House Commerce Committee Research Articles

Televising sin: efforts to restrict the televised advertisement of cigarettes and alcohol in the united states, 1950s to 1980s

Near the end of 2001, the National Broadcasting Company announced a departure in its advertising policy: the network would effectively break the taboo against spirits advertising on television by a...

Progress toward an institute for imaging: House of Representatives passage of the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering Establishment Act

On September 27, 2000, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 1795, the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering Establishment Act. House passage of this legislation represents an important step toward the creation of a new institute for medical imaging, bioengineering, and related fields of research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Consideration and passage of H.R. 1795 by the House followed a hearing in the Subcommittee on Health and Environment of the House Commerce Committee 2 weeks earlier. Representative Richard Burr (R-NC), a Subcommittee member and the author of H.R. 1795, had requested that the Subcommittee schedule a hearing on this issue. Three chairs of academic radiology departments--Drs R. Nick Bryan of the University of Pennsylvania, N. Reed Dunnick of the University of Michigan, and Bruce J. Hillman of the University of Virginia--testified in support

Cardiovascular News

Cardiovascular News

DOE needs new waste separation technology

After investing more than a decade of work and nearly $500 million, the Department of Energy is back to square one in its efforts to find a technology capable of safely separating radioactive elements from some 31 million gal of saltcake wastes stored at its Savannah River Site, near Aiken, S.C. DOE's difficulties are laid out in a blistering report by the General Accounting Office, released June 1. Rep. John D. Dingell (D-Mich.), the ranking minority member of the House Commerce Committee who requested the review, calls the episode an extraordinary and pathetic waste of taxpayer money. Last week, DOE responded by taking responsibility for the separation work away from its site contractor, Westinghouse Savannah River Co. The separation contract is worth roughly $40 million, DOE officials say, out of the approximately $1.2 billion Westinghouse Savannah River is paid annually for overall site management. Problems with the technology were recognized more than a ...

Cryptography in America

In 1516, almost 20 years before his beheading for political and religious obstreperousness, Sir Thomas More wrote in “Utopia”: “… and it will fall out as in a complication of diseases, that by applying a remedy to one sore, you will provoke another; and that which removes the one ill symptom produces others. …” More was talking about the stratification of society as a result of privilege based on a landed economy. But his injunction applies equally well in the debate over cryptography and the Internet. Simply put, the future prosperity, academic freedoms, and civil liberties of U.S. citizens are being pitted against the interests of society to protect itself against the intrusions of criminals, terrorists, and unfriendly states. Some in government seek to protect society by barring international traffic in expert information and by providing law enforcement and security agencies with unlimited access to all encrypted traffic. However, many information scientists contend that such policies will impede research and teaching, isolate the U.S. expert community, and retard the development of the “information economy.” Proposals advocating domestic controls over cryptography would give government the authority to superintend the transactions of citizens and deprive the human rights community of the tools needed to monitor the fates of those who suffer repressions worldwide. The U.S. government has applied existing laws in questionable ways to stem the spread of this technology. Phil Zimmerman, author of the public domain encryption system PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) was threatened with prosecution for illegally exporting munitions after someone posted the software on the Internet. Ultimately the government dropped its dubious pursuit of a criminal indictment. Recently, a U.S. academic had to go to federal court to be allowed to speak about his research to audiences that might include non-U.S. citizens. A AAAS program to provide training in encryption to human rights groups abroad is hampered by government restrictions. If the United States unilaterally mediates the intellectual exchange of its information scientists, it will be an unprecedented assault on academic freedom in peacetime. And since U.S. information scientists do not constitute a monopoly of innovation, it would not achieve the intended result of impeding the diffusion of cryptography technology. If the government succeeds in gaining immediate access to the secret keys of companies and individuals, many innocent users in the information chain could be held criminally liable. In response, U.S. service providers and carriers would be forced to downgrade or deny encryption altogether. This could destroy the Internet as a tool of commerce. In September, despite the rejection by the House Commerce Committee of an amendment that would have prohibited the manufacture, sale, distribution, and export or import of encryption systems,[*][1] the House National Security and Intelligence committees had already approved equivalent amendments. The arena has now shifted to the House Rules Committee and to the Senate, which is considering similar restrictive legislation.[†][2] The science and technology communities have tried to inform the Administration and Congress of the critical issues shaping this debate, but they have not been widely heard. These efforts include a 1994 Office of Technology Assessment report, [‡][3] a 1996 National Research Council report,[§][4] and a spring 1997 report of an ad hoc group of senior cryptographers and computer scientists.[|][5] It is now time for scientists and technologists to confront the nation's legitimate security and criminal issues and to work in concert with Congress and the Administration to address these confounding puzzles. It will require all of our intelligence and rigor if we are to avoid Sir Thomas More's presentiment that by applying a remedy to one problem we may inflict a suppurating wound elsewhere on the body politic. [1]: #fn-1 [2]: #fn-2 [3]: #fn-3 [4]: #fn-4 [5]: #fn-5

Fate of “modernization” hangs on commerce committee action

AbstractThe House Commerce Committee will decide the fate offinancial modernization legislation by September 15th.

Pesticide reform bill kills Delaney clause

Leaders of the House Commerce Committee last week reached a bipartisan compromise on legislation that could significantly change the way pesticide residues in food are regulated. The agreement's most controversial proviso calls for repeal of the Delaney clause as it applies to pesticides. The agreement will be incorporated into H.R. 1627. That bill reforms both the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act, which contains the Delaney clause. The clause, which was passed in 1958, made it illegal to add any chemical to a processed food that has been determined to cause cancer in humans or animals. Under FIFRA, the Environmental Protection Agency sets tolerances for pesticide residues, even suspected carcinogens, for raw foods. The compromise replaces the Delaney clause with a new negligiblerisk standard—reasonable certainty of no harm—to use in setting pesticide residue tolerances. The new standard would apply to pesticide residues in both raw and ...

Inside H.R. 226

Among legislation introduced on the first day of the 104th Congress was H.R. 226, a Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) reauthorization bill. Identical to H.R. 3392, passed by the House in the 103rd Congress, the bill was introduced by John Dingell (D‐Michigan), ranking minority member of the House Commerce Committee and its Health and Environment Subcommittee. Dingell introduced the measure to serve as a starting point for reauthorization discussions in this session of Congress. He chaired the House committee that marked up the bill passed by the 103rd Congress. This article summarizes H.R. 226, which will be a factor in the debate on SDWA reauthorization.

The Nature of Congressional Committee Jurisdictions

Jurisdictions are the defining characteristics of committee systems, and they are central in any discussions about the U. S. Congress; yet we know little about them. Where do committee property rights come from? Are they rigid? Are they flexible? I introduce a distinction between statutory jurisdictions (which are written in the House and Senate Rules) and common law jurisdictions (which emerge through bill referral precedents). Turf is gained through common law advances, not through formal rules changes (like the “reforms” passed by the House in 1946, 1974, and 1980). Jurisdictional change is ongoing and incremental. The analysis draws on an examination of hearings held by the House Commerce Committee from 1947 through 1990.

Legislator Uncertainty, Legislative Control, and the Delegation of Legislative Power

On May 2, 1878, the House Commerce Committee favorably reported a bill regulate interstate commerce and to prohibit unjust discrimination by common carriers. Known as the Reagan bill, after the chairman, John Reagan, of Texas, H.R. 3547 outlawed rebates and other forms of discrimination and included a restrictive longand short-haul clause. The bill did not establish a federal commission to enforce the law, however, providing only that aggrieved shippers could bring suit in the federal courts and, if successful, could recover triple damages. To supply additional enforcement incentives railroads were to be fined a minimum of $1,000 for each offense, this amount to be divided between the government and the informer. After lengthy debate and the addition of a provision outlawing pools (agreements to split traffic or revenue) the Reagan bill passed the Democratic House, only to disappear without a trace in the Republican Senate.l Senate inaction stalled the regulatory drive until 1885. In that year the Republican Senate adopted a bill reported by a select committee chaired by

Policy Making in Congressional Committees: The Impact of “Environmental” Factors

It is well established that various characteristics of a congressional committee may shape and, to an extent, standardize its handling of a range of policy areas. This article, however, examines the substantial variations that most committees continue to display as they move from issue to issue. Why is it that the House Commerce Committee, for example, approaches issues like major-disease research, health care delivery, cable television development, and power plant siting in such radically different ways? What determines the incentives of legislators to invest time and effort in a policy area, and to orient themselves toward broad “public” interests, once involved? Focusing on the House and Senate Commerce Committees, the article takes as its data base patterns of legislative action and inaction in major areas of the committees' jurisdiction during 1969–1974. Particular attention is given to how perceived levels of group conflict and of public salience affect a legislator's orientation toward a policy area, and to the level and direction of executive involvement as an intervening variable of major significance. High-salience, low-conflict areas (e.g., health research) generally offer the strongest incentives to congressional involvement, and low-salience, high-conflict areas (e.g., communications regulation) the weakest, while mixed cases (e.g., a high-salience, high-conflict area like health care delivery) display considerable variability. Issues may change considerably with time in their perceived levels of salience and conflict, and legislators can influence, as well as respond to, such changes. Congressional initiatives often respond to perceived “neglect” on the part of the executive, or disagreement with the content of its moves. But particularly in high-conflict areas, congressional activists will often find that their success requires executive involvement.

Local control of recombinant DNA research--only for accidents?

Proposed federal legislation concerning recombinant DNA research attempts to restrict the ability of local governments to regulate the research. In March of 1978, the House Commerce Committee approved a bill that would “bar states and localities from setting their own standards over gene transplant technology.” Two weeks later, the House of Representatives Science, Research, and Technology Subcommittee approved a bill which would permit a state to regulate such researchonly when it is “necessary” to protect local health. The “necessary” standard usually requires strict proof that a regulated substance or activity will cause significant harm to public health. Under this standard a locality might have to wait for significant harm to occur before it could adopt regulations that are stricter than federal requirements.This anomaly presents the basic question of this article: Who should decide whether recombinant DNA research is a health hazard — the local or the federal government? This article will utilize a legal approach to answer the question, analyzing and weighing the issues presented by pertinent cases.

Television and radio program ratings and measurements: A selected and annotated bibliography

Following testimony dealing with the role played by television audience ratings in determining whether a given program will or will not be kept on the air, Chairman Oren Harris of the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce requested the American Statistical Association to examine, describe, and evaluate the statistical reliability and validity of the various commercial rating services. The ASA's Technical Committee on Broadcast Ratings, under the Chairmanship of William G. Madow, produced its report early in 1961. It was published by the House Commerce Committee in March, under the title, Evaluation of Statistical Methods Used in Obtaining Broadcast Ratings (House Report 193, 87th Congress, 1st Session). Although the entire report is highly technical, it is recommended to all those seriously interested in the rating services and their standards. For those without the statistical background to understand certain portions of the report, attention is called to more easily read articles, such as H...