[House Report 118-271]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


118th Congress }                                              {    Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session   }                                              {   118-271

======================================================================

 
 TO AMEND TITLE 28, UNITED STATES CODE, TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL PLACE 
  FOR HOLDING COURT FOR THE PECOS DIVISION OF THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF 
                     TEXAS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

 November 13, 2023.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

           Mr. Jordan, from the Committee on the Judiciary, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 786]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 786) to amend title 28, United States Code, to 
provide an additional place for holding court for the Pecos 
Division of the Western District of Texas, and for other 
purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon 
without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     1
Background and Need for the Legislation..........................     2
Hearings.........................................................     3
Committee Consideration..........................................     3
Committee Votes..................................................     3
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     3
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................     3
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................     3
Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects..........................     4
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................     4
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................     5
Advisory on Earmarks.............................................     5
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................     5
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................     5
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................     5
Section-by-Section Analysis......................................     5
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............     5

                          Purpose and Summary

    H.R. 786, introduced by Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-TX), amends 
title 28, United States Code, to provide additional places for 
holding court in the Western District of Texas and the Western 
District of Washington.

                Background and Need for the Legislation

    Pursuant to federal statute, the state of Texas is divided 
into four judicial districts, the Northern, Southern, Eastern, 
and Western Districts of Texas, and the state of Washington is 
divided into two judicial districts, the Eastern and Western 
Districts of Washington.\1\ Currently, the Western District of 
Texas is only authorized to hold court in Austin, Waco, El 
Paso, San Antonio, Del Rio, Pecos, and Midland, Texas, as well 
as Odessa, Texas, in certain circumstances.\2\ Similarly, the 
Western District of Washington is only authorized to hold court 
in Bellingham, Seattle, Tacoma, and Vancouver, Washington.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\28 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 124, 128.
    \2\28 U.S.C. Sec. 124(d).
    \3\28 U.S.C. Sec. 128(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 2018, the Judicial Conference of the United States 
adopted a legislative proposal recommending that Congress add 
Mount Vernon, Washington, as an additional location for holding 
court in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of 
Washington.\4\ According to the Judicial Conference, adding 
Mount Vernon as a location for holding court would allow the 
court to move ``its monthly Central Violations Bureau 
proceedings from Bellingham to Mount Vernon, a closer location 
to the vast majority of defendants, witnesses, agents, and 
attorneys who come to court.''\5\ Additionally, the Judicial 
Conference elaborated that this proposal is a ``minor, cost-
free change that would result in increased convenience for the 
parties and decreased administrative costs for the court.''\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\Letter from James C. Duff, Sec'y, Judicial Conference of the 
U.S. to Rep. Bob Goodlatte, Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (Nov. 
9, 2018) (on file with the Committee).
    \5\Id.
    \6\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Similarly, in 2022, the Judicial Conference adopted a 
legislative proposal recommending that Congress add Alpine, 
Texas, as an additional location for holding court in the U.S. 
District Court for the Western District of Texas.\7\ A 
courthouse already exists in Alpine, which is currently used by 
a full-time magistrate judge as well as ``the magistrate 
judge's staff . . . the Clerk's office, Probation, Pretrial 
Services and the U.S. Marshals Service.''\8\ The Judicial 
Conference noted that ``Alpine is also more convenient for the 
litigants and the public who currently drive approximately 102 
miles to the Pecos courthouse to conduct court business.''\9\ 
Additionally, the Judicial Conference reported that ``filings 
in the Pecos Division continue to steadily increase,''\10\ 
which indicates that an additional location would be beneficial 
for judicial resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\Letter from Roslynn R. Mauskopf, Sec'y, Judicial Conference of 
the U.S. to Sen. Chuck Grassley, Ranking Member, S. Comm. on the 
Judiciary (Nov. 1, 2022) (on file with the Committee).
    \8\Id.
    \9\Id.
    \10\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Senate companion to this bill, S. 227, passed the 
Senate by unanimous consent on February 28, 2023.\11\ Previous 
versions of this bill were introduced as H.R. 3034 in the 117th 
Congress, which was passed by the House on suspension of the 
rules,\12\ and H.R. 3713 in the 116th Congress, which was 
favorably reported out of the Judiciary Committee by voice 
vote.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\S. 227, 118th Cong. (2023).
    \12\H.R. 3034, 117th Cong. (2021).
    \13\H.R. 3713, 116th Cong. (2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                Hearings

    For the purposes of clause 3(c)(6)(A) of House rule XIII, 
the Committee states that no hearings were held to assist in 
the formulation of H.R. 786.

                        Committee Consideration

    On September 28, 2023, the Committee met in open session 
and ordered the bill, H.R. 786, favorably reported by voice 
vote, a quorum being present.

                            Committee Votes

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of House rule XIII, the 
Committee states that no roll call votes were taken during 
consideration of H.R. 786.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of House rule XIII, the 
Committee advises that the findings and recommendations of the 
Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) 
of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, are 
incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives does not apply where 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 timely submitted prior to filing of the report 
and is included in the report. Such a cost estimate is included 
in this report.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has 
received the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 786 from the 
Director of the Congressional Budget Office:




    H.R. 786 would authorize certain federal courts in the 
states of Texas and Washington to hold proceedings in 
additional cities within their respective districts.
    Specifically, the bill would allow courts in the Pecos 
Division of the Western District of Texas to hold proceedings 
in the city of Alpine. Under current law, those proceedings are 
held in the city of Pecos. In addition, the bill would 
authorize federal courts in the Western District of Washington 
to hold proceedings in the city of Mount Vernon. Under current 
law, those proceedings are held in the cities of Bellingham, 
Seattle, Tacoma, and Vancouver.
    Using information from the Administrative Office of the 
United States Courts about current operating costs for those 
courts, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would cost 
less than $500,000 over the 2024-2028 period. Such spending 
would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jon Sperl. The 
estimate was reviewed by Emily Stern, Senior Adviser for Budget 
Analysis.
                                         Phillip L. Swagel,
                             Director, Congressional Budget Office.

                Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects

    With respect to the requirements of clause 3(d)(1) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by the 
Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                    Duplication of Federal Programs

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of House rule XIII, no provision 
of H.R. 786 establishes or reauthorizes a program of the 
federal government known to be duplicative of another federal 
program.

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of 
House rule XIII, H.R. 786 provides additional places for 
holding court in the Western District of Texas and the Western 
District of Washington.

                          Advisory on Earmarks

    In accordance with clause 9 of House rule XXI, H.R. 786 
does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clauses 
9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of House Rule XXI.

                       Federal Mandates Statement

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act.

                      Advisory Committee Statement

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                  Applicability to Legislative Branch

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Pub. L. 104-
1).

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

    Section 1: Additional Places for Holding Court: Amends 28 
U.S.C. Sec. 124(d)(6) and Sec. 128(b) to add Alpine, Texas, and 
Mount Vernon, Washington, as places for holding court in the 
Western District of Texas and the Western District of 
Washington, respectively.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is 
printed in italics and existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

                      TITLE 28, UNITED STATES CODE




           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
PART I--ORGANIZATION OF COURTS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 5--DISTRICT COURTS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 124. Texas

  Texas is divided into four judicial districts to be known as 
the Northern, Southern, Eastern, and Western Districts of 
Texas.
  Northern District
  (a) The Northern District comprises seven divisions.
  (1) The Dallas Division comprises the counties of Dallas, 
Ellis, Hunt, Johnson, Kaufman, Navarro, and Rockwall.
  Court for the Dallas Division shall be held at Dallas.
  (2) The Fort Worth Division comprises the counties of 
Comanche, Erath, Hood, Jack, Palo Pinto, Parker, Tarrant, and 
Wise.
  Court for the Fort Worth Division shall be held at Fort 
Worth.
  (3) The Abilene Division comprises the counties of Callahan, 
Eastland, Fisher, Haskell, Howard, Jones, Mitchell, Nolan, 
Shackleford, Stephens, Stonewall, Taylor, and Throckmorton.
  Court for the Abilene Division shall be held at Abilene.
  (4) The San Angelo Division comprises the counties of Brown, 
Coke, Coleman, Concho, Crockett, Glasscock, Irion, Menard, 
Mills, Reagan, Runnels, Schleicher, Sterling, Sutton, and Tom 
Green.
  Court for the San Angelo Division shall be held at San 
Angelo.
  (5) The Amarillo Division comprises the counties of 
Armstrong, Brisco, Carson, Castro, Childress, Collingsworth, 
Dallam, Deaf Smith, Donley, Gray, Hall, Hansford, Hartley, 
Hemphill, Hutchinson, Lipscomb, Moore, Ochiltree, Oldham, 
Parmer, Potter, Randall, Roberts, Sherman, Swisher, and 
Wheeler.
  Court for the Amarillo Division shall be held at Amarillo.
  (6) The Wichita Falls Division comprises the counties of 
Archer, Baylor, Clay, Cottle, Foard, Hardeman, King, Knox, 
Montague, Wichita, Wilbarger, and Young.
  Court for the Wichita Falls Division shall be held at Wichita 
Falls.
  (7) The Lubbock Division comprises the counties of Bailey, 
Borden, Cochran, Crosby, Dawson, Dickens, Floyd, Gaines, Garza, 
Hale, Hockley, Kent, Lamb, Lubbock, Lynn, Motley, Scurry, 
Terry, and Yoakum.
  Court for the Lubbock Division shall be held at Lubbock.
  Southern District
  (b) The Southern District comprises seven divisions.
  (1) The Galveston Division comprises the counties of 
Brazoria, Chambers, Galveston, and Matagorda.
  Court for the Galveston Division shall be held at Galveston.
  (2) The Houston Division comprises the counties of Austin, 
Brazos, Colorado, Fayette, Fort Bend, Grimes, Harris, Madison, 
Montgomery, San Jacinto, Walker, Waller, and Wharton.
  Court for the Houston Division shall be held at Houston.
  (3) The Laredo Division comprises the counties of Jim Hogg, 
La Salle, McMullen, Webb, and Zapata.
  Court for the Laredo Division shall be held at Laredo.
  (4) The Brownsville Division comprises the counties of 
Cameron and Willacy.
  Court for the Brownsville Division shall be held at 
Brownsville.
  (5) The Victoria Division comprises the counties of Calhoun, 
DeWitt, Goliad, Jackson, Lavaca, Refugio, and Victoria.
  Court for the Victoria Division shall be held at Victoria.
  (6) The Corpus Christi Division comprises the counties of 
Aransas, Bee, Brooks, Duval, Jim Wells, Kenedy, Kleberg, Live 
Oak, Nueces, and San Patricio.
  Court for the Corpus Christi Division shall be held at Corpus 
Christi.
  (7) The McAllen Division comprises the counties of Hidalgo 
and Starr.
  Court for the McAllen Division shall be held at McAllen.
  Eastern District
  (c) The Eastern District comprises seven divisions.
  (1) The Tyler Division comprises the counties of Anderson, 
Cherokee, Gregg, Henderson, Panola, Rains, Rusk, Smith, Van 
Zandt, and Wood.
  Court for Tyler Division will be held at Tyler.
  (2) The Beaumont Division comprises the counties of Hardin, 
Jasper, Jefferson, Liberty, Newton, and Orange.
  Court for the Beaumont Division is to be held at Beaumont.
  (3) The Sherman Division comprises the counties of Collin, 
Cook, Delta, Denton, Fannin, Grayson, Hopkins, and Lamar.
  Court for the Sherman Division shall be held at Sherman and 
Plano.
  (4) The Marshall Division comprises the counties of Camp, 
Cass, Harrison, Marion, Morris, and Upshur.
  Court for the Marshall Division shall be held at Marshall.
  (5) The Texarkana Division comprises the counties of Bowie, 
Franklin, Red River, and Titus.
  Court for the Texarkana Division shall be held at Texarkana, 
and may be held anywhere within the Federal courthouse in 
Texarkana that is located astride the State line between Texas 
and Arkansas.
  (6) The Lufkin Division comprises the counties of Angelina, 
Houston, Nacogdoches, Polk, Sabine, San Augustine, Shelby, 
Trinity, and Tyler.
  Court for the Lufkin Division shall be held at Lufkin.
  Western District
  (d) The Western District comprises seven divisions.
  (1) The Austin Division comprises the counties of Bastrop, 
Blanco, Burleson, Burnet, Caldwell, Gillespie, Hays, Kimble, 
Lampasas, Lee, Llano, Mason, McCulloch, San Saba, Travis, 
Washington, and Williamson.
  Court for the Austin Division shall be held at Austin.
  (2) The Waco Division comprises the counties of Bell, Bosque, 
Coryell, Falls, Freestone, Hamilton, Hill, Leon, Limestone, 
McLennan, Milam, Robertson, and Somervell.
  Court for the Waco Division shall be held at Waco.
  (3) The El Paso Division comprises the county of El Paso.
  Court for the El Paso Division shall be held at El Paso.
  (4) The San Antonio Division comprises the counties of 
Atascosa, Bandera, Bexar, Comal, Dimmit, Frio, Gonzales, 
Guadalupe, Karnes, Kendall, Kerr, Medina, Real, and Wilson.
  Court for the San Antonio Division shall be held at San 
Antonio.
  (5) The Del Rio Division comprises the counties of Edwards, 
Kinney, Maverick, Terrell, Uvalde, Val Verde, and Zavalla.
  Court for the Del Rio Division shall be held at Del Rio.
  (6) The Pecos Division comprises the counties of Brewster, 
Culberson, Jeff Davis, Hudspeth, Loving, Pecos, Presidio, 
Reeves, Ward, and Winkler.
  Court for the Pecos and Alpine Division shall be held at 
Pecos.
  (7) The Midland-Odessa Division comprises the counties of 
Andrews, Crane, Ector, Martin, Midland, and Upton.
  Court for the Midland-Odessa Division shall be held at 
Midland. Court may be held, in the discretion of the court, in 
Odessa, when courtroom facilities are made available at no 
expense to the Government.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 128. Washington

  Washington is divided into two judicial districts to be known 
as the Eastern and Western Districts of Washington.
  Eastern District
  (a) The Eastern District comprises the counties of Adams, 
Asotin, Benton, Chelan, Columbia, Douglas, Ferry, Franklin, 
Garfield, Grant, Kittitas, Klickitat, Lincoln, Okanogan, Pend 
Oreille, Spokane, Stevens, Walla Walla, Whitman, and Yakima.
  Court for the Eastern District shall be held at Spokane, 
Yakima, Walla Walla, and Richland.
  Western District
  (b) The Western District comprises the counties of Clallam, 
Clark, Cowlitz, Grays Harbor, Island, Jefferson, King, Kitsap, 
Lewis, Mason, Pacific, Pierce, San Juan, Skagit, Skamania, 
Snohomish, Thurston, Wahkiakum, and Whatcom.
  Court for the Western District shall be held at Bellingham, 
Seattle, Tacoma, Mount Vernon, and Vancouver.

                                  



118th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    118-271

======================================================================


 TO AMEND TITLE 28, UNITED STATES CODE, TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL PLACE 
  FOR HOLDING COURT FOR THE PECOS DIVISION OF THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF 
                     TEXAS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

 November 13, 2023.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

           Mr. Jordan, from the Committee on the Judiciary, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 786]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 786) to amend title 28, United States Code, to 
provide an additional place for holding court for the Pecos 
Division of the Western District of Texas, and for other 
purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon 
without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     1
Background and Need for the Legislation..........................     2
Hearings.........................................................     3
Committee Consideration..........................................     3
Committee Votes..................................................     3
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     3
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................     3
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................     3
Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects..........................     4
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................     4
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................     5
Advisory on Earmarks.............................................     5
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................     5
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................     5
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................     5
Section-by-Section Analysis......................................     5
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............     5

                          Purpose and Summary

    H.R. 786, introduced by Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-TX), amends 
title 28, United States Code, to provide additional places for 
holding court in the Western District of Texas and the Western 
District of Washington.

                Background and Need for the Legislation

    Pursuant to federal statute, the state of Texas is divided 
into four judicial districts, the Northern, Southern, Eastern, 
and Western Districts of Texas, and the state of Washington is 
divided into two judicial districts, the Eastern and Western 
Districts of Washington.\1\ Currently, the Western District of 
Texas is only authorized to hold court in Austin, Waco, El 
Paso, San Antonio, Del Rio, Pecos, and Midland, Texas, as well 
as Odessa, Texas, in certain circumstances.\2\ Similarly, the 
Western District of Washington is only authorized to hold court 
in Bellingham, Seattle, Tacoma, and Vancouver, Washington.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\28 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 124, 128.
    \2\28 U.S.C. Sec. 124(d).
    \3\28 U.S.C. Sec. 128(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 2018, the Judicial Conference of the United States 
adopted a legislative proposal recommending that Congress add 
Mount Vernon, Washington, as an additional location for holding 
court in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of 
Washington.\4\ According to the Judicial Conference, adding 
Mount Vernon as a location for holding court would allow the 
court to move ``its monthly Central Violations Bureau 
proceedings from Bellingham to Mount Vernon, a closer location 
to the vast majority of defendants, witnesses, agents, and 
attorneys who come to court.''\5\ Additionally, the Judicial 
Conference elaborated that this proposal is a ``minor, cost-
free change that would result in increased convenience for the 
parties and decreased administrative costs for the court.''\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\Letter from James C. Duff, Sec'y, Judicial Conference of the 
U.S. to Rep. Bob Goodlatte, Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (Nov. 
9, 2018) (on file with the Committee).
    \5\Id.
    \6\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Similarly, in 2022, the Judicial Conference adopted a 
legislative proposal recommending that Congress add Alpine, 
Texas, as an additional location for holding court in the U.S. 
District Court for the Western District of Texas.\7\ A 
courthouse already exists in Alpine, which is currently used by 
a full-time magistrate judge as well as ``the magistrate 
judge's staff . . . the Clerk's office, Probation, Pretrial 
Services and the U.S. Marshals Service.''\8\ The Judicial 
Conference noted that ``Alpine is also more convenient for the 
litigants and the public who currently drive approximately 102 
miles to the Pecos courthouse to conduct court business.''\9\ 
Additionally, the Judicial Conference reported that ``filings 
in the Pecos Division continue to steadily increase,''\10\ 
which indicates that an additional location would be beneficial 
for judicial resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\Letter from Roslynn R. Mauskopf, Sec'y, Judicial Conference of 
the U.S. to Sen. Chuck Grassley, Ranking Member, S. Comm. on the 
Judiciary (Nov. 1, 2022) (on file with the Committee).
    \8\Id.
    \9\Id.
    \10\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Senate companion to this bill, S. 227, passed the 
Senate by unanimous consent on February 28, 2023.\11\ Previous 
versions of this bill were introduced as H.R. 3034 in the 117th 
Congress, which was passed by the House on suspension of the 
rules,\12\ and H.R. 3713 in the 116th Congress, which was 
favorably reported out of the Judiciary Committee by voice 
vote.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\S. 227, 118th Cong. (2023).
    \12\H.R. 3034, 117th Cong. (2021).
    \13\H.R. 3713, 116th Cong. (2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                Hearings

    For the purposes of clause 3(c)(6)(A) of House rule XIII, 
the Committee states that no hearings were held to assist in 
the formulation of H.R. 786.

                        Committee Consideration

    On September 28, 2023, the Committee met in open session 
and ordered the bill, H.R. 786, favorably reported by voice 
vote, a quorum being present.

                            Committee Votes

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of House rule XIII, the 
Committee states that no roll call votes were taken during 
consideration of H.R. 786.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of House rule XIII, the 
Committee advises that the findings and recommendations of the 
Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) 
of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, are 
incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives does not apply where 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 timely submitted prior to filing of the report 
and is included in the report. Such a cost estimate is included 
in this report.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has 
received the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 786 from the 
Director of the Congressional Budget Office:




    H.R. 786 would authorize certain federal courts in the 
states of Texas and Washington to hold proceedings in 
additional cities within their respective districts.
    Specifically, the bill would allow courts in the Pecos 
Division of the Western District of Texas to hold proceedings 
in the city of Alpine. Under current law, those proceedings are 
held in the city of Pecos. In addition, the bill would 
authorize federal courts in the Western District of Washington 
to hold proceedings in the city of Mount Vernon. Under current 
law, those proceedings are held in the cities of Bellingham, 
Seattle, Tacoma, and Vancouver.
    Using information from the Administrative Office of the 
United States Courts about current operating costs for those 
courts, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would cost 
less than $500,000 over the 2024-2028 period. Such spending 
would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jon Sperl. The 
estimate was reviewed by Emily Stern, Senior Adviser for Budget 
Analysis.
                                         Phillip L. Swagel,
                             Director, Congressional Budget Office.

                Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects

    With respect to the requirements of clause 3(d)(1) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by the 
Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                    Duplication of Federal Programs

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of House rule XIII, no provision 
of H.R. 786 establishes or reauthorizes a program of the 
federal government known to be duplicative of another federal 
program.

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of 
House rule XIII, H.R. 786 provides additional places for 
holding court in the Western District of Texas and the Western 
District of Washington.

                          Advisory on Earmarks

    In accordance with clause 9 of House rule XXI, H.R. 786 
does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clauses 
9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of House Rule XXI.

                       Federal Mandates Statement

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act.

                      Advisory Committee Statement

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                  Applicability to Legislative Branch

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Pub. L. 104-
1).

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

    Section 1: Additional Places for Holding Court: Amends 28 
U.S.C. Sec. 124(d)(6) and Sec. 128(b) to add Alpine, Texas, and 
Mount Vernon, Washington, as places for holding court in the 
Western District of Texas and the Western District of 
Washington, respectively.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is 
printed in italics and existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

                      TITLE 28, UNITED STATES CODE




           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
PART I--ORGANIZATION OF COURTS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 5--DISTRICT COURTS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 124. Texas

  Texas is divided into four judicial districts to be known as 
the Northern, Southern, Eastern, and Western Districts of 
Texas.
  Northern District
  (a) The Northern District comprises seven divisions.
  (1) The Dallas Division comprises the counties of Dallas, 
Ellis, Hunt, Johnson, Kaufman, Navarro, and Rockwall.
  Court for the Dallas Division shall be held at Dallas.
  (2) The Fort Worth Division comprises the counties of 
Comanche, Erath, Hood, Jack, Palo Pinto, Parker, Tarrant, and 
Wise.
  Court for the Fort Worth Division shall be held at Fort 
Worth.
  (3) The Abilene Division comprises the counties of Callahan, 
Eastland, Fisher, Haskell, Howard, Jones, Mitchell, Nolan, 
Shackleford, Stephens, Stonewall, Taylor, and Throckmorton.
  Court for the Abilene Division shall be held at Abilene.
  (4) The San Angelo Division comprises the counties of Brown, 
Coke, Coleman, Concho, Crockett, Glasscock, Irion, Menard, 
Mills, Reagan, Runnels, Schleicher, Sterling, Sutton, and Tom 
Green.
  Court for the San Angelo Division shall be held at San 
Angelo.
  (5) The Amarillo Division comprises the counties of 
Armstrong, Brisco, Carson, Castro, Childress, Collingsworth, 
Dallam, Deaf Smith, Donley, Gray, Hall, Hansford, Hartley, 
Hemphill, Hutchinson, Lipscomb, Moore, Ochiltree, Oldham, 
Parmer, Potter, Randall, Roberts, Sherman, Swisher, and 
Wheeler.
  Court for the Amarillo Division shall be held at Amarillo.
  (6) The Wichita Falls Division comprises the counties of 
Archer, Baylor, Clay, Cottle, Foard, Hardeman, King, Knox, 
Montague, Wichita, Wilbarger, and Young.
  Court for the Wichita Falls Division shall be held at Wichita 
Falls.
  (7) The Lubbock Division comprises the counties of Bailey, 
Borden, Cochran, Crosby, Dawson, Dickens, Floyd, Gaines, Garza, 
Hale, Hockley, Kent, Lamb, Lubbock, Lynn, Motley, Scurry, 
Terry, and Yoakum.
  Court for the Lubbock Division shall be held at Lubbock.
  Southern District
  (b) The Southern District comprises seven divisions.
  (1) The Galveston Division comprises the counties of 
Brazoria, Chambers, Galveston, and Matagorda.
  Court for the Galveston Division shall be held at Galveston.
  (2) The Houston Division comprises the counties of Austin, 
Brazos, Colorado, Fayette, Fort Bend, Grimes, Harris, Madison, 
Montgomery, San Jacinto, Walker, Waller, and Wharton.
  Court for the Houston Division shall be held at Houston.
  (3) The Laredo Division comprises the counties of Jim Hogg, 
La Salle, McMullen, Webb, and Zapata.
  Court for the Laredo Division shall be held at Laredo.
  (4) The Brownsville Division comprises the counties of 
Cameron and Willacy.
  Court for the Brownsville Division shall be held at 
Brownsville.
  (5) The Victoria Division comprises the counties of Calhoun, 
DeWitt, Goliad, Jackson, Lavaca, Refugio, and Victoria.
  Court for the Victoria Division shall be held at Victoria.
  (6) The Corpus Christi Division comprises the counties of 
Aransas, Bee, Brooks, Duval, Jim Wells, Kenedy, Kleberg, Live 
Oak, Nueces, and San Patricio.
  Court for the Corpus Christi Division shall be held at Corpus 
Christi.
  (7) The McAllen Division comprises the counties of Hidalgo 
and Starr.
  Court for the McAllen Division shall be held at McAllen.
  Eastern District
  (c) The Eastern District comprises seven divisions.
  (1) The Tyler Division comprises the counties of Anderson, 
Cherokee, Gregg, Henderson, Panola, Rains, Rusk, Smith, Van 
Zandt, and Wood.
  Court for Tyler Division will be held at Tyler.
  (2) The Beaumont Division comprises the counties of Hardin, 
Jasper, Jefferson, Liberty, Newton, and Orange.
  Court for the Beaumont Division is to be held at Beaumont.
  (3) The Sherman Division comprises the counties of Collin, 
Cook, Delta, Denton, Fannin, Grayson, Hopkins, and Lamar.
  Court for the Sherman Division shall be held at Sherman and 
Plano.
  (4) The Marshall Division comprises the counties of Camp, 
Cass, Harrison, Marion, Morris, and Upshur.
  Court for the Marshall Division shall be held at Marshall.
  (5) The Texarkana Division comprises the counties of Bowie, 
Franklin, Red River, and Titus.
  Court for the Texarkana Division shall be held at Texarkana, 
and may be held anywhere within the Federal courthouse in 
Texarkana that is located astride the State line between Texas 
and Arkansas.
  (6) The Lufkin Division comprises the counties of Angelina, 
Houston, Nacogdoches, Polk, Sabine, San Augustine, Shelby, 
Trinity, and Tyler.
  Court for the Lufkin Division shall be held at Lufkin.
  Western District
  (d) The Western District comprises seven divisions.
  (1) The Austin Division comprises the counties of Bastrop, 
Blanco, Burleson, Burnet, Caldwell, Gillespie, Hays, Kimble, 
Lampasas, Lee, Llano, Mason, McCulloch, San Saba, Travis, 
Washington, and Williamson.
  Court for the Austin Division shall be held at Austin.
  (2) The Waco Division comprises the counties of Bell, Bosque, 
Coryell, Falls, Freestone, Hamilton, Hill, Leon, Limestone, 
McLennan, Milam, Robertson, and Somervell.
  Court for the Waco Division shall be held at Waco.
  (3) The El Paso Division comprises the county of El Paso.
  Court for the El Paso Division shall be held at El Paso.
  (4) The San Antonio Division comprises the counties of 
Atascosa, Bandera, Bexar, Comal, Dimmit, Frio, Gonzales, 
Guadalupe, Karnes, Kendall, Kerr, Medina, Real, and Wilson.
  Court for the San Antonio Division shall be held at San 
Antonio.
  (5) The Del Rio Division comprises the counties of Edwards, 
Kinney, Maverick, Terrell, Uvalde, Val Verde, and Zavalla.
  Court for the Del Rio Division shall be held at Del Rio.
  (6) The Pecos Division comprises the counties of Brewster, 
Culberson, Jeff Davis, Hudspeth, Loving, Pecos, Presidio, 
Reeves, Ward, and Winkler.
  Court for the Pecos and Alpine Division shall be held at 
Pecos.
  (7) The Midland-Odessa Division comprises the counties of 
Andrews, Crane, Ector, Martin, Midland, and Upton.
  Court for the Midland-Odessa Division shall be held at 
Midland. Court may be held, in the discretion of the court, in 
Odessa, when courtroom facilities are made available at no 
expense to the Government.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 128. Washington

  Washington is divided into two judicial districts to be known 
as the Eastern and Western Districts of Washington.
  Eastern District
  (a) The Eastern District comprises the counties of Adams, 
Asotin, Benton, Chelan, Columbia, Douglas, Ferry, Franklin, 
Garfield, Grant, Kittitas, Klickitat, Lincoln, Okanogan, Pend 
Oreille, Spokane, Stevens, Walla Walla, Whitman, and Yakima.
  Court for the Eastern District shall be held at Spokane, 
Yakima, Walla Walla, and Richland.
  Western District
  (b) The Western District comprises the counties of Clallam, 
Clark, Cowlitz, Grays Harbor, Island, Jefferson, King, Kitsap, 
Lewis, Mason, Pacific, Pierce, San Juan, Skagit, Skamania, 
Snohomish, Thurston, Wahkiakum, and Whatcom.
  Court for the Western District shall be held at Bellingham, 
Seattle, Tacoma, Mount Vernon, and Vancouver.