UNT Libraries Government Documents Department - Browse

ABOUT BROWSE FEED

Environmental Reauthorizations and Regulatory Reform: From the 104th Congress to the 106th

Description: The 104th Congress pursued efforts to reform environmental regulations on several fronts: (1) revising regulatory decision making processes; (2) attaching specific reforms to funding bills; (3) establishing a House corrections day calendar of bills addressing specific regulatory problems; and (4) incorporating regulatory reforms into individual program reauthorization bills. The 105th Congress has pursued regulatory reform in four primary directions: (1) proposals to establish a comprehensive cost-benefit/risk analysis framework for regulatory programs, (2) private property “takings” initiatives, (3) amendments and reforms directed at individual environmental statutes, and (4) oversight of environmental programs.
Date: January 8, 1999
Creator: Blodgett, John E.

Campaign Finance Debate in the 106th Congress: Comparison of Measures Under House Consideration

Description: On September 14, the House passed H.R. 417 on a vote of 252-177, as amended by three perfecting amendments: Bereuter/Wicker #6; Faleomavaega #1; and Sweeney #21. This report features two tables. Table 1 summarizes and compares the ten perfecting amendments, current law, and the Shays-Meehan proposal. Table 2 summarizes and compares current law, the Shays-Meehan bill, and the three substitute amendments.
Date: January 12, 2000
Creator: Cantor, Joseph E.

Campaign Finance Bills in the 106th Congress: Comparison of Shays-Meehan, as passed, with McCain-Feingold, as considered

Description: On September 14, 1999, the House passed the Shays-Meehan bill--H.R. 417, the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act of 1999, as amended, by a vote of 252-177. Senate sponsors of the companion measure, S. 26 (McCain-Feingold), revised their proposal and, on September 16, introduced S. 1593, containing just four sections of H.R. 417 and S. 26. The Senate debated S. 1593 from October 13-20, culminating in unsuccessful cloture votes October 19 on two amendments: Daschle amendment 2298, substituting text nearly identical to the House-passed H.R. 417; and Reid amendment 2229 (a perfecting amendment to no. 2298), substituting text of S. 1593 as offered, plus McCain amendment 2294 (adopted October 14), which added certain disclosure requirements. This report compares provisions of the House-passed bill with the one considered by the Senate in October 1999. No further updates are planned.
Date: January 12, 2000
Creator: Cantor, Joseph E.

Elementary and Secondary School Teachers: Action by the 106th Congress

Description: The quality and quantity of public elementary and secondary school teachers are of increasing concern to the 106th Congress. Although states and localities are responsible for most aspects of teacher preparation, recruitment, and employment, the federal government supports a wide array of programs for teachers. Several of these programs are being considered for amendment and extension by the 106th Congress including the Eisenhower Professional Development program and the Class Size Reduction program. The 106th Congress has before it a wide array of legislative proposals to address teacher issues. Action has occurred on several proposals. This report tracks such action and will be updated as it occurs.
Date: August 22, 2000
Creator: Stedman, James B.

Disaster Mitigation Assistance Bills in the 106th Congress: Comparison of Provisions

Description: The Administration initiative to shift federal emergency management policy away from a "response and recovery" emphasis has generated little congressional controversy, although some have raised concerns about the cost effectiveness of implementing a mitigation strategy. Greater attention, it is generally argued, should be given to mitigation (loss reduction) efforts before disasters occur in order to reduce future losses. Legislation (H.R. 707, S. 1691) pending before the 106th Congress would amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (the Stafford Act) which authorizes federal assistance when the President declares that a catastrophe has overwhelmed state and local resources.
Date: May 5, 2000
Creator: Bea, Keith

Disaster Mitigation Bills in the 106th Congress: H.R. 707, S. 1691 Compared

Description: The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act authorizes the President to declare that an emergency or major disaster exists that overwhelms state and local resources. Legislation before the 106th Congress (H.R. 707 and S. 1691) would, among other matters, amend the Act to: (1) fund hazard mitigation projects designed to reduce future disaster losses; (2) add conditions to assistance; and (3) consolidate provisions governing the distribution of aid to disaster victims. This report compares provisions of the two bills, and will be updated as legislative action occurs.
Date: October 25, 1999
Creator: Bea, Keith

Clean Water Act Issues in the 106th Congress

Description: In the 106th Congress, no comprehensive activity on reauthorizing the Clean Water Act occurred, although a number of individual clean water bills were enacted. Other issues have been debated recently, such as reforming the law to provide regulatory relief for industry, states and cities, and individual landowners. The debate over many of these issues highlights differing views of the Act and its implementation by some who seek to strengthen existing requirements and others who believe that costs and benefits should be more carefully weighed before additional control programs are mandated.
Date: November 24, 1998
Creator: Copeland, Claudia

Clean Water Act Issues in the 106th Congress

Description: In the 106th Congress, no comprehensive activity on reauthorizing the Clean Water Act occurred, although a number of individual clean water bills were enacted. Other issues have been debated recently, such as reforming the law to provide regulatory relief for industry, states and cities, and individual landowners. The debate over many of these issues highlights differing views of the Act and its implementation by some who seek to strengthen existing requirements and others who believe that costs and benefits should be more carefully weighed before additional control programs are mandated.
Date: February 23, 2001
Creator: Copeland, Claudia

Environmental Protection Issues in the 106th Congress

Description: This report discuses issues such as Reforming Superfund, defense cleanup compliance, funding measures, beach assessment, air-related risk management plans, and research received congressional attention in the 106th Congress, first session. In the remaining days, there may be action related on water quality programs involving specific water bodies, and funding of environmental programs.
Date: September 11, 2000
Creator: Lee, Martin R.

Clean Air Act Issues in the 106th Congress

Description: The Clean Air Act and its 1990 amendments appear to have contributed to a marked improvement in air quality nationwide. Of nearly 100 metropolitan areas not meeting air quality standards for ozone in 1990, more than two-thirds now do so. Even greater progress has been achieved with carbon monoxide: 36 of 42 areas not in attainment in 1990 now meet the standard. Nevertheless, EPA remains concerned about air pollution. In 1997, the Agency promulgated major revisions to its air quality standards for ozone and particulates, an action that would require most states and urban areas to establish additional controls on a wide range of pollution sources. The revised standards were challenged by numerous parties and the courts have remanded the standards to EPA. Implementation is currently in limbo, pending resolution of appeals by the Supreme Court.
Date: November 14, 2000
Creator: McCarthy, James E.

Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA) (H.R. 701) and a Related Initiative in the 106th Congress

Description: This report compares existing law with H.R. 701, as passed by the House(HP) and H.R. 701, as reported by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee (SCR). Both versions, also known as the Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA), would have created a new fund, the CARA Fund. Both bills would have created and funded a new coastal energy impact assistance program, amended and funded the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), funded the Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program and the Historic Preservation Fund, increased funding for wildlife conservation, funded land restoration and easement programs, and funded the Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) Program.1 The SCR version would also have funded additional programs to protect natural and cultural resources.
Date: January 17, 2001
Creator: Zinn, Jeffrey A. & Corn, M. Lynne