H.R. 2868 is expected to be considered under a structured rule making ten amendments in order. The bill was introduced by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) on June 15, 2009. H.R. 2868 was considered by both the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Homeland Security. Republicans on both panels opposed the bill. The legislation was reported by Energy and Commerce by a vote of 29-18 and out of Homeland Security by a vote of 18-11.

The rule for H.R. 2868 additionally allows for bills to be considered under suspension of the rules through November 7, 2009.

 

H.R. 2868 amends the authority of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to protect against acts of terrorism against chemical facilities, wastewater treatment works, and drinking water systems.  The bill also makes DHS' Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards permanent (see Background section below).

The bill authorizes a total of $900 million over three years for chemical security, including $325 million in Fiscal Year 2011, of which $100 million would be available for methods to reduce the consequences of a terrorist attack, $300 million in Fiscal Year 2012, of which $75 million would be available for methods to reduce the consequences of a terrorist attack, and $275 million in Fiscal Year 2013, of which $50 million would be available for methods to reduce the consequences of a terrorist attack.  

Risk-Based Designation and Ranking of Chemical Facilities:  H.R. 2868 authorizes DHS to designate any chemical substance as a "substance of concern" and establish threshold quantities for each such chemical that is used, stored, manufactured, processed, or distributed by a chemical facility.  Considerations would include the potential for death, serious adverse effects to human health, the environment, critical infrastructure, national security, or the national economy from a terrorist incident.

The bill requires DHS to maintain a list of facilities that have more than a threshold quantity of a "substance of concern" and pose a security risk based on criteria such as the potential threat or likelihood of a terrorist attack at the facility, the potential harm from a terrorist incident, and the proximity of the facility to large population centers.  DHS could require a facility to submit information regarding the facility's substances of concern to determine whether it would be covered under the list. 

H.R. 2868 also requires DHS to assign each covered facility to one of at least four risk-based tiers, with Tier 1 being the highest-risk.  DHS would periodically review the list of substances of concern and the threshold quantities, and could at any time add, remove, or change the tier assignment for each facility.  DHS would be responsible for providing covered facilities with relevant information about probable threats.

Security Vulnerability Assessments & Site Security Plans:  H.R. 2868 requires DHS to establish risk-based, performance-based standards, and procedures for mandatory security vulnerability assessments and site security plans, and to set deadlines by tier for completion.  DHS would approve or disapprove the assessments and security plans within 180 days of receipt.  The bill directs facilities to review and resubmit their security vulnerability assessments and site security plans every five years.  Facilities would have to notify DHS if they change their use or storage of a substance of concern or modify operations.

Site Inspections:   The bill allows DHS a right of entry at reasonable times to chemical facilities to conduct security verifications and inspections.  For Tier 1 and Tier 2 facilities, DHS would also conduct unannounced inspections to evaluate compliance with requirements of the bill.  H.R. 2868 requires DHS to increase its number of chemical facility inspectors by at least 100 in Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012.  During inspections, DHS would be required to offer employees the opportunity to share information about the facility's compliance or non-compliance. 

Records:  The bill allows DHS to require the submission of, or access to, a chemical facility's records in order to review its security vulnerability assessment or site security plan.

Information Sharing:  H.R. 2868 requires DHS to provide information concerning a threat that is relevant to a specific chemical facility in a timely manner.  Likewise, facilities would be required to report any threat, significant security incident, or penetration of the facility's cyber or physical security to DHS.

Enforcement:  For owners or operators of facilities deemed to be in violation of the bill, H.R. 2868 allows the Secretary to issue a fine of $25,000 per day.  The Secretary may also issue an order to cease operations at the facility until compliance is achieved to the satisfaction of DHS.

Whistleblower Protections:  The bill directs DHS to establish a process for any person to report deficiencies or vulnerabilities at a chemical facility.  The identity of the person would be kept confidential and retaliation against whistleblowers would be prohibited.  Any employee who alleges retaliation occurred could seek review in district court.

Lack of Federal Preemption:  The bill allows any State or local government to issue a regulation, requirement, or standard or performance for chemical facility security that is more stringent than the federal statute.

Information Protection:  H.R. 2868 gives DHS authority to promulgate regulations and issue orders to prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of protected information.  DHS would provide standards for the appropriate sharing of protected information with federal, State, local, and tribal governments, law enforcement and first responders, and designated chemical facility personnel.  Any person who discloses protected information in knowing violation would be subject to criminal penalties and removal from federal office or employment.  The legislation defines protected information to include vulnerability assessments and site security plans and portions of other security-related documents, and records that would be detrimental to the security of covered chemical facilities if disclosed.  The bill does not prohibit the sharing of information with Members of Congress.

Methods to Reduce Consequences of an Attack:  The bill requires the owner or operator of a covered chemical facility to include in its site security plan an assessment of methods to reduce the consequences of a terrorist attack (more commonly referred to as "Inherently Safer Technologies."  The Director of a new Office of Chemical Facility Security could require a facility to implement methods to reduce consequences of a terrorist attack, if the director determines that certain conditions are met.  An owner or operator of a facility could provide a written appeal to DHS, within 120 days, explaining why it cannot comply with the determination.

Background Checks:  The bill requires DHS to issue regulations requiring chemical facilities to establish personnel background checks for individuals with access to restricted areas of the facility's critical assets.  The regulations would describe the appropriate scope and applications for security background checks.  If, as the result of a background check, a chemical facility finds that an individual is not legally authorized to work in the U.S., or meets certain criminal history disqualifiers, the owner or operator shall cease to employ the individual, subject to redress processes available to the individual.

Citizen "Enforcement" and Petitions:  The bill allows any person to bring a civil action in district court against any governmental entity allegedly in violation of the Act or against the Secretary for an alleged failure to perform any act or duty under the bill.

The bill also requires DHS to establish a petition process to receive, investigate, and respond to allegations of violations at covered facilities.  DHS would establish the parameters of the petition process and the procedures for the Inspector General's review of DHS' response to a petition.  DHS would be required to accept all petitions, investigate all allegations, determine whether an enforcement action is required, and respond to all accepted petitions in writing.

Drinking Water Security:  H.R. 2868 authorizes the EPA to regulate the security of community water systems serving more than 3,300 people, as well as other public water systems that EPA determines present a security risk.  The bill authorizes $315 million in Fiscal Year 2011 for grants to States and nonprofits to help develop security plans for covered public water systems.  $30 million of this total could be used for administrative costs incurred by the EPA or States, and $125 million could be used to implement methods to reduce the consequences of a chemical release from an intentional act at water systems.  The measure authorizes such sums that may be necessary in Fiscal Years 2012 through 2015.

The bill requires water systems to conduct a vulnerability assessment, develop and implement a site security plan, and develop an emergency response plan.  EPA would establish deadlines for these plans and for providing training to employees of water systems, and requires the EPA to consult with States exercising primary enforcement responsibility for public water systems and with DHS.  H.R. 2868 requires EPA to assign each water system to one of four risk-based tiers, with Tier 1 being highest-risk.  It requires the EPA to develop regulations to establish risk-based, performance-based standards and procedures for mandatory security vulnerability assessments and site security plans.  The bill allows each water system to select layered security measures that address the security risks identified in the vulnerability assessment and meet the risk-based performance standards.  

Under this bill, EPA would provide guidance, computer software, and other tools to water systems in Tier 3 and Tier 4 to streamline the process for other systems.  For a water system that is assigned to Tiers 1 and 2 that possesses a substance of concern, the State exercising primary enforcement for the system would be required to make determinations on methods to reduce consequences of a chemical release.  In States without primacy, the EPA would make such a determination.

The State with primacy could require a water system to implement methods to reduce consequences of a chemical release if it determines that certain conditions are met.  Such conditions include whether consequence-reduction methods would significantly reduce the consequences of a release of a substance, not increase the interim storage of a substance of concern by the water system, not put the water system out of compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act, and remain feasible for the water system.

A water system that violates any requirement of this section would be liable for a civil penalty of up to $25,000 for each day after the violation occurs.

H.R. 2868 allows EPA to make grants to States, non-profit organizations, and water systems to assist them in implementing this section.  The bill also creates a new worker training grants program for training and education of employees with roles or responsibilities under the bill. 

Wastewater Treatment Works Security:  The bill establishes EPA as the lead agency for wastewater security.  It authorizes $1 billion over five years for EPA to make grants to States, municipalities, and other entities to conduct vulnerability assessments, providing security-related training to treatment works employees and emergency response providers, and install security improvements at publicly-owned wastewater treatment facilities.

The bill also requires treatment works with a capacity of at least 2.5 million gallons per day, or any facility deemed by the EPA to present a security risk, to conduct a vulnerability assessment, develop and implement a site security plan, and develop an emergency response plan for the treatment works.  H.R. 2868 requires EPA to assign each covered treatment works to one of at least four risk-based tiers, with Tier 1 being highest-risk.  It requires the EPA to develop regulations to establish risk-based, performance-based standards and procedures for mandatory security vulnerability assessments and site security plans.

The bill directs EPA to require the owner or operator of a covered treatment works that possesses a substance of concern to include in its site security plan an assessment of methods to reduce the consequences of a terrorist attack, including the elimination or reduction of such substances.  The assessment would include the potential impact of the method on the responsibilities of the treatment works under the Clean Water Act.  It would also provide for the mandatory implementation of a method to reduce the consequences of a terrorist attack for a treatment works that is assigned to the highest two risk-based tiers and possesses a substance of concern.

The bill requires the owner or operator of a treatment works to develop an emergency response plan that incorporates the results of the current vulnerability assessment and site security plan, and certify to the EPA when the plan has been completed.  

 

BACKGROUND

Chemical facilities affected by this legislation generate about $550 billion in revenues per year in the U.S.  Over half of these facilities employ less than 50 employees, and as very small businesses are vulnerable to burdensome regulations in the current economic climate.  National unemployment stands at 9.8 percent, while the rate for the manufacturing sector is 11.9 percent.  According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, chemical manufacturing employment is projected to decline further, with employment in the sector dropping by 16 percent.  According to experts, "Inherently Safer" Technologies (IST) mandated by this bill could cost anywhere from thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars, depending on the complexity of the facility.

Chemical facilities are often located in populated areas and hold chemicals that can cause harm to people and the environment if used maliciously, so these sites may be considered terrorist targets.  To address this issue, in 2006, Congress authorized DHS to establish risk-based security performance standards for chemical facilities that use or store chemicals that make attractive terrorist targets.  The Department issued final regulations in 2007 that resulted in the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards, for which legislative authority sunsets on October 4, 2009.  However, the authority to regulate chemical security was extended for one year through the Fiscal Year 2010 Homeland Security Appropriations bill, which was signed into law on October 28, 2009. 

The finalized Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards exempted drinking water and wastewater facilities from the program.  DHS and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) claim this is a critical security gap.  Though not included in the legislation as reported by the committees, language dealing with water facilities is incorporated in the bill by the rule. 

Members may have several concerns with this bill, including those described below.  H.R. 2868 is opposed by several groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, American Farm Bureau Federation, American Trucking Associations, Chemical Producers and Distributors Association, and the National Association of Manufacturers.

"Inherently Safer" Technologies (IST):  The bill attempts to impose an unproven, "one size fits all" engineering philosophy known as IST on chemical facilities, drinking water systems and wastewater treatment facilities, all of which represent disparate and complicated sectors.  IST is a chemical engineering philosophy that suggests through changes in manufacturing or storage processes, modifying chemical ingredients, or through purchasing or other business practices, facilities with chemicals can reduce the number, amount, or form of dangerous chemicals used.  One example of IST is replacing chlorine gas with sodium hypochlorite to disinfect drinking water.

Under this bill, the federal government would impose mandates to adopt unproven technologies and chemical substitutions, but according to their own testimony, they lack the technical and personnel expertise to evaluate whether these alternatives are effective, productive, and safe across these sectors.  Members may be especially concerned about the costs of such technologies to farms, small businesses, drinking water systems, and wastewater treatment facilities.

Expansion of Civil Litigation:  The bill would allow citizen suits to be filed against federal facilities, drinking water systems, and wastewater treatment facilities for violations, and against DHS or EPA for failure to enforce the Act.  Some Members may believe that citizen suits are not appropriate in a national security context.  This bill would represent the first time Congress would be authorizing citizen suits in the national or homeland security arena.  The Department of Homeland Security has testified that these suits could result in the release of very sensitive security information through the legal discovery process that would be helpful to terrorists.  Non-U.S. citizens and environmental organizations would be able to file such suits.

Inadequate Sensitive Information Protection:  The bill rolls back information protection language standards that Congress has employed since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.  H.R. 2868 also eliminates penalties for people who recklessly, carelessly, or negligently disclose sensitive security information to the public.

Lack of Federal Preemption: Some Members may be concerned that the bill would allow States and localities to enact laws that hinder, pose obstacles to, or frustrate the purpose of the federal effort, undermining the purpose of having federal security programs for chemical, drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities.  Other forms of national security laws, including nuclear, hazmat transportation, aviation, and port security make the federal government the dominant regulator without State and local interference.

COST

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that H.R. 2868 would cost at least $1.1 billion over five years, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, according to its most recent estimate.  The bill would also extend private-sector mandates and impose new mandates on employers and on owners and operators of certain public and private facilities.

 

AMENDMENTS

1)    Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS):  Makes technical corrections and fixes typos and verbiage issues in the underlying legislation.

2)    Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX):  Places provisions in the bill allowing the new federal chemical facility regulations enacted by the bill to preempt State and local laws that hinder, pose obstacles to, or frustrate the purpose of the federal program.

3)    Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL):  Establishes a point of contact within the Office of Chemical Facility Security responsible for interagency coordination.  Requires the Secretary to liaise with State Emergency Response Commissions and Local Emergency Planning Committees to update emergency planning and training procedures.

4)    Reps. Dent (R-PA) and Olson (R-TX):  Strikes Title I, affecting chemical facilities, and replaces it with an extension through October 1, 2012, of DHS' current regulatory authority under section 550(b) of the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2007.

5)    Rep. Dent (R-PA):  Strikes a section from the bill (Sec. 2111) which requires assessments and implementation of methods to reduce the consequences of a terrorist attack.

6)    Rep. Flake (R-AZ):  Prevents earmarking in the worker training grant program established in the bill, and would clarifies that Congress presumes that grants awarded through that program will be awarded on a competitive basis, and if they are not, requires the Secretary to submit a report to Congress as to why not.

7)    Reps. Schrader (D-OR) and Kissell (D-NC):  Requires DHS to conduct a study on the scope and potential impacts of the provisions that require the use of safer processes or chemicals on manufacturers or retailers of pesticide or fertilizer.

8)    Rep. McCaul (R-TX):  Strikes the citizen enforcement section of the bill (Sec. 2116).

9)    Rep. Halvorsen (D-IL):  Permits the Secretary to provide guidance, tools, methodologies, or software to assist small covered chemical facilities in complying with the security requirements.

10)  Reps. Foster (D-IL) and Lujan (D-NM):  Directs the Secretary to establish appropriate protocols and security procedures for covered chemical facilities that are also universities and academic labs, separate from commercial chemical facilities.

 

H.Res. 893 is expected to be considered on the floor of the House on Friday, November 6, 2009, under a motion to suspend the rules, requiring a two-thirds vote for passage. The legislation was introduced by Rep. Jose E. Serrano (D-NY) November 5, 2009.

H.Res. 893 would resolve that the House of Representatives "congratulates the 2009 Major League Baseball World Series Champions, the New York Yankees, for an outstanding season and a record 27th World Series Championship win; and the players, coaches, staff and leadership of the Yankees organization for their great success."

BACKGROUND

According to the resolution findings, during the 2009 regular season, the Yankees had the best record in baseball, going 103-59. The Yankees were able to defeat the defending World Series Champions by 4 games to 2. This victory represents the Yankees' 27th World Series Championship win.

H.R. 3737 is expected to be considered under suspension of the rules, requiring a two-thirds majority for passage. The legislation was introduced by Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-IN) on October 7, 2009. This bill was incorporated into H.R. 3854 which passed the House on October 29, 2009, by a vote of 389-32.

H.R. 3737 authorizes such sums as necessary to make $80 million in technical assistance grants and $110 million in direct loans in Fiscal Year 2010 and 2011 under the SBA Microloan program. This program provides short-term loans of up to $35,000 for working capital and the purchase of supplies, inventory, and equipment. The bill also increases loan limits for intermediary lenders to $1 million for the first year of participation and $7 million in the remaining years. H.R. 3737 expands the eligibility for intermediary lenders so that lenders with no experience making microloans would be eligible to participate if one of its employees has at least three years of experience. Finally, the bill creates a Young Entrepreneurs program in the SBA to assist the development of new businesses by young people who remain in their local area. Repayment on such loans would be deferred for six months.

COST

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has not produced a cost estimate for H.R. 3737.

H.R. 1838 is expected to be considered under suspension of the rules, requiring a two-thirds majority for passage. The legislation was introduced by Rep. Mary Fallin (R-OK) on April 1, 2009. This bill was incorporated into H.R. 2352 which passed the House on May 20, 2009, by a vote of 406-15.

 

 

H.R. 1838 authorizes $20 million in Fiscal Year 2010 and $22 million in Fiscal Year 2011 for women's business centers, 40 percent of which must be spent on new centers. These cost-share funds would be available to centers only if certain non-federal dollar requirements are met. The bill establishes performance standards for these women's business centers and each center must submit an annual financial and strategic plan to the SBA.

COST

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has not produced a cost estimate for H.R. 1838.

H.R. 3743 is expected to be considered under suspension of the rules, requiring a two-thirds majority for passage. The legislation was introduced by Rep. Parker Griffith (D-AL) on October 7, 2009. This bill was incorporated into H.R. 3854, which passed the House on October 29, 2009, by a vote of 389-32.

H.R. 3743 amends the SBA disaster loan program to enable SBA to better respond to major disasters. Specifically, the bill authorizes such sums as necessary in Fiscal Years 2010 and 2011 to administer the program and increases the limit for disaster loans to $3 million (from $1.5 million) and increases the aggregate loan limit amount for a borrower to $3 million (from $2 million).

The bill further allows SBA to issue grants of up to $100,000 for small businesses affected by a disaster. Such sums as may be necessary are authorized for $100 million in such grants in each of Fiscal Years 2010 and 2011. H.R. 3743 authorizes $50 million in loan applicant assistance grants for each of Fiscal Years 2010 and 2011. These grants would go to women's business centers, small business development centers, Veteran Business Outreach Centers, and chambers of commerce in an area affected by a disaster.

 

COST

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has not produced a cost estimate for H.R. 3743.

H.R. 1845 is expected to be considered under suspension of the rules, requiring a two-thirds majority for passage. The legislation was introduced by Rep. Aaron Schock (R-IL) on April 1, 2009. This bill was incorporated into H.R. 2352, which passed the House on May 20, 2009, by a vote of 406-15.

H.R. 1845 authorizes $150 million in Fiscal Year 2010 and $160 million in Fiscal Year 2011 for the Small Business Development Center (SBDC) program. Only fully accredited higher education institutions may receive new grants through the program.

The bill authorizes $2.5 million in each of the Fiscal Years 2010 and 2011 for a new grant program for SBDCs to develop programs which help local small firms in securing capital and repairing damaged credit. These grants would be for $300,000 each.

The bill authorizes $2.5 million in each of the Fiscal Years 2010 and 2011 to establish a procurement training program by which SBDCs work with local agencies to find contracts for local small businesses. The bill also authorizes $2.5 million in each of the Fiscal Years 2010 and 2011 for a new "green entrepreneurial development program" to educate businesses on energy efficiency, green technology, and clean technology.

Finally, H.R. 1845 authorizes $2.5 million in each of the Fiscal Years 2010 and 2011 for a statewide small business helpline in every State and territory to provide information to small business and dislocated workers interested in starting a business.

 

COST

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has not produced a cost estimate for H.R. 1845.

H.Res. XXX is expected to be considered under suspension of the rules, requiring a two-thirds majority for passage.  The legislation was introduced by Rep. XXX (D-XX) on XXX. 

H.Res. XXX provides for the passage of H.R. 1299 and S. 1023 (see below).  Both of these bills have been passed by the House previously.  In the case of S. 1023, the bill was passed attached to H.R. 1035, which passed the House on October 7, 2009.

BACKGROUND

Summary of S. 1023:

Visitor Tax:  The bill would impose a fee on foreign visitors to the U.S. from Visa Waiver Program countries, to be established and collected by the Secretary of Homeland Security.  The initial fee would be $10 per travel authorization.  These fees would be deposited into the Fund described below.  The Secretary would not be able to collect the fee after September 30, 2014.

Corporation for Travel Promotion:  This provision would establish a nonprofit Corporation for Travel Promotion to be headed by an 11-member board of directors to be appointed by the Secretary of Commerce.  Board members would not receive compensation.  The bill does allow the Corporation to have an executive director and employees. 

The Corporation would develop and execute a plan to (1) provide information to foreign visitors regarding U.S. entry requirements and fees; (2) identify "misconceptions" regarding U.S. entry policies; (3) advertise and promote the benefits of travel to the U.S.; (4) ensure that all States and D.C. benefit from international travel; and (5) prioritize activities towards countries and populations most likely to travel to the U.S.  Specifically, the Corporation would be able obtain grants and enter into contracts with companies, State, and federal agencies, and hire consultants, for example. 

Limitations on Expenditures:  The Corporation would not be able to spend more than $25 million on any campaign, unless approved by two-thirds of the board members.  The Corporation would have to adopt a budget for each fiscal year and undergo annual audits.  The budget would be sent to the Secretary of Commerce and would available to the public on the Corporation's website.  The Corporation is required to submit an annual report to Congress.

Annual Assessment:  The bill would authorize the Corporation to impose and collect an annual assessment on U.S. members of the travel industry represented on the Board, in proportion to their share of the aggregate revenue of the industry.  The initial aggregate assessment could not exceed $20 million.  The assessment would have to be approved by a majority of members of the industry in a referendum.  The Corporation would be able to bring suit in federal court to compel compliance with this assessment.

Travel Promotion Fund:  Under the bill, a Travel Promotion Fund would be established in the Treasury.  In Fiscal Year 2010, the Treasury Secretary would make up to $10 million available to cover the Corporation's initial activities.  In Fiscal Years 2011-2014, the Secretary would make up to $100 million available to the Fund.  No funds would be available to the Corporation in Fiscal Year 2011, unless the Corporation provides matching non-federal funds equal to at least 50 percent.  In Fiscal Years after 2011, the Corporation would have to provide matching funds equal to 100 percent.  Goods and services other than money may be included in non-federal source matches, but could not account for more than 80 percent of the required match. 

Office of Travel Promotion:  The bill would establish an Office of Travel Promotion at the Department of Commerce.  This office would serve as a liaison to the Corporation and support programs to increase the number of international visitors to the U.S.

Authorization of Appropriations:  The bill would authorize such sums as may be necessary to the Secretary of Commerce for Fiscal Years 2010-2014 to carry out expanded research programs at the existing Office of Travel and Tourism Industries.

Member Concerns:

Some Members may have several concerns with this provision that would create a government tourism advertising campaign funded by taxes on international visitors. Some Members may believe that taxing visitors during an economic downturn would in fact discourage visitors coming to the U.S. Furthermore, according to the Heritage Foundation, the tourism industry is the second-largest service export industry, and thus some Members may view it as a subsidy to large companies.

Additionally, the European Union has informed the Obama Administration that it opposes this provision. In a June 19, 2009, letter, the European Commission Ambassador wrote that the provision would "constitute a step backwards in our joint endeavour to ease transatlantic mobility" and have "potentially negative implications on reciprocal visa-free travel between the EU and the U.S." This could feasibly mean reciprocal taxes on American travelers to Europe.

 

H.Res. 700 is expected to be considered on the floor of the House on Friday, November 6, 2009, under a motion to suspend the rules, requiring a two-thirds vote for passage. The legislation was introduced by Rep. David Loebsack (D-IA) on July 30, 2009.

H.Res. 700 would resolve that the House of Representatives:
• "Supports the designation of National School Psychology Week;
• "Honors and recognizes the contributions of school psychologists to the success of students in schools across the United States; and
• "Encourages the people of the United States to observe the week with appropriate ceremonies and activities that promote awareness of the vital role school psychologists play in schools, in the community, and in helping students develop into successful and productive members of society."

BACKGROUND

According to the resolution's findings, school psychologists facilitate collaboration that helps parents and educators identify and reduce risk factors, promote protective factors, create safe schools, and access community resources.

H.Res. 877 is expected to be considered on the floor of the House on Friday, November 6, 2009, under a motion to suspend the rules, requiring a two-thirds vote for passage. The legislation was introduced by Rep. David Wu (D-OR) on October 29, 2009.

H.Res. 877 would resolve that the House of Representatives:
• "Expresses its support for Huang Qi and Tan Zuoren for engaging in peaceful expression as they seek answers and justice for the parents whose children were killed in the Sichuan earthquake of May 12, 2008; and
• "Calls on the Government of the People's Republic of China to-
o "Provide Huang Qi and Tan Zuoren with the rights that all Chinese citizens have under article 35 and article 41 of China's Constitution, namely freedom of speech and association and the right to make suggestions to officials free from suppression and retaliation;
o "Ensure that Huang Qi and Tan Zuoren are afforded the rights guaranteed to all defendants under the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China; and
o "Implement its own National Human Rights Action Plan by allowing parents, concerned citizens, and the news media to conduct their own investigations into the role inferior construction and corruption may have played in the collapse of school buildings during the Sichuan earthquake, free from government harassment and official interference, and by ensuring that citizens have full access to effective legal remedies for their grievances."

BACKGROUND

According to the resolution's findings, Chinese human rights activists Huang Qi and Tan Zuoren both sought to help the parents whose children were killed as a result of the collapse of numerous school buildings during the Sichuan earthquake of May 12, 2008.

H.Res. 892 is expected to be considered on the floor of the House on Friday, November 6, 2009, under a motion to suspend the rules, requiring a two-thirds vote for passage. The legislation was introduced by Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA) November 5, 2009.

H.Res. 892 would resolve that the House of Representatives:
• "Recognizes the events of 1989 that helped lead to the end of the Cold War;
• "Congratulates the countries of Central and Eastern Europe who have made great progress in the past 20 years and emerged as strong, vibrant democracies;
• "Expresses strong support and friendship for the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, and reaffirms its commitment to the solemn obligations set forth in article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty;
• "Welcomes the commitment by the European Union (EU) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to keep the door to membership open for all European countries which meet the conditions for accession; and
• "Supports the continued efforts to create a Europe whole, free and at peace."

BACKGROUND

According to the resolution findings, on November 24, 1989, months of protests by pro-democracy forces in Czechoslovakia led by leader Vaclav Havel resulted in the culmination of the "Velvet Revolution" and the en masse resignation of the entire Czechoslovak ruling Politburo, followed by the resignation of President Gustav Husak on December 10, and a new democratic beginning with the election of President Havel on December 29.

 

H.Res. 833 is expected to be considered on the floor of the House on Friday, November 6, 2009, under a motion to suspend the rules, requiring a two-thirds vote for passage. The legislation was introduced by Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-CA) on October 14, 2009.

H.Res. 833 would resolve that the House of Representatives:
• "Commemorates the 60th anniversary of the close relationship between the United States and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan;
• "Expresses its profound admiration and gratitude for the friendship of the Jordanian people;
• Congratulates His Majesty King Abdullah II on 10 years of enlightened and progressive rule; and
• "Shares the hope of His Majesty King Abdullah II and the Jordanian people for a more peaceful Middle East."

BACKGROUND

According to the resolution's findings, King Abdullah II, has continued his father's work to improve the lives of the Jordanian people. While also seeking to bring peace to the region in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Jordan has been an instrumental partner in the fight against al Qaeda, has provided crucial assistance in Iraq, and shouldered a great part of the Iraqi refugee burden.

H.Con.Res. 209 is expected to be considered on the floor of the House on Friday, November 6, 2009, under a motion to suspend the rules, requiring a two-thirds vote for passage. The legislation was introduced by Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE) on November 6, 2009.

H.Con.Res. 209 would resolve that the House of Representatives:
• "Recognizes the 30th anniversary of the Iranian hostage crisis, during which 52 United States citizens were held hostage for 444 days;
• "Honors the sacrifice and service of the United States diplomats and military personnel held hostage and the servicemen who lost their lives and were wounded in a valiant attempt to free the United States hostages;
• "Expresses its support for all Iranian citizens who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties, and rule of law; and
• Urges the Secretary of State to make every effort to assist United States citizens held hostage in Iran at any time during the period beginning on November 4, 1979, and ending on January 20, 1981, and their survivors in matters of compensation related to such citizens' detention."

BACKGROUND

According to the resolution findings, a total of 52 United States citizens were held hostage for 444 days until January 20, 1981, in isolated and under psychologically intimidating and onerous conditions.

H.Res. XXX is expected to be considered on the floor of the House on Tuesday, November 6, 2009, under a motion to suspend the rules, requiring a two-thirds vote for passage. The legislation was introduced by Rep. John Carter (R-TX) on November 6, 2009.

H.Res. XXX would "resolve that the House of Representatives honors the lives of the brave soldiers and civilians of the United States Army who died or were wounded in the tragic attack of November 5, 2009, at Fort Hood, Texas. The American people share the pain and grief of this tragic loss. Our thoughts and prayers will continue to be with the families of those who were so unfortunately taken from them."