings. The day before the
hearing, the Secretary of Energy announced that the LANL
contract would be competitively bid in 2005 for the first time
in 60 years as a result of the management failings revealed in
the Committee's and other investigations. The Subcommittee
received testimony from the Deputy Secretary of Energy, the
acting Administrator of the NNSA, the DOE Inspector General,
and the President of the University of California and other UC
officials.
DOE'S HIGH-LEVEL WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
On July 17, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing to review the DOE's radioactive
high-level waste management program. The purpose of the hearing
was to examine issues raised by a GAO report that evaluated the
DOE's $230 billion program to clean-up high-level radioactive
waste at former nuclear weapons production sites, and to
identify weaknesses within DOE's cleanup plan. The Subcommittee
received testimony from the DOE, GAO, and environmental
officials from Washington State and theSouth Carolina. The
hearing provided information supportive of the Committee's successful
efforts to help pass legislation to speed cleanup of these wastes.
Investigative Activities
WORKER SAFETY AT HANFORD
In the summer of 2004, following reports of safety
incidents at the high-level radioactive waste tank cleanup
project at the Hanford site, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigation opened an inquiry to review actions by the
contractor in charge of the cleanup project and will continue
to monitor the contractor and DOE efforts to improve worker
safety at the tank farms.
DOE PLUTONIUM DISPOSITION
All of the DOE's weapons-usable surplus plutonium has been
removed from the Rocky Flats, Colorado site, and relocated to
the Savannah River, South Carolina site. In the 108th Congress,
the Subcommittee of Oversight and Investigations continued to
review the numerous safety and physical security issues that
must be resolved leading up to the final disposition of these
50 tons of materials, as well as the management of these
materials, which will run into the tens of billions of dollars.
EPA GRANTS MANAGEMENT
In the 108th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations initiated an investigation into the
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) administration of
assistance agreements, also known as grants, which, at more
than $4.7 billion per year, account for more than half the
Agency's budget. On August 4, 2004, following an EPA Office of
Inspector General (OIG) report that found that EPA had not
properly used a competitive process when selecting some of its
grant recipients, Committee Chairman Joe Barton wrote the
Administrator of the EPA requesting documents relating to the
agency's grants management process. This review is ongoing.
EPA PROCUREMENT
In the 108th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations initiated a review of EPA procurement practices.
On August 4, 2004, Full Committee Chairman Barton sent a letter
to the EPA Administrator concerning an audit by the EPA OIG
that raised questions about the Federal Supply Schedule (FSS)
Procurement process. The OIG audit indicated that a lack of
competition existed in the compilation of the FSS. This lack of
competition resulted from inadequate procurement planning,
rushed procurements, a lack of training for contract project
officers, and a failure to comply with policies, procedures,
policies, and regulations outlined by the federal government.
As a result, the Committee specifically asked the EPA for an
explanation on all FSS procurements above $100,000 when only
one contractor was involved and for any changes made by EPA in
the wake of the OIG audit. This review is ongoing.
HOMELAND SECURITY AT THE EPA
In the 108th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations initiated a review of EPA procedures as they
relate to Homeland Security. An EPA OIG audit indicated that
the Agency had not developed a coordinated plan for
``identifying, obtaining, maintaining, and tracking''
counterterrorism and emergency-response equipment. On August 4,
2004, Full Committee Chairman Barton wrote the EPA
Administrator requesting information related to the Agency's
actions in the wake of the OIG report. This review is ongoing.
EPA IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
In April 2004, EPA issued its final rule designating 474
counties, in 31 states, as non-attainment areas under the new
8-hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Because
this was the first ruling on this new standard, Full Committee
Chairman Barton and Subcommittee Vice-Chairman Walden wrote the
EPA Administrator on August 23, 2004, requesting records
relating to EPA's discretionary-review process concerning non-
attainment designations. This review is ongoing.
HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Hearings
THE E-RATE PROGRAM
On June 17, July 22, and September 22, 2004, the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held hearings on
waste, fraud, and abuse in the E-rate program, the portion of
the Universal Service Fund set up to subsidize
telecommunications and Internet service and infrastructure in
qualified schools and libraries. The hearings examined (1) the
oversight and management of the E-rate program by the Federal
Communications Commission and the program administrator, (2)
issues and vulnerabilities to waste, fraud, and abuse in
program set-up, and (3) case examples of problems in the
program. The June 17 hearing featured a review of disbursements
of more than $100 million in E-rate funding for the Puerto Rico
Department of Education (PRDOE). The Subcommittee received
testimony from the Puerto Rico Office of the Comptroller, the
PRDOE, the Inspector General of the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC), vendors that were contracted to supply
telephone and internal connections to the PRDOE's 1,500
schools, a representative of the Universal Service
Administrative Company (USAC), and FCC officials. The July 22
hearing featured three panels of witnesses, and focused on
acase of bid-rigging and wire fraud uncovered at the San Francisco
Unified School District. The Subcommittee received testimony from the
Superintendent of the San Francisco Unified School District, the former
and current City Attorneys of San Francisco, a City Attorney's Office
special investigator, officials associated with a company that pleaded
guilty to federal bid-rigging and wire fraud charges, and FCC and USAC
officials. The September 22 hearing focused on both a case involving a
nationwide conspiracy to defraud the E-rate program and an examination
of issues surrounding the denial of over $500 million in E-rate funding
requests by school districts. USAC and the FCC denied the funding after
determining that the program applicants violated the program's
competitive-bidding requirements. The Subcommittee received testimony
from officials with USAC, FCC, and FCC OIG; representatives of school
districts and vendors associated with the nationwide conspiracy for
which a vendor pleaded guilty in March 2003; and representatives of
school districts and vendors associated with the denial of the $500
million in E-rate requests.
In addition, the Full Committee and Subcommittee Chairmen
requested in December 2003 that the GAO review FCC's management
of the E-rate program. GAO will complete that review early in
the 109th Congress.
HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO COMMERCE, TRADE,
AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
Hearings
IDENTITY THEFT
On December 15, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a field hearing in Langhorne, Pennsylvania,
to assess the crime of personal identity theft. The purpose of
the hearing to assess the crime of identity theft, to provide
consumers with information on where to go for assistance if
they become victims, and to provide preventative tips to stop
the fraud from occurring in the first place. The Subcommittee
received testimony from three panels of witnesses. The first
panel consisted of a Pennsylvania state representative, an
identity theft victim, and a charitable organization
representative. The second panel consisted of representatives
from a national credit reporting agency and a state bank. The
third panel included a Deputy Attorney General from the
Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office, the Deputy Commissioner
of the Pennsylvania State Police Department, and officials with
the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the Federal Trade
Commission and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service.
HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO HOMELAND SECURITY
AND CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION
Hearings
SECURITY AT NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS
On March 18, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing to review the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission's (NRC) proposed changes to security
requirements at nuclear power plants. While opening statements
by Members and witnesses were open to the public, the hearing
went into executive session for Member questioning of the
witnesses. The Subcommittee received testimony from three
panels of witnesses: the first panel featured the Chairman and
two Commissioners of the NRC, the second panel featured
representatives from the nuclear industry and nuclear power
companies and facilities, and the third panel featured an
advocacy group. The new changes were finalized and are now
being implemented at nuclear plants across the country.
PORT AND BORDER SECURITY
Throughout the 108th Congress, the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations continued its focus on efforts of
the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to secure the
nation's ports and borders from terrorist efforts to smuggle
weapons of mass destruction into the United States. On
September 30, 2003, the Subcommittee held a hearing to review
the federal government's progress toward installing radiation
detection monitors at U.S. ports and borders. The hearing
focused on CBP's ongoing efforts to install radiation portal
monitors at each port to screen incoming cargo for radiological
weapons. Due to the subject matter, the hearing was conducted
in a classified session. The Subcommittee received testimony
from one panel of witnesses, consisting of representatives from
the CBP, the U.S. Postal Service, and the U.S. Government
Accountability Office.
On December 16, 2003, and March 31, 2004 the Subcommittee
held hearings to review the CBP's targeting and inspection
program for sea cargo. The hearings focused on CBP's efforts to
implement a system to screen all incoming sea cargo and target
for evaluation and inspection high-risk cargo entering the
United States. While opening statements by Members and
witnesses were open to the public, the hearing went into
executive session for Member questioning of the witnesses. At
the December 16 field hearing held at the Delaware River Port
Authority, in Camden, New Jersey, the Subcommittee received
testimony from two panels of witnesses, consisting of
representatives from the GAO, the Department of Homeland
Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG), CBP, and the
Philadelphia Regional Port Authority. At the March 31, 2004,
the Subcommittee received testimony from representatives of the
CBP, the GAO, the OIG, Council of Foreign Relations, and
representatives from the Port of Los Angeles-Long Beach and
Port of New York-New Jersey. Port security continues to be a
major priority for the Subcommittee.
SECURITY AT DOE/NNSA NUCLEAR FACILITIES
On March 4 and May 11, 2004, the Subcommittee on Oversight
and Investigations held hearings to assess the state of
security at DOE nuclearfacilities, and the implementation of
the revised design basis threat (DBT) at various sites managed by DOE
and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). While opening
statements by Members and witnesses were open to the public, the
hearings went into executive session for Member questioning of the
witnesses. At the March 4 hearing, the Subcommittee received testimony
from DOE, the DOE Office of Inspector General, NNSA, and nuclear
security authorities. At the May 11 hearing, the Subcommittee received
testimony from the DOE, NNSA, U.S. Government Accountability Office,
and the Project on Government Oversight.
Investigative Activities
SECURITY AND SAFETY PROBLEMS AT LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY
In the 108th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations continued review and monitoring of security and
safety problems at LANL. The Lab continued to demonstrate a
lack of rigor in its management of Classified Removable
Electronic Media (CREM). In July 2004, two computer discs
containing highly classified materials were thought to have
been lost. As a result, all classified operations had been shut
down at Los Alamos, and remain shut down. Full Committee
Chairman Barton visited Los Alamos in July 2004 to review the
situation personally. On October 15, 2004, Chairman Barton sent
letters to the NNSA Administrator and the LANL Director
requesting a complete estimate of the costs to the taxpayers
resulting from the ongoing stand-down at LANL due to the
events. Review of the security and safety at LANL is ongoing.
CHEMICAL PLANT SECURITY
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued its review
of Federal and industry efforts to improve security at sites
possessing potentially dangerous chemicals. As part of this
review, officials from the EPA met with Committee staff on
February 26th to discuss the agency's voluntary survey of
security practices at approximately 31 high-risk chemical
facilities across the country. On February 28, 2004, the Full
Committee Chairman Tauzin, Environment and Hazardous Materials
Subcommittee Chairman Gillmor, and Oversight and Investigations
Subcommittee Chairman Greenwood wrote the EPA Administrator
requesting documents and information to assist the Committee in
its continuing oversight of chemical plant security. Review of
chemical plant security is ongoing.
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION CONTRACTING
In the 108th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations opened an investigation into the Transportation
Security Administration's (TSA) management and oversight of its
contract with a private firm to provide airport screeners. In
March 2002 the TSA signed a contract with Pearson Government
Solutions to recruit 30,000 to 50,000 airport ``screeners'' in
response to the events of 9/11. This contract was initially
valued at approximately $104 million; however, it subsequently
increased to more than $850 million. The Subcommittee is
examining the reasons for this significant increase and TSA's
oversight of the program.
HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO CORPORATE
ACCOUNTING PRACTICES AND OVERSIGHT
Hearings
FINANCIAL COLLAPSE OF HEALTHSOUTH
On October 16 and November 5, 2003, the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations held two hearings to examine the
financial collapse of the HealthSouth Corporation.
Stockholders, including employees, lost more than $4 billion
when it was revealed that the accounting had been deliberately
manipulated to increase sales and reduce costs. Five former
chief financial officers have pled guilty to fraud charges, as
have several other employees. The former chief executive
officer is expected to be tried on criminal charges next year.
The hearings focused on the (1) failure of internal controls
and corporate compliance within the health care services
company, (2) the role that other parties, including the Board
of Directors, the outside auditors and the investment bankers,
played in the company's failure to detect and report financial
fraud earlier, and the effect new Corporate accountability
laws, passed in the 107th Congress, have on Corporate
oversight. At the October 16 hearing, the Subcommittee received
testimony from current and former HealthSouth corporate
officers and employees with insight into company operations and
practices, as well as the Chief Executive Officer and former
Senior Vice President of Corporate Finance, both of whom
invoked their Fifth Amendment protections at the hearing. At
the November 5 hearing, the Subcommittee received testimony
from a representative on the Ad Hoc Advisory Group on the
Organizational Sentencing Guidelines, U.S. Sentencing
Commission; certain members of the HealthSouth Board of
Directors, the acting CEO; and representatives of HealthSouth's
outside accounting, banking, and legal advisors.
Investigative Activities
SEC DOCUMENT PRODUCTION
During the 107th Congress, the Subcommittee on Oversight
and Investigations initiated a review of the role of the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) with respect to the
SEC's own reviews and investigations of the financial collapse
of 13 selected companies. This oversight effort continued in
the 108th Congress and included an April 9, 2003, letter from
Full Committee Chairman Tauzin to the SEC Chairman requesting
the agency release certain internal agency documents relatingto
its financial reviews of the companies at issue, which the agency had
withheld from Committee staff. Following the request, the SEC supplied
the internal records.
MISCELLANEOUS HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES
Investigative Activities
UNITED NATION'S OIL FOR FOOD PROGRAM
The Committee first conducted oversight hearings on the
United Nation's Oil for Food Program in the 106th Congress. In
the 108th Congress the Committee continued its oversight of the
Program. On May 23, 2003, and July 8, 2004, the Subcommittee on
Energy and Air Quality held hearings on the Program. (See
Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee section of this report for
details.) As part of the Committee's intensified oversight, the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations launched an in-
depth review of the Program, including document reviews and
interviews with State Department, Central Intelligence Agency,
U.S. Treasury, IRS, former United Nations and Iraqi officials.
Full Committee Chairman Barton and other Energy and Commerce
Committee members and staff traveled to Baghdad, Iraq, in
September 2004 to conduct interviews and perform site visits
related to the program. On October 7 and October 18, 2004,
Chairman Barton wrote United Nations Secretary-General Kofi A.
Annan requesting his personal involvement in the expeditious
discovery and release by the United Nations of information and
documents related to the Committee's investigation. On October
22, 2004, Chairman Barton wrote Jacques Chirac, President of
France, requesting the French government's cooperation in the
Committee's investigation of the Program. Chairman Barton met
with the French Ambassador in December 2004, to discuss this
matter.
FEDERAL AGENCY MANAGEMENT AND ETHICS OVERSIGHT
In the 108th Congress, as part of the Committee's oversight
responsibilities generally and as an expansion of its review of
conflict-of-interest policies in particular, the Subcommittee
on Oversight and Investigations initiated an examination of
ethics policies and practices at Federal agencies and
commissions within the Committee's jurisdiction. On June 18,
2004, Full Committee Chairman Barton and Oversight and
Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Greenwood requested
information and documents relating to this investigation from
15 Federal agencies: the Department of Commerce, Department of
Energy, Department of Health and Human Services, Consumer
Product Safety Commission, Environmental Protection Agency,
Federal Communications Commission, Federal Trade Commission,
Food and Drug Administration, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Chemical Safety
and Hazard Investigation Board, Medicare Payment Advisory
Commission, Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, and Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. The review of agency policies
is ongoing.
Hearings Held
The Medical Liability Insurance Crisis: A Review of the
Situation in Pennsylvania.--Oversight hearing on The Medical
Liability Insurance Crisis: A Review of the Situation in
Pennsylvania. Hearing held on February 10, 2003. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-4.
Procurement and Property Mismanagement and Theft at Los
Alamos National Laboratory.--Oversight hearing on Procurement
and Property Mismanagement and Theft at Los Alamos National
Laboratory. Hearings held on February 26, 2003 and March 12,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-13.
South Florida's Access to Affordable Prescription Drugs:
Costs and Benefits of Alternative Solutions.--Oversight hearing
on South Florida's Access to Affordable Prescription Drugs:
Costs and Benefits of Alternative Solutions. Hearing held on
March 10, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-9.
A Review of NRC's Proposed Security Requirements for
Nuclear Power Plants.--Oversight hearing on A Review of NRC's
Proposed Security Requirements for Nuclear Power Plants.
Hearing held on March 18, 2003. NOT PRINTED.
SARS: Assessment, Outlook, and Lessons Learned.--Oversight
hearing on SARS: Assessment, Outlook, and Lessons Learned.
Hearing held on May 7, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-20.
Assessing Initiatives to Increase Organ Donations.--
Oversight hearing on Assessing Initiatives to Increase Organ
Donations. Hearing held on June 3, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number
108-36.
A System Overwhelmed: The Avalanche of Imported,
Counterfeit, and Unapproved Drugs into the U.S.--Oversight
hearing on A System Overwhelmed: The Avalanche of Imported,
Counterfeit, and Unapproved Drugs into the U.S. Hearing held on
June 24, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-29.
A Review of DOE's Radioactive High-Level Waste Cleanup
Program.--Oversight hearing on A Review of DOE's Radioactive
High-Level Waste Cleanup Program. Hearing held on July 17,
2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-42.
Issues Relating to Ephedra-containing Dietary
Supplements.--Oversight hearing on Issues Relating to Ephedra-
containing Dietary Supplements. Hearing held on July 23, 2003.
PRINTED, Serial Number 108-43.
Issues Relating to Ephedra-containing Dietary
Supplements.--Joint oversight hearing with the Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection on Issues Relating to
Ephedra-containing Dietary Supplements. Hearing held on July
24, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-43.
Nuclear Terrorism Prevention: A Review of the Federal
Government's Progress toward Installing Radiation Detection
Monitors at U.S. Ports and Borders.--Oversight hearing on
Nuclear Terrorism Prevention: A Review of the Federal
Government's Progress towardInstalling Radiation Detection
Monitors at U.S. Ports and Borders. Hearing held on September 30, 2003.
NOT PRINTED.
The Financial Collapse of HealthSouth.--Oversight hearing
on the Financial Collapse of HealthSouth. Hearings held on
October 16, 2003 and November 5, 2003. PRINTED, Serial Numbers
108-53 and 108-59.
Identity Theft: Assessing the Problem and Efforts to Combat
It.--Oversight hearing on Identity Theft: Assessing the Problem
and Efforts to Combat It. Hearing held on December 15, 2003.
PRINTED, Serial Number 108-60.
Port Security: A Review of the Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection's Targeting and Inspection Program for Sea Cargo.--
Oversight hearing on Port Security: A Review of the Bureau of
Customs and Border Protection's Targeting and Inspection
Program for Sea Cargo. Hearing held on December 16, 2003. NOT
PRINTED.
A Review of Security at DOE Nuclear Facilities and the
Implementation of the Revised Design Basis Threat.--Oversight
hearing on A Review of Security at DOE Nuclear Facilities and
the Implementation of the Revised Design Basis Threat. Hearing
held on March 4, 2004. NOT PRINTED.
A Review to Assess Progress with the Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection's Targeting Program for Sea Cargo.--Oversight
hearing on A Review to Assess Progress with the Bureau of
customs and Border Protection's Targeting Program for Sea
Cargo. Hearing held on March 31, 2004. NOT PRINTED.
DOE Nuclear Security: What Are the Challenges, and What's
Next?--Oversight hearing on DOE Nuclear Security: What Are the
Challenges, and What's Next? Hearing held on May 11, 2004. NOT
PRINTED.
NIH Ethics Concerns: Consulting Arrangements and Outside
Awards.--Oversight hearings on NIH Ethics Concerns: Consulting
Arrangements and Outside Awards. Hearings held on May 12, 2004,
May 18, 2004, and June 22, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-88.
Parents Be Aware: Health Concerns about Dietary Supplements
for Overweight Children.--Oversight hearing on Parents Be
Aware: Health Concerns about Dietary Supplements for Overweight
Children. Hearing held June 16, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number
108-93.
Problems with the E-Rate Program: Waste, Fraud, and Abuse
Concerns in the Wiring of Our Nation's Schools to the
Internet.--Oversight hearing on Problems with the E-Rate
Program: Waste, Fraud, and Abuse Concerns in the Wiring of Our
Nation's Schools to the Internet. Hearing held on June 17,
2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-92.
A Review of Hospital Billing and Collection Practices.--
Oversight hearing on A Review of Hospital Billing and
Collection Practices. Hearing held on June 24, 2004. PRINTED,
Serial Number 108-109.
Problems with the E-Rate Program: Waste, Fraud, and Abuse
Concerns in the Wiring of Our Nation's Schools to the
Internet.--Oversight hearing on Problems with the E-Rate
Program: Waste, Fraud, and Abuse Concerns in the Wiring of Our
Nation's Schools to the Internet. Hearing held on July 22,
2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-103.
Publication and Disclosure Issues in Anti-Depressant
Pediatric Clinical Trials.--Oversight hearing on Publication
and Disclosure Issues in Anti-Depressant Pediatric Clinical
Trials. Hearing held on September 9, 2004. PRINTED, Serial
Number 108-121.
Problems with the E-Rate Program: Waste, Fraud, and Abuse
Concerns in the Wiring of Our Nation's Schools to the
Internet.--Oversight hearing on Problems with the E-Rate
Program: Waste, Fraud, and Abuse Concerns in the Wiring of Our
Nation's Schools to the Internet. Hearing held on September 22,
2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-124.
FDA's Role in Protecting the Public Health: Examining FDA's
Review of Safety & Efficacy Concerns in Anti-Depressant Use by
Children.--Oversight hearing on FDA's Role in Protecting the
Public Health: Examining FDA's Review of Safety & Efficacy
Concerns in Anti-Depressant Use by Children. Hearing held on
September 23, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-125.
Flu Vaccine: Protecting High-Risk Individuals and
Strengthening the Market.--Joint oversight hearing with the
Subcommittee on Health on Flu Vaccine: Protecting High-Risk
Individuals and Strengthening the Market. Hearing held on
November 18, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number 108-134.
Medicaid Prescription Drug Reimbursement: Why the
Government Pays Too Much.--Oversight hearing on Medicaid
Prescription Drug Reimbursement: Why the Government Pays Too
Much. Hearing held on December 7, 2004. PRINTED, Serial Number
108-126.
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE OVERSIGHT PLAN FOR THE 108TH CONGRESS
Clause 2(d) of Rule X of the Rules of the House of
Representatives for the 108th Congress requires each standing
Committee in the first session of a Congress to adopt an
oversight plan for the two-year period of the Congress and to
submit the plan to the Committee on Government Reform and to
the Committee on House Administration.
Clause 1(d)(1) of Rule XI requires each Committee to submit
to the House not later than January 2 of each odd-numbered
year, a report on the activities of that committee under Rules
X and XI during the Congress ending at noon on January 3 of
such year. Clause 1(d)(3) of Rule XI also requires that such
report shall include a summary of the oversight plans submitted
by the Committee pursuant to clause 2(d) of Rule X; a summary
of the actions taken and recommendations made with respect to
each such plan; and a summary of any additional oversight
activities undertaken by the Committee, and any recommendations
made or action taken thereon.
Part A of this section contains the Committee on Energy and
Commerce Oversight Plan for the 108th Congress, which was
considered and adopted by a voice vote of the Full Committee on
February 12, 2003, a quorum being present.
Part B of this section contains a summary of the actions
taken by the Committee on Energy and Commerce to implement the
Oversight Plan for the 108th Congress and the recommendations
made with respect to this plan.
PART A
Committee on Energy and Commerce Oversight Plan
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
108TH CONGRESS
CONGRESSMAN W. J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, CHAIRMAN
Rule X, clause 2(d) of the Rules of the House requires each
standing Committee to adopt an oversight plan for the two-year
period of the Congress and to submit the plan to the Committees
on Government Reform and House Administration not later than
February 15 of the first session of the Congress.
This is the oversight plan of the Committee on Energy and
Commerce for the 108th Congress. It includes the areas in which
the Committee expects to conduct oversight during the 108th
Congress, but does not preclude oversight or investigation of
additional matters as the need arises.
----------
COMMERCE, TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ISSUES
VEHICLE AND TIRE SAFETY
During the 106th Congress, the Committee's oversight of the
Firestone tire recall matter led to the passage of
legislation--the Transportation Recall Enhancement,
Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) Act--mandating that
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
institute rulemakings to require the submission of data on
safety-related problems, claims, and lawsuits (whether foreign
or domestic) from manufacturers of products within NHTSA's
purview, including tires and vehicles. In the 107th Congress,
the Committee conducted oversight of NHTSA's implementation of
the TREAD Act, as well as industry's continuing response to the
safety issues that led to its enactment. In the 108th Congress,
the Committee intends to continue its review of the
implementation of the TREAD Act, including creation of an early
warning database system, rollover standard setting, and general
vehicle safety issues.
DECEPTIVE ADVERTISING OF HEALTH-RELATED PRODUCTS
During the past two years, the Federal Trade Commission
(FTC) has increased its enforcement efforts in the area of
deceptive advertising of health-related products, particularly
weight-loss supplements. Despite these increased efforts by the
FTC to crack down on deceptive advertising in this area,
advertising of weight-loss products continues to saturate all
advertising mediums. In the 108th Congress, the Committee will
examine the enforcement efforts to date of the FTC with respect
to deceptive advertising of weight-loss products, and
investigate issues related to recidivism in this industry, as
well as emerging products that are being marketed directly to
children or are dietary products designed for use exclusively
by children.
THE FTC'S CONSUMER PROTECTION EFFORTS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue to
review the management, operations, rulemaking, and enforcement
actions of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in safeguarding
consumers. In particular, the Committee will continue to review
Commission activity with regard to franchises, business
opportunities, telemarketing and identity theft. The Committee
also will examine the FTC's consumer protection mandate and
performance as part of its reauthorization process.
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue to
review the management, operations, and activities of the
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in safeguarding
consumers, and particularly their children, from faulty or
dangerous products. In particular, the Committee will review
the adequacy of the CPSC's data gathering and dissemination
efforts with respect to products within its jurisdiction. The
Committee also will examine other activities that enhance
consumer product safety, such as safety standard organizations.
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
The Committee's oversight of corporate accounting scandals
during the 107th Congress led to the passage of corporate
governance and accounting reform legislation in 2002. In the
108th Congress, the Committee will conduct oversight of
accounting standards changes and Financial Accounting Standards
Board (FASB) projects implemented in response to the new law
and the corporate financial collapses of 2001 and 2002. In
particular the Committee will monitor changes to standards
relating to accounting for derivatives and hedging,
disclosurerequirements for guarantees, and disclosures about fair value
and revenue recognition. The Committee will seek to ensure that the
FASB standard-setting process is independent and transparent, and that
the standards set by FASB result in unbiased financial information that
reflects economic reality and promotes transparency in corporate
disclosure. The Committee also will review the implementation of the
funding mechanism provided for FASB through the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board created under last year's corporate reform
act.
In addition, the Committee will monitor the progress of the
International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and its effect
on U.S. accounting standards and standard setting. The
Committee also will review the Securities and Exchange
Commission study regarding principles-based accounting to
explore the costs and benefits of a rules-based vs. principles-
based system of accounting for U.S. companies.
INTERSTATE AND E-COMMERCE
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue to
examine issues that substantially impact or affect interstate
commerce, with particular interest in activities that impede
such commerce. The Committee will continue its review of
consumer information privacy in the commercial context. The
Committee also will continue to examine impediments to
electronic commerce, including state legal and regulatory
impediments.
In addition, the Committee will continue to review and
consider issues relating to private-sector cyber security,
fraud, and other criminal issues confronting e-commerce. The
Committee also will continue to examine whether there is a need
for further liability reform in a number of areas, including
product liability and punitive damage awards generally.
TRADE
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue to
monitor and examine both multilateral trade agreements
(including World Trade Organization agreements) and bilateral
agreements such as the Singapore and Chile Free Trade
Agreements, as those agreements relate to services within the
Committee's jurisdiction--including telecommunications,
electronic commerce, food and drugs, and energy. The Committee
also will examine non-tariff trade barriers, such as legal and
regulatory barriers, to electronic commerce and other services
within the Committee's jurisdiction. In addition, the Committee
will examine the role of the Office of the United States Trade
Representative with respect to the assessment of international
telecommunications trade and the implementation of trade
agreements in this area. The Committee also will continue to
examine the issue of foreign government ownership of companies
in service industries within the Committee's jurisdiction.
ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS (ECNS)
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue to
evaluate the role of electronic communications networks (ECNs)
in providing competition in the securities marketplace. The
Committee will review impediments to competition and innovation
in the securities markets, and explore ways to eliminate
barriers while preserving investor protections. The Committee
also will examine the current issues surrounding the
availability of market data, and will consider appropriate
treatment of last sale and quotation information.
ATHLETICS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue to
conduct oversight of issues affecting amateur athletics,
including the role of commercialism, athletic opportunities,
drug abuse, and the health and welfare of student athletes. In
addition, the Committee will monitor the governance of
organizations responsible for administering athletics,
including the U.S. Olympic Committee.
TRAVEL AND TOURISM
Following the September 11 terrorist attacks, the travel
and tourism industries were severely impacted by the decrease
in business and vacation travel. In the 108th Congress, the
Committee will review the obstacles that stand in the way of a
full recovery for the travel and tourism industries, as well as
how the industries, along with Federal and state governments,
can encourage and promote the United States as a travel
destination for international and domestic passengers.
ENERGY AND AIR QUALITY ISSUES
NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY
During the 108th Congress, the Committee will undertake an
examination of national energy policy, examining U.S. policies
as they relate to conservation, energy efficiency, production,
and consumption of electricity, oil and natural gas, coal,
hydroelectric power, nuclear power, and renewable energy. The
Committee will examine the impact government policies are
having on the exploration, production, and development of
domestic energy resources. The Committee will review the
Department of Energy's Office of Fossil Energy to ensure that
its programs and resources are being optimized to support the
domestic petroleum industry. The Committee also will examine
global crude oil supplies in light of potential supply
interruptions, such as a war with Iraq, political turmoil in
Venezuela, and increasing competition from other countries for
swing supply. The Committee will examine other issues relating
to the nation's current energy infrastructure with a view
towards its expansion.
In May 2001, Vice President Cheney and the other members of
the National Energy Policy Development Group issued a report on
a National Energy Policy. The report recommends specific
legislative and regulatoryreforms necessary to ensure the
nation's long-term energy security and to meet short-term energy needs.
The report contains numerous recommendations for action by specific
agencies within the Federal government. The Committee will conduct
oversight of the activities of these agencies with regard to the
recommendations contained in the National Energy Policy report.
THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue to
examine the activities of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) relating to electric industry restructuring,
protection of consumers, and the development of efficient and
vigorous wholesale markets for electricity. In particular, the
Committee will focus on FERC's review of applications for
regional transmission organizations (RTOs), its review of
comments on its proposed standard market design rulemaking, the
adequacy and reliability of the nation's interstate
transmission grid, and other matters relating to wholesale
electricity markets and the development of infrastructure
needed to support such markets. The Committee will examine
whether FERC's policies appropriately address the interests of
each region of the country, the situation of industry
participants with pending RTO applications, and the overall
benefits of well-functioning wholesale markets. The Committee
also will continue its oversight of FERC's handling of, and
lessons learned from, the crisis in California and western
electricity markets during 2001-2002, including review of the
Commission staff's forthcoming investigative report and the
Commission's other enforcement activity.
THE FEDERAL ELECTRIC UTILITIES
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will conduct oversight
of the activities of the Federal Power Marketing
Administrations (PMAs) and the Tennessee Valley Authority
(TVA). The Federal government has been marketing electricity
since the 1930s. According to the General Accounting Office
(GAO), the Federal government today markets more than 10
percent of the nation's power through the PMAs and TVA. The
majority of this power is sold to ``preference customers,''
which includes cooperatives, municipal utilities, irrigation
districts, large industrial customers, and military
installations. The Committee will conduct oversight of the PMAs
and TVA regarding issues such as debt reduction through
recovery of costs, consistency with electricity transmission
policies of the Federal government to promote competitive
wholesale power markets, transmission and generation
infrastructure upgrades, and compliance with relevant statutes.
OIL AND NATURAL GAS MARKETS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will examine the
reliability and transparency of natural gas markets, including
price indices as well as the industry's use of derivatives and
risk management as a means to stabilize commodity prices in the
energy sector. The Committee also will examine whether domestic
oil and gas companies are disadvantaged compared to foreign
companies when competing for exploration and development
programs in other countries.
THE STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE
With a potential war with Iraq looming and the political
turmoil in Venezuela reducing oil exports from that country,
the Committee will examine the appropriate uses of the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the Executive Branch's ability to
withdraw inventories, and a potential expansion and filling of
the reserve to its Congressionally authorized amount of one
billion barrels.
CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGIES
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue its
review of technological advances and other issues relating to
``clean coal.'' The Committee will examine the potential for
various technologies to achieve increased efficiency, decreased
environmental impacts (including air emissions), and the long-
term ability of such technology to maintain a diverse energy
supply for the nation. Past reviews have indicated that, while
some technologies have begun to attract private capital, many
technologies have yet to achieve economic viability in the
marketplace. Thus, the Committee will examine whether the
Federal government has a role to play in the expedited
deployment of such power plant equipment, how different
incentives could affect the deployment of new technologies, and
the likely costs and benefits of different approaches.
GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
The Committee will continue to monitor international
negotiations on climate change during the 108th Congress. The
Committee will consider whether international agreements are
achievable, effective and fair to various U.S. interests. The
Committee also will consider whether agreements on climate
change are scientifically well grounded. In addition, the
Committee will review components of ongoing climate programs--
including activities carried out under the Global Change
Research Program, the Climate Change Technology Initiative, and
Section 1605(b) of the Energy Policy Act of 1992--to ensure
compliance with Congressional intent and guidance in this area.
GENERAL MANAGEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND ITS NATIONAL
LABORATORIES
As in previous Congresses, the Committee will continue its
comprehensive review of general management issues at the
Department of Energy (DOE), including management of the
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and the
national laboratories. The Committee will examine DOE's budget
requests and determine whether they are consistent with the
Committee's priorities. The Committee willalso continue to
examine whether DOE is effectively managing the contractors that
operate the national laboratories, and whether more competition is
necessary in the contracting process. The Committee will continue to
review the treatment of whistleblowers by DOE and its contractors.
In the 107th Congress, the Committee began a detailed
investigation of procurement and property management
deficiencies at Los Alamos National Laboratory, one of DOE's
national laboratories run by the University of California. The
Committee also recently requested that GAO review procurement
and property inventory practices at the other two major
national laboratories managed and operated by the University of
California--the Lawrence Berkeley and Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratories. In the 108th Congress, the Committee
will continue to review these matters.
DOE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND HIGH-LEVEL WASTE CLEAN UP PROGRAM
The Department of Energy's Environmental Management (EM)
program initiated a comprehensive accelerated cleanup
initiative in Fiscal Year 2003. The Committee will continue its
review of this initiative to ensure that increased funding
intended to achieve accelerated cleanup will actually result in
real cleanup progress. The Committee also will review EM's
high-level waste disposal program, including the construction
and operation of high-level waste facilities at the Hanford
site, the Idaho Environmental and Engineering Laboratory, and
the Savannah River site.
THE YUCCA MOUNTAIN PROJECT
In the 107th Congress, the Committee reported H.J. Res. 87
approving the site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for the
development by the Department of Energy (DOE) of a permanent
repository for the disposal of commercial and government-owned
spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive wastes. DOE
cannot begin construction activities at Yucca Mountain until
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission approves the construction
authorization license. In the 108th Congress, the Committee
will oversee DOE's progress toward completing its license
application for construction authorization.
SAFETY AND SECURITY OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL
Spent nuclear fuel is currently located at hundreds of
storage sites across the country at private and government-
owned facilities. Spent fuel storage facilities include above-
ground dry storage facilities and wet storage basins. Under
current Federal plans, spent nuclear fuel will eventually be
transported to a permanent disposal facility at Yucca Mountain.
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will review issues
relating to the current safety and security of spent nuclear
fuel in storage, as well as the safety and security of spent
nuclear fuel in transport.
DOE NUCLEAR SAFETY PROGRAMS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue its
oversight of implementation of nuclear safety regulations by
the Department of Energy (DOE) and its contractor employees. As
part of this review, the Committee will monitor closely the
National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) efforts to
coordinate with appropriate nuclear safety offices at DOE to
ensure that investigations are initiated and enforcement
actions are taken whenever nuclear safety violations occur at
facilities managed by NNSA.
DOE SECURITY PROGRAMS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue its
extensive oversight of security matters at Department of Energy
(DOE) sites, particularly at the national nuclear weapon
laboratories, in order to ensure that continuing improvements
are made in the protection of classified information and
nuclear materials--whether in storage, in use, or in transport.
The Committee also will review DOE's efforts to finalize and
implement a new design basis threat for its facilities and
laboratories.
THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
As in previous Congresses, the Committee will review the
activities of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The
Committee will examine NRC's budget requests, conduct oversight
of how the Commission discharges its various responsibilities,
and review whether the Commission is an effective regulator of
nuclear facilities. In particular, the Committee will monitor
closely NRC's efforts to increase security requirements at
nuclear facilities and develop a new design basis threat for
these facilities. In addition, as part of the Committee's
oversight of nuclear safety generally, the Committee will
continue its review of nuclear safety issues at the Davis-Besse
nuclear power plant--a situation that raises additional
concerns about the Commission's ability to conduct adequate
safety-related oversight of its regulated facilities.
ADVANCED AUTOMOBILE AND HYDROGEN FUEL INITIATIVES
In the 107th Congress, the Committee began a review of the
FreedomCAR program run by the Department of Energy. In the
108th Congress, the Committee will continue to review the
Department's FreedomCAR and FreedomFUEL advanced automobile and
hydrogen fuels and infrastructure initiatives. This oversight
effort will include an assessment of program set-up, cost-
effectiveness, the hurdles that must be overcome to develop and
bring to market advanced automobile technologies, and the
infrastructures necessary to support them. The Committee also
will continue to explore advanced vehicle technologies that may
provide benefits in the near-term, such as clean diesel and
hybrid technologies.
EPA IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT
In previous Congresses, the Committee has taken an active
role in overseeing the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
implementation of the Clean Air Act and various amendments to
this Act, including such matters as the 1997 revision to ozone
and particulate matter standards, EPA's diesel engine
certification program, EPA's regional haze program,
implementation of Title VI of the Clean Air Act relating to
metered-dose inhalers, and other related matters. In the 108th
Congress, the Committee will continue to review significant
activities regarding the Clean Air Act and the success of
various efforts in achieving improved air quality in a manner
that allows both administrative flexibility and improved cost-
effectiveness. The Committee's review will include oversight of
EPA strategies to attain Clean Air Act standards, including the
implementation and assessment of vehicle emission inspection
and maintenance programs.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ``EQUIP'' PROGRAM
The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002
significantly revised and expanded the Environmental Quality
Incentives Program (EQUIP). This program provides incentive
payments and cost-share payments to assist producers in their
compliance with local, state and Federal environmental laws
regarding soil, water, air quality, and wildlife habitat.
Recently, the EQUIP program has funded such items as the
purchase of less-polluting diesel generators on farms in
California. In the 108th Congress, the Committee will review
how both increased funding levels and the broadened legislative
focus of the program assists communities in meeting obligations
under Federal environmental statutes within the Committee's
jurisdiction.
ENVIRONMENT AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ISSUES
EPA MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS
During the 108th Congress, the Committee intends to
continue its general oversight of the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), including reviewing EPA's mission and identifying
programs or initiatives that deviate from that mission. The
Committee also will review the agency's funding decisions,
resource allocation, grants, research activities, enforcement
actions, relations with State and local governments, and
program implementation. Moreover, in light of an EPA Office of
Inspector General's suggestion that the agency needs to improve
its planning, measuring, and accountability practices, the
Committee intends to monitor EPA's efforts to correct these
deficiencies.
EPA PROTECTION OF SECURITY-RELATED INFORMATION
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will oversee
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) efforts to protect
security preparedness and vulnerability information submitted
to the agency under the provisions of the Public Health and
Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002. In
addition, the Committee will review EPA's relationship to, and
coordination with, the Department of Homeland Security.
EPA'S RELATIONSHIP WITH THE STATES
In a report released in the previous Congress, the General
Accounting Office (GAO) identified the Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA) relationship with the States as a ``major
performance and accountability challenge,'' citing
disagreements over respective roles and responsibilities,
priorities, and the proper conduct of Federal oversight. The
Committee intends to monitor EPA's commitment to improving the
agency's long-term relationship with the States under the
National Environmental Performance Partnership. In addition,
the Committee will continue to examine progressions and
innovations made in the States' environmental programs, and
evaluate whether there are Federal or state-level barriers to
further success in these areas.
THE SUPERFUND PROGRAM AND BROWNFIELDS
In past Congresses, the Committee has conducted a review of
the Superfund program run by the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), including (1) regional enforcement and
implementation of the cleanup program; (2) program management
concerns identified by EPA's Inspector General; and (3) EPA
expenditures from the Superfund Trust Fund. In the 108th
Congress, the Committee will continue its review of the
efficiency, effectiveness, funding, and pace of progress of the
Superfund program. As part of the overall Superfund review, the
Committee intends to monitor the implementation of the new
brownfields remediation and grants law. In particular, the
Committee is interested in reviewing whether EPA is properly
administering the law and whether existing state brownfields
programs are being inappropriately hampered by any
implementation or management practices at the Federal level.
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT IMPLEMENTATION
The Committee will review the Environmental Protection
Agency's relationship to the States' toxic waste cleanup
programs, and whether Federal program reforms, additional
funding, or stronger enforcement under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act are necessary to expedite
cleanups at toxic waste sites.
EPA RISK ASSESSMENT PRACTICES
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will conduct oversight
with respect to Environmental Protection Agency risk assessment
practices.
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AMENDMENTS
In the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments of 1996,
Congress authorized a drinking water state revolving loan fund
(DWSRF) program to help public water systems finance
infrastructure projects needed to comply with Federal drinking
water regulations and to protect public health. Under this
program, States receive capitalization grants to make loans for
drinking water projects and to support certain other
activities. Since the law's enactment, the Committee has
examined the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
implementation of the 1996 SDWA Amendments, including the
conduct and adequacy of safe drinking water research and state
funding of drinking water programs. At the end of Fiscal Year
2003, the current authorization for the DWSRF will expire. As
part of the Committee's efforts to meet the needs of the
nation's drinking water delivery systems and reauthorize the
DWSRF, the Committee will continue its review of the 1996
Amendments and the magnitude of any funding ``gap'' between
identified resources and identified needs for drinking water
delivery systems. In addition, the Committee will assess EPA's
implementation of non-grant components of the 1996 SDWA
Amendments, including compliance rates and future safe drinking
water delivery challenges.
The Committee also will review EPA's implementation of
Title IV of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism
Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 with respect to security
of drinking water systems from terrorist attack.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
Last year, the Department of Defense (DOD) asserted that
its ability to train the country's armed forces is being
hampered by certain Federal environmental laws--three of which
fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee. As the committee
responsible for passage of the Federal Facilities Compliance
Act, the Committee will review DOD's environmental activities
and ascertain its record of clean-up effectiveness, ongoing
monitoring, and compliance with Federal and state environmental
laws and regulations. In addition, the Committee will examine
DOD's actions in response to two GAO reports issued in the
107th Congress, which raised concerns about DOD's overall
environmental efforts at Formerly Utilized Defense Sites.
HEALTH AND HEALTHCARE ISSUES
MEDICARE MODERNIZATION
Given the growing financial pressures facing the Medicare
program because of an aging population, the Committee will
continue to examine ways to strengthen and modernize the
program for current and future generations. Today, Medicare
consumes approximately 12 percent of the Federal budget--a
number expected to increase to over 30 percent by 2030. In the
108th Congress, the Committee will review proposals to address
program growth, examine the adequacy of existing Part A and
Part B funding mechanisms, and review proposals to improve
beneficiaries' basic benefit packages. Specifically, the
Committee will explore initiatives that enhance beneficiary
choice, provide patients with better access to preventive
benefits and a catastrophic cap on out-of-pocket expenditures,
and reform cost-sharing mechanisms.
CHILDHOOD VACCINE SHORTAGES
Since the summer of 2001, there has been a reported
shortage of doses to protect children against eight of 11
vaccine-preventable diseases, including chicken pox,
diphtheria, and whooping cough. According to the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), this vaccine shortage is
the worst in 24 years, causing vaccines to be unavailable to
millions of children. Moreover, the number of domestic
manufacturers of vaccines has dropped from 37 to four. In the
108th Congress, the Committee will examine the factors that may
contribute to shortages of vaccines. In particular, the
Committee will review whether government policies or
regulations in this area provide disincentives to vaccine
research, development, and production, and whether the Federal
vaccine injury compensation and liability system is working
effectively.
SAFETY OF BREAST IMPLANTS
Over the last several years, the Committee has monitored
the oversight by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the
breast-implant industry and the safety and efficacy of saline-
filled and silicone-filled breast implants. Under a provision
of the medical device user fee law passed in the last Congress,
the National Institutes of Health is required to issue a report
this year on the safety of breast implants. In addition, FDA
will be reviewing pre-market applications for silicone breast
implants this year. Given these developments, the Committee
will continue its review in this area during the 108th
Congress.
FDA DRUG APPROVAL PROCESS REFORM
Last year, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
held two hearings concerning ImClone Systems and the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) review and rejection of its cancer
treatment drug Erbitux. This inquiry revealed inconsistencies
in the drug review processes between the two FDA centers that
consider drug applications and their policies for interacting
with drug companies submitting such applications. By exposing
these issues, the Committee helped spur a FDA reorganization of
therapeutic drug reviews and other policy changes to improve
the drug approval process. The Committee will continue to
monitor and examine these FDA policy changes to improve the
drug approval process during the 108th Congress.
PRESCRIPTION DRUG SAFETY AND ABUSE
In previous Congresses, the Committee has investigated
safety and misuse concerns surrounding several prescription
drugs approved for sale by the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA), including the acne drugAccutane and the top-selling
analgesic Oxycontin. In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue
to monitor issues relating to these two drugs, as well as FDA's pending
evaluation of Palladone, another narcotic analgesic.
In the 108th Congress, the Committee also will continue its
prior investigations into the safety of imported (and re-
imported) drugs, including counterfeit or unapproved drugs and
bulk ingredients imported for use in finished drug products.
The Committee's efforts will include a continuing review of FDA
activities to address the growing problems of prescription
drugs being sold illegally to U.S. residents from Internet
sites, and the potential consequences such activities pose to
public health. In addition, the Committee will continue its
review of the growing emergence of Mexican border pharmacies,
and the potential threats such sources may pose to U.S.
travelers seeking medicines from such sources. The Committee's
efforts also will focus on what actions FDA, the Drug
Enforcement Administration, and various mail couriers
(including the U.S. Postal Service, FedEx, and UPS) are taking
to prevent or limit a variety of dangerous drugs (including
controlled substances) from illegally entering the United
States. Finally, given FDA's pending investigations of several
cases of counterfeit finished drugs found by patients and
pharmacists in the United States, the Committee will continue
to examine the evolving nature of this issue and the efforts
FDA and the pharmaceutical industry are taking to reduce this
threat.
NURSING HOMES QUALITY OF CARE
As part of the Committee's jurisdiction over programs
administered by the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS), including Medicare Part B and Medicaid, the Committee
will examine quality-of-care issues in nursing homes during the
108th Congress. The Committee will monitor HHS' efforts to
promote quality care in nursing homes, and whether consumers
are receiving sufficient information to help them evaluate
quality. Moreover, as part of the Committee's continuing
oversight of corporate accountability, the Committee will
review the management of publicly-traded nursing homes and the
public disclosures to investors concerning the financial health
of these companies, particularly given the recent bankruptcies
(and subsequent reorganizations) of many of the largest nursing
home chains.
CMS' MANAGEMENT OF THE MEDICARE AND MEDICAID PROGRAMS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue to
assess the management by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services (CMS) of the fiscal intermediaries and carriers that
are responsible for processing all Medicare claims and
payments. Although CMS provides overall policy guidance for the
administration of Medicare, day-to-day operation of the program
is dependent on contractors that process beneficiary claims and
make Medicare payments to healthcare providers. The Committee's
prior oversight in this area has revealed how several of these
contractors fraudulently misrepresented their performance,
submitted false financial data, compromised the integrity of
audits, and destroyed relevant documents in order to receive
greater incentive payments from CMS--and how CMS failed to
detect these activities because of lax oversight coupled with
complex and often contradictory directives from CMS
headquarters and regional offices. In response, CMS initiated
significant efforts to reform its management of Medicare
contractors, and has sought new authority to expand the types
of entities that can serve as Medicare contractors. The
Committee will continue to review CMS oversight of these
contractors and examine the current contractor eligibility
requirements and the Medicare claims payment system.
During the 108th Congress, the Committee also will continue
efforts to streamline administrative and regulatory burdens on
beneficiaries and providers. As part of this effort, the
Committee will monitor CMS' implementation of the Balanced
Budget Act of 1997 (BBA), the Balanced Budget Refinement Act
(BBRA), the Benefits Improvement and Protection Act (BIPA), as
well as any regulatory relief legislation that this Congress
may pass. The Committee also will review the Medicare appeals
process to evaluate its efficiency and effectiveness in
resolving disputes over Medicare coverage affecting the
program's 40 million beneficiaries. The new Medicare appeals
process was included in BIPA, which was enacted in 2000. In
addition, these laws contain provisions having an impact on the
Medicaid program and the State Children's Health Insurance
Program (S-CHIP), which the Committee will review as well.
MEDICARE+CHOICE
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue to
examine the Medicare+Choice market and the policies that affect
plans' decisions to participate in the program. Over the last
several years, hundreds of plans have withdrawn from the
Medicare+Choice program, affecting more than 2.4 million
beneficiaries. In addition, many plans have reduced benefits or
increased beneficiary cost-sharing, making these plans less
attractive to beneficiaries. The Committee will carefully
examine these issues, and attempt to identify solutions that
will guarantee that beneficiaries will continue to have access
to Medicare+Choice plans.
PRESCRIPTION DRUGS
As part of the Congressional effort to enact a new
prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries, the
Committee will continue to review issues relating to
prescription drugs. These issues will include assessing
beneficiaries' pharmaceutical needs, utilization and
expenditures, as well as the special circumstances of low-
income seniors, and how all of these factors might relate to
possible benefit designs. The Committee will examine innovative
strategies for harnessing purchasing power to lower costs, and
for providing better disease management for Medicare
beneficiaries. In addition, the Committee will continue its
oversight into the abuses associated with drug-price reporting
practices, particularly theuse of Average Wholesale Price
(``AWP'') to set reimbursements for both the Medicare and Medicaid
programs.
THE UNINSURED
Forty-one million Americans lack access to health
insurance. In the 108th Congress, the Committee will examine
ways to expand insurance coverage to these individuals and
improve the insurance marketplace.
MEDICARE PREVENTATIVE CARE
As part of its oversight of how the Centers for Medicare
and Medicaid Services manages the delivery of health care, the
Committee will continue to assess policies concerning
beneficiary use and the cost effectiveness of clinical
preventive benefits and services under Medicare.
PREVENTING WASTE, FRAUD AND ABUSE IN FEDERAL HEALTHCARE PROGRAMS
The Medicare program continues to be at risk of
considerable losses due to waste, fraud and abuse. Because of
the program's large size and scope--providing health care
coverage for 40 million Americans, with expenditures in excess
of $241 billion each year--the Committee will focus
considerable attention on efforts to eliminate improper
payments. In particular, the Committee will review Federal
financial management processes and controls, and information
technology and systems used to prevent and detect fraud.
The Committee also will examine Medicare reimbursement
policies to identify and eliminate potential areas in which the
program may be vulnerable to fraud and abuse. These initiatives
will include an examination of reimbursements to hospitals,
skilled nursing facilities, and other providers, including
outlier payment issues. The Committee also will review issues
relating to healthcare financing highlighted by the recent
collapse of National Century Financial Enterprises. In this
context, the Committee will examine the pace of reimbursement
from Medicaid and Medicare programs, and the potential impact
this may have upon providers and their reliance on risky and
expensive cash flow financing from lenders such as National
Century. The Committee also will examine how these financing
arrangements may threaten healthcare providers with bankruptcy,
as the National Century case has demonstrated.
REFORM OF THE MEDICAID PROGRAM
Medicaid is a program jointly funded by the Federal
government and the States to provide healthcare coverage for
approximately 44 million low-income Americans. In Fiscal Year
2001, Medicaid had total expenditures of $228 billion, with the
Federal share equaling approximately 57 percent. It is
estimated that total Medicaid spending for Fiscal Year 2002
will, for the first time, exceed spending for Medicare, and
Medicaid spending is projected to double within the next ten
years. On average, Medicaid currently consumes 15-20 percent of
all state budgets, and is often the second largest budget item
for States after education expenses.
The challenges inherent in overseeing a program of
Medicaid's size, growth and diversity, combined with the open-
ended nature of its Federal funding, places the program at risk
for exploitation and waste. During the 108th Congress, the
Committee will review the Medicaid program to assess its
current operations and determine how they may be improved.
These efforts will include examining the current system for
financing Medicaid, and whether it may create incentives for
States and providers to attempt to inappropriately obtain
additional Federal funds. The Committee also will focus its
attention on the needs of the elderly and disabled populations
within Medicaid, and assess new strategies for improving the
quality and cost effectiveness of the care they receive. In
this regard, the Committee will examine state efforts to modify
and improve the Medicaid program, and whether these efforts are
meeting the needs of elderly and disabled beneficiaries.
IMAGE-GUIDED BIOPSY
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will examine why
image-guided biopsy, a minimally invasive procedure used to
determine if a patient has breast cancer, is used significantly
less than surgical biopsy. Image-guided biopsy involves less
cost to the patient and does not involve general anesthesia,
unlike surgical biopsy. Yet surgical biopsy continues to be the
method of biopsy most doctors use, despite the lack of data
indicating that it is more effective or accurate than image-
guided biopsy. Evidence also suggests that many patients are
not made aware that they have an option for a less-invasive
procedure. The Committee will review whether patients are
receiving adequate information about this option, and whether
the use of surgical biopsy over image-guided biopsy may result
from the larger reimbursement rates under Medicare for the
surgical biopsy procedure.
THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION
Building on the Committee's prior oversight work to ensure
the adequacy of Federal, state, and local efforts to respond to
bioterrorism and other public health emergencies, the Committee
will investigate ways to improve the grant making process at
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to strengthen
the capacity of the public health infrastructure at the state
and local level. In particular, the Committee plans to review
the effectiveness of current chronic disease prevention
programs with respect to reducing the incidence of these
diseases. The Committee also will review ways to improve
infectious disease surveillance and control.
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH
Over the past five years, Congress has invested
considerable additional resources into the National Institutes
of Health (NIH), roughly doubling its budget. With
approximately $27 billion per fiscal year, NIHis the largest
source of funding for health research in the world. In Spring 2003, the
Institute of Medicine is expected to release a report on the
organizational structure of NIH, specifically focusing on whether the
current structure is meeting the scientific research needs of the
United States.
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will conduct an
examination of NIH's organizational structure, priority
setting, and research activities. In particular, the Committee
will examine how NIH exercises oversight over grant-receiving
institutions. During one of the Committee's investigations last
year, the Committee learned that NIH was providing grants to
the Coulston Foundation, a registered animal research facility
in Alamagordo, New Mexico, which had recently declared
bankruptcy and had been cited by two other Federal agencies for
violations of various Federal regulations. This incident raises
the question whether NIH oversight ensures that its grant funds
are properly managed, and that grantee institutions are not in
violation of Federal regulations.
HHS PROGRAMS AFFECTING CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
The Committee will continue to conduct oversight of
Department of Health and Human Services grant programs that
affect the health of children and families. The Committee will
evaluate the current distribution of funding for these
programs, assess whether the monies are being spent
effectively, and examine the extent to which these programs
comply with statutory requirements and Congressional intent. In
addition, the Committee will review the implementation of those
aspects of the welfare reform provisions that are within the
Committee's jurisdiction. These provisions are scheduled for
reauthorization this year.
ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will review the
efforts and recommendations of the Interagency Task Force on
Antimicrobial Resistance, which was statutorily authorized
under the Public Health Improvement Act of 1999 (P.L. 106-505).
This oversight will involve assessment of the Federal
surveillance and monitoring programs, prevention and control
efforts, and research and development activities relating to
antimicrobial resistance.
ORGAN DONATIONS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee intends to review the
current organ donation system, and whether improvements can be
made to the system in order to increase the availability of
donated organs for patients on transplant waiting lists.
DRUG ABUSE TREATMENT & PREVENTION
For the last several years, the Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) has been attempting to
publish mandatory guidelines for testing of alternative
specimens (such as hair, sweat, and oral fluid) and on-site
testing techniques for potential drugs of abuse. These
alternative testing matrices could help bolster the accuracy
and capability of workplace drug testing. The Committee intends
to examine the reasons for the delay in publication of these
guidelines, and whether the process for issuing these
guidelines can be expedited.
The Committee also will review more generally SAMHSA and
the programs it administers, in order to identify strengths and
weaknesses of the current grant structure. In addition, the
Committee will examine the Administration's new initiative to
help drug-addicted Americans find needed treatment.
MEDICAL LIABILITY INSURANCE
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue to focus
on issues relating to medical liability insurance. In
particular, the Committee plans to review the extent and causes
of the medical liability insurance crisis, which may be
contributing to providers' unwillingness to continue practicing
in certain jurisdictions and in certain specialties.
PATIENT SAFETY
As part of its jurisdiction over public health, the
Committee will continue to address the issues of patient safety
and medical errors. In its 1999 report, To Err Is Human, the
Institute of Medicine estimated that 44,000 to 98,000 Americans
die each year as a result of medical errors. While there has
been some dispute about the accuracy of these precise
estimates, the Committee intends to explore possible incentives
to encourage the healthcare industry to reduce medical errors,
and will review the Federal government's overall role in
promoting patient safety.
PEDIATRIC DRUG TESTING
Late last year, a Federal court ruled that the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) did not have the authority to issue
its ``Pediatric Rule,'' which required manufacturers of drugs
and biologics to test their drugs intended for adults on
children. In light of this decision, the Committee intends to
review FDA efforts to ensure the appropriate testing of drugs
in children, and will consider whether statutory changes are
necessary.
GENERIC DRUG COMPETITION
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently proposed a
rule that would re-interpret the 30-month stay provision of the
Hatch-Waxman Act, among other things. Prior to the re-
interpretation, brand-name drug manufacturers, in limited
instances, could obtain multiple 30-month stays to forestall
generic competition. The proposed rule would allow for only one
30-month stay. The Committee intends to monitor FDA's
promulgation of the final rule during the 108th Congress.
FOOD ALLERGEN LABELING
In the 108th Congress, the Committee intends to review
whether the food industry is adequately labeling food products
for the presence of eight major food allergens in a manner that
is easily understood by consumers.
MEDICAL DEVICE ISSUES
Last year, the President signed into law the Medical Device
User Fee and Modernization Act of 2002. Among other things,
this legislation required device manufacturers to pay user fees
to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the review of
their medical devices. In the 108th Congress, the Committee
will conduct oversight in this area to ensure timely and
effective implementation of this law.
ANIMAL DRUG ISSUES
Approval of animal drugs takes the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) longer than virtually any other drug
application. In the 108th Congress, the Committee will review
the reasons for this delay, and consider whether it is
necessary to develop a user fee program for animal drugs. Under
such a program, industry would pay fees to FDA for review of
animal drug applications and, with such fees, FDA would hire
additional personnel in order to speed the animal drug review
process.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS ISSUES
THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE PROGRAM
In previous Congresses, the Committee has reviewed the
operations of the Universal Service Program administered by the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Universal service was
first implemented as a government policy with the Charleston
Plan of implicit subsidies in 1951 as a means of ensuring that
all Americans enjoyed a ubiquitous, reliable, and affordable
communications system. Universal service policies were amended
after the breakup of AT&T in the early 1980s and again in the
1996 Telecommunications Act. One of the changes made in 1996
was the expansion of the program to include the subsidization
of telecommunications services provided to schools, libraries,
and rural health care providers. In the 108th Congress, the
Committee will review the effectiveness of the universal
service program and evaluate several possible reforms,
including whether the fund should be expanded to include
additional services, whether the fund should be reduced to
account for advances in technology, and whether the methodology
for how funds are collected and distributed should be changed.
The part of the program focused on schools, libraries, and
rural healthcare providers is known as the ``E-Rate'' program,
and its roughly $2 billion annual fund is administered for the
FCC by an independent company, the Universal Service
Administrative Company. All telecommunications carriers that
provide interstate and international services pay contributions
into the E-Rate program, which are distributed by the FCC in
the form of grants to schools, libraries, and rural health care
providers. Recent reports by the FCC's Inspector General and
certain public interest groups, as well as recent criminal
charges filed by the Department of Justice, indicate the
potential for significant fraud, waste, and abuse within the E-
Rate program, and suggest a lack of effective oversight of the
program by the FCC. In the 108th Congress, the Committee will
investigate these reports.
HEALTH OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS SECTOR
The prosperity of the telecommunications and technology
sector provided a driving force behind the unprecedented
economic growth experienced by the United States from 1995 to
2000. The mass-market commercialization of the Internet and the
passage of the 1996 Telecommunications Act unleashed a massive
investment in telecommunications and Internet companies. This
boom, however, turned to bust in 2000 and 2001, as new
investment from Wall Street dried up. There has been much
analysis and speculation regarding the reasons for this change
of fortunes in the telecommunications industry. Some analysts
have suggested a glut in Internet backbone capacity led to the
industry's decline; others have suggested that too many local
exchange competitors had poor business plans. Investors also
shifted from evaluating companies based on revenue growth to
evaluating them based upon profitability--and few of these
companies were making any profit. In addition, even companies
that had been profitable, such as incumbent local exchange
carriers and cable companies, faced a decline in profitability
due to increased intermodal competition and the overall decline
in both business and consumer spending. As a result, hundreds
of thousands of employees of telecommunications service and
manufacturing companies have lost their jobs and dozens of
companies have filed for bankruptcy.
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will examine what
caused the downward spiral of the telecommunications sector,
whether the causes were purely business-related, or whether
there were regulatory or policy reasons for the slowdown.
FCC IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 1996 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT
In 1996, Congress enacted a major overhaul of the country's
telecommunications laws. Among the many changes made in 1996,
two in particular have spurred a tremendous amount of interest
and controversy. First, in order to spur multi-platform
facilities-based competition among telecommunications
providers, Congress required incumbent local exchange carriers
(ILECs) to make parts of their networks available to
competitors seeking to offer telecommunications services. These
competitors then would be able to offer telecommunications
services while they gradually built out their own networks.
Second, the 1996 Telecommunications Act created, for thefirst
time, a statutory distinction between telecommunications services
(essentially transmission services in which information does not change
content or form) and information services (which do alter the content
or form of information that is being transmitted). Companies interested
in offering competitive telecommunications services were granted rights
such as the ability to interconnect with an incumbent's network, the
permission to resell an incumbent's retail services, the opportunity to
enable a telephone customer to keep his or her phone number even if he
or she switched carriers, and the right to lease parts of an
incumbent's networks and collocate equipment in an incumbent's offices.
Information services, on the other hand, were essentially left
unregulated.
There has been widespread disagreement about whether the
rules implementing these provisions from the 1996
Telecommunications Act have been effective in achieving the
goals of the Act. In the 108th Congress, the Committee will
continue to examine the implementation of the 1996
Telecommunications Act by the Federal Communications
Commission.
WIRELESS E-911 DEPLOYMENT
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has required
mobile telecommunications service providers to put technology
in their networks and/or consumer handsets that enable a public
safety official to determine a wireless caller's location with
a certain degree of accuracy. This program, known as E-911, has
the potential to save lives in cases in which 911 emergency
calls are made from mobile phones but the caller is unable to
provide precise location information. However, the deployment
of location technology in mobile networks and handsets has been
slower than expected. In 2002, former FCC Chief Engineer Dale
Hatfield led a study of E-911 implementation and made several
findings. He cited the need to bring incumbent local exchange
carriers into closer coordination with respect to E-911
implementation. Hatfield also recommended that the FCC urge
stakeholders to develop industry-wide procedures for testing
and certification of wireless E-911 to ensure that they meet
the accuracy requirements specified in the Commission's rules.
In addition, Hatfield recommended that there be closer
cooperation between the FCC and local and state 911 operations.
In the 107th Congress, the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet held a hearing on the
status of the implementation of E-911. In the 108th Congress,
the Committee will continue its examination in this regard and
explore the recommendations from the Hatfield report.
DIGITAL TELEVISION
In the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Congress gave
television broadcasters additional 6 MHz blocks of spectrum to
begin broadcasting in digital format, and required them to
cease analog broadcasting and return 6 MHz blocks of spectrum
the later of December 31, 2006, or once more than 85% of
television households have access to digital television
channels. While many digital stations already are in operation
in major metropolitan areas, the overall conversion to digital
television has been criticized as being slow, unorganized and
unrealistic. There are a number of open proceedings at the
Commission that will impact the success of the transition to
digital television. The Committee intends to monitor the FCC's
actions in these proceedings to ensure the rapid deployment of
digital television in all areas of the country in accordance
with the schedule set forth in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997.
Further, the Committee plans to continue its in-depth review of
the transition to digital television to determine what barriers
exist to its full development and deployment.
EFFICIENT USE OF SPECTRUM AND SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT
Management of spectrum within the United States is shared
between the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) (governing
private sector use of the spectrum) and the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)
(governing governmental use of the spectrum). Virtually all
usable spectrum already has been allocated. The recent
popularity and growth of the wireless telecommunications
industry has increased demand for the allocation and assignment
of additional spectrum in order to provide new services, such
as third generation (``3G'') wireless services and Wi-Fi. The
tension created by the current shortfall has a significant
impact on the U.S. economy and the ability of U.S. wireless
providers to compete with wireless companies in other nations
that are rushing to offer new wireless services. The Committee
plans an extensive review of spectrum management functions in
the 108th Congress, in order to ensure efficient use of
spectrum, particularly by Federal government users. In
addition, the Committee will review efforts to promote spectrum
sharing that may be beneficial to the promotion of new wireless
technologies.
MEDIA OWNERSHIP RULES
The 1996 Telecommunications Act mandated that the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) immediately liberalize a number
of its broadcast ownership rules. On an ongoing basis, the Act
also requires the FCC to review its ownership rules biennially
to ``determine whether any of such rules are necessary in the
public interest as the result of competition.'' In September
2002, the FCC consolidated three pending broadcast ownership
proceedings into a single Biennial Review on six broadcast
ownership rules: the broadcast-newspaper cross-ownership rule;
the local radio ownership rule; the television-radio cross-
ownership rule; the dual network rule; the local television
ownership rule; and the national television ownership rule. In
addition to the Biennial Review, the FCC has before it a
separate pending proceeding on the cable horizontal ownership
cap. The need to reassess these ownership rules was made more
urgent by the determination of the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit that, if the Commission is to
retain its media ownership rules in their present form, it must
first justify their need. In the 107th Congress, the Committee
corresponded with the FCC and met with its staff on these
issues. The issue of whether the mediaownership rules should be
relaxed has many proponents and opponents and, during the 108th
Congress, the Committee will monitor closely the FCC's progress in
these proceedings. A decision on the Biennial Review is expected in
Spring 2003.
ICANN
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
(ICANN) governs the management and registration of the domain
name system. In the 108th Congress, the Committee plans to
examine the structure and operations of ICANN, and its effort--
along with that of the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration--to privatize the domain name system
and determine the rightful ownership of the root server. ICANN
also will be selecting and approving an unspecified number of
new Internet domains. Past ICANN selections of new domains have
been met with considerable controversy, and the Committee will
exercise oversight to ensure that the selection process is
open, fair, and competitive.
DOT KIDS
During the 107th Congress, the ``Dot Kids Implementation
and Efficiency Act'' was passed into law. That law requires the
operator of the ``.us'' country-code domain to create and
maintain the ``.kids'' secondary domain. In the 108th Congress,
the Committee will monitor closely the implementation of the
``.kids'' domain to ensure that the site is created consistent
with the content mandates of the law. The Committee also will
exercise oversight over the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration's role in the creation and
publication of the ``.kids'' domain.
CONTENT PROTECTION AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO E-COMMERCE
As the digital arena continues to grow, questions about the
protection of intellectual property arise that never existed in
an analog world. Because digital copies are as perfect as
originals, the question of how to ensure content protection in
a digital age is critical in the development of all digital
distribution platforms. The methods by which to protect the
right of digital content producers, however, may impinge on the
traditional expectations that consumers have grown accustomed
to from living in the analog world. There also is a threat that
particular technological means of content protection may stifle
e-commerce and the further development of the Internet. In the
108th Congress, the Committee intends to examine how developing
technologies in digital rights management, including
watermarking and deterrents for peer-to-peer file sharing,
affect traditional content protections. Further, the Committee
will review whether traditional content protections warrant any
changes, and whether new mechanisms are necessary to strike the
proper balance between protecting works and encouraging the
continued growth of the digital economy.
INTERNET SPAM AND POP-UP ADVERTISEMENTS
Internet users are expressing increasing frustration over
the growing number of unsolicited e-mails they receive from
commercial vendors, as well as the frequency of pop-up
advertisements during Internet use. In the 108th Congress, the
Committee will examine the extent of this problem and any
efforts by the government and private sectors to control or
limit such practices.
THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING
Congress created the Corporation for Public Broadcasting
(CPB) in the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967. Historically, the
Committee has been charged with monitoring the activities of
CPB and authorizing appropriations. In the 108th Congress, the
Committee will continue to review the level of Federal funding
necessary for the continuation of public broadcasting from
stations across the country. The Committee also will examine
issues relating to the efficiency of CPB, its funding
mechanisms, and its relationship to the national program
distribution services--the Public Broadcasting Service and
National Public Radio. Further, the Committee intends to
conduct an examination of the estimated transition costs of the
public broadcasters for converting from analog to digital
television, as well as the intended uses that public
broadcasters have for this new technology.
HOMELAND SECURITY ISSUES
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE ASSURANCE ACTIVITIES
In 1997, the President's Council on Critical Infrastructure
Protections recommended that the Federal government initiate
increased efforts to ensure that critical infrastructures
within the United States, including the electric power grid,
telecommunications and transportation systems, and water
supplies, are adequately secure from threats posed by malicious
actors, foreign governments, and terrorists. Partially in
response to this report, President Clinton issued Presidential
Decision Directive 63 and created the Critical Infrastructure
Assurance Office, which was originally housed within the
Department of Commerce but will soon be transferred to the new
Department of Homeland Security. In 2001, President Bush
expanded upon this structure, and included additional sectors
of the economy within this framework. In the previous Congress,
the Committee closely followed efforts to improve critical
infrastructure protections and, in the 108th Congress, the
Committee intends to continue to review infrastructure
assurance efforts that affect areas within the Committee's
jurisdiction. In particular, the Committee will review
protection efforts in the electricity, energy, nuclear, postal/
shipping, and information and telecommunications industries, as
well as with respect to the food and drinking water supplies
and the public health infrastructure.
Specifically with respect to the chemical sector, the
Committee expects to receive in March 2003 a report it
requested from the General Accounting Office (GAO) on issues
relating to chemical facility security, and will review its
findings and recommendations. The Committee also will review
the efforts of Federal agencies and the private sector to
assess the vulnerabilities of such facilities and enhance
security measures, including the Department of Justice's
implementation of the requirements of the Chemical Safety
Information, Site Security and Fuels Regulatory Relief Act of
1999 and whether the Department has access to adequate funding
for this purpose.
NUCLEAR SMUGGLING
Because of the large volume of imports and a limited number
of resources, the United States Customs Service inspects only
about two percent of all cargo containers entering U.S. ports.
In addition, Customs' effort to target inspections to suspect
shipments is hampered by its reliance on cargo manifest data
that is often vague, incomplete, and inconsistent. Because of
these limitations, Customs must implement non-intrusive
technological devices in order to effectively scan cargo for
nuclear and/or radiological materials.
The United States, principally through the Second Line of
Defense program run by the Department of Energy (DOE), has
installed over 300 sophisticated portal monitors in the former
Soviet Union to detect the exportation of smuggled nuclear or
radiological materials from those countries. Yet as of November
2002 there were no analogous systems in place in the United
States to prevent the importation of nuclear or radiological
material. As a result of this Committee's oversight in the
107th Congress, Customs has improved coordination with DOE and
has begun to deploy radiation portal monitoring systems along
the northern U.S. border in December 2002 and January 2003.
Customs plans on installing additional portal monitoring
systems along the northern border in the first quarter of 2003.
In addition, as a result of past Committee oversight, FedEx and
UPS have taken steps to heighten their security procedures to
prevent the importation of nuclear material through their
systems.
Considerable oversight of these areas will be required to
ensure that the U.S. becomes better secured from these threats,
and to ensure that scarce resources are not expended on
ineffective technologies. In the 108th Congress, the Committee
will continue to monitor Federal government and private sector
efforts at border crossings, seaports, and mail facilities. The
Committee's review will analyze and assess Customs' and DOE's
efforts and equipment aimed at detecting and preventing the
smuggling of dangerous commerce, particularly nuclear and
radiological weapons of mass destruction.
BIOTERRORISM PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE
In the 107th Congress, the Committee's oversight of the
adequacy of Federal, state and local efforts to prepare for and
effectively respond to bioterrorism and other public health
emergencies led to the passage of the Public Health Security
and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002. In the
108th Congress, the Committee will oversee the implementation
of this Act by the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS), and the coordination between HHS and the Department of
Homeland Security with respect to setting priorities and goals
for bioterrorism-related research and preparedness activities.
As part of this review, the Committee will examine the
implementation of pre-event smallpox vaccination of select
groups of health care workers (including review of issues
relating to liability and compensation for adverse events), as
well as the Administration's Bioshield proposal to accelerate
the development and stockpiling of new vaccines and
countermeasures for dangerous biological agents. The Committee
also will review HHS efforts in the area of education and
training of certain categories of health care professionals, as
well as the implementation of tighter regulatory controls on
the possession, use, and transfer of dangerous biological
agents.
Further, the Committee intends to monitor the Food and Drug
Administration's (FDA) promulgation of rules intended to combat
possible bioterrorist activities relating to food products by
ensuring that FDA has additional information about foods
entering the country and is better able to track food shipments
throughout the country. Under last year's bioterrorism law, FDA
must promulgate by October 2003 final rules pertaining to prior
notice of food shipments, registration of food facilities,
record-keeping requirements, and administrative detention of
food shipments.
PUBLIC SAFETY SPECTRUM
A major communications problem identified by the September
11 tragedy was the absence of interoperable spectrum used by
public safety officials. Police, fire, and rescue personnel
from different jurisdictions often are not able to communicate
with each other using their respective communications devices
because they operate using different, incompatible frequencies.
Finding or creating spectrum bands that could be used for
interoperability among different public safety operations is
critical if the United States is to be prepared to prevent or
mitigate another terrorist strike. Moreover, to the extent that
spectrum currently encumbered by broadcasters during the
digital transition might be slated for public safety once the
broadcaster gives it back, this issue is tied to the digital
television transition.
In the 108th Congress, the Committee will examine this
interoperability and spectrum management problem, gathering
information from public safety officials at the Federal, state,
and local level, the Federal Communications Commission,
manufacturers of equipment that could be used for public safety
purposes, and carriers that offer communications services for
public safety operations.
IMPLEMENTATION OF GOVERNMENT-WIDE CYBER SECURITY PROGRAM
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 included a separate
legislative provision entitled the Federal Information Security
Management Act, which reauthorized and enhanced a government-
wide cyber security program under the direction of the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB). In the 107th Congress, the
Committee reviewed the efforts of Federal agencies within its
jurisdiction to comply with the original government-wide cyber
security law, which passed in October 2000. During the 108th
Congress, the Committee will continue these efforts to ensure
that Federal agencies are complying with the cyber security
provisions of the new Homeland Security Act.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HOMELAND SECURITY ACT
Last year, Congress passed the historic Homeland Security
Act of 2002, which created a new Department of Homeland
Security to consolidate and coordinate homeland defense
activities currently spread throughout the Federal government.
The Committee's prior oversight and legislative activities in
this area contributed significantly to the development and
passage of this legislation. In the 108th Congress, the
Committee will oversee the implementation of this new law as it
pertains to matters within the Committee's jurisdiction,
including critical infrastructure protection, research and
development, and emergency preparedness.
MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES
MISUSE OF GOVERNMENT PURCHASE AND TRAVEL CARDS
In 2002, the Committee's investigation of misuse of
government purchase cards at agencies under the jurisdiction of
the Committee spurred the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
to take an active role in restructuring and improving the
purchase card programs at all Federal government agencies. In
the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue to work with
OMB to ensure that the new programs are successful in
preventing fraud, waste, and abuse in the use of this
procurement tool. The Committee also requested that the General
Accounting Office (GAO) conduct an audit of the travel card
program at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
This report is due to be completed in February 2003. The
Committee intends to continue its review of the travel card
programs at HHS and other relevant agencies.
PART B
Implementation of the Committee on Energy and Commerce Overisght Plan
for the 108th Congress
----------
COMMERCE, TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ISSUES
VEHICLE AND TIRE SAFETY
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued its work
reviewing motor vehicle and tire safety. The National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is charged to reduce
deaths, injuries and economic losses that result from motor
vehicle crashes by setting safety performance standards for
vehicles and equipment. NHTSA further investigates safety
defects, use of safety belts, child safety seats and air bags,
and provides consumer education on motor vehicle safety. On
March 11, 2004, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on the
reauthorization of NHTSA. That hearing focused on the vehicle
safety initiatives and regulatory priorities of NHTSA currently
and into the future, including vehicle compatibility,
rollovers, seat belt use, and tire safety. The hearing
witnesses included government regulators, automobile industry
representatives, insurance organizations, and automobile safety
advocates.
DECEPTIVE ADVERTISING OF HEALTH-RELATED PRODUCTS
During the 107th Congress, the Federal Trade Commission
(FTC) increased its enforcement efforts in the area of
deceptive advertising of health-related products, particularly
weight-loss supplements. Despite these increased efforts by the
FTC to crack down on deceptive advertising in this area,
advertising of weight-loss products continues to saturate all
advertising mediums. In the 108th Congress, the Committee
examined the enforcement efforts to date of the FTC with
respect to deceptive advertising of weight-loss products. On
July 23 and 24, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held two hearings, the second hearing held
jointly with the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection, to examine the marketing and use of ephedrine-
containing dietary supplements in light of reports of adverse
reactions by consumers using such products, including the death
of a professional baseball player. The first hearing focused on
manufacturers and distributors of ephedra-containing
supplements and the advertising and labeling, and safety
concerns related to their products. The second hearing focused
on policies and concerns related to sports leagues and
organizations, including the various positions sports leagues
have taken on the use of ephedra-containing supplements by
their athletes, and on issues related to the regulatory
environment for ephedra-based products. Following the hearings,
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) conducted a re-
examination of dietary supplements containing ephedra, such
products were banned from sale effective April 2004.
THE FTC'S CONSUMER PROTECTION EFFORTS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee examined the actions
of the FTC in safeguarding consumers. On July 9, 2003, the
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection held a
joint hearing with the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and
the Internet on legislative efforts to combat spam. In addition
to spam causing disruptions of consumer Internet accounts, spam
has also been used to commit fraud through deceptive and
fraudulent solicitations. The hearing focused on anti-spam
legislative proposals in the 108th Congress.
On December 15, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a field hearing in Langhorne, Pennsylvania,
on personal identity theft. The purpose of the hearing was to
assess the crime of identity theft, to provide consumers with
information on where to go for assistance if they become
victims, and to provide preventative tips to stop the fraud
from occurring in the first place. The Subcommittee received
testimony from a Pennsylvania state representative, an identity
theft victim, and a charitable organization representative. A
second panel consisted of representatives from a national
credit reporting agency and a state bank. The third panel
included a Deputy Attorney General from the Pennsylvania
Attorney General's Office, the Deputy Commissioner of the
Pennsylvania State Police Department, and officials with the
Bureau of Consumer Protection at the FTC and the U.S. Postal
Inspection Service. In addition, on September 28, 2004, the
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection held a
hearing on protecting the privacy of consumers' Social Security
Numbers. The hearing also focused on identity theft and the
integrity of social security numbers as well as legislative
efforts to enhance protections for both. The FTC has
responsibility for maintaining the Identity Theft
Clearinghouse.
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to examine
children's product safety issues. On October 6, 2004, the
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection held a
hearing to assess current consumer product safety standards and
the existing authority and resources of the Consumer Produce
Safety Commission are sufficient to protect children. The
hearing explored particular hazards to children and the
Consumer Product Safety Commission's (CPSC) process for dealing
with dangerous products. The Committee also kept abreast of
fire safety rulemaking at the CPSC and developments with regard
to antifreeze safety.
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
The Committee's oversight of corporate accounting scandals
during the 107th Congress led to the passage of corporate
governance and accounting reform legislation in 2002. In the
108th Congress, theCommittee conducted oversight of accounting
standards changes and Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)
projects implemented in response to the new law and the corporate
financial collapses of 2001 and 2002. The Committee also examined
issues related to current financial reporting failures. On September
25, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection
held a hearing on Freddie Mac and accounting issues raised by the Doty
report. The hearing focused on the report, which was prepared for the
Board of Directors of Freddie Mac, and considered the accounting
matters raised in the report as a case study for broader issues with
the formation and application of accounting standards. The Subcommittee
received testimony from the author of the report, a forensic accountant
who assisted in the report's preparation, and an expert on accounting
issues. On July 22, 2003, the Subcommittee held a hearing on FASB
derivative accounting standards. The hearing examined the application
of accounting standards to derivatives, particularly Financial
Accounting Standard (FAS) 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments
and Hedging Activities. It also examined the application of FAS 133 by
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to their respective derivatives transactions
and hedging activities. The Subcommittee received testimony from a
member of FASB, an executive officer from Freddie Mac, a representative
from a think tank, and an accounting professor. In addition, on July 8,
2004, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the FASB proposal on stock
option expensing. The hearing focused on the FASB's proposal on the
accounting treatment for stock options and the impact of Federal
legislation on the proposal. The Committee heard testimony from the
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), the FASB, as well as
industry representatives.
As part of the Committee's oversight of corporate
accounting practices, on October 16 and November 5, 2003, the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held two hearings
to examine the financial collapse of the HealthSouth
Corporation. The hearings focused on the (1) failure of
internal controls and corporate compliance within the health
care services company, (2) the role that other parties,
including the Board of Directors, the outside auditors and the
investment bankers, played in the company's failure to detect
and report financial fraud earlier, and the affect the new
corporate governance and accounting reform legislation, passed
in the 107th Congress, have on Corporate oversight. At the
October 16 hearing, the Subcommittee received testimony from
current and former HealthSouth corporate officers and employees
with insight into company operations and practices, as well as
the Chief Executive Officer and former Senior Vice President of
Corporate Finance, both of whom invoked their Fifth Amendment
protections at the hearing. At the November 5 hearing, the
Subcommittee received testimony from a representative on the Ad
Hoc Advisory Group on the Organizational Sentencing Guidelines,
U.S. Sentencing Commission; certain members of the HealthSouth
Board of Directors, the acting CEO; and representatives of
HealthSouth's outside accounting, banking, and legal advisors.
The Committee also worked with the GAO on accounting
standards for loan commitments.
INTERSTATE AND E-COMMERCE
In the 108th Congress, the Committee examined issues that
substantially impact or affect interstate commerce, with
particular interest in activities that impede such commerce. On
October 30, 2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection held a hearing titled E-Commerce: The Case
of Online Wine Sales and Direct Shipment. The hearing focused
on state restrictions to interstate commerce involving the sale
of wine. Because states have different laws regarding the sale
of alcohol over the Internet, customers in many states with
such restrictions are unable to purchase out of state wine over
the Internet. Witnesses included a representative from the FTC
and representatives from the wine industry.
The Committee continued its review of consumer information
privacy issues in the commercial context. On April 29, 2004,
the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection
held a hearing on spyware. Concern has been growing that
individuals are losing their privacy when they connect to the
Internet as companies increasingly monitor and ``follow'' the
users across different Websites for various purposes. The most
pernicious forms of spyware can install software programs onto
a consumer's computer in order to track Web usage for directed
advertising, or in the worst-case scenario, to steal or
transmit private information. The hearing focused on problems
associated with spyware, efforts to protect computer users
against spyware, and possible legislative and regulatory
solutions. As a result of the hearing, the Committee worked to
develop legislation to address the problems related to spyware
and provide Federal penalties and remedies. H.R. 2929,
introduced by Mrs. Bono, was reported by the Full Committee, as
amended, on July 20, 2004 (H. Rpt. 108-619). The House passed
H.R. 2929 under suspension of the rules on October 5, 2004.
The Committee also reviewed and considered issues relating
to private-sector cyber security. On November 6, 2003, the
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held an
oversight hearing on computer viruses. The hearing focused on
the increasing threat from malicious code, known as computer
worms and viruses, as well as the financial impact on business
and consumers of computer viruses. Testimony was received from
representatives of cyber security companies, software
companies, and Internet service providers. On November 19,
2003, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection held a hearing on cyber-security and consumer data.
The hearing focused on the risks and costs of cyber-security
threats and efforts to respond to those threats. The witnesses
included the FTC, e-commerce companies, and various types of
computer-related companies with an interest in Internet
security.
TRADE
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to monitor
and examine both multilateral trade agreements (including World
Trade Organization agreements) and bilateral agreements such as
the Singapore and Chile Free Trade Agreements, as those
agreements relate to services within the Committee's
jurisdiction--including telecommunications,electronic commerce,
food and drugs, and energy. The Committee's concern is primarily non-
tariff trade barriers, such as legal and regulatory barriers, to
electronic commerce and other services within the Committee's
jurisdiction. As part of this oversight, on May 8, 2003, the
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection held a hearing
on the significance of the Singapore and Chile Free Trade Agreements.
The hearing focused on services and e-commerce provisions of the trade
agreements. The Subcommittee heard testimony from representatives from
the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the Department of
Commerce, various trade associations, a labor union, and a policy
group. On March 31, 2004, the Subcommittee held a hearing on U.S.-China
trade and the preparations for the Joint Commission on Commerce and
Trade. The U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT) was
established in 1983 as a forum for high-level discussions on bilateral
trade issues and a vehicle for promoting commercial relations between
China and the United States. The hearing examined the main issues that
would be discussed at the joint session including intellectual property
protection and piracy in China, non-tariff barriers to U.S.
manufacturing products in China, and labor and environmental issues in
China. Witnesses included the Deputy U.S. Trade Representative, as well
as representatives from the games, music, and movie industries,
representatives from the manufacturing industry, and a representative
from a labor union.
ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS (ECNS)
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to monitor
market data issues and how current market data regulations
impact competition in the securities markets. The Committee
focused on these issues in the context of database protection
legislation. The Committee held hearings on the database issue
and held markup sessions for two database bills.
The Committee also continued to work with the GAO to review
the state of readiness of financial institutions and markets,
including ECNs, for terrorist acts that would be disruptive of
the financial markets. GAO submitted a report to the Committee
on September 27, 2004, and committed to provide a follow-up
report in the 109th Congress on progress in correcting
weaknesses in telecommunications resilience, physical controls,
and business continuity planning for these institutions and
markets.
ATHLETICS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to conduct
oversight of issues affecting amateur athletics, specifically
collegiate athletes, including the role of commercialism and
the health and welfare of student athletes. On March 11, 2004,
the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection
held an oversight hearing to examine National Collegiate
Athletic Association (NCAA) rules governing the recruiting of
college athletes and the enforcement of those rules by member
universities and the NCAA. The impetus for the hearing was the
media reported allegations of misconduct and possible criminal
violations that occurred at various college and university
campuses. Witnesses included representatives from the NCAA, the
University of Colorado, Vanderbilt University, and the founder
of a private organization specializing in counseling student
athletes. In addition, on May 18, 2004, the Subcommittee held
an oversight hearing on actions taken by the NCAA to address
recruiting practices of potential student athletes. The hearing
was also in response to numerous reports of alleged behavior--
including possible criminal violations--that occurred at
colleges and universities. Contemporaneous with the media
reports of those incidents, the NCAA convened a task force to
examine current practices, guidelines, and rules regarding
recruiting behavior and offer recommendations to the NCAA. The
hearing examined the recommendations of the task force as well
as broader issues that were affecting the enforcement of rules
and the accountability of universities, athletic departments,
and the student athletes.
The Committee also examined the governance of organizations
responsible for administering athletics, including the U.S.
Olympic Committee. On March 19, 2003, the Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection held an oversight
hearing to examine issues related to the structure of the USOC
and their effect on the USOC's ability to fulfill its mission.
The hearing focused on the USOC governance, the division of
labor between paid staff and volunteers, and the stated mission
of the USOC and how it affected their ability to function
efficiently. Witnesses testifying at the hearing included
current and former U.S. Olympic athletes, including two Members
of the 108th Congress, as well as current and former
representatives of the USOC, the current head of the Athlete's
Advisory Committee, the head of the National Governing Bodies
Council and a member of the board of directors. The
Subcommittee held a second oversight hearing on July 16, 2003,
to examine the recommendations to reform the USOC put forth by
the USOC's internal Task Force on Governance and Ethics and a
second set of recommendations proposed by the Independent
Commission of the USOC. The hearing focused on how each set of
proposals would affect USOC governance. Witnesses testifying at
the hearing included members of both groups as well as a
representative of the Disabled Sports USA.
TRAVEL AND TOURISM
Following the September 11 terrorist attacks, the travel
and tourism industry were severely impacted by the decrease in
business and vacation travel. In the 108th Congress, the
Committee reviewed the obstacles that stand in the way of a
full recovery for the travel and tourism industry, as well as
how the industry, along with Federal and state governments, can
encourage and promote the United States as a travel destination
for international and domestic passengers. On April 30, 2003,
the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection
held an oversight hearing on the state of the travel and
tourism industry. The hearing focused on the efforts to improve
travel to the United States in light of new regulatory
requirements initiated for security purposes. The Subcommittee
also held an oversight hearing on June 23, 2004, toexamine the
status and implementation of homeland security procedures affecting the
travel industry and their effectiveness. The hearing focused
specifically on the strengths and weaknesses of new security measures,
the availability of information for travelers regarding security
requirements, and suggestions that would improve security without
sacrificing the efforts of the industry to promote and attract travel.
ENERGY AND AIR QUALITY ISSUES
NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY
During the 108th Congress, the Committee examined the
Nation's energy policy, including policies relating to natural
gas, coal, hydropower, nuclear, energy efficiency and
conservation, energy markets, ultradeep water research and
development, the status of the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline and
pipeline safety generally, the potential for hydrogen as an
energy source, and the status of the Nation's refining
industry. The Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee initiated its
oversight with a series of hearings on a comprehensive national
energy policy, held on March 5, 12 and 13, 2003. These hearings
were followed on May 20, 2003, with a Subcommittee hearing on
the potential for a hydrogen energy economy, and on June 10,
2003, the Full Committee held a hearing on domestic natural gas
supply and demand issues.
To assist the Committee in its consideration of
comprehensive energy legislation, and Energy Star measures in
particular, Full Committee Chairman Tauzin sent a letter to the
Department of Energy (DOE) on March 21, 2003, requesting an
explanation of the current process for designating a product
with the Energy Star label, with emphasis on (1) statutory, due
process, and administrative procedure requirements, (2)
solicitation and consideration of stockholder comments, and (3)
energy savings and other factors used to determine whether a
product should receive the Energy Star label.
Looking into research developments, on June 24, 2003, the
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held a hearing on the
future options for generation of electricity from coal. And on
April 29, 2004, the Subcommittee held a hearing that examined
the benefits of ultradeep water research and development. The
hearing addressed the issue of benefits that may accrue to the
nation as a result of programs that focus on the use of
technology for exploring and producing oil and natural gas in
ultradeep waters.
In additional national energy policy oversight, on July 15,
2004, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the status of the U.S.
refining industry. The hearing updated members on refining
capacity, gasoline prices, and the likelihood of building new
domestic refining capacity. Finally, on July 20, 2004, the
Subcommittee held a hearing on pipeline safety. The hearing
examined the implementation of the Pipeline Safety Improvement
Act of 2002, and presented views from various stakeholders.
THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulates
electric utilities, hydropower facilities, and natural gas and
oil pipelines. In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued
to examine the activities of the FERC. In particular, the
Committee's oversight focused on FERC's role in managing the
August 14, 2003 electricity blackout, the largest in the
nation's history, and regional energy reliability and security
issues that resulted from the crisis, and FERC's role in the
construction and operation of an Alaska natural gas
transportation project. The Committee also looked at the
Commission's ability to promote hydropower and development of
Nation's waterways. On September 3 and 4, 2003, the Full
Committee held a series of hearings investigating the causes of
the August 14, 2003 electricity blackout, the largest in the
nation's history. Approximately 62,000 MW of customer load was
lost, affecting an area with roughly 50 million people.
On May 5, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
held a hearing on the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Status
Report. The hearing focused on status of the Alaska Natural Gas
Pipeline project and the probability of its being built.
On June 9, 2004, Full Committee Chairman Barton sent a
letter to Chairman Patrick Wood concerning FERC's ability to
promote hydropower and development of Nation's waterways.
THE FEDERAL ELECTRIC UTILITIES
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to monitor
the activities of Federal Power Marketing Administrations
(PMAs) and the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), specifically
with regard to the August 14, 2003 electricity blackout.
OIL AND NATURAL GAS MARKETS
In the 108th Congress, and in light of the war in Iraq, the
Committee examined the status of oil and natural gas markets.
As part of its oversight, on June 10, 2003, the Full Committee
held a hearing on domestic natural gas supply and demand
issues, looking at the projected natural gas supply and demand
imbalance and its effect on prices for the 2003 Winter season.
Following the hearing, Speaker Hastert formed the Task Force
For Affordable Natural Gas (TFANG), naming Chairman Tauzin and
Committee on Resources Chairman Pombo as co-chairs. TFANG held
several public meetings to investigate causes of today's
natural gas shortage; the impact of natural gas prices on the
American economy; and, short- and long-term ideas to encourage
a stable supply of natural gas to ease prices.
In connection with its oversight of oil markets, the
Committee continued its oversight of the United Nation's Oil
for Food Program. The Committee first conducted oversight
hearings on the Program in the 106th Congress. In the 108th
Congress, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held two
hearings examining the Program, its effect on oil markets, and
alleged improprieties involving the program. A May 14, 2003
hearing examined the Program's effect on oil markets, and
whether it should be continued. Following the hearing, on May
23, 2003, FullCommittee Chairman Tauzin and Energy and Air
Quality Subcommittee Chairman Barton wrote United Nations Secretary-
General Kofi A. Annan requesting internal and external audits of the
oil for food program. A July 8, 2004, Subcommittee hearing on the
Program updated members on the investigations into the alleged
improprieties involving the Oil for Food Program. The Committee
intensified its oversight of the Oil for Food Program with the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations launching an in-depth
review of the Program, including document reviews and interviews with
State Department, Central Intelligence Agency, U.S. Treasury, IRS,
former United Nations and Iraqi officials. Full Committee Chairman
Barton and other Energy and Commerce Committee members and staff
traveled to Baghdad, Iraq, in September 2004 to conduct interviews and
perform site visits related to the program. On October 7 and October
18, 2004, Chairman Barton wrote United Nations Secretary-General Kofi
A. Annan requesting his personal involvement in the expeditious
discovery and release by the United Nations of information and
documents related to the Committee's investigation. On October 22,
2004, Chairman Barton wrote Jacques Chirac, President of France,
requesting the French government's cooperation in the Committee's
investigation of the Program. Chairman Barton met with the French
Ambassador in December 2004, to discuss this matter.
THE STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE
With the war with Iraq and the political turmoil in
Venezuela reducing oil exports from that country, the
Committee, while it took no direct oversight action, continued
to monitor developments concerning the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve during the 108th Congress.
CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGIES
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued its review
of technological advances and other issues relating to ``clean
coal.'' On June 24, 2003, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality held a hearing examining the status of new
technologies, and the improvements to existing technologies for
the future use of coal for electric generation. The hearing
also provided information on the current and projected cost,
reliability, and overall competitiveness of coal in the
marketplace.
GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
The Committee continued to monitor international
negotiations on climate change during the 108th Congress. In
addition, while the Committee took no direct oversight action
with regard to global climate change, it continued to monitor
developments concerning whether international agreements are
achievable, effective and fair to various U.S. interests and
whether agreements on climate change are scientifically well
grounded. The Committee also continued to monitor components of
ongoing climate programs--including activities carried out
under the President's Global Climate Change Initiatives (GCCI),
Global Change Research Program, the Climate Change Technology
Initiative, and Section 1605(b) of the Energy Policy Act of
1992--to ensure compliance with Congressional intent and
guidance in this area. The Subcommittee on Energy and Air
Quality held two hearings on DOE programs supporting the
President's initiative. The first, on May 20, 2003, focused on
the potential for the use of hydrogen in both stationary and
transportation applications, and the second, on June 24, 2003,
examined the status of new technologies, and the improvements
to existing technologies for the future use of coal for
electric generation.
GENERAL MANAGEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND ITS NATIONAL
LABORATORIES
As in previous Congresses, the Committee continued its
comprehensive review of general management issues at the DOE,
including management of the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) and the national laboratories. On July
13, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held a
hearing to review proposals to consolidate the Offices of
Counter Intelligence at National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) and DOE. Witnesses included the
Administrator of NNSA and the National Counterintelligence
Executive. Additionally, The Committee also examined DOE's
budget requests to determine whether they are consistent with
the Committee's priorities.
The Committee also continued to examine whether DOE is
effectively managing the contractors that operate the national
laboratories, and whether more competition is necessary in the
contracting process. In the 107th Congress, the Committee began
a detailed investigation of procurement and property management
deficiencies at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), one of
DOE's national laboratories run by the University of
California. In the 108th Congress, on February 26 and on March
12, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held
hearings on procurement and property mismanagement and theft at
LANL. The purpose of the hearings was to: (1) assess reports of
theft and loss of governmental property and misuse of
government procurement mechanisms by personnel at LANL, (2)
review the actions of the University of California and LANL
management in response to such reports, and (3) review the
effectiveness of oversight of LANL by the University and the
NNSA. On May 1, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing to review the DOE's management of
LANL, and LANL's response to the issues discussed in the
previous hearings. The day before the hearing, the Secretary of
Energy announced that the LANL contract would be competitively
bid in 2005 for the first time in 60 years as a result of the
management failings revealed in the Committee's and other
investigations. The Subcommittee received testimony from the
Deputy Secretary of Energy, the acting Administrator of the
NNSA, the DOE Inspector General, and the President of the
University of California and other UC officials.
In addition to oversight of LANL management, the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations continued review
and monitoring ofsecurity and safety problems at LANL. The Lab
continued to demonstrate a lack of rigor in its management of
Classified Removable Electronic Media (CREM). In July 2004, two
computer discs containing highly classified materials were thought to
have been lost. As a result, all classified operations had been shut
down at Los Alamos, and remain shut down. Full Committee Chairman
Barton visited Los Alamos in July 2004 to review the situation
personally. On October 15, 2004, Chairman Barton sent letters to the
NNSA Administrator and the LANL Director requesting a complete estimate
of the costs to the taxpayers resulting from the ongoing stand-down at
LANL due to the events. Review of the security and safety at LANL is
ongoing.
DOE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND HIGH-LEVEL WASTE CLEAN UP PROGRAM
The DOE's Environmental Management (EM) program initiated a
comprehensive accelerated cleanup initiative in Fiscal Year
2003. The Committee continued to monitor this initiative to
ensure that increased funding intended to achieve accelerated
cleanup will actually result in real cleanup progress. The
Committee also reviewed EM's high-level waste disposal program.
On July 17, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing to review the DOE's radioactive
high-level waste management program. The purpose of the hearing
was to examine issues raised by a U.S. Government
Accountability Office (GAO) report that evaluated the DOE's
$230 billion program to clean-up high-level radioactive waste
at former nuclear weapons production sites, identify weaknesses
within DOE's cleanup plan. The Subcommittee received testimony
from the DOE, GAO, and environmental officials from Washington
State and the South Carolina. The hearing provided information
supportive of the Committee's successful efforts to help pass
legislation to speed cleanup of these wastes in the FY05
Defense Authorization Act
THE YUCCA MOUNTAIN PROJECT
In the 107th Congress, the Committee reported H.J. Res. 87
approving the site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for the
development by the DOE of a permanent repository for the
disposal of commercial and government-owned spent nuclear fuel
and high-level radioactive wastes. DOE cannot begin
construction activities at Yucca Mountain until the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) approves the construction
authorization license. In the 108th Congress, on March 25,
2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held a hearing
to review the Department of Energy's Yucca Mountain Project.
The hearing focused on the DOE's progress toward submission of
a license application to the NRC to develop Yucca Mountain as a
long-term repository for the disposal of radioactive waste, and
legislation to reclassify contributions to the Nuclear Waste
Fund (NWF) proposed in H.R. 3429 and H.R. 3981. Witnesses
included Members of Congress, representatives from the DOE,
NRC, the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, a state
regulatory commission, and the nuclear industry.
SAFETY AND SECURITY OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL
Spent nuclear fuel is currently located at hundreds of
storage sites across the country at private and government-
owned facilities. Spent fuel storage facilities include
aboveground dry storage facilities and wet storage basins.
Under current Federal plans, spent nuclear fuel will eventually
be transported to a permanent disposal facility at Yucca
Mountain. In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to
monitor issues relating to the current safety and security of
spent nuclear fuel in storage, as well as the safety and
security of spent nuclear fuel in transport.
DOE NUCLEAR SAFETY PROGRAMS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued its
oversight of implementation of nuclear safety regulations by
DOE and its contractor employees. As part of this review, on
July 13, 2004, the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held
a hearing to review proposals to consolidate the Offices of
Counter Intelligence at NNSA and DOE. Witnesses included the
Administrator of NNSA and the National Counterintelligence
Executive.
All of the DOE's weapons-usable surplus plutonium has been
removed from the Rocky Flats, Colorado site, and relocated to
the Savannah River, South Carolina site. In the 108th Congress,
the Subcommittee of Oversight and Investigations continued to
review the numerous safety and physical security issues that
must be resolved leading up to the final disposition of these
50 tons of materials, as well as the management of these
materials, which will run into the tens of billions of dollars.
As part of its oversight of safety regulations, in the
summer of 2004, following reports of safety incidents at the
high-level radioactive waste tank cleanup project at the
Hanford site, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation
opened an inquiry to review actions by the contractor in charge
of the cleanup project and will continue to monitor the
contractor and DOE efforts to improve worker safety at the tank
farms.
DOE SECURITY PROGRAMS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued its
extensive oversight of security matters at DOE sites,
particularly at the national nuclear weapon laboratories, in
order to ensure that continuing improvements are made in the
protection of classified information and nuclear materials--
whether in storage, in use, or in transport. On March 4 and May
11, 2004, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held
hearings to assess the state of security at DOE nuclear
facilities, and the implementation of the revised design basis
threat (DBT) at various sites managed by DOE and the NNSA.
While opening statements by Members and witnesses were open to
the public, the hearings went into executive session for Member
questioning of the witnesses. At the March 4 hearing, the
Subcommittee received testimony from DOE, theDOE Office of
Inspector General, NNSA, and nuclear security authorities. At the May
11 hearing, the Subcommittee received testimony from the DOE, NNSA,
GAO, and the Project on Government Oversight.
THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
As in previous Congresses, the Committee reviewed the
activities of the NRC. In particular, the Committee monitored
closely NRC's efforts to increase security requirements at
nuclear facilities and develop a new design basis threat for
these facilities. On March 18, 2003, the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations held a hearing to review NRC's
proposed changes to security requirements at nuclear power
plants. While opening statements by Members and witnesses were
open to the public, the hearing went into executive session for
Member questioning of the witnesses. The Subcommittee received
testimony from the Chairman and two Commissioners of the NRC,
representatives from the nuclear industry and nuclear power
companies and facilities, and an advocacy group. The new
changes were finalized and are now being implemented at nuclear
plants across the country.
In addition, as part of the Committee's oversight of
nuclear safety generally, the Committee continued to monitor
nuclear safety issues at the Davis-Besse nuclear power plant--a
situation that raised additional concerns about the NRC's
ability to conduct adequate safety-related oversight of its
regulated facilities.
ADVANCED AUTOMOBILE AND HYDROGEN FUEL INITIATIVES
In the 107th Congress, the Committee began a review of the
FreedomCAR program run by the Department of Energy. In the
108th Congress, the Committee continued to review the DOE's
FreedomCAR and FreedomFUEL advanced automobile and hydrogen
fuels and infrastructure initiatives. On May 20, 2003, the
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held a hearing on a
hydrogen energy economy focusing on the potential for the use
of hydrogen in both stationary and transportation applications,
specifically the DOE's Freedom Car and Hydrogen Fuel
Initiative. In addition, the predicted benefits for the use of
hydrogen as an energy source as well as the challenges faced in
make such a substantial change to our nation's energy and
equipment infrastructure, and issues concerning the production,
distribution and safe utilization of hydrogen were considered.
EPA IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT
In previous Congresses, the Committee has taken an active
role in overseeing the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
implementation of the Clean Air Act and various amendments to
this Act. In the 108th Congress, the Committee will continue to
review significant activities regarding the Clean Air Act and
the success of various efforts in achieving improved air
quality in a manner that allows both administrative flexibility
and improved cost-effectiveness. In April 2004, EPA issued its
final rule designating 474 counties, in 31 states, as non-
attainment areas under the new 8-hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards. Because this was the first ruling on
this new standard, Full Committee Chairman Barton and
Subcommittee Vice-Chairman Walden wrote the EPA Administrator
on August 23, 2004, requesting records relating to EPA's
discretionary-review process concerning non-attainment
designations. This review is ongoing.
The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality also held a
number of hearings examining the EPA's implementation of the
Clean Air Act and various amendments to this Act. On July 8,
2003, the Subcommittee held a hearing that explored the basic
framework and elements of the Administration's Clear Skies
Initiative, how this proposal would change current law
regarding the regulation of affected facilities, and the
anticipated costs and benefits of this approach to controlling
emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrous oxides
(NOX) and mercury (Hg) from affected facilities. A
July 22, 2003, Subcommittee hearing looked at the ``Bump-Up''
Policy Under Title I of the Clean Air Act, and addressed the
attainment date extension policy issued by the EPA in 1998, the
current situation facing various ``nonattainment'' areas
following court decisions invalidating this policy, and the
ability of the EPA, states and local areas to address downwind
attainment problems in the future. The Subcommittee held a
field hearing on January 12, 2004 to explore efforts in the
Coachella Valley in Palm Desert, California, to meet National
Ambient Air Quality Standards and the unique circumstances
presented by Southern California geography, the desert
environment and continuing growth in the region. The
Subcommittee hearing also considered emissions of particulate
matter associated with natural conditions in the valley as well
as other activities and conditions, including declining water
levels in the Salton Sea. In addition, the Subcommittee held a
hearing on July 21, 2004, to examine the current use of methyl
bromide in the United States, alternatives to the use of methyl
bromide, the international process underway to implement the
Montreal Protocol, and the U.S. efforts to comply with the
Montreal Protocol.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ``EQUIP'' PROGRAM
The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002
significantly revised and expanded the Environmental Quality
Incentives Program (EQUIP). This program provides incentive
payments and cost-share payments to assist producers in their
compliance with local, state, and Federal environmental laws
regarding soil, water, air quality, and wildlife habitat. While
the Committee took no direct oversight action in the 108th
Congress, it continued to monitor how the program assists
communities in meeting obligations under Federal environmental
statutes within the Committee's jurisdiction.
ENVIRONMENT AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ISSUES
EPA MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS
During the 108th Congress, the Committee continued its
general oversight of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
As part of this oversight, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations initiated an investigation into the EPA's
administration of assistance agreements, also known as grants,
which, at more than $4.7 billion per year, account for more
than half the Agency's budget. On August 4, 2004, following an
EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG) report that found that
EPA had not properly used a competitive process when selecting
some of its grant recipients, Committee Chairman Joe Barton
wrote the Administrator of the EPA requesting documents
relating to the agency's grants management process. This review
is ongoing. The Subcommittee also initiated a review of EPA
procurement practices. On August 4, 2004, Full Committee
Chairman Barton sent a letter to the EPA Administrator
concerning an audit by the EPA OIG that raised questions about
the Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) Procurement process. The OIG
audit indicated that a lack of competition existed in the
compilation of the FSS. This lack of competition resulted from
inadequate procurement planning, rushed procurements, a lack of
training for contract project officers, and a failure to comply
with policies, procedures, and regulations outlined by the
Federal Government. As a result, the Committee specifically
asked the EPA for an explanation on all FSS procurements above
$100,000 when only one contractor was involved and for any
changes made by EPA in the wake of the OIG audit. This review
is also ongoing.
EPA PROTECTION OF SECURITY-RELATED INFORMATION
In the 108th Congress, the Committee monitored EPA efforts
to protect security preparedness and vulnerability information
submitted to the agency under the provisions of the Public
Health and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002.
On September 30, 2004, the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials held a hearing entitled Controlling
Bioterror: Assessing Our Nation's Drinking Water Security. The
hearing focused on oversight of the Bioterrorism Act, and
options available to manage the vulnerability of the nation's
water supply and water quality systems to terrorist attack. The
EPA and the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO)
testified.
The Committee also reviewed EPA's relationship to, and
coordination with, the Department of Homeland Security. The
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations initiated a review
of EPA procedures as they relate to Homeland Security. An EPA
OIG audit indicated that the Agency had not developed a
coordinated plan for ``identifying, obtaining, maintaining, and
tracking'' counter-terrorism and emergency-response equipment.
On August 4, 2004, Full Committee Chairman Barton wrote the EPA
Administrator requesting information related to the Agency's
actions in the wake of the OIG report. This review is ongoing.
EPA'S RELATIONSHIP WITH THE STATES
In a report released in the previous Congress, the GAO
identified the EPA's relationship with the States as a ``major
performance and accountability challenge,'' citing
disagreements over respective roles and responsibilities,
priorities, and the proper conduct of Federal oversight. The
Committee monitored the EPA's commitment to improving the
agency's long-term relationship with the States under the
National Environmental Performance Partnership. While the
Subcommittee did not hold any specific hearings that focused on
the Federal-State dynamic, many issues the Subcommittee
addressed in hearings either had state witnesses who testified
about the operation of Federal statutes within states, the role
of state primacy in enforcing Federal environmental statutes,
or those challenges being faced in environmental protection
because of gaps or friction in coverage between Federal and
State legal activities. Since most environmental laws within
the jurisdiction of the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials have both a Federal and state role
envisioned--the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, and the Solid
Waste Disposal Act--the Subcommittee will continue to examine
the questions of Federalism in environmental law as well as
what provisions allow for the most effective and efficient
protection of human health and the environment.
THE SUPERFUND PROGRAM AND BROWNFIELDS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued its ongoing
review of the efficiency, effectiveness, funding, and pace of
progress of the Superfund program. The Subcommittee made
several unofficial inquiries of the EPA and had the EPA conduct
a subcommittee-wide briefing on the status of the Federal
statutory brownfields program on September 13, 2004. The focus
of the briefing and other inquiries was on the processing of
grant applications, interest in redevelopment of brownfields
under the new law, coordination between EPA and the states on
cleanup and grant responsibilities, and the impact that
increasing grant eligibility for bona-fide prospective
purchasers would have on the overall program.
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT IMPLEMENTATION
On May 20, 2004, the Subcommittee on Environment and
Hazardous Materials held a hearing on the EPA's Resource
Conservation Challenge (RCC), in the Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response. In late 2002, the EPA created the RCC as a
cross-agency initiative that focuses on partnerships and
collaboration with States and the private sector to find
solutions to specific national environmental problems by
reducing waste production potential. The RCC is composed of
voluntary programs and projects with a focus on efficient
materials management or recycling and the RCC is results
oriented. The solutions being advanced by the RCC are mostly
voluntary, but may include regulatory approaches, to allow
material recycling and reuse, as well as protection of human
health and the environment. A representative from EPA testified
on the status of the program and possible goals for future RCC
efforts. In addition, as described earlier in this Report, the
Subcommittee held ahearing on March 5, 2003, on the
effectiveness of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks programs under
Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
EPA RISK ASSESSMENT PRACTICES
In the 108th Congress, the Committee conducted oversight
with respect to EPA risk assessment practices. On July 13,
2004, the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials
held a hearing entitled POPs, PIC, and LRTAP: the Role of the
United States and Draft Legislation to Implement These
International Conventions. The hearing focused on a discussion
draft that contained provisions to bring the United States into
compliance with international agreements. Much of the testimony
before the panel focused on provisions in a draft legislative
package that would require risk assessment and cost benefit
analysis.
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT AMENDMENTS
Since the law's enactment, the Committee has examined the
EPA's implementation of the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
Amendments, including the conduct and adequacy of safe drinking
water research and state funding of drinking water programs.
While it took no direct oversight action, the Committee
continued its review of the 1996 Amendments and the magnitude
of any funding ``gap'' between identified resources and
identified needs for drinking water delivery systems. As part
of its oversight of the SDWA generally, on July 22, 2004, the
Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials held a
hearing on the discovery of elevated amounts of lead in
drinking water in the District of Columbia, and drinking water
infrastructure needs related to the providing of safe drinking
water. Witnesses included representatives from the EPA,
District of Columbia, the GAO, environmental advocates,
stakeholders, and industry representatives. Also, as already
noted, the Committee continued to oversee EPA's implementation
of Title IV of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism
Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 with respect to security
of drinking water systems from terrorist attack.
In addition, on April 2, 2004, the Subcommittees on
Environment and Hazardous Materials held a hearing on H.R.
2771, a bill to amend the SDWA to reauthorize the New York City
Watershed Protection Program. The New York City Watershed
program is one of 14 authorizations in the SDWA that had
expired. During the hearing there was not only discussion about
the importance of reauthorizing the New York City Watershed,
but also the status and significance of the other 13
authorizations. Witnesses included Members of Congress,
representatives from the EPA, Natural Resources Defense
Council, New York Department of Environmental Conservation, and
the Catskills Watershed Corporation.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
In the 107th Congress, the Department of Defense (DOD)
asserted that its ability to train the country's armed forces
is being hampered by certain Federal environmental laws--three
of which fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee. On
April 21, 2004, the Subcommittees on Environment and Hazardous
Materials and Energy and Air Quality held a joint hearing on
environmental issues affecting the readiness of the DOD. The
hearing focused on several legislative proposals by the DOD,
which would either amend or affect the operation of
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the
SDWA, and the Clean Air Act. Witnesses included representatives
from the DOD, the EPA, state regulators, and environmental
advocates.
HEALTH AND HEALTHCARE ISSUES
MEDICARE MODERNIZATION
During the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to
examine ways to strengthen and modernize the Medicare program
for current and future generations. The Committee reviewed
proposals to address Medicare program growth, examined the
adequacy of existing Part A and Part B funding mechanisms, and
reviewed proposals to improve beneficiaries' basic benefit
packages and to design a Medicare drug benefit. As part of this
oversight, on April 8, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held a
hearing to provide Members with a better understanding of the
complexity involved in designing a Medicare drug benefit and
some of the issues that needed to be considered in developing
legislation creating the drug benefit, including program design
and management tools necessary to ensure its affordability and
long-term sustainability. Witnesses included former government
officials and economic advisers from the Congressional Budget
Office, the President's Council of Economic Advisors, and the
Health Care Financing Administration, as well as consumer
advocacy groups. On April 9, 2003, the Subcommittee held an
oversight hearing to examine the long-term fiscal situation of
the Medicare program and options for improving beneficiary
choices within the program. Witnesses included a representative
from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, policy and
industry specialists, and a consumer advocacy group. In
addition, one witness testified as a Medicare beneficiary.
Information provided at these hearings assisted the Committee
in design of the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, which was
signed into law by the President on December 8, 2003. The
legislation is more fully described in the Subcommittee on
Health Legislation section of the Committee's Activity Report
for the 108th Congress.
CHILDHOOD VACCINE SHORTAGES
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to examine
the factors that may contribute to shortages of vaccines. The
Committee continued to examine whether government policies or
regulations in this area provide disincentives to vaccine
research, development, andproduction, and whether the Federal
vaccine injury compensation and liability system is working
effectively.
Additionally, as part of the Committee's oversight of
vaccine supply issues, on November 18, 2004, the Subcommittee
on Health and the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
held a joint hearing on the flu vaccine shortage, ways to
protect high-risk individuals for this flu season, and decrease
the chances of this problem happening next year. The Committee
received testimony from representatives from the Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS), the U.S. Government
Accountability Office (GAO), a state health department, and
various segments of the health care industry. Following the
hearing, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
initiated an investigation of issues surrounding the loss of
nearly half of the flu vaccine needed by the United States for
the 2004/2005 flu season, as a result of contamination at the
Liverpool, UK manufacturing facility of Chiron Corporation.
Full Committee Chairman Barton and Ranking Member Dingell wrote
the HHS, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Chiron
Corporation, on November 18, 2004, requesting documents
relating to when the flu vaccine shortage first became
apparent, and the company and agencies' attention and response
to the reports of problems as they emerged. This aspect of the
investigation is ongoing.
SAFETY OF BREAST IMPLANTS
Over the past several years, the Committee has monitored
the oversight by the FDA of the breast-implant industry and the
safety and efficacy of saline-filled and silicone-filled breast
implants. In addition, the Committee reauthorized the
Mammography Quality Standards Act, to help ensure that women
receive accurate mammography results, including women with
breast implants.
FDA DRUG APPROVAL PROCESS REFORM
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to monitor
and examine FDA policy changes to improve the drug approval
process. As part of this oversight the Committee also examined
FDA monitoring of drugs already on the market. On September 9
and September 23, 2004, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held hearings examining concerns over the safety
and efficacy of anti-depressants in children and whether data
from various pediatric clinical trials of anti-depressants had
been communicated adequately to the public. The September 9th
hearing focused on publication and disclosure issues of the
safety and efficacy data in pediatric anti-depressant clinical
trials. The Subcommittee received testimony from
representatives of the seven pharmaceutical companies that
conducted pediatric clinical trials for depressed children, the
FDA, and industry associations. The September 23rd hearing
focused primarily on the FDA's regulatory process of reviewing
the anti-depressant pediatric clinical trial safety data and
whether the FDA informed the public in an accurate and timely
manner about the risks associated with these drugs for
children. Six witnesses from the FDA provided testimony.
In addition, the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee
initiated an investigation of issues surrounding the withdrawal
of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) Cox-2
inhibitor called rofecoxib, known commercially as Vioxx, by its
manufacturer Merck & Co., Inc. (Merck). On September 30, 2004,
Merck publicly announced a voluntary worldwide withdrawal of
Vioxx, a medicine approved by the FDA in 1999 for use in
treating osteoarthritis and the management of acute pain in
adults, and later, for rheumatoid arthritis. The publicly
reported reason for this withdrawal was new data from a three-
year clinical trial that showed a two-fold increase in
cardiovascular adverse events in patients taking Vioxx. On
November 23, 2004, Committee Chairman Barton and Ranking Member
Dingell wrote Merck and the FDA to request more information and
documentation relating to: (1) FDA knowledge about these
cardiovascular adverse events associated with Vioxx; (2) when
FDA learned about this information; and, (3) the action FDA
took in response to cardiovascular safety concerns associated
with Vioxx. The investigation is ongoing.
PRESCRIPTION DRUG SAFETY AND ABUSE
In the 108th Congress, in connection with the Committee's
ongoing oversight of pharmaceutical abuse and diversion in
general, and of the abuse and diversion of the painkiller
Oxycontin in particular, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations initiated an examination of the FDA evaluation
of Palladone, a high dose, extended release formulation that
contains hydromorhone, a Schedule II narcotic painkiller.
Palladone is currently undergoing FDA evaluation. On February
26, 2003, Chairman Tauzin, Ranking Member Dingell, Subcommittee
Chairman Greenwood, and Ranking Member Deutsch wrote Purdue
Pharma L.P. for records relating to risk management, safety,
and marketing of Palladone. As part of this inquiry the
Subcommittee continued its oversight of efforts to reduce
deaths and addiction associated with Oxycontin, while at the
same time enable legitimate patients access to effective
palliative medication. In addition, Subcommittee Chairman
Greenwood, with Appropriations' Commerce-Justice-State
Subcommittee Chairman Wolf and Mr. Harold Rogers, requested
that the GAO examine Oxycontin abuse and diversion and efforts
to address the problem. In December 2003, the GAO issued its
report and recommended that the FDA Commissioner ensure that
FDA's risk management plan guidance encourages pharmaceutical
manufacturers that submit new drug applications for these
substance to include plans that contain a strategy for
monitoring the use of these drugs and identifying potential
abuse and diversion problems. Relatedly, on March 4, 2004, the
Subcommittee on Health held an oversight hearing on
prescription drug monitoring programs. The hearing focused on
examining the role of prescription drug monitoring programs in
preventing and deterring prescription drug abuse. Witnesses
testifying included a Member of Congress, the Secretary of the
Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services, and
representatives of the GAO and two trade associations.
The Committee also continued its prior investigations into
the safety of imported (and re-imported) drugs, including
counterfeit or unapproved drugs and bulk ingredients imported
for use in finished drug products. On June 24, 2003, the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a hearing
that examined the system in place to protect against
counterfeit and unapproved pharmaceutical imports. The purpose
of the hearing was to receive testimony concerning: (1) the
measures taken by the FDA to prevent imported unapproved and
counterfeit pharmaceuticals from being taken by U.S. consumers;
(2) the release by FDA of 1,233 packages of unapproved Viagra
that were imported through Miami, Florida; and, (3) the
findings of the South Florida Statewide Grand Jury that
highlighted a burgeoning counterfeit drug problem in Florida
and which were a driving force behind a Florida law designed to
ensure the safety and efficacy of pharmaceuticals taken by
Floridians. The Subcommittee received testimony from the FDA,
the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, and Florida
officials from agencies responsible for oversight of
pharmaceutical imports, and the prosecution of violations of
state import laws. The hearing provided a case study into the
nationwide issues surrounding the import of pharmaceuticals for
personal use.
On December 9, 2003, as part of this continuing oversight,
the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee initiated an
investigation of enablers of illegal Internet pharmacies and
what efforts have been made toward discouraging these enablers
from facilitating illicit Internet pharmacies. Enablers
include: Internet search engines that accept advertising from
illicit Internet pharmacies, consignment carriers used by Web
sites to ship drugs from these pharmacies, and credit card
companies used in advertising by illicit Internet pharmacies.
The Committee sent letters to the FDA, the Drug Enforcement
Administration, and the Bureau of Customs & Border Protection
to get details about any companies that these agencies have
contacted, and whether any of these companies committed to
discontinue doing business with illicit Internet pharmacies. In
addition, the Committee wrote to the CEOs of Federal Express,
United Parcel Service, Visa International, and MasterCard
International, for information about each company's actions or
counter-measures taken relating to illicit Internet pharmacy
websites.
In addition, the Committee advanced legislation that would
provide grants to states through the Department of Health and
Human Services to monitor the dispensing of Schedule II, III,
and IV drugs as defined by the Controlled Substances Act. The
National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting Act
passed the House under suspension of the rules. The legislation
is more fully described in the Subcommittee on Health
Legislation section of the Committee's Activity Report for the
108th Congress.
NURSING HOMES' QUALITY OF CARE
As part of the Committee's jurisdiction over programs
administered by HHS, including Medicare Part B and Medicaid,
the Committee examined quality-of-care issues in nursing homes
during the 108th Congress. Although the Committee did not
engage in any direct oversight action on this topic during the
108th Congress, it continued to monitor developments in this
area.
CMS' MANAGEMENT OF THE MEDICARE AND MEDICAID PROGRAMS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to assess
the management by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services (CMS) of the fiscal intermediaries and carriers that
are responsible for processing all Medicare claims and
payments. While the Committee took no direct oversight action,
it continued to review CMS oversight of these contractors and
examine the current contractor eligibility requirements and the
Medicare claims payment system.
The Committee also continued oversight of efforts to
streamline the program for beneficiaries and providers. On May
5, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held an oversight hearing
on Medicare reimbursements for physicians and other health
professionals. The hearing also focused on the mechanics of the
current payment system, including the formula used to annually
update payment made under the fee schedule. Witnesses included
representatives from the U.S. GAO, Congressional Budget Office,
and Medicare Payment Advisory Commission.
MEDICARE+CHOICE
In the 108th Congress, the Committee examined the
Medicare+Choice market and the policies that affect plans'
decisions to participate in the program. In recent years,
hundreds of plans have withdrawn from the Medicare+Choice
program, affecting more than 2.4 million beneficiaries. In
addition, many plans have reduced benefits or increased
beneficiary cost-sharing, making these plans less attractive to
beneficiaries. The Committee has examined these issues, and
made changes to the program in the Medicare Modernization Act
of 2003, to attract more plans to the program. The Committee
renamed Medicare+Choice as Medicare Advantage plans and
increased payments to ensure beneficiary access to these types
of plans. The legislation is more fully described in the
Subcommittee on Health Legislation section of the Committee's
Activity Report for the 108th Congress.
PRESCRIPTION DRUGS
As part of the Congressional effort to enact a new
prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries, the
Committee reviewed issues relating to prescription drugs and
continued its oversight into the abuses associated with drug-
price reporting practices. The Medicare Modernization Act of
2003 (MMA) took important steps to address abuses in drug
pricing under Part B. The legislation is more fully described
in the Subcommittee on Health Legislation section of the
Committee's Activity Report for the 108th Congress.
On May 20, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held a hearing
regarding implementation of the Medicare Drug Discount Card
Programestablished in by MMA. The hearing focused on efforts to
educate seniors about the new benefit, and savings that seniors can
recognize from enrolling in the program. Witnesses included the
Administrator for CMS, as well as industry and consumer advocacy
representatives and a Medicare beneficiary.
On March 10, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a field hearing in Aventura, Florida, on
South Florida's access to affordable prescription drugs. The
hearing examined the experiences of Florida's senior citizens
concerning the cost of drugs, the perspective of federal and
state regulators regarding the safety and efficacy of drugs
imported into Florida, and the perspective of pharmaceutical
industry and pharmacy associations on efforts to assist low-
income seniors in obtaining free or discounted pharmaceuticals.
The Subcommittee received testimony from private citizens, the
American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), the FDA, and
the Bureau of Statewide Pharmaceutical Services of the Florida
Department of Health, and the pharmacy and pharmaceutical
industries. The hearing continued the Committee's efforts to
oversee and address issues surrounding the safety and efficacy
of pharmaceuticals, particularly, the Subcommittee's work in
the 107th Congress examining the ability of the FDA to protect
against counterfeit or poor-quality imported pharmaceuticals.
As part of the Committee's oversight of drug-price
reporting practices, on December 7, 2004, the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations held a hearing on prescription
drug reimbursement under Medicaid. The hearing focused on
whether the Federal Medicaid program pays too much for
prescription drugs, primarily because most states continue to
reimburse based upon Average Wholesale Price, or AWP, a price
reported by drug manufacturers solely for reimbursement
purposes. Pricing data and documents obtained by the
Subcommittee during its extensive investigation revealed that
AWP bears little relationship to what pharmacies and physicians
actually pay for the drugs, particularly for generic drugs.
States have difficulty in obtaining accurate sales prices
because, although CMS receives them from the manufacturers, it
is barred by law from sharing them with the states. Some states
have been very aggressive in establishing other mechanism to
get accurate prices and additional price concessions from drug
manufacturers. But all of the witnesses agreed that the AWP
system was ``broken'' and needed to be fixed. During the
hearing, the Subcommittee received testimony from two
witnesses, from Ven-A-Care of Florida Keys, Inc., which had
been instrumental in bringing various Medicare and Medicaid
abuses to the attention of the Congress, as well as Federal and
state agencies. The company also had prosecuted numerous false
claims cases arising from the issues examined at the hearing.
The Subcommittee also received testimony from officials from
CMS, the Texas Attorney General's office, the Texas Health and
Human Services Commission, the Michigan Department of Community
Health, pharmacy chains, and generic and brand drug
manufacturers. In addition, as part of the ongoing
investigation into prescription drug reimbursement under
Medicaid, Subcommittee Chairman Greenwood, in February 2004,
requested a GAO review of Medicaid prescription drug
reimbursement approaches by the states. The Subcommittee
requested that GAO determine whether states have been obtaining
all available drug rebates under the Medicaid Drug Rebate
program to which they are entitled and that GAO examine means
by which states can constrain the growth in drug spending
without affecting enrollees' access to quality prescription
drugs. A report from GAO is expected in the 109th Congress.
In addition, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations opened an investigation in August 2004 into HHS
management of the 340B Drug Discount Program, which was created
to provide discount drug prices for various entities that serve
low-income patients, including community health centers and
public hospitals. The investigation was prompted by two
inspection reports issued in June 2004 by the HHS Office of
Inspector General (HHS-OIG). The reports focused on the
administration of the program and revealed that 340B entities
are often overcharged for the drugs and that there are major
structural defects in the management and oversight of the
Program on the part of HHS's Health Resources and Services
Administration (HRSA). The first of these inspection reports
compared the prices that a sample of the 340B entities actually
paid in September 2002 to the 340B ceiling prices for those
drugs and found that many of the sampled prices exceeded the
ceiling prices, resulting in substantial overcharges. These
overcharges are often passed on to Medicaid, because if covered
entities dispense drugs purchased through the 340B Program to
Medicaid recipients, they are required to bill Medicaid at
acquisition cost. The report went on to explain that HRSA has
no processes or procedures to ensure that 340B entities receive
the discounted prices from the drug manufacturers, nor does it
have the authority to remedy any overcharges it may uncover.
The second report found serious problems with the database used
by HRSA to administer the Program and concluded that these
deficiencies compromised HRSA's ability to manage the Program
successfully. Full Committee Chairman Barton sent a letter to
HRSA on August 9, 2004 asking HRSA to describe its management
of the 340B Program and what steps it has taken to improve its
oversight in light of the HHS-OIG reports. Chairman Barton also
sent a request letter to HHS-OIG on October 31, 2004 requesting
additional examination of this issue.
THE UNINSURED
In the 108th Congress the Committee continued to monitor
ways to expand insurance coverage to the more than 40 million
individuals who are uninsured and ways to improve the insurance
marketplace. As part of its oversight of health insurance
issues, on June 24, 2004, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing to examine hospital billing and
collection practices for uninsured/self-pay patients. The
hearing focused on policies and practices for setting rates for
and charging the uninsured or self-pay patients, the laws and
regulations that affect the policies, and the guidance from the
HHS regarding billing and collection practices. Because of the
pricing system set up by hospitals under their interpretation
of Medicare regulations, uninsured patients are charged the
``list price'' for hospital care. For insured patients, there
are discounts as high as 50 percent from the list price, which
are negotiated by their insurance companies. Such a system has
the effect of chargingthe uninsured the highest prices for
health care. As a result, uninsured patients have lost good credit
ratings and have had liens placed on their residences. The Subcommittee
received testimony from three panels of witnesses. The first panel
featured expert and advocacy witnesses who testified about hospital
management and finance, debtor-creditor law, bankruptcy, and the
perspective of patients. The second panel featured the chief executive
officers of the five largest hospital chains in the United States. And
the third panel was comprised of representatives from the CMS and the
HHS-OIG. During the hearing, all of the hospital chains present stated
that they had implemented or would implement policies providing free or
discounted care for low-income uninsured patients.
MEDICARE PREVENTIVE CARE
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to assess
policies concerning beneficiary use of and the cost
effectiveness of clinical preventive benefits and services
under Medicare. On September 21, 2004, the Subcommittee on
Health held a hearing to examine the preventive benefits in the
Medicare program, specifically the expansion of preventive
benefits under the MMA. Witnesses provided insight on the need
for these services, how the medical community determines the
appropriateness of utilizing these services, and mechanisms to
ensure beneficiaries take advantage of them. Witnesses included
representatives from the Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality, GAO, and an industry representative.
PREVENTING WASTE, FRAUD AND ABUSE IN FEDERAL HEALTHCARE PROGRAMS
The Medicare program continues to be at risk of
considerable losses due to waste, fraud and abuse. Because of
the program's large size and scope--providing health care
coverage for 40 million Americans, with expenditures in excess
of $241 billion each year--the Committee focused considerable
attention on efforts to eliminate improper payments. The
Committee also reviewed Federal financial management processes
and controls, and information technology and systems used to
prevent and detect fraud. In the MMA, the Committee addressed
many of these issues, including: Medicare secondary payor;
competitive bidding for durable medical equipment (DME); use of
recovery audit contractors; and background checks on direct
access employees of long-term care facilities or providers. In
addition, MMA reformed payment for outpatient drugs and
biologicals. MMA abolished the costly average wholesale price
(AWP) for physician-administered drugs under Part B. Providers
will now be reimbursed for drug costs determined by a new
market-based price or average sales price (ASP). The
legislation is more fully described in the Subcommittee on
Health Legislation section of the Committee's Activity Report
for the 108th Congress.
In addition, as part of the Committee's broader assessment
of Medicaid, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
launched a broad investigation into potential waste, fraud, and
abuse in the Medicaid program. In January 2003, the GAO placed
Medicaid for the first time on its list of government programs
at ``High Risk'' of fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement. On
June 12, 2003, the Subcommittee issued letter requests to all
50 states for documents and information on a range of matters
relating to each State's administration and oversight of the
Medicaid program. Part of this inquiry involves an examination
of intergovernmental transfers and state financing mechanisms:
Among the matters principally at issue with intergovernmental
transfers is the use of certain financing mechanisms by some
states to generate additional Federal Medicaid matching funds.
Included in these financing mechanisms is a process by which
excessive Medicaid payments to state-owned health facilities
are subsequently returned to the state treasury and then
reported to the Federal government for the purposes of
obtaining Medicaid matching dollars. The Subcommittee has been
investigating the scope and prevalence of such mechanisms, and
whether this is common practice among certain states and their
public hospitals.
REFORM OF THE MEDICAID PROGRAM
During the 108th Congress, the Committee reviewed the
Medicaid program to assess its current operations and determine
how they may be improved. These efforts included a focus on the
needs of the elderly and disabled populations within Medicaid,
and assessment of strategies to improve the quality and cost
effectiveness of the care they receive. On March 12, 2003, the
Subcommittee on Health held an oversight hearing examining the
Medicaid program. The hearing focused on the governors'
assessment of the current Medicaid program. Specifically, the
hearing focused on current and long term Medicaid financing,
and other issues surrounding Medicaid. The only witnesses were
three Governors who provided their views on the Medicaid
program. On October 8, 2003, the Health Subcommittee held an
oversight hearing on the challenges facing the Medicaid
program, including incentives for states to maximize Federal
contributions and financing. Witnesses at the hearing provided
perspectives on the challenges facing the Medicaid program and
suggested program changes. Witnesses included the CMS
Administrator, a delegate to a State House of Representatives,
and a policy specialist from the health care industry.
As part of its efforts to assess ways to improve patient
care, on June 5, 2003, the Health Subcommittee held a hearing
to examine several state demonstration projects that allow
Medicaid beneficiaries with disabilities to manage some of
their personal care services. The hearing focused on these
demonstration programs, known generically as Cash and
Counseling, which allow certain beneficiaries to choose to
receive a monthly cash-allowance for personal care services
based on a professional assessment of their needs. Witnesses
discussed whether this program should be expanded nationwide
and concerns with including other Medicaid-covered services
within the program. Witnesses included representatives from
Florida's program, as well as an advocacy group representing
disabled beneficiaries, and the mother of a disabled
beneficiary. And on October 15, 2003, the Subcommittee held a
hearing to examine how the Medicaid program coordinates care
for itsbeneficiaries to improve health and quality of care. The
hearing focused on the efforts to coordinate care through disease
management, Primary Care Case Management programs, integrated managed
care plans, and other new innovative state approaches. Witnesses
included government health care officials from Florida, North Carolina
and Indiana, and representatives from health care organizations.
In addition, as part of this Committee work, the
Subcommittee on Health held an oversight hearing on March 18,
2004, to examine how some states use inter-governmental
transfers, and the impact this funding mechanisms have on the
growth in Federal Medicaid spending. Its use has allowed some
states to shift a significant portion of their fiscal
obligations for the program onto federal taxpayers. In
addition, monies diverted through this mechanism were used for
non-Medicaid expenditures. Witnesses included officials from
GAO and the HHS-OIG, as well as a hospital representative. On
April 1, 2004, the Health Subcommittee held its second
oversight hearing to examining inter-governmental transfers.
Witnesses included representative from CMS and the Ohio Office
of Medicaid.
IMAGE-GUIDED BIOPSY
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to evaluate
issues related to image-guided biopsy, a minimally invasive
procedure used to determine if a patient has breast cancer.
Evidence suggested the use of surgical biopsy over image-guided
biopsy may have resulted from the larger reimbursement rates
under Medicare for the surgical biopsy procedure. While the
Committee took no direct oversight action, it continued to
monitor the issues.
THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION
In the 108th Congress, the Committee investigated several
approaches to improving the grant making process at the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Several of the CDC
programs were evaluated as part of Committee negotiations of
referred legislation.
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH
In the 108th Congress, the Committee initiated a broad
examination of the National Institutes of Health's (NIH)
organizational structure, priority setting, and research
activities. Over the past five years, Congress has invested
considerable additional resources into NIH, roughly doubling
its budget. With approximately $27 billion per fiscal year, NIH
is the largest source of funding for health research in the
world. At the same time, the majority of NIH authorities have
expired.
The Subcommittee on Health held a series of hearings to
evaluate how NIH operates. The first hearing, held on May 22,
2003, focused on how NIH is utilizing taxpayer dollars to
improve and expand its research activities in the field of
genomics research. On July 10, 2003, the Subcommittee held an
oversight hearing to evaluate how NIH's technology transfer
policies are working to bring new products to the market and
improve public health, and evaluated whether NIH's technology
transfer policies prohibit the federal government from fairly
recouping research investments. On March 25, 2004, the
Subcommittee held an oversight hearing to review how NIH is
conducting clinical research and highlighted areas for
improvement. On June 2, 2004, the Subcommittee on Health held a
hearing to examine how the National Institutes of Health sets
research priorities to meet public health needs and advance
scientific opportunities.
In addition to the Subcommittee on Health hearings, on
October 2, 2003, the Full Committee and the Senate Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee held a joint oversight
hearing on the organizational structure of the National
Institutes of Health (NIH). The hearing focused on how the
current organizational structure of NIH impacts the management
of the agency, priority setting, and the advancement of
science. Testimony was received from both the current and past
Director of the NIH, as well as a representative of the
National Academy of Sciences.
As part of examination of NIH, the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations initiated an examination of the
NIH management infrastructure. In a March 2003 letter to the
NIH director, Full Committee Chairman Tauzin and Subcommittee
Chairman Greenwood requested information relating to grant
oversight; efforts to address waste, fraud, and abuse in
federal grants; and information relating to NIH administration
and administrative costs. The review is ongoing. In addition,
as part of the Committee's oversight of NIH financial
management, and its broader review of procurement policies at
agencies within its jurisdiction, the Subcommittee on Oversight
and Investigations initiated an examination of the standards
used to award contracts and the nature of the procurement
process at NIH. In a March 2004 letter to the NIH director,
Full Committee Chairman Barton and Subcommittee Chairman
Greenwood requested records relating to the use of purchase
cards, purchase orders, telecommunications support contracts,
and technology acquisition contracts at the agency. The review
is ongoing.
On May 12 and 18 and June 22, 2004, the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations held three hearings focusing on
conflict-of-interest issues involving NIH employees and drug
companies. The purpose of the hearings was to: (1) assess the
recommendations of the NIH Blue Ribbon Panel on Conflict of
Interest Policies, which was appointed to examine conflicts of
interest polices, especially those related to consulting
arrangements and outside ``awards'' received by NIH officials;
(2) review two case studies, one illustrating the Committee's
concerns about consulting arrangements, and the other
illustrating the concerns about outside awards, as well as
related legal and policy decisions by the Office of Government
Ethics, the HHS, and the NIH; and (3) assess the NIH's response
to the Committee's concerns and the Blue Ribbon Panel Report
recommendations, and explore whether the National Cancer
Institute (NCI) properly managed conflict of interest issues.
As part of its oversight of the ethics programs at the NIH,
the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations identified
issues concerning the NIH's use of special authority under
Title 42 of the PublicHealth Service Act. The special
authority, 42 U.S.C. 209(f) ``Special Consultants,'' provides that
under certain circumstances, special consultants may be employed ``to
assist and advise in the operations of the [Public Health] Service''
without regard to civil service laws. Since 2000, the NIH, without the
knowledge of Congress, has been using 42 U.S.C. 209(f) as a mechanism
to increase the salaries of government scientists by evading the salary
limitations in the civil service system and treating these full-time,
government scientists as if they were temporary expert consultants. As
a result, the NIH has compensated nearly 4,000 out of 6,000 of its
scientists under this mechanism, including paying some NIH Institute
Directors and other senior NIH officials at annual salary rates greater
than the salary of the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human
Services. The Subcommittee raised legal and policy questions about the
perceived misuse of special-consultant authority during its NIH
oversight hearings.
In addition, the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee
also opened an inquiry into the fairness of the NIH awards
process, specifically whether in some cases NIH's methods of
awarding grants and contracts are structured to ensure or
maximize the chances that certain institutions and/or
individuals personally favored by high-ranking NIH officials
win the awards. On November 10, 2003, Full Committee Chairman
Tauzin and Subcommittee Chairman Greenwood issued letters to
relevant parties requesting information relating to a March
2002 award to Harvard University of a five-year, $40 million
subcontract for a molecular target laboratory (MTL) through a
prime contract funded by the NCI. Documents obtained by the
Committee raised questions about whether the outcome of the
award was pre-determined. The review is ongoing.
HHS PROGRAMS AFFECTING CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to conduct
oversight of HHS grant programs that affect the health of
children and families. Several of the HHS programs were
evaluated as part of Committee negotiations of referred
legislation.
ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE
In the 108th Congress, while the Committee engaged in no
specific oversight activity, it continued to monitor and assess
Federal surveillance and monitoring programs, prevention and
control efforts, and research and development activities
relating to antimicrobial resistance.
ORGAN DONATIONS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued its
oversight of the organ donation system. On June 3, 2003, the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a hearing
that examined initiatives the health care community is
exploring to increase organ donation. There are 81,000-plus
candidates in the United States waiting for an organ
transplant. The hearing examined issues related to advances in
science to improve the success of organ transplantation, issues
surrounding potential financial incentives to increase organ
donation, HHS' Best Practices Initiative, and state initiatives
to increase organ donations. The Subcommittee heard testimony
from patients waiting for or who had received transplants,
representatives from state and federal organ donor networks,
HHS, and the medical and advocacy community.
The Committee also advanced legislation to improve organ
donation. The Committee approved H.R. 399, the Organ Donation
Improvement Act, on January 29, 2003. This bill was
incorporated into H.R. 3926, which was signed into Public Law
108-216 on April 5, 2004.
DRUG ABUSE TREATMENT & PREVENTION
In a February 2003 letter to the HHS Secretary, the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations raised concerns
about delays to include alternative drug tests in federal
workplace programs and requested that the agency expedite
review of alternative drugs tests and take appropriate action
to strengthen the federal workplace drug-testing program.
Federal workplace drug testing policy continues to be based
only on testing of urine, as it has since 1988. However, since
1988 the FDA has approved alternative drug tests using hair,
sweat, and saliva. These alternative tests could strengthen
security of the federal workplace. Notwithstanding FDA
clearance of alternatives to urine-testing for drugs-of-abuse,
increased use of alternative tests in the private sector, and
the meetings of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMHSA)'s Drug Testing Advisory Board over a
five-year period, SAMHSA had not published proposed guidelines
on alternative specimens for notice and comment. As a result of
the Subcommittee's inquiry, HHS published proposed revisions to
federal mandatory drug-testing guidelines in the Federal
Register. These revisions require federal workers who submit to
drug screening to have their saliva, sweat, or hair tested as
the Administration increases efforts to deter and detect
illegal drug use among 1.6 million civilian employees.
MEDICAL LIABILITY INSURANCE
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to review
the extent and causes of the medical liability crisis. On
February 10, 2003, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a field hearing at St. Mary Medical Center
in Langhorne, Pennsylvania, on issues surrounding the rise of
medical liability insurance premiums. The hearing examined the
impact of rising premiums on the provision of health care in
the state, the business practices of Pennsylvania insurers, the
influence of medical liability claims on the rates, and the
current and proposed state and federal legislative initiatives
directed at addressing medical liability insurance issues. The
governor of Pennsylvania spoke on the first panel. The
hearing's second panel featured patients and physicians who
testified to their experiences with the provision of health
care, as well as a hospital administrator and a representative
of the American Medical Association. The third panel featured
representatives from the insurance industry, medical schools
and other medical enterprises, academia, advocacyorganizations,
and the trial bar. The hearing helped focus attention on the effects
and causes of rising medical liability premiums in Pennsylvania, and
nationally. On February 27, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held an
oversight hearing assessing the need to enact medical liability reform.
The hearing focused on the current medical liability crisis, what other
factors contribute to rising medical malpractice insurance premiums and
the potential impact of medical liability reforms, such as those
proposed in H.R. 5, the Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-Cost, Timely
Healthcare (HEALTH) Act of 2003, on patients' rights, insurance
companies and physicians. Testimony was received from a patient
perspective and a health law attorney, as well as industry
representatives and consumer advocacy groups.
On March 6, 2003, the Committee approved H.R. 5, with an
amendment, by voice vote. The House approved the legislation on
March 13, 2003 by a vote of 229 yeas and 196 nays, with one
Member voting present.
PATIENT SAFETY
As part of its jurisdiction over public health, the
Committee continued to monitor the issues of patient safety and
medical errors. In addition, the Committee pursued oversight of
this area in the context of legislative activity. Health
Subcommittee Chairman Bilirakis introduced H.R. 663, to amend
the Public Health Service Act to provide for the improvement of
patient safety and to reduce the incidence of events that
adversely affect patient safety, on February 11, 2003. The bill
passed by voice vote in the Full Committee on February 12,
2003. The legislation passed the House on March 12, 2003. The
legislation is more fully described in the Subcommittee on
Health Legislation section of the Committee's Activity Report
for the 108th Congress.
PEDIATRIC DRUG TESTING
In 2002, a Federal court ruled that the FDA did not have
the authority to issue its ``Pediatric Rule,'' which required
manufacturers of drugs and biologics to test their drugs
intended for adults on children. In the 108th Congress, the
Committee continued to monitor FDA efforts to ensure the
appropriate testing of drugs in children. In addition, the
Committee advanced legislation that would provide the FDA the
authority to require tests of drugs intended for adults on
children. The bill passed the House under suspension of the
rules. The Pediatric Research Equity Act was signed into law by
the President on December 3, 2003. The legislation is more
fully described in the Subcommittee on Health Legislation
section of the Committee's Activity Report for the 108th
Congress.
GENERIC DRUG COMPETITION
The Committee instituted changes to the Hatch/Waxman laws
in the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, which will speed the
approval of generic drugs. Brand drug companies will only be
allowed one 30-month stay of the approval of a generic
competitor. The legislation also forces generics to forego
their 180-day generic exclusivity if they do not bring a
product to market within a specified time period. Additionally,
the law ensures that all agreements between innovators and
generics related to the 180-day exclusivity must be reported to
the Federal Trade Commission; thereby, preventing potential
anti-competition arrangements.
FOOD ALLERGEN LABELING
In the 108th Congress, the Committee monitored developments
concerning food allergen labeling. As part of this work, the
Committee advanced legislation that required food manufacturers
to disclose allergens contained in their product on its label.
The bill then passed the House under suspension of the rules.
The Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act was
signed into law by the President on August 2, 2004. The
legislation is more fully described in the Subcommittee on
Health Legislation section of the Committee's Activity Report
for the 108th Congress.
MEDICAL DEVICE ISSUES
In the 107th Congress, the President signed into law the
Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act of 2002. Among
other things, this legislation required device manufacturers to
pay user fees to the FDA for the review of their medical
devices. During the 108th Congress, the Committee monitored
implementation of the Act. As part of this work, the Committee
advanced legislation to make technical corrections to the Act.
The bill passed the House under suspension of the rules. The
President on Apri1 1, 2004, signed the Medical Devices
Technical Corrections Act into law. The legislation is more
fully described in the Subcommittee on Health Legislation
section of the Committee's Activity Report for the 108th
Congress.
ANIMAL DRUG ISSUES
During the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to
monitor developments with regard to the speed of animal drug
application approvals. As part of this work, the Committee
advanced legislation that provides the FDA the authority to
approve animal drugs for minor species and for minor uses in an
expedited process. The legislation also provides incentives to
manufacturers to produce drugs for minor species and for minor
uses. The bill passed the House under suspension of the rules.
The Minor Use and Minor Species Animal Health Act was signed
into law by the President on August 2, 2004. The legislation is
more fully described in the Subcommittee on Health Legislation
section of the Committee's Activity Report for the 108th
Congress.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS ISSUES
THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE PROGRAM
In previous Congresses, the Committee has reviewed the
operations of the various universal service programs
administered by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Universal service was first implemented as a government policy
with the Charleston Plan of implicit subsidies in 1951 as a
means of ensuring that all Americans enjoyed a ubiquitous,
reliable, and affordable communications system. Universal
service policies were amended after the breakup of AT&T in the
early 1980s and again in the 1996 Telecommunications Act. One
of the changes made in 1996 was the expansion of the program to
include the subsidization of telecommunications services
provided to schools, libraries, and rural health care
providers.
On September 24, 2003, the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet held an oversight hearing
on the future of universal service, competition and advances in
technology, and current and future funding mechanisms.
Witnesses from Federal and state regulatory bodies as well as
large and small telecommunications companies provided
testimony. Further, on June 17, July 22, and September 22,
2004, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held
hearings on waste, fraud, and abuse in the E-rate program, the
portion of the Universal Service Fund set up to subsidize
telecommunications and Internet services and infrastructure in
qualified schools and libraries. The hearings examined (1) the
oversight and management of the E-rate program by the FCC and
the program administrator, (2) issues and vulnerabilities to
waste, fraud, and abuse in program set-up, and (3) case
examples of problems in the program. The Subcommittee received
testimony from school officials, Federal administrators of the
program, representatives of corporations that were contracted
to supply telephone and internal connections to schools. In
addition, the Full Committee and Subcommittee Chairmen
requested in December 2003 that the U.S. General Accounting
Office (GAO) review FCC's management of the E-rate program. GAO
will complete that review early in the 109th Congress.
HEALTH OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS SECTOR
The mass-market commercialization of the Internet and the
passage of the 1996 Telecommunications Act unleashed a massive
investment in telecommunications and Internet companies. This
boom, however, turned to bust in 2000 and 2001, as new
investment from Wall Street dried up. As a result, hundreds of
thousands of employees of telecommunications service and
manufacturing companies have lost their jobs and dozens of
companies have filed for bankruptcy. On February 5, 2003 and
February 26, 2003 the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and
the Internet held oversight hearings focusing on the current
health of the telecommunications sector. These hearings
explored the telecommunications sector's economic slump, its
affect on service providers and equipment manufacturers, and
the impact of Commission regulations on the telecommunications
sector. The Subcommittee received testimony from Federal
officials, financial analysts, and public policy and research
organizations.
On January 29, 2003, Chairman Tauzin, Ranking Member
Dingell, and 20 Members of the Committee wrote the FCC to
express concern that the Commission's local competition rules
were subverting the intent of the Telecommunications Act of
1996 and undermining the economic well-being of the
telecommunications sector. The Members asked the Commission to
foster facilities-based competition by providing all
competitors with the incentive to build new networks.
On March 17, 2004, Chairman Barton, Ranking Member Dingell,
and Mr. Upton and Mr. Boucher wrote to U.S. Attorney General
John Ashcroft to request that the Solicitor General not appeal
a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
that struck down the Commission's February 2003 unbundling
rules. The authors of the letter believed that the court's
decision would have a positive impact on the health of the
telecommunications sector.
FCC IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 1996 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT
In 1996, Congress enacted a major overhaul of the country's
telecommunications laws. Among the many changes made in 1996,
two in particular have spurred a tremendous amount of interest
and controversy: Congress's requirement that incumbent local
exchange carriers (ILECs) make parts of their networks
available to competitors seeking to offer telecommunications
services and the distinction between regulated
telecommunications services (essentially transmission services
in which information does not change content or form) and
essentially unregulated information services (which do alter
the content or form of information that is being transmitted).
There has been widespread disagreement about whether the rules
implementing these provisions from the 1996 Telecommunications
Act have been effective in achieving the goals of the Act.
Throughout the 108th Congress, the Committee examined the
implementation of the 1996 Telecommunications Act by the FCC
and the effect of those provisions on the telecommunications
industry.
The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
held a series of hearings to explore the changing
telecommunications marketplace and the regulatory treatment of
broadband services. On July 21, 2003, the Subcommittee held a
hearing on the disparity in regulation and what the proper
regulatory framework for broadband Internet access services
should be. On July 7, 2004, the Subcommittee held a hearing on
the impact of Voice over Internet Protocol (VOIP) services on
the communications industry as well as the impact of the
current statutory/regulatory framework for communications
services on VOIP services. On February 4, 2004 and May 19,
2004, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet
held oversight hearings on the state of competition in the
communications marketplace in general as well as how the
convergence of voice, video, and data services is enabling
companies using different technology platforms to compete head-
to-head. The Subcommittee received testimony from financial
analysts and economists, witnessed demonstrations of new
technology devices that reflect the convergence of voice,
video, and data services and heardtestimony regarding the
delivery of broadband services using the electricity grid.
Members of the Committee also wrote a series of letters to
address concerns with Broadband regulations, VOIP services and
packet switch facilities. A January 29, 2003, letter to the FCC
urged that unbundling rules are not applied to broadband
facilities; a January 22, 2004, letter to the Commission asked
that it resolve ambiguities in the Commission's 2003 broadband
rules; a March 17, 2004, letter to the Attorney General urged
the Solicitor General not to appeal the decision of the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that upheld the
Commission's rules that exempted packet-switched and fiber
facilities from onerous facilities; a September 23, 2004,
letter to the Commission to urge that the Commission's
unbundling rules imposed under section 271 of the
Communications Act be reconciled with the Commission's
unbundling rules imposed under Section 251 to ensure that
companies investing in new broadband facilities have the
maximum incentive to deploy such facilities as quickly and
ubiquitously as possible; an October 5, 2004, letter to the
Commission urged the agency to determine that VOIP services are
interstate and subject to the Commission's exclusive
jurisdiction; and, an October 20, 2004, letter from 23 Members
of the Committee supporting the notion that VOIP service is
interstate in nature and that the Commission should have
exclusive jurisdiction over rate regulation of VOIP. The
October 20th letter also urged the Commission to proceed with
careful deliberation on matters dealing with VOIP and not
disrupt the critical and longstanding role of the states in
protecting consumers and ensuring public safety.
WIRELESS E-911 DEPLOYMENT
The roll out of the FCC program known as E-911, a
requirement that mobile telecommunications service providers
put technology in their networks and/or consumer handsets that
enable a public safety official to determine a wireless
caller's location with a certain degree of accuracy, has been
slower than expected. In the 108th Congress the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet held hearings on the status
of the implementation of E-911. On June 4, 2003, the
Subcommittee held an oversight hearing which explored the
progress that wireless carriers, local exchange carriers
(LECs), and public safety answering points (PSAPs) were making
in their efforts to deploy Phase II Enhanced 911 service within
the deadlines and parameters established by the FCC. The
Committee received testimony from a Federal agency,
representatives of large wireless providers, and a
representative of the National Emergency Number Association.
DIGITAL TELEVISION
In the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Congress gave
television broadcasters additional 6 MHz blocks of spectrum to
begin broadcasting in digital format, and required them to
cease analog broadcasting and return 6 MHz blocks of spectrum
the later of December 31, 2006, or once more than 85% of
television households have access to digital television
channels. During the 108th Congress, the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications held hearings, and roundtable discussions
with industry representatives to monitor the FCC's actions in
proceedings that will impact the success of the transition to
digital television in all areas of the country in accordance
with the schedule set forth in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997.
On June 2, 2004, the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on
the digital television transition. Witnesses included industry
representatives, advocacy groups, and a representative of a
think tank. On July 21, 2004, the Subcommittee held an
oversight hearing on a digital television transition plan
implemented in Berlin, Germany. On July 22, 2004, the Committee
hosted a digital television roundtable discussion, designed to
solicit updates from the Commission, industry and consumer
groups on the DTV transition's progress and remaining DTV
issues.
EFFICIENT USE OF SPECTRUM AND SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT
Management of spectrum within the United States is shared
between the FCC (governing private sector use of the spectrum)
and the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) (governing governmental use of the
spectrum). With virtually all usable spectrum already allocated
there is increased demand for the allocation and assignment of
additional spectrum in order to provide new wireless services.
During the 108th Congress the Committee reviewed spectrum
management functions and efforts to promote spectrum sharing
that may be beneficial to the promotion of new wireless
technologies.
In addition, on June 11, 2003, the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet held an oversight hearing
on the spectrum needs of our nation's first responders. Topics
that were explored included interference problems on radio
frequencies used by first responders, interoperability
communication difficulties with officials in other agencies on
common radio frequencies, and modernizing communications
systems. The Subcommittee received testimony from Members of
Congress, state and local officials, commercial mobile service
providers, and equipment manufacturers.
MEDIA OWNERSHIP RULES
The 1996 Telecommunications Act required the FCC to relax a
number of its broadcast ownership restrictions. It also
required the FCC to review its ownership restrictions
biennially to ``determine whether any of such rules are
necessary in the public interest as the result of
competition.'' The FCC consolidated three pending broadcast
ownership proceedings in September 2002 into a single Biennial
Review. The Committee wrote nine letters to the Commission
between February 2003 and May 2003 weighing in on various
aspects of the proceeding and checking in on its status.
In June 2003, the FCC: (1) raised the national television
potential audience reach limit to 45 percent from 35 percent;
(2) relaxed some of the limits on the ownership of two
television stations in a market, referredto as ``duopolies'';
(3) allowed, for the first time, ownership of three television stations
in a market, referred to as ``triopolies,'' in certain limited
circumstances; (4) slightly tightened the limit on the number of local
radio stations an entity may own by using a more restrictive, Arbitron-
based definition of the relevant local market for purposes of applying
the rule; (5) loosened the restrictions on the cross ownership of a TV
station and a radio station in the same market; (6) allowed, for the
first time, ownership of a newspaper and a radio station or a newspaper
and TV station in the same market, in certain circumstances; and, (7)
preserved the existing dual network rule. Congress rolled back the
national television potential audience reach limit to 39 percent in the
2004 Omnibus Appropriations Act. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit remanded most of the remaining ownership rules in June
2004, telling the FCC that while the rules may be justifiable, the FCC
needs to do a better job of supporting them. In particular, the court
remanded the television duopoly/triopoly, local radio ownership, and
cross-ownership rules for further explanation and support. Any Supreme
Court appeal must be filed by the end of December. The FCC and a number
of broadcasters are each currently deciding whether to do so. In the
109th Congress, the Committee will continue to monitor any FCC or court
decisions on the broadcast ownership rules.
ICANN
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
(ICANN) governs the management and registration of ``generic
top-level domain'' names (gTLDs) such as .com or .gov. ICANN
operates through a Memorandum of Understanding with the
Department of Commerce. As ICANN moves toward complete
privatization of the domain name system from the Department of
Commerce, the Committee continued to monitor its progress.
Specifically, the Committee met with officials from NTIA to
discuss the movement toward rewriting the Memorandum of
Understanding between ICANN and the Department and when ICANN
independence could occur.
DOT KIDS
During the 107th Congress, the ``Dot Kids Implementation
and Efficiency Act'' was passed into law. That law requires the
operator of the ``.us'' country-code domain to create and
maintain the ``.kids'' secondary domain. In the 108th Congress,
on May 6, 2004, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the
Internet held an oversight hearing on The ``Dot Kids'' Internet
Domain: Protecting Children Online. This hearing focused on the
roll out of the new ``dot kids'' Internet domain and what
actions industry, government and other organizations could take
to ensure the domain is a success. The Subcommittee received
testimony from government officials, industry representatives,
and child safety organizations.
CONTENT PROTECTION AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO E-COMMERCE
As broadcasters and cable operators continue to move from
analog to digital technology, and broadband deployment
continues, questions about the protection of content persist.
Conventional wisdom holds that consumers will not embrace
digital technology in large numbers until a greater amount of
compelling content is available that takes advantage of digital
platforms. Conventional wisdom also holds that content owners
will not make a greater amount of compelling digital content
available until they have better assurances that their content
will not be unlawfully copied and distributed over broadband
networks. Promoting the development of broadband and digital
platforms turns in a large part, then, on testing this
conventional wisdom and, if accurate, addressing the concerns
it raises. Maximizing growth in digital and broadband platforms
will require striking the right balance between content owners'
expectations that they will be able to exert controls over
their content, and consumers' expectations that digital and
broadband platforms will bring them more flexibility, not less,
in using content and electronics. The Committee kept an eye on
these issues in the 108th Congress by drafting letters,
convening roundtable discussions with industry and consumer
representatives, and holding hearings. Topics included the
amount and form of digital content available over broadcast and
cable platforms, and content protection mechanisms such as
those implemented by the FCC in its broadcast flag and cable
plug-and-play regulations. The Committee will continue to
monitor these issues in the 109th Congress, and may hold
additional roundtables or hearings on content-protection
related topics in the context of the DTV transition, broadband
deployment, video streaming, and peer-to-peer networks.
INTERNET SPAM AND POP-UP ADVERTISEMENTS
Internet users are expressing increasing frustration over
the growing number of unsolicited e-mails they receive from
commercial vendors, as well as the frequency of pop-up
advertisements during Internet use. On July 9, 2003, the
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held a
joint oversight hearing with the Subcommittee on Commerce,
Trade, and Consumer Protection on the legislative efforts to
combat unsolicited commercial email, also known as spam. The
hearing explored the problems created by spam, which has been a
ballooning problem for electronic mail users, businesses, and
Internet service providers. Witnesses included representatives
of large Internet service providers, Federal and state/local
officials, and representatives of consumers.
THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING
Congress created the Corporation for Public Broadcasting
(CPB) in the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967. Historically, the
Committee has been charged with monitoring the activities of
CPB and authorizing appropriations. In the 108th Congress, the
Committee reviewed the level of Federal funding necessary for
the continuation of public broadcasting from stations across
the country. Specifically, the Committee examinedthe funding of
the television future fund created within CPB. After a GAO report was
released indicating that monies used to finance the Future Fund were
not being properly allocated, Chairman Barton wrote a letter with
Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Upton, Mr.
Burr, and Mr. Regula on May 21, 2004, to Mr. Robert Coonrad, President
and CEO for the Corporation of Public Broadcasting, asking for the
remaining money in the television future fund be returned to the public
television stations since using community service grant money for
future fund purposes was contrary to CPB's statute.
HOMELAND SECURITY ISSUES
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE ASSURANCE ACTIVITIES
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to monitor
protection efforts in the electricity, energy, nuclear, postal/
shipping, and information and telecommunications industries, as
well as with respect to the food and drinking water supplies
and the public health infrastructure. As part of this
oversight, the Committee continued its review of Federal and
industry efforts to improve security at sites possessing
potentially dangerous chemicals. As part of this review,
officials from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) met
with Committee staff on February 26th to discuss the agency's
voluntary survey of security practices at approximately 31
high-risk chemical facilities across the country. On February
28, 2004, the Full Committee Chairman Tauzin, Environment and
Hazardous Materials Subcommittee Chairman Gillmor, and
Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Greenwood
wrote the EPA Administrator requesting documents and
information to assist the Committee in its continuing oversight
of chemical plant security. Review of chemical plant security
is ongoing. In addition, on March 18, 2003, the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations held a hearing to review the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) proposed changes to
security requirements at nuclear power plants. While opening
statements by Members and witnesses were open to the public,
the hearing went into executive session for Member questioning
of the witnesses. The Subcommittee received testimony from the
Chairman and two Commissioners of the NRC, representatives from
the nuclear industry and nuclear power companies and
facilities, and an advocacy group. The new changes were
finalized and are now being implemented at nuclear plants
across the country.
NUCLEAR SMUGGLING
Throughout the 108th Congress, the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations continued its focus on efforts of
the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to secure the
nation's ports and borders from terrorist efforts to smuggle
weapons of mass destruction into the United States. As part of
this oversight, on September 30, 2003, the Subcommittee held a
hearing to review the federal government's progress toward
installing radiation detection monitors at U.S. ports and
borders. The hearing focused on CBP's ongoing efforts to
install radiation portal monitors at each port to screen
incoming cargo for radiological weapons. Due to the subject
matter, the hearing was conducted in a classified session. The
Subcommittee received testimony from one panel of witnesses,
consisting of representatives from the CBP, the U.S. Postal
Service, and the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO).
On December 12, 2003, and March 31, 2004 the Subcommittee held
hearings to review the CBP's targeting and inspection program
for sea cargo. The hearings focused on CBP's efforts to
implement a system to screen all incoming sea cargo and target
for evaluation and inspection high-risk cargo entering the
United States. While opening statements by Members and
witnesses were open to the public, the hearing went into
executive session for Member questioning of the witnesses. At
the December 12 field hearing held at the Delaware River Port
Authority, in Camden, New Jersey, the Subcommittee received
testimony from two panels of witnesses, consisting of
representatives from the GAO, the Department of Homeland
Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG), CBP, and the
Philadelphia Regional Port Authority. At the March 31, 2004,
the Subcommittee received testimony from representatives of the
CBP, the GAO, the OIG, Council of Foreign Relations, and
representatives from the Port of Los Angeles-Long Beach and
Port of New York-New Jersey. Port security continues to be a
major priority for the Subcommittee.
BIOTERRORISM PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE
In the 108th Congress, the Committee monitored the
implementation of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism
Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 by the Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS), and the coordination between
HHS and the Department of Homeland Security with respect to
setting priorities and goals for bioterrorism-related research
and preparedness activities. As part of this review, on March
27, 2003, the Subcommittee on Health held an oversight hearing
on Project Bioshield. Project Bioshield aims to spur the
research and development of new vaccines, drugs, and other
countermeasures to deal with those biological, chemical,
nuclear or radiological agents that pose a material threat to
our national security. Witnesses included HHS Secretary Tommy
Thompson, and other experts in vaccine and drug research and
development. In addition, on June 25, 2004, the Subcommittee on
Health held an oversight hearing to review the implementation
of food security provisions of the Act. The hearing reviewed
new requirements for registration of food processors, prior
notice of imported food shipments, establishment and
maintenance of records, and administrative detention. The
Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and
Response Act mandated these requirements. Witnesses included
representatives of the Food and Drug Administration, U.S.
Customs, the food processing and distribution industries.
As part of the Committee's oversight of its other areas of
jurisdiction under the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism
Preparedness and Response Act, the Subcommittee on Environment
and Hazardous Materials held a hearing on September 30, 2004,
to oversee EPA's implementation of Title IV of the Act with
respect to security ofdrinking water systems from terrorist
attack. As part of its oversight of bioterrorism preparedness
activities, the Committee reviewed issues relating to liability and
compensation for adverse events regarding pre-event smallpox
vaccination. As a result of this, the Committee also worked on the
Smallpox Emergency Personnel Protection Act of 2003, which provides
benefits for certain individuals with injuries resulting from
administration of a smallpox vaccine, and for other purposes. The
President signed this bill into law on April 30, 2003. Also, on May 11,
2004, the Health Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R. 3266, the Faster,
Smarter Funding for First Responders Act of 2004. The primary focus of
the hearing was the need to avoid unnecessary duplication of functions
and the need for coordination between the Department of Homeland
Security and the HHS. Among other items, the hearing reviewed
implementation of current bioterrorism and public health emergency
preparedness and response programs for first responders.
PUBLIC SAFETY SPECTRUM
A major communications problem identified by the September
11 tragedy was the absence of interoperable spectrum used by
public safety officials. Police, fire, and rescue personnel
from different jurisdictions often are not able to communicate
with each other using their respective communications devices
because they operate using different, incompatible frequencies.
On June 11, 2003, the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and
the Internet held an oversight hearing on the spectrum needs of
our nation's first responders. The Subcommittee received
testimony from Members of Congress, state and local officials,
commercial mobile service providers, and equipment
manufacturers. Topics that were explored included interference
problems on radio frequencies used by first responders,
interoperability communication difficulties with officials in
other agencies on common radio frequencies, and modernizing
communications systems.
IMPLEMENTATION OF GOVERNMENT-WIDE CYBER SECURITY PROGRAM
During the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to
monitor the efforts of Federal agencies within its jurisdiction
to ensure the agencies are complying with the cyber security
provisions of the Homeland Security Act of 2002.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HOMELAND SECURITY ACT
In the 108th Congress, the Committee monitored
implementation of Homeland Security Act of 2002 as it pertains
to matters within the Committee's jurisdiction, including
critical infrastructure protection, research and development,
and emergency preparedness. As part of this oversight, the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations initiated a review
of EPA procedures as they relate to Homeland Security. An EPA
OIG audit indicated that the Agency had not developed a
coordinated plan for ``identifying, obtaining, maintaining, and
tracking'' counter-terrorism and emergency-response equipment.
In August 4, 2004, Full Committee Chairman Barton wrote the EPA
Administrator requested information related to the Agency's
actions in the wake of the OIG report. This review is ongoing.
In addition, the Subcommittee opened an investigation into the
Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) management and
oversight of its contract with a private firm to provide
airport screeners. In March 2002 the TSA signed a contract with
Pearson Government Solutions to recruit 30,000 to 50,000
airport ``screeners'' in response to the events of 9/11. This
contract was initially valued at approximately $104 million;
however, it subsequently increased to more than $850 million.
The Subcommittee is examining the reasons for this significant
increase and TSA's oversight of the program.
In addition, on June 23, 2004, the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet held an oversight hearing
which focused on protecting homeland security, and explored the
progress made in ensuring that public safety communications
systems and therefore communications between different public-
safety agencies are interoperable. This hearing explored
whether interoperability is an achievable goal and the steps
that need to be taken in order to achieve that goal. Witnesses
included officials from Federal, state/local agencies, and
wireless companies.
MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES
MISUSE OF GOVERNMENT PURCHASE AND TRAVEL CARDS
In the 108th Congress, the Committee continued to monitor
implementation of OMB guidelines to ensure that the new
purchase card programs are successful in preventing fraud,
waste, and abuse in the use of this procurement tool. As part
of this oversight, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held hearings, on February 26 and on March 12,
2003, that involved review of procurement and property
management deficiencies at Los Alamos National Laboratory, one
of the Department of Energy's national laboratories run by the
University of California. (For details, see the General
Management of the Department of Energy and Its National
Laboratories, above.) Additionally, in a March 2004 letter to
the National Institutes of Health director, Full Committee
Chairman Barton and Subcommittee Chairman Greenwood requested
records relating to the use of purchase cards, purchase orders,
telecommunications support contracts, and technology
acquisition contracts at the agency. The review is ongoing.
APPENDIX I
Legislative Activities
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
Summary of Committee Activities
Total Bills and Resolutions Referred to Committee............. 1114
Public Laws................................................... 55
Bills and Resolutions Reported to the House................... 49
Hearings Held:
Days of Hearings.......................................... 154
Full Committee........................................ 9
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection.......................................... 31
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality................ 20
Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials... 8
Subcommittee on Health................................ 26
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet... 28
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.......... 32
Hours of Sitting.......................................... 458:44
Full Committee........................................ 30:52
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection.......................................... 71:25
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality................ 63:46
Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials... 21:30
Subcommittee on Health................................ 67:34
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet... 68:34
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.......... 125:03
Legislative Markups:
Days of Markups........................................... 35
Full Committee........................................ 21
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection.......................................... 3
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality................ 2
Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials... 2
Subcommittee on Health................................ 3
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet... 4
Hours of Sitting.......................................... 80:13
Full Committee........................................ 62:35
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection.......................................... 1:08
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality................ 7:44
Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials... 3:58
Subcommittee on Health................................ 1:48
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet... 3:18
Business Meetings:
Days of Meetings.......................................... 4
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.......... 4
Hours of Sitting.......................................... 1:22
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.......... 1:22
Executive Sessions:
Days of Meetings.......................................... 6
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.......... 6
Hours of Sitting.......................................... 10:54
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.......... 10:54
APPENDIX II
This list includes: (1) legislation on which the Committee
on Energy and Commerce acted directly; (2) legislation
developed through Committee participation in House-Senate
conferences; and (3) legislation which included provisions
within the Committee's jurisdiction, including legislation
enacted by reference as part of other legislation.
PUBLIC LAWS: 55
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Law Date approved Bill Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
108-10 March 11, 2003 H.R. 395 Do Not Call
Implementation
Act.
108-12 April 22, 2003 H.R. 397 To reinstate and
extend the
deadline for
commencement of
construction of a
hydroelectric
project in the
State of
Illinois.
108-20 April 30, 2003 H.R. 1770 Smallpox Emergency
Personnel
Protection Act of
2003.
108-39 June 30, 2003 H.R. 2312 ORBIT Technical
Corrections Act
of 2003.
108-40 June 30, 2003 H.R. 2350 Welfare Reform
Extension Act of
2003.
108-41 July 1, 2003 H.R. 389 Automatic
Defibrillation in
Adam's Memory
Act.
108-74 August 15, 2003 H.R. 2854 To amend title XXI
of the Social
Security Act to
extend the
availability of
allotments for
fiscal years 1998
through 2001
under the State
Children's Health
Insurance
Program, and for
other purposes.
108-75 August 15, 2003 S. 1015 Mosquito Abatement
for Safety and
Health Act.
108-82 September 29, 2003 H.R. 3161 To ratify the
authority of the
Federal Trade
Commission to
establish a do-
not-call
registry.
108-89 October 1, 2003 H.R. 3146 To extend the
Temporary
Assistance for
Needy Families
block grant
program, and
certain tax and
trade programs,
and for other
purposes.
108-127 November 17, 2003 H.R. 3288 To amend title XXI
of the Social
Security Act to
make technical
corrections with
respect to the
definition of
qualifying State.
108-130 November 18, 2003 S. 313 Animal Drug User
Fee Act of 2003.
108-136 November 24, 2003 H.R. 1588 National Defense
Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year
2004.
108-154 December 3, 2003 S. 286 Birth Defects and
Developmental
Disabilities
Prevention Act of
2003.
108-155 December 3, 2003 S. 650 Pediatric Research
Equity Act of
2003.
108-163 December 6, 2003 H.R. 3058 Health Care Safety
Net Amendments
Technical
Corrections Act
of 2003.
108-164 December 6, 2003 H.R. 3140 Fairness to
Contact lens
Consumers Act.
108-173 December 8, 2003 H.R. 1 Medicare
Prescription
Drug,
Improvement, and
Modernization Act
of 2003.
108-176 December 12, 2003 H.R. 2115 Vision 100--
Century of
Aviation
Reauthorization
Act.
108-179 December 15, 2003 H.R. 1813 Torture Victims
Relief
Reauthorization
Act of 2003.
108-187 December 16, 2003 S. 877 Controlling the
Assault of Non-
Solicited
Pornography and
Marketing Act of
2003.
108-194 December 19, 2003 S. 686 Poison Control
Center
Enhancement and
Awareness Act
Amendments of
2003.
108-197 December 19, 2003 S. 1929 Mental Health
Parity
Reauthorization
Act of 2003.
108-210 March 31, 2004 S. 2231 Welfare Reform
Extension Act of
2004.
108-214 April 1, 2004 S. 1881 Medical Devices
Technical
Corrections Act.
108-216 April 5, 2004 H.R. 3926 Organ Donation and
Recovery
Improvement Act.
108-228 May 18, 2004 S. 2315 To amend the
Communications
Satellite Act of
1962 to extend
the deadline for
the INTELSAT
initial public
offering.
108-265 June 30, 2004 S. 2507 Child Nutrition
and WIC
Reauthorization
Act of 2004.
108-276 July 21, 2004 S. 15 Project BioShield
Act of 2004.
108-282 August 2, 2004 S. 741 Minor Use and
Minor Species
Animal Health Act
of 2004.
108-304 September 24, 2004 H.R. 361 Sports Agent
Responsibility
and Trust Act.
108-308 September 30, 2004 H.R. 5149 To reauthorize the
Temporary
Assistance for
Needy Families
block grant
program through
March 31, 2005,
and for other
purposes.
108-328 October 16, 2004 H.R. 2771 To amend the Safe
Drinking Water
Act to
reauthorize the
New York City
Watershed
Protection
Program.
108-336 October 18, 2004 S. 551 Southern Ute and
Colorado
Intergovernmental
Agreement
Implementation
Act of 2004.
108-343 October 18, 2004 S. 2319 Tapoco Project
Licensing Act of
2004.
108-355 October 21, 2004 S. 2634 Garrett Lee Smith
Memorial Act.
108-357 October 22, 2004 H.R. 4520 American Jobs
Creation Act of
2004.
108-358 October 22, 2004 S. 2195 Anabolic Steroid
Control Act of
2004.
108-362 October 25, 2004 H.R. 3858 Pancreatic Islet
Cell
Transplantation
Act of 2004.
108-365 October 25, 2004 H.R. 4555 Mammography
Quality Standards
Reauthorization
Act of 2004.
108-371 October 25, 2004 S. 2896 A bill to modify
and extend
certain
privatization
requirements of
the
Communications
Satellite Act of
1962.
108-375 October 28, 2004 H.R. 4200 National Defense
Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year
2005.
108-377 October 30, 2004 H.R. 2023 Asthmatic
Schoolchildren's
Treatment and
Health Management
Act of 2003.
108-406 October 30, 2004 H.R. 5131 Special Olympics
Sport and
Empowerment Act
of 2004.
108-414 October 30, 2004 S. 1194 Mentally Ill
Offender
Treatment and
Crime Reduction
Act of 2003.
108-426 November 30, 2004 H.R. 5163 Norman Y. Mineta
Research and
Special Programs
Reorganization
Act.
108-427 November 30, 2004 H.R. 5213 Research Review
Act of 2004.
108-437 December 3, 2004 S. 1146 Three Affiliated
Tribes Health
Facility
Compensation Act.
108-441 December 3, 2004 S. 2302 A bill to improve
access to
physicians in
medically
underserved
areas.
108-446 December 3, 2004 H.R. 1350 Individuals with
Disabilities
Education
Improvement Act.
108-447 December 8, 2004 H.R. 4818 Consolidated
Appropriations
Act, 2005.
108-448 December 8, 2004 S. 2618 A bill to amend
title XIX of the
Social Security
Act to extend
medicare cost-
sharing for the
medicare part B
premium for
qualifying
individuals
through September
2005.
108-458 December 17, 2004 S. 2845 9/11
Recommendations
Implementation
Act.
108-490 December 23, 2004 H.R. 5204 To amend section
340E of the
Public Health
Service Act
(relating to
children's
hospitals) to
modify provisions
regarding the
determination of
the amount of
payments for
indirect expenses
associated with
operating
approved graduate
medical residency
training
programs.
108-494 December 23, 2004 H.R. 5419 Enhance 911 Act of
2004.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPENDIX III
PART A
PRINTED HEARINGS OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No. Hearing title Hearing date(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
108-1 The Do Not Call List January 8, 2003
Authorization (Full
Committee Briefing)
108-2 Assessing the Need to February 27, 2003
Enact Medical
Liability Reform
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-3 Health of the February 5, 2003
Telecommunication
Sector: A Perspective
From Investors and
Economists
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-4 The Medical Liability February 10, 2003
Insurance Crisis: A
Review of the
Situation in
Pennsylvania
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-5 Does the U.S. Olympic March 19, 2003
Committee's
Organizational
Structure Impede Its
Mission? (Subcommittee
on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer
Protection)
108-6 Health of the February 26, 2003
Telecommunications
Sector: A Perspective
From the Commissioners
of the Federal
Communications
Commission
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-7 Comprehensive National March 5, 2003, March 12,
Energy Policy 2003, and March 13, 2003
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-8 A Review of the February 12, 2003
Administration FY2004
Health Care Priorities
(Full Committee)
108-9 South Florida's Access March 10, 2003
to Affordable
Prescription Drugs:
Costs and Benefits of
Alternative Solutions
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-10 HIV/AIDS, TB, and March 20, 2003
Malaria: Combating a
Global Pandemic
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-11 Furthering Public March 27, 2003
Health Security:
Project Bioshield
(Subcommittee on
Health, Joint hearing
with the Subcommittee
on Emergency
Preparedness and
Response of the Select
Committee on Homeland
Security)
108-12 The Commercial Spectrum March 25, 2003
Enhancement Act
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-13 Investigation of February 26, 2003 and March
Management Problems at 12, 2003
Los Alamos National
Laboratory
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-14 Review of the May 1, 2003
University of
California's
Management Contract
for Los Alamos
National Laboratory
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-15 Travel and Tourism in April 30, 2003
America Today
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-16 The Effectiveness of March 5, 2003
Leaking Underground
Storage Tank Cleanup
Programs (Subcommittee
on Environment and
Hazardous Materials)
108-17 A Review of FASB Action March 4, 2003
Post-Enron and
Worldcom (Subcommittee
on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer
Protection)
108-18 The United Nations Oil May 14, 2003
for Food Program
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-19 Trade in Services and E- May 8, 2003
Commerce: The
Significance of the
Singapore and Chile
Free Trade Agreements
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-20 SARS: Assessment, May 7, 2003
Outlook, and Lessons
Learned (Subcommittee
on Oversight and
Investigations)
108-21 The Hydrogen Energy May 20, 2003
Economy (Subcommittee
on Energy and Air
Quality)
108-22 Strengthening and April 9, 2003
Improving Medicare
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-23 The National Institutes May 22, 2003
of Health: Decoding
our Federal Investment
in Genomic Research
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-24 Medicaid Today: The March 12, 2003
States' Perspective
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-25 Designing a Twenty- April 8, 2003
First Century Medicare
Prescription Drug
Benefit (Subcommittee
on Health)
108-26 Natural Gas Supply and June 10, 2003
Demand (Full
Committee)
108-27 Wireless E-911 June 4, 2003
Implementation:
Progress and Remaining
Hurdles (Subcommittee
on Telecommunications
and the Internet)
108-28 Consumer Directed June 5, 2003
Services: Improving
Medicaid
Beneficiaries' Access
to Quality Care
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-29 A System Overwhelmed: June 24, 2003
The Avalanche of
Imported, Counterfeit,
and Unapproved Drugs
Into the U.S.
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-30 Reauthorization of the June 11, 2003
Federal Trade
Commission:
Positioning the
Commission for the
Twenty-First Century
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-31 Can Tobacco Cure June 3, 2003
Smoking? A Review of
Tobacco Harm Reduction
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-32 Future Options for June 24, 2003
Generation of
Electricity from Coal
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-33 Hearing on H.R. 382, July 23, 2003
H.R. 411, and H.R 1730
(Subcommittee on
Environment and
Hazardous Materials)
108-34 The Spectrum Needs of June 11, 2003
our Nation's First
Responders
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-35 Legislative Efforts to July 9, 2003
Combat Spam (Joint
Hearing with the
Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection
and the Subcommittee
on Telecommunications
and the Internet)
108-36 Assessing Initiatives June 3, 2003
to Increase Organ
Donations
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-37 FASB Derivative July 22, 2003
Accounting Standards
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-38 NIH: Moving Research July 10, 2003
from the Bench to the
Bedside (Subcommittee
on Health)
108-39 Legislative Efforts to July 16, 2003
Reform the U.S.
Olympic Committee
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-40 The Regulatory Status July 21, 2003
of Broadband Services:
Information Services,
Common Carriage, or
Something in Between?
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-41 Fairness to Contact September 9, 2003
Lens Consumers Act
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-42 A Review of Department July 17, 2003
of Energy's
Radioactive High-Level
Waste Cleanup Programs
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-43 Issues Relating to July 23, 2003
Ephedra-Containing
Dietary Supplements
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-43 Issues Relating to July 24, 2003
Ephedra-Containing
Dietary Supplements
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection
and Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-44 The Health Insurance July 17, 2003
Certificate Act of
2003 (Subcommittee on
Health)
108-45 The International September 17, 2003
Consumer Protection
Act of 2003
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-46 Database and September 23, 2003
Collections of
Information
Misappropriations
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection,
Joint Hearing with the
Committee on the
Judiciary's
Subcommittee on
Courts, the Internet
and Intellectual
Property)
108-47 E-911 Implementation September 11, 2003
Act of 2003
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-48 Freddie Mac: Accounting September 25, 2003
Standards Issues
Raised in the DOTY
Report (Subcommittee
on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer
Protection)
108-49 The Future of Universal September 24, 2003
Service (Subcommittee
on Telecommunications
and the Internet)
108-50 Digital Dividends and November 19, 2003
other Proposals to
Leverage Investment in
Technology
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-51 E-Commerce: The Case of October 30, 2003
Online Wine Sales and
Direct Shipment
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-52 Cybersecurity and November 19, 2003
Consumer Data: What's
at Risk for the
Consumer (Subcommittee
on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer
Protection)
108-53 The Financial Collapse October 16, 2003
of Healthsouth, Part 1
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-54 Blackout 2003: How Did September 3, 2003 and
it Happen and Why? September 4, 2003
(Full Committee)
108-55 The Status of Methyl June 3, 2003
Bromide Under the
Clean Air Act and the
Montreal Protocol
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-56 Managing Biomedical October 2, 2003
Research to Prevent
and Cure Disease in
the 21st Century:
Matching NIH Policy
with Science (Full
Committee, Joint
Hearing with the
Senate Committee on
Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions)
108-57 Evaluation Coordination October 15, 2003
of Care in Medicaid:
Improving Quality and
Clinical Outcomes
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-58 Challenges Facing the October 8, 2003
Medicaid Program in
the 21st Century
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-59 The Financial Collapse November 5, 2003
of Healthsouth, Part 2
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-60 Identity Theft: December 15, 2003
Assessing the Problem
and Efforts to Combat
It (Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-61 Air Quality Issues in January 12, 2004
the Coachella Valley
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-62 ``Bump-Up'' Policy July 22, 2003
Under Title I of the
Clean Air Act
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-63 The Current State of February 4, 2004
Competition in the
Communications
Marketplace
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-64 College Recruiting: Are March 11, 2004
Student Athletes Being
Protected?
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-65 The Clear Skies July 8, 2003
Initiative: A
Multipollutant
Approach to the Clean
Air Act (Subcommittee
on Energy and Air
Quality)
108-66 Computer Viruses: The November 6, 2003
Disease, The
Detection, and the
Prescription for
Protection
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-67 ``Can You Say That on January 28, 2004
TV?'': An Examination
of the FCC's
Enforcement with
Respect to Broadcast
Decency (Subcommittee
on Telecommunications
and the Internet)
108-68 The Broadcast Decency February 11, 2004 and
Enforcement Act February 26, 2004
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-69 NIH: Re-engineering March 25, 2004
Clinical Research
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-70 A Review of the March 25, 2004
Department of Energy's
Yucca Mountain
Project, and Proposed
Legislation to Alter
the Nuclear Waste
Trust Fund
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-71 Reauthorization of the March 18, 2004
National Highway
Traffic Safety
Administration
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-72 To amend the Safe April 2, 2004
Drinking Water Act to
reauthorize the New
York City Watershed
Protection Program
(Subcommittee on
Environment and
Hazardous Materials)
108-73 Prescription Drug March 4, 2004
Monitoring: Strategies
to Promote Treatment
and Deter Prescription
Drug Abuse
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-74 U.S.-China Trade: March 31, 2004
Preparations for the
Joint Commission on
Commerce and Trade
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-75 Oversight of the March 10, 2004
Satellite Home Viewer
Improvement Act
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-76 Inter-governmental March 18, 2004 and April 1,
Transfers: Violations 2004
of the Federal-State
Medicaid Partnership
or Legitimate State
Budget Tool?
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-77 Ultradeep Water April 29, 2004
Research and
Development: What Are
the Benefits?
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-78 The Satellite Home April 1, 2004
Viewer Improvement
Reauthorization Act of
2004 (Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-79 The State of U.S. March 24, 2004
Industry (Full
Committee)
108-80 FY 2005 Budget April 1, 2004
Priorities for the
Department of Energy
(Full Committee)
108-81 EPA's Resource May 20, 2004
Conservation Challenge
(Subcommittee on
Environment and
Hazardous Materials)
108-82 Alaska Natural Gas May 5, 2004
Pipeline Status Report
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-83 Regional Energy May 19, 2004
Reliability and
Security: DOE
Authority to Energize
the Cross Sound Cable
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-84 The ``Dot Kids'' May 6, 2004
Internet Domain:
Protecting Children
Online (Subcommittee
on Telecommunications
and the Internet)
108-85 Competition in the May 19, 2004
Communications
Marketplace: How
Convergence is
Blurring the Lines
Between Voice, Video,
and Data Services
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-86 Advancing the DTV June 2, 2004
Transition: An
Examination of the FCC
Media Bureau Proposal
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-87 The Junk Fax Prevention June 15, 2004
Act of 2004
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-88 NIH Ethics Concerns: May 12, 2004, May 18, 2004,
Consulting and June 22, 2004
Arrangements and
Outside Awards
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-89 Spyware: What You Don't April 29, 2004
Know Can Hurt You
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-90 Online Pornography: May 6, 2004
Closing the Doors on
Pervasive Smut
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-91 Supporting Our May 18, 2004
Intercollegiate
Student-Athletes:
Proposed NCAA Reforms
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-92 Problems with the E- June 17, 2004
rate Program: Waste,
Fraud, and Abuse
Concerns in the Wiring
of Our Nation's
Schools to the
Internet, Part 1
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-93 Parents Be Aware: June 16, 2004
Health Concerns about
Dietary Supplements
for Overweight
Children (Subcommittee
on Oversight and
Investigations)
108-94 Assessing Digestive July 8, 2004
Diseases Research and
Treatment
Opportunities
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-95 Physician Fee Schedule: May 5, 2004
A Review of the
Current Medicare
Payment System
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-96 Travel, Tourism, and June 23, 2004
Homeland Security:
Improving Both without
Sacrificing Either
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-97 Tapped Out? Lead in the July 22, 2004
District of Columbia
and the Providing of
Safe Drinking Water
(Subcommittee on
Environment and
Hazardous Materials)
108-98 Protecting Homeland June 23, 2004
Security: A Status
Report on
Interoperability
Between Public Safety
Communications Systems
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-99 FASB Proposals on Stock July 8, 2004
Option Expensing
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-100 A Review of the March 10, 2004
Administration's
FY2005 Health Care
Priorities (Full
Committee)
108-101 The Digital Television July 21, 2004
Transition: What We
Can Learn From Berlin
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-102 Faster and Smarter May 11, 2004
Funding for First
Responders Act of 2004
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-103 Problems with the E- July 22, 2004
Rate Program: Waste,
Fraud, and Abuse
Concerns in the Wiring
of Our Nation's
Schools to the
Internet, Part 2
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-104 Voice Over Internet July 7, 2004
Protocol Services:
Will the Technology
Disrupt the Industry
or Will Regulation
Disrupt the
Technology?
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-105 Freddie Mac's January 28, 2004
Accounting
Restatement: Are
Accounting Standards
Working? (Subcommittee
on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer
Protection)
108-106 United Nations Oil for July 8, 2004
Food Program
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-107 A Review of Hospital June 24, 2004
Billing and
Collections Practices
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-108 RFID Technology: What July 14, 2004
the Future Holds for
Commerce, Security,
and the Consumer
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-109 The Digital Media May 12, 2004
Consumers' Right Act
of 2003 (Subcommittee
on Commerce, Trade,
and Consumer
Protection)
108-110 Competition and July 14, 2004
Consumer Choice in the
MVPD Marketplace--
Including an
Examination of
Proposals to Expand
Consumer Choice, Such
as A La Carte and
Themed-Tiered
Offerings
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-111 Pipeline Safety July 20, 2004
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-112 POPS, PIC, and LRTAP: July 13, 2004
The Role of the U.S.
and Draft Legislation
to Implement these
International
Conventions
(Subcommittee on
Environment and
Hazardous Materials)
108-113 The Statues of the U.S. July 15, 2004
Refining Industry
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-114 Implementation of the June 25, 2005
Food Security
Provisions of the
Public Health Security
and Bioterrorism
Preparedness and
Response Act
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-115 Law Enforcement Access September 8, 2004
to Communication
Systems in the Digital
Age (Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-116 The Effect of TV September 13, 2004
Violence on Children:
What Policymakers Need
to Know (Subcommittee
on Telecommunications
and the Internet)
108-117 Keeping Seniors September 21, 2004
Healthy: New
Perspective Benefits
in the Medicare
Modernization Act
(Subcommittee on
Health)`
108-118 Methyl Bromide: Update July 21, 2004
on Achieving the
Requirements of the
Clean Air Act and the
Montreal Protocol
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air
Quality)
108-119 Current Environmental April 21, 2004
Issues Affecting the
Readiness of the DOD
(Subcommittee on
Energy and Air Quality
and Subcommittee on
Environment and
Hazardous Materials)
108-120 Repairing the 21st September 22, 2004
Century Car: Is
Technology Locking the
Consumer Out?
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-121 Publication and September 9, 2004
Disclosure Issues in
Antidepressant
Pediatric Clinical
Trials (Subcommittee
on Oversight and
Investigations)
108-122 An Examination of September 29, 2004
Wireless Directory
Assistance Policies
and Programs
(Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and
the Internet)
108-123 Controlling Bioterror: September 30, 2004
Assessing Our Nation's
Drinking Water
Security (Subcommittee
on Environment and
Hazardous Materials)
108-124 Problems with the E- September 22, 2004
rate Program: Waste,
Fraud, and Abuse
Concerns in the Wiring
of Our Nation's
Schools to the
Internet, Part 3
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-125 FDA's Role in September 23, 2004
Protecting Public
Health: Examining
FDA's Review of Safety
& Efficacy Concerns in
Anti-Depressant Use by
Children (Subcommittee
on Oversight and
Investigations)
108-126 Medicaid Prescription December 7, 2004
Drug Reimbursement:
Why the Government
Pays Too Much
(Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
108-127 Examining Professional September 9, 2004
Boxing: Are Further
Reforms Needed?
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-128 Protecting the Privacy September 28, 2004
of Consumers' Social
Security Number
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-129 Child Product Safety: October 6, 2004
Do Current Standards
Provide Enough
Protection?
(Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection)
108-130 Medicare Prescription May 20, 2004
Drug Discount Cards:
Immediate Savings for
Seniors (Subcommittee
on Health)
108-131 Scientific June 2, 2004
Opportunities and
Public Needs:
Balancing NIH's
Priority Setting
Process (Subcommittee
on Health)
108-132 Health Information July 22, 2004
Technology: Improving
Quality and Value of
Patient Care
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-133 Improving Women's September 29, 2004
Health: Understanding
Depression After
Pregnancy
(Subcommittee on
Health)
108-134 Flu Vaccine: Protecting November 18, 2004
High-Risk Individuals
and Strengthening the
Market (Subcommittee
on Health and
Subcommittee on
Oversight and
Investigations)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART B
COMMITTEE PRINTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No. Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
108-A Committee Rules.
108-B Compilation of Selected Acts With the
Jurisdiction of the Committee on
Energy and Commerce--Environmental
Law, Volume 2.
108-C Compilation of Selected Energy-
Related Legislation--Oil, Gas, and
Nonnuclear Fuels.
108-D Compilation of Selected Acts Within
the Jurisdiction of the Committee on
Energy and Commerce--Communications
Law.
------------------------------------------------------------------------